Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Eyes of Nine" data-source="post: 8034293" data-attributes="member: 99786">Initiative isn't painful, in the sense that nothing in any game at the table is &quot;painful&quot; if your group likes it and it doesn't detract from the fun. However, if it's not in the rules, then you'll have to come up with your own system. And initiative is just one of many possible systems.What I like about initiative: It's very clear when people take their turns. It also delineates the concept of &quot;turns&quot; or &quot;rounds&quot;, within which are discrete atomic &quot;actions&quot; or &quot;moves&quot; or whatever that can be taken. The concept of the &quot;turn&quot; in D&amp;D and its descendants goes all the way back to at least 1e, and probably before that. For a tactical combat game, where there's a bit of competition between the PCs and the GM characters/creatures, the idea of a turn makes things feel more &quot;fair&quot;. There is also nothing in a game of D&amp;D more delineatory than &quot;Ok, guys, roll for initiative&quot;. It delineates that we are moving out of the shared storytelling space we were in before, and moving into the tactical combat game and are going to engage with the tactical combat game sub-systems.What I don't like about initiative: It's an artificial construct laid across the story (which I tend to either call &quot;the fiction&quot; or &quot;the narrative&quot;). It moves us away from the storytelling we were sharing before and moves us into the tactical combat sub-game. Which is fine in a game like D&amp;D and games like D&amp;D, which has the history of doing that EXACT Thing. But in other games, maybe we don't have to leave the narrative shared space, except briefly because we have an in-game conflict and we want to engage with a random element (a die roll, a card draw) to either a) assist the GM in deciding the outcome, b) add a moment of excitement and suspense to the story or c) there may not be trust between the players and the GM that the GM will provide the most awesome outcome to advance the story. (Trust between players and GMs is probably a whole other thread that I'm not actually interested in starting myself; but would participate if someone else started it <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🙃" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f643.png" title="Upside-down face&nbsp; &nbsp; :upside_down:" data-shortname=":upside_down:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /> ).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Eyes of Nine, post: 8034293, member: 99786"] Initiative isn't painful, in the sense that nothing in any game at the table is "painful" if your group likes it and it doesn't detract from the fun. However, if it's not in the rules, then you'll have to come up with your own system. And initiative is just one of many possible systems. What I like about initiative: It's very clear when people take their turns. It also delineates the concept of "turns" or "rounds", within which are discrete atomic "actions" or "moves" or whatever that can be taken. The concept of the "turn" in D&D and its descendants goes all the way back to at least 1e, and probably before that. For a tactical combat game, where there's a bit of competition between the PCs and the GM characters/creatures, the idea of a turn makes things feel more "fair". There is also nothing in a game of D&D more delineatory than "Ok, guys, roll for initiative". It delineates that we are moving out of the shared storytelling space we were in before, and moving into the tactical combat game and are going to engage with the tactical combat game sub-systems. What I don't like about initiative: It's an artificial construct laid across the story (which I tend to either call "the fiction" or "the narrative"). It moves us away from the storytelling we were sharing before and moves us into the tactical combat sub-game. Which is fine in a game like D&D and games like D&D, which has the history of doing that EXACT Thing. But in other games, maybe we don't have to leave the narrative shared space, except briefly because we have an in-game conflict and we want to engage with a random element (a die roll, a card draw) to either a) assist the GM in deciding the outcome, b) add a moment of excitement and suspense to the story or c) there may not be trust between the players and the GM that the GM will provide the most awesome outcome to advance the story. (Trust between players and GMs is probably a whole other thread that I'm not actually interested in starting myself; but would participate if someone else started it 🙃 ). [/QUOTE]

Verification