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
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
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="Hriston" data-source="post: 7760152" data-attributes="member: 6787503"><p>As @<em><strong><u><a href="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=42582" target="_blank">pemerton</a></u></strong></em> has already pointed out, initiative doesn’t have to work the way it does in 5E. You could have all the action in a round resolve simultaneously, or use side initiative. Another suggestion I’ve seen made on these boards is to forego rolling initiative at the beginning of combat, waiting until conflicts in timing arise in the course of events and resolving each of those conflicts with an opposed DEX check. Clearly, turn-based initiative is a deliberate design choice in 5E, not a necessary one. </p><p></p><p>Also, the way the game has chosen to keep each character’s turn separate is to call into question the certainty of when each character’s turn will happen. It resolves that uncertainty with a DEX check, which measures a character’s ability to move and act quickly and is compared with the other results to establish a ranking. None of this is necessary for turn-based initiative. Each player could make an unmodified roll or draw straws if the goal is only to establish a turn order. The choice of a DEX check implies that the participants are attempting to move and act quickly and that they may fail to do so. Saying that it's a special case or that it's necessary doesn't explain that away.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I doubt you were fighting in rounds. Seriously, though, I don't see why "trying to win" doesn't entail trying to strike the first blow. Just letting your opponent hit you first seems like a good way to get knocked out.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You're trying to move and/or act before they do. They are trying to do the same. Those two efforts are in direct opposition to each other. Only one can succeed in being first. No one is claiming you're trying to stop them from acting at all. That would require incapacitating them in some way, which I think is beyond what initiative is meant to decide.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm not sure what you mean by "Combat requires". There are any number of ways a combat system can organize the action. If the intent of the initiative phase is only to impose an order of resolution then why not flip a coin? Why use a DEX check at all?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The DM could decide both turns resolve simultaneously, but the rule is clearly designed to avoid that situation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hriston, post: 7760152, member: 6787503"] As @[I][B][U][URL="http://www.enworld.org/forum/member.php?u=42582"]pemerton[/URL][/U][/B][/I] has already pointed out, initiative doesn’t have to work the way it does in 5E. You could have all the action in a round resolve simultaneously, or use side initiative. Another suggestion I’ve seen made on these boards is to forego rolling initiative at the beginning of combat, waiting until conflicts in timing arise in the course of events and resolving each of those conflicts with an opposed DEX check. Clearly, turn-based initiative is a deliberate design choice in 5E, not a necessary one. Also, the way the game has chosen to keep each character’s turn separate is to call into question the certainty of when each character’s turn will happen. It resolves that uncertainty with a DEX check, which measures a character’s ability to move and act quickly and is compared with the other results to establish a ranking. None of this is necessary for turn-based initiative. Each player could make an unmodified roll or draw straws if the goal is only to establish a turn order. The choice of a DEX check implies that the participants are attempting to move and act quickly and that they may fail to do so. Saying that it's a special case or that it's necessary doesn't explain that away. I doubt you were fighting in rounds. Seriously, though, I don't see why "trying to win" doesn't entail trying to strike the first blow. Just letting your opponent hit you first seems like a good way to get knocked out. You're trying to move and/or act before they do. They are trying to do the same. Those two efforts are in direct opposition to each other. Only one can succeed in being first. No one is claiming you're trying to stop them from acting at all. That would require incapacitating them in some way, which I think is beyond what initiative is meant to decide. I'm not sure what you mean by "Combat requires". There are any number of ways a combat system can organize the action. If the intent of the initiative phase is only to impose an order of resolution then why not flip a coin? Why use a DEX check at all? The DM could decide both turns resolve simultaneously, but the rule is clearly designed to avoid that situation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
Top