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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Best Initiative System?
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="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5949104" data-attributes="member: 54877"><p>Keep declares general and loose, and they go fast. A key way to do this is to not allow gaming mechanics to creep into the declaration, even if you are using a grid. Even if the fighter can see that the door is five squares away, he doesn't say, "I run to this square." He says, "I run over by the door." I know this sound nitpicky, but it is absolutely critical to making the declarations work. As a bonus, it translates equally well on or off the grid. It doesn't translate well to a tactical module, which is a big reason why you want to switch to cyclic initiative if using one.</p><p> </p><p>With rolling, I'll do it one of several ways, but I'll generally roll every round. You can roll once for each side. You can roll once for each major group. You can roll individually for the characters but not for the monsters. Or you can do the way I specified in the link, where the monster group(s) all get a 10 on their initiative roll, and then each player is rolling to see where they fit.</p><p> </p><p>I like that, because it is ultra fast to resolve, but still lets each player rolll individually. Players roll. Meanwhile, I'm double-checking the monster initiative groups. Say I have three groups, which is a rare, fairly complex fight. The initiatives are maybe 12, 15, and 17. Those are now DCs for the characters to beat. I ask, "Who beat 17?" We have show of hands. And so on. Takes 15-20 seconds, and everyone know where they stand. With a single group of monsters, it's as fast as everyone can roll a d20 and say whether they met the single DC or not. After the first round, everyone knows what the DC is. </p><p> </p><p>Since the characters on a side are all going at the same time anyway, all we really need to know is does character A go before this group of monsters or after them? </p><p> </p><p>And of course this takes slightly longer than not rolling every round. However, now is where the saving comes in. Everyone knows what they declared. Everyone knows when they go. All the players that are eligible to go can act ... now! That's why in my version, I didn't allow sequencing of such actions. If the fighter and rogue go together, they act on their declarations without seeing what the other guy is doing specifically. </p><p> </p><p>What gets cut out is a lot of analysis paralysis based on what other people have done, as well as the lack of attention that happens on waiting for everyone else to go. This is particularly striking when I use a single group of monsters. You are either going now, or the monsters are whacking you, or you just went or are about to go. You also get some handling time improvements on the DM side, as you are looking at monster hit points and defenses when they are getting whacked by several people, then switching over to monster attacks when they are doing the whacking. This is basic efficiency training--arrange so that you pick up an object or look at a statistic as few times as you reasonably can. </p><p> </p><p>The DM getting the results from the players does take a flexible touch. If several players go together, you may very well need to take them in some order. I just go around the table, if it is necessary. Usually, though, there are only 2-4 players going at once, and the natural speed differences in them resolving their attacks means that the results come in staggered.</p><p> </p><p>It scales because the difference between 4 players and 8 players is four extra declarations, plus the time it takes to get 4 results. It is not the time it takes for 4 additional players to learn that it is now their action, state what they are doing, roll, give the results, etc. </p><p> </p><p>I don't pretend that someone trying this for the first time would see immediate and dramatic improvements. I had the advantage of already having played with various side-by-side initiatives in multiple systems. It does have its own minor skill set to learn. But I doubt anyone can give it a fair try with 5 or more players and not see a fairly significant improvement after a bit of practice. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin :D" data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Crazy Jerome, post: 5949104, member: 54877"] Keep declares general and loose, and they go fast. A key way to do this is to not allow gaming mechanics to creep into the declaration, even if you are using a grid. Even if the fighter can see that the door is five squares away, he doesn't say, "I run to this square." He says, "I run over by the door." I know this sound nitpicky, but it is absolutely critical to making the declarations work. As a bonus, it translates equally well on or off the grid. It doesn't translate well to a tactical module, which is a big reason why you want to switch to cyclic initiative if using one. With rolling, I'll do it one of several ways, but I'll generally roll every round. You can roll once for each side. You can roll once for each major group. You can roll individually for the characters but not for the monsters. Or you can do the way I specified in the link, where the monster group(s) all get a 10 on their initiative roll, and then each player is rolling to see where they fit. I like that, because it is ultra fast to resolve, but still lets each player rolll individually. Players roll. Meanwhile, I'm double-checking the monster initiative groups. Say I have three groups, which is a rare, fairly complex fight. The initiatives are maybe 12, 15, and 17. Those are now DCs for the characters to beat. I ask, "Who beat 17?" We have show of hands. And so on. Takes 15-20 seconds, and everyone know where they stand. With a single group of monsters, it's as fast as everyone can roll a d20 and say whether they met the single DC or not. After the first round, everyone knows what the DC is. Since the characters on a side are all going at the same time anyway, all we really need to know is does character A go before this group of monsters or after them? And of course this takes slightly longer than not rolling every round. However, now is where the saving comes in. Everyone knows what they declared. Everyone knows when they go. All the players that are eligible to go can act ... now! That's why in my version, I didn't allow sequencing of such actions. If the fighter and rogue go together, they act on their declarations without seeing what the other guy is doing specifically. What gets cut out is a lot of analysis paralysis based on what other people have done, as well as the lack of attention that happens on waiting for everyone else to go. This is particularly striking when I use a single group of monsters. You are either going now, or the monsters are whacking you, or you just went or are about to go. You also get some handling time improvements on the DM side, as you are looking at monster hit points and defenses when they are getting whacked by several people, then switching over to monster attacks when they are doing the whacking. This is basic efficiency training--arrange so that you pick up an object or look at a statistic as few times as you reasonably can. The DM getting the results from the players does take a flexible touch. If several players go together, you may very well need to take them in some order. I just go around the table, if it is necessary. Usually, though, there are only 2-4 players going at once, and the natural speed differences in them resolving their attacks means that the results come in staggered. It scales because the difference between 4 players and 8 players is four extra declarations, plus the time it takes to get 4 results. It is not the time it takes for 4 additional players to learn that it is now their action, state what they are doing, roll, give the results, etc. I don't pretend that someone trying this for the first time would see immediate and dramatic improvements. I had the advantage of already having played with various side-by-side initiatives in multiple systems. It does have its own minor skill set to learn. But I doubt anyone can give it a fair try with 5 or more players and not see a fairly significant improvement after a bit of practice. :D [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Best Initiative System?
Top