Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
More granular initiative variant
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="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8155563" data-attributes="member: 6987520"><p>Thanks, glad it helps and hopefully makes things clearer for everyone. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>Hmm... I see where you're going here but part of the issue (as I see it) is that not everyone will move (or even want to) on each impulse. Movement at 30 feet in 5E, divided into seconds, is only 5 feet per second or about a normal walking pace. In combat, I imagine sometimes it will happen that way (sizing up an opponent maybe) but other times you will have a short burst of 30 feet over only 2 seconds.</p><p></p><p>With 6 seconds and 6 impulses, the natural observation is to equate 1 second = 1 impulse, but I don't think that was really what you were going for. While I can make a quick leap/dash of 15 feet in a single second, that might not equate to 1 impulse. You have to decide for yourself if you want that connection or not. In CIV, I decided early on I didn't want it. CIV only dictates and breaks up the flow and order of actions, not necessarily how long they took to accomplish.</p><p></p><p>You might want to consider something more along these lines: <em>You can move up to half your speed on an impulse, with a minimum of 5 feet.</em></p><p></p><p>So, a "cautious" approach could literally be 5 feet per impulse like you suggest, but a couple quick jumps into the fight could get you there much more quickly. If you know you still have a long way to go, when you <em>dash</em>, don't double the speed--keep it at half--but allow it for two more impulses.</p><p></p><p>Ex. You're speed is 40 (mobile feat). You move 20 on impulse #1, 20 more on impulse #2, but still need to more more so elect to take the dash action and gain another 40 feet of movement, allowing you to move 20 on impulse #3 and 20 more on impulse #4.</p><p></p><p>This shows how it took you "time" to move a full 80 feet because you covered the ground over 4 impulses. Additionally, someone like a rogue could use Cunning Action for that dash, and still have <em>another</em> dash action to take, allowing them to further move on impulses #5 and 6, covering a total of 120 feet of movement. Or, since they still have their action, the rogue could actually attack a target.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I think allowing light weapons to attack twice would be ok. I would avoid finesse, though as it ties even <em>more</em> into DEX-based builds which are already to much in 5E IMO. Unarmed strikes could also be twice, so a monk could use Extra attack and strike twice on an impulse and then flurry of blows for two more attacks on the next impulse.</p><p></p><p></p><p>I suppose this is just a matter of taste and preference. I want <em>both</em> scenarios to be able to happen, which is why I went another direction.</p><p></p><p>Is it likely in CIV for one creature to do everything first? Not really. But I did already find a flaw through play testing. If the opponents rolls poorly, the PCs definitely have a much better chance of taking all their actions first. So, I amended CIV (not online yet) that instead of rolling a d20 for the first initiative roll, everyone rolls d10+10. This way, it is still possible for a PC to roll well and take all their actions before me as DM, but worst case I'll have an 11 or so, and likely get in <em>something</em> before the PCs finish their actions.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Wasted actions won't happen much IMO. Play-testing will show more if you ever get to. As for the movement, if you change movement to my suggestion above, the action will happen sooner as the combatants close in more quickly and I doubt you'll see much unspent movement (at least, not anymore than you already see in 5E).</p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm glad it helped. But, IRL closing in on a foe was often preceded by a volley of ranged attacks. It is also a reason why a bowman could hold up someone on the road if they had a beat on the target. A readied attack and as soon as the target moves, you shoot. Pretty good incentive to just hand over your purse. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sure, you're most welcome. This sort of stuff is obviously fun for me--working on game mechanics--so I hope you'll eventually get a chance to try it out and report back. If you have any more tweaks and such, I'll more than happy to look over things and offer constructive feedback.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="DND_Reborn, post: 8155563, member: 6987520"] Thanks, glad it helps and hopefully makes things clearer for everyone. :) Hmm... I see where you're going here but part of the issue (as I see it) is that not everyone will move (or even want to) on each impulse. Movement at 30 feet in 5E, divided into seconds, is only 5 feet per second or about a normal walking pace. In combat, I imagine sometimes it will happen that way (sizing up an opponent maybe) but other times you will have a short burst of 30 feet over only 2 seconds. With 6 seconds and 6 impulses, the natural observation is to equate 1 second = 1 impulse, but I don't think that was really what you were going for. While I can make a quick leap/dash of 15 feet in a single second, that might not equate to 1 impulse. You have to decide for yourself if you want that connection or not. In CIV, I decided early on I didn't want it. CIV only dictates and breaks up the flow and order of actions, not necessarily how long they took to accomplish. You might want to consider something more along these lines: [I]You can move up to half your speed on an impulse, with a minimum of 5 feet.[/I] So, a "cautious" approach could literally be 5 feet per impulse like you suggest, but a couple quick jumps into the fight could get you there much more quickly. If you know you still have a long way to go, when you [I]dash[/I], don't double the speed--keep it at half--but allow it for two more impulses. Ex. You're speed is 40 (mobile feat). You move 20 on impulse #1, 20 more on impulse #2, but still need to more more so elect to take the dash action and gain another 40 feet of movement, allowing you to move 20 on impulse #3 and 20 more on impulse #4. This shows how it took you "time" to move a full 80 feet because you covered the ground over 4 impulses. Additionally, someone like a rogue could use Cunning Action for that dash, and still have [I]another[/I] dash action to take, allowing them to further move on impulses #5 and 6, covering a total of 120 feet of movement. Or, since they still have their action, the rogue could actually attack a target. I think allowing light weapons to attack twice would be ok. I would avoid finesse, though as it ties even [I]more[/I] into DEX-based builds which are already to much in 5E IMO. Unarmed strikes could also be twice, so a monk could use Extra attack and strike twice on an impulse and then flurry of blows for two more attacks on the next impulse. I suppose this is just a matter of taste and preference. I want [I]both[/I] scenarios to be able to happen, which is why I went another direction. Is it likely in CIV for one creature to do everything first? Not really. But I did already find a flaw through play testing. If the opponents rolls poorly, the PCs definitely have a much better chance of taking all their actions first. So, I amended CIV (not online yet) that instead of rolling a d20 for the first initiative roll, everyone rolls d10+10. This way, it is still possible for a PC to roll well and take all their actions before me as DM, but worst case I'll have an 11 or so, and likely get in [I]something[/I] before the PCs finish their actions. Wasted actions won't happen much IMO. Play-testing will show more if you ever get to. As for the movement, if you change movement to my suggestion above, the action will happen sooner as the combatants close in more quickly and I doubt you'll see much unspent movement (at least, not anymore than you already see in 5E). I'm glad it helped. But, IRL closing in on a foe was often preceded by a volley of ranged attacks. It is also a reason why a bowman could hold up someone on the road if they had a beat on the target. A readied attack and as soon as the target moves, you shoot. Pretty good incentive to just hand over your purse. ;) Sure, you're most welcome. This sort of stuff is obviously fun for me--working on game mechanics--so I hope you'll eventually get a chance to try it out and report back. If you have any more tweaks and such, I'll more than happy to look over things and offer constructive feedback. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
More granular initiative variant
Top