D&D 5E Avoiding Initiative

[robus]

I wish I knew. I've got my first 5e group up to level 7, and already I'm starting to dread combat.

I switched to Mearlsian Initiative, and my guys like it. However, combat in D&D just seems to drag so much. I mean, the rest of the game is fine, a couple rolls, make a check, move on...but then combat starts and everything slows down.

I've switched to using the average damage values for the monsters just to keep things moving. And you also have to keep thinking about why the fight is continuing. If the players are easily beating the monsters (and there's no backup) you can call it early and ask them how they want to finish it up? Prisoners? Pile of bodies? If the monsters are getting beaten then why are they still fighting? There better be something worth fighting for! The combat must be happening for a reason or else, yeah, it's a slog.

 

[Shawn Stroud]

I started using the "Popcorn" initiative method in a high level Pathfinder game (it would probably work just as well for DnD). All participants roll initiative to see who goes first. After that person has taken a turn, they pick the next person/participant to take a turn (and so on, and so on). I found my group really liked the way they could coordinate their efforts, and everyone stayed engaged with the combat for longer (as opposed to checking their phone, arguing over rules, etc...)

 

[Simon T. Vesper]

I started using the "Popcorn" initiative method in a high level Pathfinder game (it would probably work just as well for DnD). All participants roll initiative to see who goes first. After that person has taken a turn, they pick the next person/participant to take a turn (and so on, and so on).

That is freaking amazing. I can just imagine the coordination possibilities.

 

[CubicsRube]

I have as a default enemies try to flee a combat if they're aware that things are going badly.

Only undead, constructs and sentient beings with reasons to fight to the death (defending young, crazed cultists, etc) fight to the death.

I rarely make those that retreat come back later, unless its made awaee thst theyre likely to go and get reinforcements.

Makes fights a lot quicker.

Back on the subject on initiative. There's no right answer purely because every system has pros and cons. I've played and run games that do round the table initiative, and that's worked fine for me, though some players may not like it.

Honestly i find any system features that give a character a boost to initiative artificial at best anyway.

If you have changing initiative, it can make fights feel more chaotic, or if you have ordered initiative, it enables you to plan better as a team. If you do round the table for example, you know when you get back to the dm, you've got bad things coming, so you've got to see what you can do before that.

 

[Yaarel]

This thread changed my mind about initiative. DM narrative adjudication works best most of the time, to determine who attacks first.

The only dilemma is whether to allow an entire side to go first, or to interweave hero then monster then an other hero then an other monster.

For simplicity sake, I will probably let the entire side go first. I am less concerned about the power of focus-fire, whether by the heroes or by the monsters.

 

[Yaarel]

I have as a default enemies try to feel a combat if they're aware that things are going badly.

Only undead, constructs and sentient beings with reasons to fight to the death (defending young, crazed cultists, etc) fight to the death.

I rarely make those that retreat come back later, unless its made awaee thst theyre likely to go and get reinforcements.

Makes fights a lot quicker.

Back on the subject on initiative. There's no right answer purely because every system has pros and cons. I've played and run games that do round the table initiative, and that's worked fine for me, though some players may not like it.

Honestly i find any system features that give a character a boost to initiative artificial at best anyway.

If you have changing initiative, it can make fights feel more chaotic, or if you have ordered initiative, it enables you to plan better as a team. If you do round the table for example, you know when you get back to the dm, you've got bad things coming, so you've got to see what you can do before that.

I completely agree with monsters fleeing − just like heroes sometimes flee when things go pairshaped.

Normally, the heroes still get xp for defeating the monsters.

 

[CubicsRube]

Yes. I still give full xp.

 

[ccs]

I started using the "Popcorn" initiative method in a high level Pathfinder game (it would probably work just as well for DnD). All participants roll initiative to see who goes first. After that person has taken a turn, they pick the next person/participant to take a turn (and so on, and so on). I found my group really liked the way they could coordinate their efforts, and everyone stayed engaged with the combat for longer (as opposed to checking their phone, arguing over rules, etc...)

So in other words it's just rolling initiative for each side.
Because I fail to see how that doesn't instantly become All of side A goes, then all of side B goes. The only catch here is that you're determining who goes 1st on each side randomly, so some plans/combos might not always work.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

I know it would be a massive change from D&D (as in dropping out a good deal of traditional tactics entirely), but I am desperately intrigued by Uncharted Worlds and its "one roll combats" (they aren't, really, but its close.) Let it be a plot beat or a few and lets move on. Even worse, once combat starts, I kinda get the feeling that everything dramatic goes away. Not all the time, but a lot of the time. Its just about chewing through the bad guys' HP until they are all dead.

Watch how fight scenes in good action movies play out. They can be quite extended and involved -- not just "a plot beat or a few". But they're very rarely just the two sides attacking each other until one side dies or runs away. There's almost always some special objective to increase tension, like "get the macguffin" or "hold out for reinforcements" or "don't let them escape". The environment frequently plays a role, whether it's simple like the placement of light and cover or convoluted like the whole thing taking place inside a giant clock. It often becomes a running battle, with protagonists moving from location to location, varying both the aforementioned environmental effects and just changing the scenery. For further variety, the antagonists often alter their tactics over the course of the battle, deploying secret weapons or specialist mooks or devious traps just when the heroes (and audience) are starting to get used to the situation. And finally, the best fights develop the characters who are participating in them, revealing their values and priorities and hopes and fears through dialogue and decisions.

D&D combat rules are calibrated to generate these kinds of big set-piece fights. I can't speak for your players in particular, but it's why a lot of people come to the table in the first place. So I'd recommend embracing it rather than trying to get rid of it. Just be sure to make full use of the playbook that films like Star Wars and Lord of the Rings are working from, and you should be able to run battles that are more than just grinds.

 

[Lanefan]

Then he should put more points in DEX. The point is to give an alternative to the OP not wanting to roll intitiative. Sure the slow guy is going to always be slow, but that's just how it is.

Problem is, Dex is already too useful - no point making it even more so by having it lock in the turn order for every combat.

Usually non sex characters don't mind being farther down in the order.

Best typo I've seen all day!