NPC turn, player turn

[Asmor]

So here's something that I just thought of...

Many GMs, myself included, only roll initiative once for entire packs of the same monster (i.e. a few rats or kobolds). Heck, I often do that for groups of enemies even when their initiative modifiers aren't the same.

Anyways, in those cases or when the PCs are fighting a single enemy you end up with a situation where all the PCs go, and then the monsters go.

I'm considering ignoring initiative after the first "monster" turn, and letting the players decide what order they take their actions each round. It's nothing they couldn't do anyway with some clever use of delaying. Only thing I see that breaks the rules is if they would all end up delaying to 1 more than the monster, and then a PC with higher dex wants to go after a PC with lower dex so technically would have to delay down to the monster's initiative. I think that's kind of an artificial situation, though, so I've got no problem allowing it.

Basically, it'd go like this:

Me: Initiative!

(everyone rolls initiative, kobolds get a 15).

Me: Ok, who beats a 15?

(two players raise their hand)

Me: Ok, you two go first. Decide amongst yourselves your order.

(they take their actions)

Me: Ok, the kobolds do such and such. Your turn.

(all the PCs take their actions in whatever order they choose)

Now, on the surface it doesn't seem fair since it looks like it gives an extra action to PCs who roll higher than the monster, but in reality that's exactly how it would work. Compare this initative:

Adam: 20
Bob: 17
Kobolds: 15
Carl: 12
Dan: 9

Official version: Adam and bob go. Then kobolds go. Then carl, dan, adam, bob. Then kobolds. repeat.

My version: People who beat kobolds (Adam and Bob) go. Then kobolds. Then everyone (carl, dan, adam and bob, in any order). Then kobolds. Repeat.

It seems like this would greatly simplify combat since I wouldn't need to keep track of initiatives. Downside is that it only works when there are exactly two sides (PCs vs. NPCs with same initiative), unless you want to get complicated and start splitting the PCs into subgroups.

Is there any other downside I'm missing?

 

[lottrbacchus]

seems good. the slight advantage of allowing the players to go in whatever order they want is that it eliminates the stupidity some players exhibit by getting to go first.

see my post on gelatinous cube tpk. or summary- the characters got themselves all tied up by doing stuff all out of order because of who got to go first. instead of delaying their actions, they did silly things that ended up costing them. this actually simulates the chaos of combat. had they discussed things for a couple of minutes, they would barely remember even having met a GC. instead, they are enjoying the new characters they made because they acted on the spur of the moment.

"why don't you let me get past you before you continue splashing oil everywhere? ah, never mind, i'll just shoot a couple of arrows while this thing, that has already engulfed two other guys, engulfs me as well".

anyhoo- we're old school and roll init every round. but that wasn't your question. BUT but, while it slightly slows down the game, it keeps the party from fully power gaming because they never know if next round they will get to act first...

 

[Quartz]

It can fall down where you have enemies of significantly different initiatives, but in the case you give, I think it's a much needed simplification and simply represents the group getting their act together. After all, by rolling one initiative die for the opponents, you've already done that for them.

 

[Jhoony]

Looks good to me, especially for situations against multiple small critters liek the one you describe. I think for bigger battles, or ones with more types of enemy I'd keep the "in initiative order" business just to simulate that it's harder to co-ordinate your movements. Also in the first round I'd make them go in initiative order as I view that more as a re-action than an action.