D&D General Alternate Stats for Initiative [+]

How about this: Decouple it from stats entirely. Make it a skill that can be trained by anyone. Expertise and Jack of All Trades may apply. Maybe add a homebrewed "improved initiative" feat for extra bonuses.

(I haven't read the whole thread, so apologies if this has already been suggested.)


ETA: Never mind, upon catching up I see it's been suggested and rejected.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

At this point, I'm largely letting the PCs act in whatever order they want, and interspersing the NPCs in as the story makes sense (or using an alternative Daggerheart system where the PCs keep acting until the die roll goes badly).
 

I feel like the way the game plays, it feels important but actually isn't. Rogues need it to get some free damage, tactics players need to act first before everyone separates themselves and makes mass effects impossible, but beyond that just stand still and hack is the order of the day and you don't need to go fast for that. In fact, you want the cleric going last to heal anyone that goes down.

I would actually use this as an argument to describe why initiative is so important. In this example, a high initiative means the cleric can chose to be on offence or use buffs (i.e. tactics), and can heal friends the next round if needed. A low initiative means you're demoting them to only being support, ostensibly while the rogue gets to go fight the bad guys.

That being said, I am doubtful we will reach agreement on this specific topic in the near future. But, for the purposes of this thread, would if be accurate to say that you feel like initiative would benefit from being more tied to class than ability scores?
 

I would actually use this as an argument to describe why initiative is so important. In this example, a high initiative means the cleric can chose to be on offence or use buffs (i.e. tactics), and can heal friends the next round if needed. A low initiative means you're demoting them to only being support, ostensibly while the rogue gets to go fight the bad guys.
I'd argue that's kind of the intent pre 5.5 where you needed to dedicate to healing due to anemic healing numbers.

Not that I agree with that design choice, but I think it was there.

That being said, I am doubtful we will reach agreement on this specific topic in the near future. But, for the purposes of this thread, would if be accurate to say that you feel like initiative would benefit from being more tied to class than ability scores?
That's a thought. But I feel more like classes should get initiative manipulation mechanics.

Initiative in D&D is kind of empty as a mechanic. Other games have passes and dynamic changes, and abilities on timers, but D&D is just... waiting in line.
 

I'd argue that's kind of the intent pre 5.5 where you needed to dedicate to healing due to anemic healing numbers.

Not that I agree with that design choice, but I think it was there.


That's a thought. But I feel more like classes should get initiative manipulation mechanics.

Initiative in D&D is kind of empty as a mechanic. Other games have passes and dynamic changes, and abilities on timers, but D&D is just... waiting in line.
that last line is interesting.....and I wonder if players want that? Like, I miss commander types that could manipulate when / how often others could act (which has the same effect as initiative changing, somewhat).
 

Now if there is some investment in character choices, things become more interesting.
True. There are a number of feats and class features that can influence a character's overall initiative modifier. The Alert feat, the Gloom Stalker Ranger's Dread Ambusher feature, the desire to act first and ask questions later... ;)
 


Reading through this thread, I just thought of this:

What if you were to just tell party "OK it's combat- you all go. Who's going first, second, third, etc?" and let them sort it out? That forces them to talk and plan out the round. But that'd invalidate some features that deal with getting better initiative.

Then maybe the GM secretly rolls for the enemies, and they go in-between the PC turns. Or you use passive 10+Initiative bonus for enemies. Either way, the PCs don't know when the enemies are going 'til said enemies act.

PC initiative features could still be made useful in some fashion, I'm sure...
Off the top of my head:
PCs with initiative features could react to enemies taking their "surprise" turns. Say it's: Archer, Warrior, Thief, Mage. Archer goes, then before Warrior goes, INTERRUPT, Goblin assassin goes. Thief can choose to go after the goblin goes, and before the warrior- A G T W M. Or maybe if the Thief's initiative feature would trump the goblin assassin's initiative (use passive v passive initiative to determine this?) then the thief could even go BEFORE the assassin would go. So it ends up A T G W M.

Initiative as it stands is always so... crappy. There's always so little communication because people are going to be going when they rolled to go, so why bother planning/talking it out when the order of battle is decided by the dice? This'd mean that the fight literally couldn't start until they talked it out and decided who was going to go when, and presumably why they're going then.

It's a little off-topic but it's still initiative. Since we're talking about throwing out Dex as the initiative stat, why not chuck'em all?! 😅
 

Reading through this thread, I just thought of this:

What if you were to just tell party "OK it's combat- you all go. Who's going first, second, third, etc?" and let them sort it out? That forces them to talk and plan out the round. But that'd invalidate some features that deal with getting better initiative.

Then maybe the GM secretly rolls for the enemies, and they go in-between the PC turns. Or you use passive 10+Initiative bonus for enemies. Either way, the PCs don't know when the enemies are going 'til said enemies act.

PC initiative features could still be made useful in some fashion, I'm sure...
Off the top of my head:
PCs with initiative features could react to enemies taking their "surprise" turns. Say it's: Archer, Warrior, Thief, Mage. Archer goes, then before Warrior goes, INTERRUPT, Goblin assassin goes. Thief can choose to go after the goblin goes, and before the warrior- A G T W M. Or maybe if the Thief's initiative feature would trump the goblin assassin's initiative (use passive v passive initiative to determine this?) then the thief could even go BEFORE the assassin would go. So it ends up A T G W M.

Initiative as it stands is always so... crappy. There's always so little communication because people are going to be going when they rolled to go, so why bother planning/talking it out when the order of battle is decided by the dice? This'd mean that the fight literally couldn't start until they talked it out and decided who was going to go when, and presumably why they're going then.

It's a little off-topic but it's still initiative. Since we're talking about throwing out Dex as the initiative stat, why not chuck'em all?! 😅
That's pretty much what I do at this point in most encounters. It's actually the rules for several games.

Here's an example why: The PCs are outside a door. They plan to have the wizard fireball the door when they open it, and have the rogue and barbarian charge in after that. Of course, once you open the door and combat starts, you roll initiative and the wizard might roll the worst. What does the party do then? It's silly to me, but I get not everyone agrees.
 

Reading through this thread, I just thought of this:

What if you were to just tell party "OK it's combat- you all go. Who's going first, second, third, etc?" and let them sort it out? That forces them to talk and plan out the round. But that'd invalidate some features that deal with getting better initiative.

What happens if the members don't completely agree on order, or if the planning (or negotiating) takes too long?
 

Trending content

Remove ads

Top