D&D 5E Concurrent initiative variant; Everybody declares/Everybody resolves [WAS Simultaneous Initiative]

[Rune]

Simultaneous initiative

I prefer to call them "Dexterity (Initiative)" checks, and, yes, that does mean each contested instance triggers its own roll--just like any other opposed check.

As for the six-second turn headache, I get around that by lengthening the amount of time that a round represents. 1 minute is a little too long, if you're sticking to the movement speeds, but 30 seconds feels about right to me. Short enough to be cinematic, long enough for reinforcements to plausibly arrive. Just have to adjust the 1- and 5-minute spell/ability durations upward.

I think that the above improves cyclical initiative, but, at least for my tastes, it happens to go very well with the simultaneous initiative* variant that I run.


* "Concurrent outcome resolution?"

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

So are there any ways to break this combat resolution system?

Could you rephase your question to be more specific? What are you trying to discover? What are you trying to break, in what way, and why?

You can still get unrealistic outcomes from this system; the Peasant Railgun still works. This doesn't fix all issues with discretized actions in D&D; it just fixes enough issues to be more fun than the PHB initiative system is.

 

[FrogReaver]

Could you rephase your question to be more specific? What are you trying to discover? What are you trying to break, in what way, and why?

You can still get unrealistic outcomes from this system; the Peasant Railgun still works. This doesn't fix all issues with discretized actions in D&D; it just fixes enough issues to be more fun than the PHB initiative system is.

Does your system make it any easier/harder to kite enemies. Or does it make it any easier/harder to close into melee? Does it often lead to not being able to have a valid target for their declared action and thus ending their turn and if not how is such an issue prevented, very generic declarations or the ability to change the action when no targets exist? Do enemies abide by the same rules?

 

[mellored]

The activities the PCs are engaged in are simultaneous. E.g. the goblin is hiding at the same time Eladriel is attacking. In practice, it's rare that you even need to impose an ordering at all. It only happens once in the OP.

Except you do.
I don't mean rolling dice, but you have to decide if the goblin hides before or after the attack.

That's ordering the events.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Except you do.
I don't mean rolling dice, but you have to decide if the goblin hides before or after the attack.
That's ordering the events.

No--the goblin is hiding while she's shooting at it. It's not an instantaneous event. If she misses the goblin, or if the goblin fails to hide, then it doesn't matter if she shot at it before or after it finished hiding. Either way she shot an arrow and it didn't hit a goblin, so choose whatever ordering is convenient and nobody (player or DM) will object.

 

[FrogReaver]

Except you do.
I don't mean rolling dice, but you have to decide if the goblin hides before or after the attack.

That's ordering the events.

Thank you for saying what I've been trying to say all thread and in 1-2 lines to boot.

A truly simultaneous system could be interesting though. And it may can be achieved with 2 small rule changes.

1. allowing melee attacks without penalty if at any part of the round you are adjacent to your target. Allowing ranged attacks without penalty if at any point in the round you are at range from an enemy. Basically you take the best opportunity to hurt an enemy that round that you can.
2. Reactionary movement.

Phase 1: Declare movement and actions
Phase 2: Resolve Actions and Declare Reactions
Phase 3: Resolve Reactions
Phase 4: Resolve all reactionary movement

All effects of actions are applied at same time. Buffs and negative conditions only apply the round after they occur and similar to melee and ranged a character is able to benefit from them next turn even if you end the condition on the next turn.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Does your system make it any easier/harder to kite enemies. Or does it make it any easier/harder to close into melee? Does it often lead to not being able to have a valid target for their declared action and thus ending their turn and if not how is such an issue prevented, very generic declarations or the ability to change the action when no targets exist? Do enemies abide by the same rules?

It makes it harder to kite enemies. That's by design--I like chaos, and I don't like cheesy exploits. Asking if it makes it easier to close to melee is redundant--that's the same thing as asking if it's easier to kite.

Yes, enemies abide by the same rules. There is no difference between PC and NPC when it comes to game rules; they are all characters, including the monsters, and they all play by the same rules.

I don't understand the intent of your question about "does it often lead to not being able to have a valid target". Are you really interested in knowing details of my players' and monsters' behavior, or are you looking for something else? What are you really trying to discover here that you can't figure out yourself, and why? I'm a little bit skeptical because so far you haven't engaged constructively with this thread; you've only seemingly attempted to derail it, and the context in which you're asking this question makes it appear like another attempt to disrupt.

 

[FrogReaver]

I have listed all my comments before the one you replied to below. I'll let them stand for themselves against your crazy and unfounded accusations.

That said I'm really not here to have a fight with you. I'm trying to understand your system better.

It makes it harder to kite enemies. That's by design--I like chaos, and I don't like cheesy exploits. Asking if it makes it easier to close to melee is redundant--that's the same thing as asking if it's easier to kite.

Yes, enemies abide by the same rules. There is no difference between PC and NPC when it comes to game rules; they are all characters, including the monsters, and they all play by the same rules.

I don't understand the intent of your question about "does it often lead to not being able to have a valid target". Are you really interested in knowing details of my players' and monsters' behavior, or are you looking for something else? What are you really trying to discover here that you can't figure out yourself, and why? I'm a little bit skeptical because so far you haven't engaged constructively with this thread; you've only seemingly attempted to derail it, and the context in which you're asking this question makes it appear like another attempt to disrupt.

So are there any ways to break this combat resolution system?

Yea, I still don't get how this is simultaneous initiative or anything remotely similar. Is it just the part about decoupling action declaration from the moment you resolve the action?

A separate thought, I read the first post and I don't see anything simultaneous about it.

Basically the only nuance I picked up on sounded like you allowed someone to delay their whole turn.

Do you break up the movement phases and the attacking phases?

Or does movement have a higher precedence than attacking or something?

 

[mellored]

No--the goblin is hiding while she's shooting at it. It's not an instantaneous event. If she misses the goblin, or if the goblin fails to hide, then it doesn't matter if she shot at it before or after it finished hiding. Either way she shot an arrow and it didn't hit a goblin, so choose whatever ordering is convenient and nobody (player or DM) will object.

So what happens when they both roll well?

Simultaneous-when-it-doesn't-matter-and-ordered-by-speed-when-it-does is a bit of a mouth full. And still misses the main point of declaring your action being separate from the resolution.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

So what happens when they both roll well?

Then you're in that rare case where you have to impose an ordering, which you do by determining whose initiative is higher. That will tell you whose action was performed more quickly. If El spent two seconds aiming and her arrows was in the air for half a second, and the goblin was most of the way into the right bushes but not quite hidden yet (i.e. would take three seconds to finish hiding), then that is one plausible interpretation of what happens when [Eladriel hits; goblin rolls well on Stealth; Eladriel's initiative is high; goblin's initiative is not as high] are all true: Eladriel hits him while he is still trying to hide.

Simultaneous-when-it-doesn't-matter-and-ordered-by-speed-when-it-does is a bit of a mouth full. And still misses the main point of declaring your action being separate from the resolution.

Yes, separating action from resolution is the key point. Everything else is just an optimization for speed or an elaboration for additional fun. If you're a DM looking for ideas to steal, the big idea I'd recommend to you is "separate action declaration from action resolution." That's where 70-80% of the gains come from.