Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Twowolves" data-source="post: 2944866" data-attributes="member: 18093">No, that isn't the sidebar I am talking about. But since I don't have my books handy and I'm getting ready for work, I'll have to look it up later.Multiple opponents with the same init? First of all, what difference does it make if 5 orcs go on a 10, or if one orc goes on each count of 13, 12, 11, 10, 9 and 8, assuming no PC actions in the middle? The issue of a DM rolling "batch initiative" is a seperate issue, throwing it in here just muddies the waters. Secondly, I don't disagree that double attacks is more lethal than double damage. It's the same principle, different scale. Combat is potentially more lethal, perhaps much more so. Ok, it becomes an underlying theme for that game.Well, ok, then you only went over two times the reccomended number of foes, instead of four times.Calling it a "mistake" is a judgement call. We sure didn't think it was a mistake at the time, and plenty of people would call the current system a mistake. I agree 100% The sidebar describing it didn't even give it much credit, but the "tweaks" that would shoot down the developers reasons against it were already in place in previous editions, but they ignored them. Certainly, if I were to use a system like this, it would be a lot more detailed than just "re-roll every round", to prevent the problems many have proposed in this thread.</blockquote>