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
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="pemerton" data-source="post: 7761206" data-attributes="member: 42582"><p>My summary is perhaps biased because I think [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION] is right.</p><p></p><p>The questions are:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">Is rolling initiative an aspect of combat resolution?</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">Is rolling initiative a type of stat-check contest?</p><p></p><p> [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION] answers yes to both questions, along the following lines:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">If a player (for a PC) or the GM (for a NPC) declares a combat-ish action (attacking with a weapon, fireballing, etc) then (i) the combat rules are activated, and (ii) two sides (in the typical case, at least) are in opposition in respect of the just-commenced battle.</p> <p style="margin-left: 20px"></p> <p style="margin-left: 20px">The fact of (i) refers us to the combat rules, which say to do various stuff at the start of combat including determining initiative for each participant. The fact of (ii) helps us understand how and why determining initiative is a type of stat-check contest: we have these opposed entities, each trying (literally) to get and retain the initiative in the battle that has just commenced, and so we use DEX for this (because it's the quickness/reaction time stat) and we compare results to work out who wins (because that's how contests work); and, because there are (often) more than two participants, we rank the non-winners by result (which is a logical extrapolation from the simple case of only two opponents).</p><p></p><p> [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] answers no to both questions, along the following lines:</p><p></p><p style="margin-left: 20px">A contest depends upon opposition. (He also has views about <em>direct </em>opposition, but I think they can be set aside for economy.) Combat involves opposition; but combat doesn't commence until one entity attacks another; and an attack is not commenced/made until an attack action is declared; and an attack action cannot be declared until a character's turn comes up; and no one's turn <em>can</em> come up until an initiative order is established; and establishing such an order depends upon making initiative checks; hence initiative checks happen prior to combat commencing and prior to any opposition arising; hence initiative checks are not a stat-check contest, even though they might superficially look like it.</p><p></p><p>An apparent consequence of Maxperson's approach is that the GM has to call for initiative checks based on some sort of intuition, or an apprehension of the <em>possibility</em> that an attack might be declared once the initiative sequence is established and hence characters start taking turns.</p><p></p><p>Hriston points to this consequence as one that <em>divorces</em> the call for initiative from that mechanic's place in the combat chapter; and adduces this as evidence in favour of the alternative view!</p><p></p><p>As I said, I think Hriston is right. But as per my post just upthread, I also think it's no surprise that this is contentious.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7761206, member: 42582"] My summary is perhaps biased because I think [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION] is right. The questions are: [indent]Is rolling initiative an aspect of combat resolution? Is rolling initiative a type of stat-check contest?[/indent] [MENTION=6787503]Hriston[/MENTION] answers yes to both questions, along the following lines: [indent]If a player (for a PC) or the GM (for a NPC) declares a combat-ish action (attacking with a weapon, fireballing, etc) then (i) the combat rules are activated, and (ii) two sides (in the typical case, at least) are in opposition in respect of the just-commenced battle. The fact of (i) refers us to the combat rules, which say to do various stuff at the start of combat including determining initiative for each participant. The fact of (ii) helps us understand how and why determining initiative is a type of stat-check contest: we have these opposed entities, each trying (literally) to get and retain the initiative in the battle that has just commenced, and so we use DEX for this (because it's the quickness/reaction time stat) and we compare results to work out who wins (because that's how contests work); and, because there are (often) more than two participants, we rank the non-winners by result (which is a logical extrapolation from the simple case of only two opponents).[/indent] [MENTION=23751]Maxperson[/MENTION] answers no to both questions, along the following lines: [indent]A contest depends upon opposition. (He also has views about [I]direct [/I]opposition, but I think they can be set aside for economy.) Combat involves opposition; but combat doesn't commence until one entity attacks another; and an attack is not commenced/made until an attack action is declared; and an attack action cannot be declared until a character's turn comes up; and no one's turn [I]can[/I] come up until an initiative order is established; and establishing such an order depends upon making initiative checks; hence initiative checks happen prior to combat commencing and prior to any opposition arising; hence initiative checks are not a stat-check contest, even though they might superficially look like it.[/indent] An apparent consequence of Maxperson's approach is that the GM has to call for initiative checks based on some sort of intuition, or an apprehension of the [I]possibility[/I] that an attack might be declared once the initiative sequence is established and hence characters start taking turns. Hriston points to this consequence as one that [I]divorces[/I] the call for initiative from that mechanic's place in the combat chapter; and adduces this as evidence in favour of the alternative view! As I said, I think Hriston is right. But as per my post just upthread, I also think it's no surprise that this is contentious. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
Top