Rolling for Initiative

[fnwc]

Awwww, roll for each monster! It's too easy for mobs to group up and gang bang a PC if they all go at once IMO.

You make that sound as if it were a bad thing.

 

[psionotic]

In 3e I rolled group initiative for like-type monsters. So an encounter with a kobold shaman, three kobold warriors and three kobold slingers would have three rolls for the npc's.

This is how I've always done it, too. Convenient if you have one init card for each type of foe.

 

[FadedC]

I think rolling for each monsters has always been the rule, but that doesn't stop many of us from rolling by group. It's just much easier to keep track of.

I always seperate different types of monsters into different groups though....so the archers and soldiers would go seperately. And if there say 2 really big monsters I'd probably do them seperately so they don't both go on 25 and eat the flatfooted rogue.

Edit: Ok so rogues can't be flatfooted but you get the idea.

 

[Vendark]

they could always delay and then go together, so why not just have them go at once and save yourself some headache.

Because on average they'll act a lot lower in the initiative count that way, since they'll all have to delay until the slowest monster acts. Trading speed for coordination seems like a fair tradeoff.

 

[Fifth Element]

10 + Init modifier also shortchanges the monster, since on average they'll roll 10.5 + Init modifier. Over hundreds of encounters that difference might actually mean a tiny little bit.

 

[Kesh]

Our GM has had the PCs roll individually, while monsters roll once per "type." That way, the minions go on one count, the X-type monsters goes on one count, the Y-type monsters go on one count, and the named/NPCs go individually like a PC.

 

[Alvoros]

I tend to "group" a couple here, a couple there etc. etc., and then roll them one iniative # per group.

Keeps things a little simpler (i.e. the two "archers on the balcony both shoot at the same time), while not overwhelming the players.

I can't see how having everyone going on 10+ init roll makes any sense....no sense of the *chaos* of battle, reflexes, randomness etc. Once battle settles in, I may group up more and more, particularly if a "leader" jumps in and tries to coordinate things, or creatures are hightly intelligent, but "dumb" creatures I try to keep somwhat chaotic...

I also purposely have cowardly/cautious creatures delay until strong points of resistance become obvious, and then try join in the easy battle, instead of winning initiive, and then just jumping in.


Alvo

 

[Filcher]

Certainly not "official" but at D&D Exp, 4E designer Chris Perkins had the players roll and then pick their highest to use as the group's init. He did the same thing for his monsters. So it was always Them => Us, or the other way around.

I don't advocate this myself but the lesson here is: Do whatever works for your group and damn the rules.

 

[chaotix42]

they could always delay and then go together

They could, but then they'd likely be going at a much lower initiative, which is a benefit for the PCs.

so why not just have them go at once and save yourself some headache.

I don't find it troublesome at all, actually.

 

[Pierson_Lowgal]

10 + Init modifier also shortchanges the monster, since on average they'll roll 10.5 + Init modifier. Over hundreds of encounters that difference might actually mean a tiny little bit.

but only if D&D were about winning, which it isn't.

I have been using 10+Init for 25+ sessions of my current home game and I absolutely love it.

1. Save time because I don't have to roll
2. Slow monsters act slowly and fast monsters act quickly - as they should

I also strongly recommend taking this advice* having players roll numerous initiatives in advance and place on index cards. This way, when combat begins there is not a pause in the action while everyone rolls dice.

*http://www.thealexandrian.net/creations/misc/running-combat.html