D&D 5E Ideas for Initiative house rules

[toucanbuzz]

This is a bad thing. If a player casts a spell and there's a decent chance it has zero effect because of randomness per round, please tell me how that adds to enjoyment at the table, which is the only true measure if it's a good thing or bad thing. Even with if some times it has a double effect, it's a net unhappiness as the lost turn plus resources spent is a bigger disadvantage.

I've been playing random initiative each round for roughly 15 or so years and also played d20 rolls for 10. It's super rare that a player ever "loses" a turn in randomized initiative because players tend to pick actions that have a realistic shot of occurring. It's a style of play for gamers who like tension and unpredictability. Instead of picking the perfect action, you pick the best one as you see it. You may not always get what you want the way you want it, and some gamers like that.

Alternately, some like the predictability and board game strategic situation that cyclical initiative provides. You always know A goes before B and plan accordingly. There's no inherent right or wrong to either one, and historically initiative was a major headache for the designers when putting out 3rd edition. Rather than debating who's right and wrong, I tend to adhere to Tasha's Cauldron's #10: Have Fun. "Each group has its own style."

 

[Scott Christian]

Yep, I think of it as "Mental Speed".

For me that would mean wisdom (at least the way d&d is set up,) but there is enough gray area that i can see where you are coming from.

Muscle memory is a thing. I hear boxers and MMA fighters say it's not mental speed (at least if you are concentrating, and that negates wisdom). But rather having seen the same punch 10,000 times, and reacting to it. At least that is how I take it.

 

[Redwizard007]

Muscle memory is a thing. I hear boxers and MMA fighters say it's not mental speed (at least if you are concentrating, and that negates wisdom). But rather having seen the same punch 10,000 times, and reacting to it. At least that is how I take it.

That sounds better represented by the poster that suggested using proficiency. A suggestion that has IMO, serious merit, but would usually be a wash since everyone likely has the same proficiency modifier.

INT - Intelligence measures mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason.

WIS - Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.

DEX - Dexterity measures agility, reflexes, and balance.

Of those, the only one that doesn't mention something about perceiving and/or reacting is Int. Int doesn't even mention speed of thought, though it is a logical enough jump that I wouldn't have a serious issue if my DM began running it that way. Wisdom lets you perceive someone ready for violence, Dexterity lets you react to it.

 

[Rabulias]

The Robert Downey Jr Sherlock Holmes films offer a possible interpretation of Int providing a bonus to Initiative.

 

[Don Durito]

Why do we want Int to offer a bonus to initiative?

What is it supposed to achieve? Is there some burning need to make Wizards act first in combat more often?

 

[DND_Reborn]

INT - Intelligence measures mental acuity, accuracy of recall, and the ability to reason.

WIS - Wisdom reflects how attuned you are to the world around you and represents perceptiveness and intuition.

DEX - Dexterity measures agility, reflexes, and balance.

Yep. Until we shifted to our current version, we did d20 + DEX, INT, or WIS (player's choice). As DM, I did d20 and just picked the highest of those scores in the monster's/ NPC's statblock.

IMO, it is the best version if you insist on adding something. Personally, we just dropped the "something".

 

[Don Durito]

Could just do the 13th Age thing where you pick the middle of three scores.

 

[Older Beholder]

This is a bad thing. If a player casts a spell and there's a decent chance it has zero effect because of randomness per round, please tell me how that adds to enjoyment at the table, which is the only true measure if it's a good thing or bad thing. Even with if some times it has a double effect, it's a net unhappiness as the lost turn plus resources spent is a bigger disadvantage.

I use the ‘roll initiative each round’ method maybe a third of the time, depending on the encounter and how I’m going for pacing. If it’s against a single big opponent I‘ll use it just to make things feel more dynamic.

In practice a player that’s rolled low initiative won’t use a spell that has a duration effect on that turn because they’re aware they’re going last.

 

[Don Durito]

Another option is to just reroll initiative at a certain point in a fight (maybe 3 rounds) or if something happens (eg reinforcements arrive). You could also allow players to choose if initiative is rerolled as a reward for a stunt that does something to change the battlefield.

 

[Quickleaf]

I use an "(American) Football Huddle" at the beginning of most combats, allowing the players 1 minute to strategize amongst themselves. Then I use "Clustered Initiative" where if a couple players have consecutive turns with no monsters between them, then those players can go in any order they like.

Creatures with the same initiative number act simultaneously (i.e. it's possible for an ogre and a fighter with initiative 11 to knock each other out).

I also occasionally spice up how Surprise works, by providing the ambusher(s) with a couple choices depending on the scene: Choose the terrain layout, Eavesdrop before attack, Free Move or Bonus Action, Withdraw after attacking in a guerilla fighting scenario, etc.