Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Legendary actions... should it be 3?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 6913251" data-attributes="member: 6787650"><p>The key problem with cyclic initiative is that it forces N-1 of the N players to sit around doing nothing until their own turn comes around. <em>Nothing else</em> in the game works this way. Normally, the DM describes a situation, the players say what they want to do, and the DM tells them what happens. (DM: there aren't any guards in sight right now. Bob: I climb the tree. Arel: While he's climbing the tree, I sneak under the bush. Kevin: I lean on a fence post and look casual. DM: Okay, you do that, then here's what happens...)</p><p></p><p>That's the way combat works at my table too, with a twist: higher Int means faster thinking means shorter OODA loops, so I tell them the declared actions of low-Int monsters first, and then ask players to declare their actions in order of Int from lowest to highest. (High-Int monsters are relatively few, and get slotted in where appropriate.) Although in practice what that actually means is that I let players of high-Int characters change their action declarations based on declarations from lower-Int characters, again because of the OODA loop. Then we all resolve actions simultaneously, rolling initiative if it's necessary to resolve near-simultaneous actions. Frequently it's not--if I miss you and then you hit me for 7 points of damage, it doesn't matter which came first.</p><p></p><p>This is exactly how we used to play AD&D. There are a couple of other little wrinkles related to durations and delayed actions, but that's the gist of it.</p><p></p><p><strong>Key properties:</strong> it avoids any artificial modal distinction between combat and non-combat; it allows smooth flow back and forth between combat and noncombat as necessary, which encourages players to consider nonviolent solutions to certain problems (like "how do we surrender when overmatched?"); it provides a natural precedent for resolving other near-simultaneous actions such as two people both waiting with readied actions on the same trigger; it neatly solves the problem of action declarations that will take longer than one turn to resolve ("I sneak around the encampment" while other PCs are fighting orcs just means you have the other PCs roll several rounds of attacks against the orcs and then tell the sneaking PC when he's in position); and most importantly, it prevents the DM from having to ask players to sit around in enforced inactivity while it's "not your turn". The pacing stays dynamic and cooperative.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 6913251, member: 6787650"] The key problem with cyclic initiative is that it forces N-1 of the N players to sit around doing nothing until their own turn comes around. [I]Nothing else[/I] in the game works this way. Normally, the DM describes a situation, the players say what they want to do, and the DM tells them what happens. (DM: there aren't any guards in sight right now. Bob: I climb the tree. Arel: While he's climbing the tree, I sneak under the bush. Kevin: I lean on a fence post and look casual. DM: Okay, you do that, then here's what happens...) That's the way combat works at my table too, with a twist: higher Int means faster thinking means shorter OODA loops, so I tell them the declared actions of low-Int monsters first, and then ask players to declare their actions in order of Int from lowest to highest. (High-Int monsters are relatively few, and get slotted in where appropriate.) Although in practice what that actually means is that I let players of high-Int characters change their action declarations based on declarations from lower-Int characters, again because of the OODA loop. Then we all resolve actions simultaneously, rolling initiative if it's necessary to resolve near-simultaneous actions. Frequently it's not--if I miss you and then you hit me for 7 points of damage, it doesn't matter which came first. This is exactly how we used to play AD&D. There are a couple of other little wrinkles related to durations and delayed actions, but that's the gist of it. [B]Key properties:[/B] it avoids any artificial modal distinction between combat and non-combat; it allows smooth flow back and forth between combat and noncombat as necessary, which encourages players to consider nonviolent solutions to certain problems (like "how do we surrender when overmatched?"); it provides a natural precedent for resolving other near-simultaneous actions such as two people both waiting with readied actions on the same trigger; it neatly solves the problem of action declarations that will take longer than one turn to resolve ("I sneak around the encampment" while other PCs are fighting orcs just means you have the other PCs roll several rounds of attacks against the orcs and then tell the sneaking PC when he's in position); and most importantly, it prevents the DM from having to ask players to sit around in enforced inactivity while it's "not your turn". The pacing stays dynamic and cooperative. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Legendary actions... should it be 3?
Top