D&D General 6E But A + Thread

[Reynard]

"Okay. I'll go first. I cast Wall of Fire/Force/Stone."
"Okay. I'll go first. I cast Prismatic X."
"Okay. I'll go first. I cast Hard Lockdown #3"
"Okay. I'll go first. I attack 4 times"
...
"You succeeded. I'll go next. I cast Wall of Fire/Force/Stone."
"You succeeded. I'll go next. I cast Prismatic X."
"You succeeded. I'll go next. I cast AOE DOT spell."
"You succeeded. I'll go next. I attack 4 times"

If the PCs have those abilities, they are fighting things that can take it. Or you have done a very poor job as GM.

 

[Reynard]

There are plenty of communities that actually understand and embrace good gaming requires some limitation.

Just because 9/10 Children voted for Candy for dinner, does not mean its correct.

That's... not a great analogy.

 

[Minigiant]

If the PCs have those abilities, they are fighting things that can take it. Or you have done a very poor job as GM.

D&D typically doesn't create stuff that can take it.

D&D is written as an attrition game and relies on difficulty is based on PCs running out of stuff due to inefficient usage.

 

[TiQuinn]

Why roll initiative at all?

Popcorn initiative could be an interesting variation but I think encounter and monster design would really have to support this so that players can just steamroll the other side by going first.

 

[Reynard]

D&D typically doesn't create stuff that can take it.

D&D is written as an attrition game and relies on difficulty is based on PCs running out of stuff due to inefficient usage.

I don't see how popcorn initiative changes that calculus overmuch.

 

[Reynard]

Popcorn initiative could be an interesting variation but I think encounter and monster design would really have to support this so that players can just steamroll the other side by going first.

"Going first" is not guaranteed, even in DH.

 

[TiQuinn]

"Going first" is not guaranteed, even in DH.

I think for 5e if the players’ side just went first, it’d cause issues for typical encounters.

 

[Argyle King]

Divorce initiative from everything. Unmodified d20 (or d10, or d6) rerolled each round, allow ties, stop there.

I'm not entirely opposed to that, but I was allowing for the possibility of things like the Improved Initiative Feat, possibly a version of Haste that adds +d6 to initiate, or maybe "Monk feature: Mystic Reflexes - at the beginning of an encounter, you may (without using an action,) spend a ki point to add your flurry die to your initiative check."

 

[Minigiant]

I don't see how popcorn initiative changes that calculus overmuch.

modern imitative makes turn order unregular and unreliable.

Daggerheart initiative allows a Player to chose to go at an opportune time and roll to hope to allow their ally to go next.
Popcorn initiative makes turn stacking easier but makes going first the roll.

With modern D&D magic and actions, that's very strong.

 

[Lanefan]

Why roll initiative at all?

To determine sequencing of events and actions.

Where all the WotC editions blow it is that they assume whatever a character does starts and ends on its rolled initiative - hence stop-motion combat - rather than using rolled initiative as a segmented measure of time within the round. A move action should start on your rolled init but not end until however long it takes you to travel your intended distance. All spells should have casting times where you start on your init and finish some number of segments later. And so on.

Re-rolling init each round preserves the fog-of-war aspect and shatters the too-predictable nature of strict turn-based init.