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
Gamers Seeking Gamers
D&D 4th Edition, H Series, Online Game
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="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 5152578" data-attributes="member: 704"><p>Ok, so I spoke with Eryiedes in the maptools sever, and we played around a bit. After an initial problem with the macros not being added to the campaign window / not being visible, we discussed the macros and the initiative window.</p><p></p><p>In the end, we were able to get the initiative window up and functioning. Having done at least that much, here is what I want to try. Using the initiative macro's as they exist now has the following trade offs.</p><p></p><p>Pros:</p><p> - The initiative window will perfectly track initiative for every player and monster. This means no one will have a missed turn (PC or Monster).</p><p></p><p> - Rolling a different initiative value for large groups of similar monsters is trivial for DM. If we ever fight 30 minions, we wont need to have all 30 go at the same initiative, and the DM wont have to roll and manually track 30 different initiative values.</p><p></p><p> - No more problems with initiative order arising from Held or Readied actions.</p><p></p><p> - Possible to automate the +2 init bonus for being within 10 of the Warlord (assuming all PC's initiative handled by macro).</p><p></p><p>Cons:</p><p> - The DM will have to set the initiative for each player, either by using a macro himself, or by setting it manually.</p><p></p><p> - In order to use the macro that automatically adds the PC to the initiative cycle and rolls his initiative, PC's, each PC token needs to have a property called 'Initiative' (not a default property).</p><p></p><p> - Any adjustments to PC initiative must be done by DM.</p><p></p><p>At first glance the system does not seem to make a substantial difference to Eryiedes, and there are some concerns about getting it to work correctly. His biggest concern is that he does not like the idea of the DM rolling initiative for the player. We can get around that though by having the PC roll it and then letting Eryiedes enter it manually.</p><p></p><p>I want to run a quick one off battle with myself as DM within a week or so to give the macros a shakedown. Then maybe a 2nd quick battle with Eryiedes as DM so he can try using the macros. If it turns out that the group as a whole like using the initiative window for tracking initiative, then we can try it in our regular game.</p><p></p><p>So what say the rest of you? I am not suggesting we try the macro's until after I get a chance to test them out, and if the possibility that the DM may have to roll you initiative bothers the rest of you, then we should probably not bother.</p><p></p><p>END COMMUNICATION</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Lord Zardoz, post: 5152578, member: 704"] Ok, so I spoke with Eryiedes in the maptools sever, and we played around a bit. After an initial problem with the macros not being added to the campaign window / not being visible, we discussed the macros and the initiative window. In the end, we were able to get the initiative window up and functioning. Having done at least that much, here is what I want to try. Using the initiative macro's as they exist now has the following trade offs. Pros: - The initiative window will perfectly track initiative for every player and monster. This means no one will have a missed turn (PC or Monster). - Rolling a different initiative value for large groups of similar monsters is trivial for DM. If we ever fight 30 minions, we wont need to have all 30 go at the same initiative, and the DM wont have to roll and manually track 30 different initiative values. - No more problems with initiative order arising from Held or Readied actions. - Possible to automate the +2 init bonus for being within 10 of the Warlord (assuming all PC's initiative handled by macro). Cons: - The DM will have to set the initiative for each player, either by using a macro himself, or by setting it manually. - In order to use the macro that automatically adds the PC to the initiative cycle and rolls his initiative, PC's, each PC token needs to have a property called 'Initiative' (not a default property). - Any adjustments to PC initiative must be done by DM. At first glance the system does not seem to make a substantial difference to Eryiedes, and there are some concerns about getting it to work correctly. His biggest concern is that he does not like the idea of the DM rolling initiative for the player. We can get around that though by having the PC roll it and then letting Eryiedes enter it manually. I want to run a quick one off battle with myself as DM within a week or so to give the macros a shakedown. Then maybe a 2nd quick battle with Eryiedes as DM so he can try using the macros. If it turns out that the group as a whole like using the initiative window for tracking initiative, then we can try it in our regular game. So what say the rest of you? I am not suggesting we try the macro's until after I get a chance to test them out, and if the possibility that the DM may have to roll you initiative bothers the rest of you, then we should probably not bother. END COMMUNICATION [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
Gamers Seeking Gamers
D&D 4th Edition, H Series, Online Game
Top