D&D 3.x Refocus disappeared in 3.5?

[AuraSeer]

No initiative counts? Wha? Do you mean not at all or not recorded after rolled?

We don't use "initiative counts" to time combat, because they're meaningless. Everybody just gets a card with their sequence number-- the fastest player gets a number 1, the next fastest gets a 2, and so on.

All that matters is the order of action. If you rolled a 13 and I rolled a 12, you go first. If you rolled a 30 and I rolled a -2, you still go first-- you don't get "more first" because of a big disparity. So we just record that you get to act before me on the first round, and from then on ignore whatever the rolled totals were.

This makes sequencing more convenient for the DM because he only needs to do the initiative countdown once. No more "Anyone go above 20? At 20? 19? 18?..." every single round; he just calls for number 1, then number 2, and everybody knows exactly who goes when.

Delaying and readying are slightly more complicated, because the order changes, but you quickly get used to it.

 

[Stalker0]

Curious now, let's say you get your standard action for a surprise round. Now let's say your initiative mod is crap, so instead you delay until everyone goes. Now you go at the beginning of that round, getting your full action.

Is that legal?

 

[Dr_Rictus]

It seems to suggest that you must select a 'count' in the initiative in the delay rules.

No, it explicitly says that you do not have to select a count, but can instead choose to act at any future point you choose to, thus changing your initiative count to whenever that happens to be. It could really hardly be clearer on this point, as far as I can see.

Of course, you or the DM has to determine what your new initiative count is, but that's very different from you having to select it.

 

[DanMcS]

Curious now, let's say you get your standard action for a surprise round. Now let's say your initiative mod is crap, so instead you delay until everyone goes. Now you go at the beginning of that round, getting your full action.

Is that legal?

Yes.

 

[melkorspawn]

We don't use "initiative counts" to time combat, because they're meaningless. Everybody just gets a card with their sequence number-- the fastest player gets a number 1, the next fastest gets a 2, and so on.
---
Delaying and readying are slightly more complicated, because the order changes, but you quickly get used to it.

Wouldn't it be easier to have flashcards with names on them, and then just go through the pile in initiative order. Then, when people delay, you just move their particular card, not reassign everyone's number.

 

[werk]

Curious now, let's say you get your standard action for a surprise round. Now let's say your initiative mod is crap, so instead you delay until everyone goes. Now you go at the beginning of that round, getting your full action.

Is that legal?

It is legal, but you still only get the standard action, because that was what you were delaying.

you take no action and then act normally on whatever initiative count you decide to act.

Once your original init goes by, you would be able to use the full action, as it's available to you at that time. Same would apply if you were restricted to only standard or partial actions for some other reason.

(or that's how we do it)

 

[Zaister]

Wouldn't it be easier to have flashcards with names on them, and then just go through the pile in initiative order. Then, when people delay, you just move their particular card, not reassign everyone's number.

No, if people delay, you don't put their cards in the back, but aside, until they decide to act, then you sort them back in.

Delay in 3.5 means: "I don't want to act now but wait and see what happens and decide to act when I see fit." i.e. when you delay you step outside the queue and you can fall back in at anytime someone else has just finished his action.

I've been using a metal board with magnets for years now, with a magnet for each charcter, opponent or group of oppopnents. That makes it easy to adjust the initiatives and everyaone has a good view of what is going on.

 

[Infiniti2000]

We don't use "initiative counts" to time combat, because they're meaningless.

They are certainly not meaningless. Do you never have new monsters show up? Once you throw out all the initiative counts (though you say you don't use them, your example proves you do), how can you place a new monster?

All that matters is the order of action.

This isn't true either, if you use the (first-half of) Delay as written. Since I choose an initiative count, then unless initiative counts still exist, I couldn't do that. It seems like you use the same houserule I do, though I maintain the record of the initiative counts in case a new creature appears.

 

[melkorspawn]

No, if people delay, you don't put their cards in the back, but aside, until they decide to act, then you sort them back in.

Delay in 3.5 means: "I don't want to act now but wait and see what happens and decide to act when I see fit." i.e. when you delay you step outside the queue and you can fall back in at anytime someone else has just finished his action.

I've been using a metal board with magnets for years now, with a magnet for each charcter, opponent or group of oppopnents. That makes it easy to adjust the initiatives and everyaone has a good view of what is going on.

I was responding specifically to AuraSeer's stated method of handling initiative order, in which he said that he assigns flashcards with the numbers, 1-however many PCs and NPCs are fighting.

He explained that it was difficult to reassign characters after they changed their initiative as a result of acting after a delayed action. I suggested using cards with character names rather than cards with numbers, because then instead of reassigning numbers when the initiative order changes, all you have to do is move the name to a different spot in the pile.

I do not remember referencing putting anyone's cards "in the back". However, it is understandable that confusion could have occurred, as I was responding to one, rather than to all.

 

[KarinsDad]

I've been using a metal board with magnets for years now, with a magnet for each charcter, opponent or group of oppopnents. That makes it easy to adjust the initiatives and everyaone has a good view of what is going on.

We use 3x5 cards. One player in the group flips them over one at a time. If you delay an action, your card comes out of the stack. If you ready an action, your card gets turned 90 degrees. It does not give the entire group a "good view of what is going on" like your system, but then again, I'm not sure I'd want the group to have that view. It's hard enough to minimize metagaming in the game without people also knowing exactly in which order allies and opponents get to act. Not that they do not eventually get a good feel for it anyway, but at least there isn't a reminder staring them in the face.

I'm sure this works fine for your group, I just would not like to encourage decision making based on knowing NPC 3 goes before PC 2, hence, I as PC 4 should attack NPC 3 instead of NPC 5 in order to give my team a better chance of surviving, etc.