DistractingFlare
First Post
Also, sorry for my delay in updating the IC thread. I just got back into town, so I'll be updating the combat tomorrow afternoon. Until then, cheers.
RECRUITING CLOSED! 4ed: The Wolfcrown
- Thread starter DistractingFlare
- Start date
HolyMan
Thy wounds are healed!
I'm not talking about divinty feats sorry I wasn't to clear. I take this feat and get to choose a Channel Divinty power offered to another class. Right now I'm leaning towards Healer's Mercy from Divine Powers it is a Cleric power.
That is great, only when you have the time and I will see if tht is any better. Thanks in Advance.
HM
DistractingFlare
First Post
Oh, I get it, HM. Sorry I didn't understand. I don't have a list, I'm sure someone out there has what you want.
Okay lads and ladies, I'm officially requesting that this "non-initiative" system be re-thunk. Some of us have jobs that prevent us from posting easily during the day, and the current system unfairly penalizes those of us who do. It's also a form of metagaming, in that real-world situations are having undue effect on in-game events.
I realize it has a certain ease of use appeal, but...I feel the price is too high. Especially when you get almost the same amount of ease from GM-rolled init (as opposed to asking everyone to roll individually, which can admittedly stall things out early in a fight).
Who goes first in combat is too critically important to leave to the happenstance of who has the most free time.
Thanks for your consideration.
I realize it has a certain ease of use appeal, but...I feel the price is too high. Especially when you get almost the same amount of ease from GM-rolled init (as opposed to asking everyone to roll individually, which can admittedly stall things out early in a fight).
Who goes first in combat is too critically important to leave to the happenstance of who has the most free time.
Thanks for your consideration.
DistractingFlare
First Post
Shayuri, I'm not really sure I understand your frustration. In case it isn't clear, this is the system I've been using:
Every character gets a turn every round. You could look at it like this:
All Enemies, Turn 1.
all Players, Turn 2.
It's not as if you're losing turns. We haven't had a single round of combat in which you didn't have a turn. It's just that I've been lumping the enemies into a group and the players into another.
So, to reply directly to your post:
"the current system unfairly penalizes those of us who do"
In what way are you being penalized? Everyone is taking a turn - the only difference is that the enemies begin the round. If it would make everyone happier, we could switch it so that the PC's act before the villains. You haven't lost a turn or suffered any mechanical disadvantage except first strike, which I'm willing to renegotiate.
It's also a form of metagaming, in that real-world situations are having undue effect on in-game events.
I really don't understand how real life is adversely effecting anything. I've never moved on without you (or anyone, for that matter). If you could maybe explain your position more clearly, I'd like to help.
So here's what I'm trying to understand -- you'd be happier if we rolled initiative, right? But what would that really change? Nobody is getting his turn taken, and what does it matter what order everybody posts in, so long as everybody gets a turn?
Shayuri, you're a terrific player, and I want to do my best as DM for you. I'm willing to talk about this until we can settle on a system that makes everyone happy. Let's work this out.
Everybody else, please weigh in on this. I'd appreciate it if everybody could throw in some feedback so I can know if this is a problem specific to Shay, or if others are frustrated by it.
-DF
Every character gets a turn every round. You could look at it like this:
All Enemies, Turn 1.
all Players, Turn 2.
It's not as if you're losing turns. We haven't had a single round of combat in which you didn't have a turn. It's just that I've been lumping the enemies into a group and the players into another.
So, to reply directly to your post:
"the current system unfairly penalizes those of us who do"
In what way are you being penalized? Everyone is taking a turn - the only difference is that the enemies begin the round. If it would make everyone happier, we could switch it so that the PC's act before the villains. You haven't lost a turn or suffered any mechanical disadvantage except first strike, which I'm willing to renegotiate.
It's also a form of metagaming, in that real-world situations are having undue effect on in-game events.
I really don't understand how real life is adversely effecting anything. I've never moved on without you (or anyone, for that matter). If you could maybe explain your position more clearly, I'd like to help.
So here's what I'm trying to understand -- you'd be happier if we rolled initiative, right? But what would that really change? Nobody is getting his turn taken, and what does it matter what order everybody posts in, so long as everybody gets a turn?
Shayuri, you're a terrific player, and I want to do my best as DM for you. I'm willing to talk about this until we can settle on a system that makes everyone happy. Let's work this out.
Everybody else, please weigh in on this. I'd appreciate it if everybody could throw in some feedback so I can know if this is a problem specific to Shay, or if others are frustrated by it.
-DF
In any RPG, there is a significant advantage to acting first (or before an enemy) in a turn. If that's not clear, I encourage you to check out the "optimization boards" where Improved Initiative and Danger Sense are routinely rated 'sky blue' in importance (that means very important). There's a reason for that.
I would far prefer using the rules as written for initiative, rather than a generic ruling that one side goes first, regardless of which side that is. And yes, as the player of a character who would have a pretty decent init bonus, I have some investment in this. Fast characters are -supposed- to have an advantage in init, that's part of what being fast -means-.
I will also admit that some of my issue was apparently due to a misunderstanding, in which I didn't realize that the 'post first, go first' policy was divided up per side. Even so, I think the house rule is a bad idea. It doesn't provide substantial improvement from the core rules, it interferes significantly with existing rules for combat and certain powers/feats, and it penalizes a fairly broad swath of character concepts (any character with a high Dex score, basically).
And for what? What does it accomplish? I don't really understand why you're defending it so vigorously.
I would far prefer using the rules as written for initiative, rather than a generic ruling that one side goes first, regardless of which side that is. And yes, as the player of a character who would have a pretty decent init bonus, I have some investment in this. Fast characters are -supposed- to have an advantage in init, that's part of what being fast -means-.
I will also admit that some of my issue was apparently due to a misunderstanding, in which I didn't realize that the 'post first, go first' policy was divided up per side. Even so, I think the house rule is a bad idea. It doesn't provide substantial improvement from the core rules, it interferes significantly with existing rules for combat and certain powers/feats, and it penalizes a fairly broad swath of character concepts (any character with a high Dex score, basically).
And for what? What does it accomplish? I don't really understand why you're defending it so vigorously.
Similar Threads
