Best Initiative System?

[johnsemlak]

Of course not!

DMPrata collated all the rules, so now it's easy to figure out!

-Hyp.

I have a vague memory from the Dragonsfoot forums a few years back that MerricB claimed that this was the single guy on the planet that understood 1e initiative.

I wonder if that Initiative booklet will make its way into the 1e reprints?

 

[am181d]

I have never (in 30-some years of role-playing) ever played an "everybody declares actions up front" style initiative system.

When playing AD&D, we rolled a... d10? And then just went in order. We ignored Weapon Speed, but I *think* we used Casting Time.

I normally play the 3e standard rules, but I'm partial to a cyclical "round the table" approach with a surprise roll to see who goes first.

 

[amerigoV]

Hmm, I do not remember any declarations back in my 1e days (. I think both sides just rolled a d6 and the highest side went first. That really added some tension in a big, close fight when you really needed to win imitative or the game was over.

 

[Celestian]

I like a simple method. Roll one dice for NPCS and one for PCs (let one player do that) and then whomever got the initiative their side goes, then the other. Much less over head than every single person having their own initiative. With something this simple re-rolling every round isn't a big deal either ... instead of just keeping the first roll for the entire encounter.

You might want to add adjustments for spell casting or other actions if someone is trying to interrupt the others actions. Otherwise I find simple is better.

 

[dagger]

This is how we do it:

Each side rolls 1d6 each round, high roll goes first, ties are simultaneous (if we feel like it, if not, reroll). Spellcasters must announce any spell being cast before init is rolled. Casters suck it long, and suck it hard. If they take damage for before its their turn.....then spell disruption ftw.

 

[Agamon]

Cyclical was a good innovation. Speeds up combat, which is always a bonus.

 

[dagger]

Cyclical was a good innovation. Speeds up combat, which is always a bonus.

May be in certain situations like your games....

 

[Agamon]

May be in certain situations like your games....

I wasn't aware slow combat was a perk for anyone, but different strokes and all, s'pose.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

Cyclical was a good innovation. Speeds up combat, which is always a bonus.

No, cyclic initiative does not speed up combat. What it does is make the whole business of who goes when highly ordered. If the DM was the type to have a lot of issues with chaos in the player/DM communication, this will probably result in a net speed boost for combat. If the DM wasn't, it will not, and will probably be slower than whatever the DM was doing before.

Moreover, cyclic initiative does the least damage to combat speed when it is least needed--i.e. with relatively few players. That is, if you have 3 or 4 players and are goofing around, applying the order of cyclic initiative may help, but it will not scale well when your two friends from out of town sit in on the session. Whereas side initiative systems tend to take more upfront work for the DM to master, but then scale very well. (And it's all well and good to say nonsense like, "people shouldn't be playing with more than N players, anyway, so why design for more?" The design team of the game doesn't have that option--not to mention, it's incredibly shallow and lazy design to do that.)

Most of all, though, I can't believe all the same people complaining about "tactical elements" in the game and then turning around and thinking that cyclic initiative is so wonderful. Where do people think those tactical elements were anchored in the first place? The speed problem from cyclic initiative itself is minor compared to all the secondary effects that then need to get addressed, and the systems that spring up around those.

 

[Stalker0]

How does that one work?

You draw cards each turn, goes in highest order. Edges (feats) can you let draw additional cards.

If you draw a joker, you get extra benefits in the round.