Don't make me roll for initiative.........again

[Paraxis]

First I am in the camp of rolling once for initiative is the best way, its simple clean and speeds up combat.

But for the ones that roll every round if the DM understands the effect it will have on play and the players understand as well then have fun and play. If I would ever do this and I would not though the DM should keep track of when spell effects started and have them end on the same initiative number X rounds later. Now thats some crazy effects.

By the way the original issue I think needs to be looked at again, Goldmoon posted on another thread how her DM thinks that if a weapon has a crit range greater then 20 then any natural roll within that range is an auto hit like rolling a nat 20. Ie you always hit with a rapier anytime you roll an 18-20.

The real issue hear is a DM who not only doesn't seem to read the rulebooks he is making up rules and calling them RAW.

I expect Goldmoon to have lots of questions soon, as this DM is overall a poor one.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Now, you get people into this mindset of planning everything in a nice orderly manner, and throw the chaos and turmoil of init every round (which is probably more like real combat - CHAOS!) - thier brain snaps...order...order...order...chaos?! They plan everything about thier character, get into a nice orderly mindset, now that planning is thrown out the window, they have to react - completely changing thier chain of thought by 180 degrees.

And, IME, that need to react actually makes them capable of reacting -- and hence speeds combats.

 

[KarinsDad]

Then the PCs are idiots or the NPC wizard is omniscient. Why didn't they have their own wizard fireball the NPC wizard the first round? Why didn't they use archers? Why didn't they bloody well spread out as they approached?

What if the PCs do exactly as you suggest as best as they can?

PCs whomp on NPCs in round one, but the indoor quarters are tight and the PC front line cannot yet get past the NPC front line. NPC Wizard is wounded, so he Fireballs the PCs and then moves into a side corridor where it is more safe. On round two, NPC Wizard wins init, gets to go again, so he moves to the corridor to see what is going on. Nobody has moved, so he fireballs again.

Everyone did smart actions. Nobody was an idiot. It just so happens that the NPCs doing smart actions ends up with a TPK.

All because of the init system, not because of anything else.

This is merely an issue of a character getting two turns fairly close to back to back. Nothing else.

As with the CDG, the question becomes, So?

So basically, your position boils down to who cares if PCs often die? The player can always roll up a new PC or the other PCs can spend a lot of their loot on getting any dead PC raised.

That's fine for your game.


It would not be fun for my game, nor I suspect for many other players here.

I also suspect the DM of games who do roll initiative every round play a less challenging combat game than I do. I often send equal or more powerful opponents against the PCs because the PCs have more versatility. They can "go to the well" with charged items or blow through their spells in order to sway combat back in their favor when it is going against them.

Mathematically, you can only heavily combat challenge the PCs when rolling init every round if you fudge dice rolls or make less optimal decisions for the NPCs because sooner or later, the NPC Fighter will get 6 back to back full round attacks against the PC Cleric just due to init instead of his normal 3 attacks followed by the PC Cleric and/or other PC allies getting a chance to respond.

Basic Laws of Probability. In fact, the basic laws of probability indicate that even rolling init once at the beginning of combat, sooner or later one or more PCs will die if the DM is giving them reasonable challenges for their level. But, the difference is that it will occur a lot less often rolling init once per combat than it will once per round.

The math is against your POV.

 

[Goldmoon]

First I am in the camp of rolling once for initiative is the best way, its simple clean and speeds up combat.

But for the ones that roll every round if the DM understands the effect it will have on play and the players understand as well then have fun and play. If I would ever do this and I would not though the DM should keep track of when spell effects started and have them end on the same initiative number X rounds later. Now thats some crazy effects.

By the way the original issue I think needs to be looked at again, Goldmoon posted on another thread how her DM thinks that if a weapon has a crit range greater then 20 then any natural roll within that range is an auto hit like rolling a nat 20. Ie you always hit with a rapier anytime you roll an 18-20.

The real issue hear is a DM who not only doesn't seem to read the rulebooks he is making up rules and calling them RAW.

I expect Goldmoon to have lots of questions soon, as this DM is overall a poor one.

Hes not really poor, just inexperienced to 3.5 D&D. Im an old-school gamer who has been playing since first edition. Re-rolling initiative every round in second edition was fine because even if the npc wizard did go last then first he had casting time. If the Frost Giant with his two handed sword of PC slaying went last the first you had weapon speed. No such things exist here in 3.5. It took me awhile to get used to the new system. (no 18% str for my fighter....thats BS) but I made the adjustments, Im just asking my DM to do the same. He still clings to some 2nd edition rules stubbornly even they dont really work for and were not designed for the 3.5 system. I make it my place in the group to gently steer him toward the modern D&D system but I am not above thwacking him in the head with a book if I must.

 

[Raven Crowking]

What if the PCs do exactly as you suggest as best as they can?

PCs whomp on NPCs in round one, but the indoor quarters are tight and the PC front line cannot yet get past the NPC front line. NPC Wizard is wounded, so he Fireballs the PCs and then moves into a side corridor where it is more safe. On round two, NPC Wizard wins init, gets to go again, so he moves to the corridor to see what is going on. Nobody has moved, so he fireballs again.

Everyone did smart actions. Nobody was an idiot. It just so happens that the NPCs doing smart actions ends up with a TPK.

All because of the init system, not because of anything else.

What if the NPC front line grapples the PC line and prevents them from acting, then the NPC wizard gets to fireball twice even if you use the normal rules? What happens then? Obviously, we should do away with grappling & pinning. Or....what if the NPC front line sunders the potion flask and disrupts spellcasting on the healers through held actions? Obviously, we'd better do away with those options.

Etc.

The DM sets up the opponents and the situations, including what information the PCs have (or can reasonably obtain) about the NPCs and what information the NPCs have about the PCs. If the DM sets up an encounter where the NPCs can easily kill the PCs, and the PCs have no way to know about it/prepare/avoid it in advance, then it is the DM's fault. But this is true regardless of what ruleset you are using.

This is not merely an issue of a character getting two turns fairly close to back to back. This is an issue where getting two turns back to back has overwhelming consequences. And, oddly enough (or not so oddly) it hasn't happened in my game yet.

So basically, your position boils down to who cares if PCs often die?

Sorta.

I mean, I certainly don't molly coddle.

However, again, IME your fears simply don't come up. Regardless of the math you claim "proves" your point, there is both player ingenuity and DM balance that come into play. Or, maybe, it is because my game is fairly mid-magic (which, against the common 3x backdrop, is "low magic"). If the PCs are running into something powerful enough to kill them in two rounds, they generally have some clues, and do their best to pick the terrain or avoid the fight. Or get help.

Again, simply put, it never comes up.

Honestly, I think that this is no different than the trap thread you and I were both on not so long ago. Some feared that allowing "sensor" type traps to sense beyond the range of a rogue's ability to search for traps would somehow destroy the balance of the game. We both know that it doesn't do so.....IF both DM and players take the rules they are using into account. The same is true with rerolled initiative.

 

[Rystil Arden]

What if the NPC front line grapples the PC line and prevents them from acting, then the NPC wizard gets to fireball twice even if you use the normal rules? What happens then? Obviously, we should do away with grappling & pinning. Or....what if the NPC front line sunders the potion flask and disrupts spellcasting on the healers through held actions? Obviously, we'd better do away with those options.

But see, in that case, the NPCs have to roll to complete those options, and they have to specifically use up several NPCs' turns to accomplish this. With initiative reroll, they can just automatically gain this effect for no price. If they do the manoeuvres you suggested, they will get *three* rounds of actions. The fact is, a Cleric with Hold Person is not a scary or uncommon encounter. You can expect to see one in any adventure of level 1 and up. And with Initiative reroll, chances are fairly good that a character will automatically die against any such cleric without getting to make a single roll beyond that one first Will save or giving the other PCs time to react or take any action. In effect, you turn a 2nd-level spell into a Save-or-instant-death effect due to the initiative variant and nothing else. Also, as to readying an action to bash the caster--you actually are even more likely to do this with initiative reroll than without, since you might get to bash the caster, ruin his spell, and then move back up to the beginning of the lineup next round as if you hadn't readied.

 

[werk]

Since it looks like you want to turn my comments into personal attacks, we'll Post inappropriately and then get our entire post edited by a jackbooted moderator. Woohoo!

Edit: <nods> good call.

 

[Rystil Arden]

werk--you should probably report a bad post instead of responding in kind. Threads in the rules forum sometimes tend to get a bit heated, but we should try to keep it civil--we're having a pretty good discussion for the most part, so it'd be sad to see it locked.

 

[Goldmoon]

werk--you should probably report a bad post instead of responding in kind. Threads in the rules forum sometimes tend to get a bit heated, but we should try to keep it civil--we're having a pretty good discussion for the most part, so it'd be sad to see it locked.

Agreed! Im getting alot out of this thread.

 

[werk]

Agreed! Im getting alot out of this thread.

So how'd the discussion with your DM go?