D&D 5E Anyone else feel individual initiative is more trouble than it's worth?

[TarionzCousin]

I've recently started using the Chris Sims method. I stole it from his twitter.
It has worked out well so far. I'm able to avoid clumping and such.

I get all of the PC's initiative rolls first, then roll and sometimes ignore the results. I plug the monsters in where it seems most dramatic--or I give the monsters set initiative rolls before the encounter.

 

[Murkmoldiev]

What I do in my crazy game is round by round individual initiative .

( I used to use speed factors too - added for weapons and - 1 to your ini for each spell level your casting. )

In addition to this, if you roll a natch 20 you get ALL YOUR ACTIONS FIRST !
If you roll a natch one you get ALL YOUR ACTIONS LAST !

Same with the monsters - although I roll once for each group of monsters.
A player may also use delay and ready actions.

This DID sometimes slow my pathfinder game down alot more
but its working very well in 5th ed due to the play speed.

It allows for much more fluid active combats - Or at least the illusion of such

 

[I'm A Banana]

It's super-meta, but I like basically going after each PC's turn (as monster populations allow).

Because clumping is annoying.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Dexterity is already modifying armor class, ranged and finesse weapon attacks and damage, and the dodgy, divey, and oops-catch-yourself-from-falling type saving throws. I can't imagine why it might be a good idea to pile Initiative onto that as well.

So here's how I've started to handle group initiative in my (OD&D) games: I got myself some playing cards with the ridiculously oversized indices, the sort for blind old ladies playing bridge. I get one pack; the player characters get another. When a fight breaks out, after any surprise round is resolved, we play a round of war. We each flip a card, and high card wins the initiative. If it's a tie, burn three cards and flip again; repeat until the tie is broken. If one side or the other pulled a joker, they automatically win the initiative and everybody on that side in the fight gets an action point (in the 4e sense) to spend during that combat.

Everybody on the winning side goes first; then everybody on the losing side. And it just alternates from there, back and forth. There's usually no real need to draw for initiative again during a single fight. This way, if the players (whose characters are all going at the same time) want to combine their actions in interesting, tactical, or swashbuckly ways, they can go ahead and do that. In other words, group initiative leads to a lot more instances of barbarians throwing halflings around, and that's just plain a-okay in my book. *thumbsup*

 

[drjones]

I have had zero problems with the standard 5e method, even with 5 and 6 players. I just have them roll and write up a list in order on a slip of papers for the PCs while I figure out the monsters and we area ready to rock in 60 seconds or so.

Wait, is this about init for each individual monster? Then no that seems pointless and confusing.

 

[Iosue]

This seems like a good place to bring this up. I love group initiative, rolled every round. In particular, I'm a big fan of B/X's Combat Sequence, and would love to implement it in 5e. However, 5e has a number of "until the start of your next turn" and the like-type effects. These would get kinda screwed up by group initiative rolled every round. Any thoughts for dealing with such effects?

Here's one sequence I'm thinking of going with:

I. Surprise Round, if any.

II. Roll Initiative.

III. Winning Side
A. Movement
B. Missiles
C. Magic
D. Melee
E. Movement (if any)

IV. Losing Side
(Same as above)

V. Any effects in play are resolved (death saves, spell effects from previous turns, etc.)

VI. Return to step II.

Any thoughts or better ideas?

 

[Rabbitbait]

I really like individual initiative when there are not many enemies, and grouping when there are lots.

I also like the players not knowing what their initiative is in the first round. They like that too - it makes it a bit more random at the start and then they are able to strategise more as they get into the swing of the battle.

I would like to try rerolling initiative every round, but the bookkeeping would be a bit annoying.

 

[Ningauble]

I've pretty much always used individual init. for PCs, group initiative for the monsters. Quicker and solves a lot of the "wait I was supposed to be next" problems. I sort of wish we could get rid of initiative altogether as it delays the start of combat and creates extra bookkeeping. But obviously there needs to be an order for turns and this is the least complicated system I have found.

 

[Authweight]

I like having the PCs roll initiative because it does away with the overly talkative strategizing that can make a combat drag, and it lets the monsters go in between PC rounds, which breaks up each round into distinct phases.

When the PCs roll, they quickly figure out the order they're going in and then just do it. In my group, if they were able to take turns however they wanted, they would spend way too long trying to figure out the perfect way to do it, and it would require lots of meta game talk to work out. With initiative, everyone just does their thing and passes to the next player.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Group. I have a very hard time imagining how it would somehow be more interesting for the faster PCs to sometimes be slower than the slow PCs. My assumption is that the group works as a whole and thus they go in order of the fast responder. From the combat management side, it also means that I can write down the PCs' initiative order and have it ready before a combat even comes up.

Also keep in mind that Init is a once-per-combat roll, meaning that if you do go with an individual roll per PC, the d20 is very swingy relative to level and ability mod. Finally, I like the idea of having a roll that allows the *entire group* to say "YES!" after a good result and commiserate after a bad one. Group rolls are rare in d20 and I think Init is the best place to put one.