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

[Storm Raven]

Y'know, the funny thing is that IME, players still require the initiative numbers to keep track of when they go even with the one-init/combat rule. Why? Because the DM almost never explicitly states the NPCs initiative and they don't know when they are up.

I never tell the PCs the NPCs initiative counts, and there isn't a problem. I just tell them who is next. I would also limit their time to make decisions when it is their turn, but no one seems to take more than a minute or so to do their stuff except for the occassional complex turn.

 

[kigmatzomat]

I simply refuse to believe you on that point. Counting down is just such a cumbersome way to achieve the desired effect; equivalent to saying "muzzle loading muskets are much quicker to use than breech loaders". I think you must be leaving something out of your explanations.

I don't see what the confusion is.

Compare:

"20...19...18...17.."
"Whoop, I'm 19! I will..."

to:

"...the orc does 2 points of damage. Next!"
"......."
"Tommy, that's you."
"What?"
"You're next."
"I am?"
"Yes."
"I thought I was after Jeff."
"Jeff said he was going to delay his next action."
"Oh. I figured I'd decide what to do while he was taking his action. Can I delay too?"
"Sure."
"Okay Jeff, you're up."
"Ummm, I wanted to delay until after Tommy went."

Now, everything past "Jeff said" is conjecture but it could have been one of dozens of other inane non-sequitors that some players are capable of. And if you don't think it's possible, you haven't played at enough Cons. I've got one player who, after 2.5 years of regular play, still has no idea what his stunning fist save is or where it is located on the PCGen character sheet.

Trust me, hollering out numbers can be far more effective and it cuts down the "you skipped me" arguements. *I* didn't skip anybody, *you* must have decided to delay/refocus/rolled low (since I have people roll init every round).

And you give people a minute to decide their actions? Assuming each takes a minute to consider their action and 1.5 minutes to roll dice/place spells/move minis/etc, then a party of 4 takes 10 minutes per round, not including GM actions. In my game with 10 characters, that's up to 25 minutes a round!

If I gave everyone 60 seconds just to decide what to do it'd take ~10 minutes just for the player's to *think* before they acted (party of 6 + 4 cohorts). Just using the 1.5 minutes/character of "doing stuff" there's 15 minutes between actions. *PLENTY* of time to make your decisions.

Now I see why you can't afford the time to roll init each round.

 

[KarinsDad]

I don't see what the confusion is.

Compare:

"20...19...18...17.."
"Whoop, I'm 19! I will..."

to:

"...the orc does 2 points of damage. Next!"
"......."
"Tommy, that's you."
"What?"
"You're next."
"I am?"
"Yes."
"I thought I was after Jeff."
"Jeff said he was going to delay his next action."
"Oh. I figured I'd decide what to do while he was taking his action. Can I delay too?"
"Sure."
"Okay Jeff, you're up."
"Ummm, I wanted to delay until after Tommy went."

Circular init and index cards work faster than either of these.

 

[DonTadow]

I don't see what the confusion is.

Compare:

"20...19...18...17.."
"Whoop, I'm 19! I will..."

to:

"...the orc does 2 points of damage. Next!"
"......."
"Tommy, that's you."
"What?"
"You're next."
"I am?"
"Yes."
"I thought I was after Jeff."
"Jeff said he was going to delay his next action."
"Oh. I figured I'd decide what to do while he was taking his action. Can I delay too?"
"Sure."
"Okay Jeff, you're up."
"Ummm, I wanted to delay until after Tommy went."

Now, everything past "Jeff said" is conjecture but it could have been one of dozens of other inane non-sequitors that some players are capable of. And if you don't think it's possible, you haven't played at enough Cons. I've got one player who, after 2.5 years of regular play, still has no idea what his stunning fist save is or where it is located on the PCGen character sheet.

Trust me, hollering out numbers can be far more effective and it cuts down the "you skipped me" arguements. *I* didn't skip anybody, *you* must have decided to delay/refocus/rolled low ('cuz I have people roll init every round).

I'd rather play with people intelligent enough to remember what place in line they are on their own. As a DM i dont have time to handhold everybody. I tell my players that i keep initiative for my own purposes not theirs. If they are skiped they are skiipped.l I wi'll go through the order once and after that i just go by whose next. Works great and saves time.

 

[kigmatzomat]

Circular init and index cards work faster than either of these.

Let's test that.

Round 1: roll init. clatter-clatter-clatter.....
"Tommy: init?"
"Umm, 4. Darn it."
"Rick?"
"18"
"Rick's cohort?"
"7"
"Steve?"
"22"
"Steve's cohort?"
"23"
"Jeff?"
"11"
"Jeff's cohort?"
"14"
"Matt?"
"13"
"Cohort?"
"15"
"Bill?"
"18"
"Write down my NPCs......Okay, Steve, you first."

vs.

"25...
24...
23...22.."
"Hey, I'm 23! I will....."

Yes, Circular init can start catching up at rounds 3-4 but I doubt that anyone here would notice any appreciable loss in playing speed.

And my question for the individual-init haters is:

Have you played 3.0 rolling init each round under a GM who was otherwise up to your expected standards?

Because I've played circular init under decent GMs and I've never noticed a speed increase.

 

[KarinsDad]

Let's test that.

Round 1: roll init. clatter-clatter-clatter.....
"Tommy: init?"
"Umm, 4. Darn it."
"Rick?"
"18"
"Rick's cohort?"
"7"
"Steve?"
"22"
"Steve's cohort?"
"23"
"Jeff?"
"11"
"Jeff's cohort?"
"14"
"Matt?"
"13"
"Cohort?"
"15"
"Bill?"
"18"
"Write down my NPCs......Okay, Steve, you first."

vs.

"25...
24...
23...22.."
"Hey, I'm 23! I will....."

Yes, Circular init can start catching up at rounds 3-4 but I doubt that anyone here would notice any appreciable loss in playing speed.

Actually, a DM could use your:

"25...
24...
23...22.."
"Hey, I'm 23! I will....."

method in round one, have a player place the index cards in order as the DM goes along and circular initiative by default will always be faster by the start of round two. Every single time. It does not need to take 3 or 4 rounds to catch up. The DM is caught up by the end of round one.

So by definition, circular initiative is always faster than rolling every round. It's inevitable if the DM handles it in an organized fashion.

Your test here fails.

And my question for the individual-init haters is:

Have you played 3.0 rolling init each round under a GM who was otherwise up to your expected standards?

No. By automatic definition, a DM who rolls inits each round is way below my expected standards.

Because I've played circular init under decent GMs and I've never noticed a speed increase.

Just by your post here, it is obvious that your definition of decent and mine are two different things.

First off, as DM, I do not get involved in inits except for the NPCs. Why give the DM double duty? He has enough tasks to do without rattling off questions or numbers as per either of your examples. Any task that can be done by a player should not be done by the DM in order to limit the number of simultaneous things that the DM has to handle.

Second in 3.5, we have a keeper of the index cards who typically says (using your example):

Keeper: "Anyone 20 to 25?"
Steve: "My cohort has 23 and I have 22"
Keeper: "Anyone 15 to 19?"
Matt: "My cohort has a 15"
Rick: "I have an 18"
Bill: "I have an 18"
Keeper: "Bill, Rick, and Matt's cohort because Bill has the highest init mod. Check. 10 to 14?"
Jeff: "My cohort has 14 and I have 11"
Matt: "I have a 13"
Keeper: "Jeff's cohort, Matt, and Jeff. 5 to 9?"
Rick: "My cohort has a 9"
Keeper: "Is Tommy the only one in the 1 to 4 range?"
Tommy: "Yeah, I guess I'm last with a 4."

Interspersed into this, the DM will say "Bad one has a 14", etc.

It takes about a minute, two minutes tops for a combat with a lot of NPCs. Still a lot less time and annoyance than:

4 minutes of gaming
DM: "15"
Matt: "I do xyz"
DM: "14" (assuming the DM is organized and keeps a D20 init die in front of him so he does not forget the current number)
Bill: "Oh shoot, I had an 18"
DM: "Pay attention Bill. Ok, you delayed until now because I'm not going back."
Bill" "Well, it was Rick's joke. I had coke coming out my nose and forgot my init. Blame Rick."
DM: "Next time, write it down."

Yada, yada, yada


And actually, my wife is usually the keeper of the index cards (except for the last few weeks while she is recovering from surgery) and you can have 5 people throw 5 simultaneous names at her with 5 sets of numbers and she'll get the cards perfect every time. So, it actually goes a lot faster than what I wrote above. And even before she started to play, we always had some player who was able to put the cards in order quickly. It's a fairly easy skill to master once a person has done it for several sessions in a row.

So, nobody has to write anything down (except as DM, I write down inits for the NPCs if I have more than 5 NPCs or so, otherwise, I just have 5 or less rolled D20s in front of me for when inits are figured out), nobody has to "pay attention" for more than a minute or so at the beginning of combat, etc.


But, you are wasting DM time and energy if he is asking for inits either at the beginning of combat, or every round, regardless of technique. However, there are DMs who are "control freaks". For some bizarre reason, they have to be involved in every little detail, or they have to be at the center of attention, or they would not dream of letting the players know when the NPC inits are, or whatever the motive (e.g. the DM has always kept track of init in our games, etc.). I have played under such DMs and they have to be in charge of inits, regardless of the fact that it is a total waste of their time to do so. It's very strange, but different strokes ...


PS. We even have a guy in charge of miniatures in our game. Either I get out miniatures I'll need before the session even starts, or during the game I'll say: "Get me out a huge giant" or whatever. It's a waste of the DM's time to do tasks that the players can handle for him. While the player is getting out the miniature, I as DM can be doing something else like adding to the drawing on the playing surface, or be flipping to a spell, or joke, or even just take a short breather for a second, or whatever.

 

[DonTadow]

But come on now. In all three examples, you guys exagerate the Player commentary to prove your point. It all comes down to players and player responsiblity. I do it in my home games and when I'm on the road. I tell players that its their job to keep track of their own initiative. I'll always announce the next three and its up to them to remember it.

Time is a precious commodity in the d and d world and I hate the feeling of an "auctioneer" rather than a game master.

 

[Raven Crowking]

No, the players could vote you out as DM if you are not reasonable.

No, they cannot. They can refuse to play in a game I run; they cannot cause me to stop running games. This isn't an elected office. There is no "In" or "Out" to vote me to or from. I offer to run; they play or do not play.

Maybe the average DM doesn't have a lineup waiting for seats at his table. IME, there are more players than DMs, and I've never had to worry about too few players. Never. For each of the people I have in my current group, there are two more hoping to get in. I DM for the people I choose to because, as DonTadow says, we are friends, and because they are enjoying the game.

And as Don says, yes, I will compromise. But what compromises I make, I make because I choose to do so. No player, and no group of players, can force me to compromise, any more than I can force them to play in a game they are not enjoying.

Also, as stated earlier, this is an explicit social contract. Not implicit. If you don't accept that I arbitrate, you don't play in my game.

(If you'd like to discuss further, please open a new thread....I'll not respond to this topic further in this one. It would be a complete derail.)

 

[Raven Crowking]

I simply refuse to believe you on that point.

Maybe there is something critical that I'm leaving out, but if so only because it seems so common-sensical to me that I am not aware of it.

Or, you can choose to believe that I am lying.

Whatever!

 

[werk]

Rant

I have to say that the declaring init DM countdown of doom is a pet peeve of mine.

Time waster and stupid annoying, but maybe that's just my opinion/experience.

"OK...inits....uh...25?"
24?
23?
22?
"I'm highest and I go on 18."
"Hold on."
21?
20?
19?
"I got 18."
"I got 17."
"I got 14."
"I go on 8."
"I got 2."
"OK, hold on...uh...17?"
<pounds head on table>

(see you saturday )