Help needed with Alternate "Initiative" System

[Danyael]

I don't know you guys, but most video game RPG designers have learned a lot with tabletop games. It seems that they should return the favor; why are we still using "turn-based" mechanics, and start using a dynamic action system?

I've been analyzing video games for a while, and although it is very difficult (actually, it's nearly impossible), a "dynamic" system, where your character is actually running while someone is shooting arrows at you, could be done.

I don't know how many systems have done this (and done it right), but this is my approach:

(Help is needed as stated... Read first)

You have a 10 x 10 chart, with ten rows, each with the numbers 1 - 10:


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10


Something like this. Now, let's say your character wants to attack his opponent, which costs 15 points (just an example, not the real thing). Your character has declared his intentions at time 0 (out of the chart) and assuming he is near his target when time 15 (5 on the second row) comes up, you resolve the attack roll.

Actually, it is very simple (but large scale battles need tokens of different colors and symbols to represent your character's action at any given moment).

The cost is adjustable at the cost of some penalties and blah blah blah. The main problem I'm facing is MOVEMENT. Movement varies and apparently, you could "choose" your speed cost, since you can determine if you just want to "walk" or "sprint" (the latter being a skill for not so obvious reasons).

Just think about it and give me a scream.

Crazy huh? It's just a start for what is supposed to be a reality in RPG's long ago.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

On first blush, it sounds like there's a lot of calculation and response. D&D initiative moves combat quickly because it's turn-based. The computer game handles all that math for the player and you move in real-time, unlike a game table where you discuss actions and analyze them.

 

[boredgremlin]

i think it would work great for a computer game. for a tabletop game i think it would slow things down way too much to re-figure initiative each turn.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Look into the Morrow Project for a finer precision combat maneuver system. But, this would extend combat in D&D into hours, making it playable only by 1% of the gaming population who find such tedious trivialities amusing. Like me. But, I realize I'm in the very small minority. So, I think you'd be wasting your time.

 

[Danyael]

Why is it only fit for computer games?? It would be a lot of calculation, but a "in-your-face" chart with specific colored tokens (w/symbols), and reducing calculations (you won't be adding 51 to your current time all the time) could make it possible. I mean, when are we taking away turn-based system that, yes, they are faster, but are a major strain to reality.

I mean, your initiative count is 17, your buddy's 16. You stated you are making a double move, so you actually moved 60 feet, and all he wanted to do is to drop his sword... he doesn't get to do it 'cause is not his turn! I don't know ou guys, but this is not meant to be a monopoly game.

 

[JVisgaitis]

I mean, when are we taking away turn-based system that, yes, they are faster, but are a major strain to reality.

Reality is great to base things off of but when it seriously slows down play for little or no gain, who cares? I think the chart no matter how intuitive would be a nightmare for players to keep track of. Plus, at the end of the day what's the advantage to gameplay for something like this? Maybe I'm just missing something...

 

[Michael Morris]

Why is it only fit for computer games?? It would be a lot of calculation... <snip>

You answered your own question. Memory issues need to managed carefully or the game becomes a chore. There's only so much people can keep in their head before they start losing track. This is one of the reasons high level play is unpopular - too much to keep track of.

 

[Vrecknidj]

The old Federation and Empire game used an initiative system that was based on 32. Each creature (object, ship, whatever) had a speed from 0 to 32, and, your speed determined which of the movement phases you'd act on. So, if you had a speed of 32, you could act on each of the 32 phases. If you had a speed of 16, you could act on every even activation, if you had a speed of 24, you could act on 3/4 of the activations, etc.

There was a table that explained when each speed got its turn.

I've always liked the idea of a chronomancy spell (or, in the case of my players most recent nemesis--a deity of time) that allowed an individual to have more than one place in the initiative order.

Dave

 

[avigor]

This sounds like the Feng Shui shot system.

The turns are called sequences. Each sequence is divided into shots; everyone's initiative checks determine how many shots their are in a sequence. Everyone rolls a six sided die and adds their speed to it (speed is an attribute in Feng Shui). Unlike some other Feng Shui rolls, sixes are not rerolled. Each action has a shot cost, which dictates when your next action is. You keep doing this, dropping your current shot. When you hit 1-2, you can perform a 3 shot action (attack, for example) without incurring a shot cost penalty on your next initiative roll. If you take more than 3 shots to drop below 0, then the remainder is deducted from your next initiative. Noone acts on shot 0 or lower; you just go to the next sequence after everyone at shot 1 has declared and resolved their actions. Continuous actions, such as driving, make other actions more complicated and add 1 to their shot cost.

In Feng Shui, it's the player's job to keep track of his current shot. The GM just has to keep track of the current shot, not the player's.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I don't know ou guys, but this is not meant to be a monopoly game.

True, but it's not meant to be a wargame simulation either. A great majority of players don't want to lose the feel of being in character for 3 hours while they battle goblins (albeit realistically). For at least a large percentage (say 15-20%), though I would not say a majority, the combat is one of the least important events in the game.

This is why you'll get a lot of negative reaction to such a system unless your group consists of a bunch of wargamers.