Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Avoiding Initiative
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Harzel" data-source="post: 7415650" data-attributes="member: 6857506"><p>I do not forbid brief requests or suggestions for coordination between the players, preferably of the sort that the PCs might actually exchange during combat. And since resolution is still (conceptually) simultaneous, there is no impediment to executing coordinated actions. However, it is true that I discourage minutes-long tactical discussions.</p><p></p><p>That said, I think the similarity of having a declaration order to having a whole turn order may be part of what is causing some of the players to get a little lost in the process. So I am considering removing the declaration order. It is interesting to hear that someone else does it that way.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Do you disclose anything about what the opponents are up to before the players declare their actions? At least at low levels, an advantage to the players of INT-ordered declaration is that they often know what their (low INT) foes are up to before having to declare their actions.</p><p></p><p>And along the same lines, do you allow simple conditional declarations such as, "If the orcs charge, then I rush out to meet them, otherwise I stay behind the rock and shoot arrows."?</p><p></p><p>Also, if a PC has multiple attacks, do you allow target switching if a foe goes down due to the first attack? How about multiple target spells such as <em>magic missile</em> and <em>scorching ray</em>? (This is something that I have wavered on.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The simulationist in me has always thought speed factors were nifty, but practically, it has never seemed worth the extra effort.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Harzel, post: 7415650, member: 6857506"] I do not forbid brief requests or suggestions for coordination between the players, preferably of the sort that the PCs might actually exchange during combat. And since resolution is still (conceptually) simultaneous, there is no impediment to executing coordinated actions. However, it is true that I discourage minutes-long tactical discussions. That said, I think the similarity of having a declaration order to having a whole turn order may be part of what is causing some of the players to get a little lost in the process. So I am considering removing the declaration order. It is interesting to hear that someone else does it that way. Do you disclose anything about what the opponents are up to before the players declare their actions? At least at low levels, an advantage to the players of INT-ordered declaration is that they often know what their (low INT) foes are up to before having to declare their actions. And along the same lines, do you allow simple conditional declarations such as, "If the orcs charge, then I rush out to meet them, otherwise I stay behind the rock and shoot arrows."? Also, if a PC has multiple attacks, do you allow target switching if a foe goes down due to the first attack? How about multiple target spells such as [I]magic missile[/I] and [I]scorching ray[/I]? (This is something that I have wavered on.) The simulationist in me has always thought speed factors were nifty, but practically, it has never seemed worth the extra effort. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Avoiding Initiative
Top