Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FormerlyHemlock" data-source="post: 6574484" data-attributes="member: 6787650">RE: speed factor initiative. I've been using a speed factor-ish variant for two or three months now. My assessment is that &quot;declare then act&quot; it isn't much faster, or slower, than regular initiative because 1.) you hardly ever need to actually roll initiative because usually it doesn't matter who acts first (only if someone goes unconscious but would have hit, then you need to see if he got his shot off before getting taken out); 2.) most of the delay in combat at my table is spent talking, not rolling dice. (Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if I enforce a &quot;no talking during combat&quot; rule--would players retreat from combat in order to confer with each other? Might be worth experimenting with.) However, it certainly does make things a lot more exciting because of the decoupling between decision and resolution.I hope you get to try it out someday.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FormerlyHemlock, post: 6574484, member: 6787650"] RE: speed factor initiative. I've been using a speed factor-ish variant for two or three months now. My assessment is that "declare then act" it isn't much faster, or slower, than regular initiative because 1.) you hardly ever need to actually roll initiative because usually it doesn't matter who acts first (only if someone goes unconscious but would have hit, then you need to see if he got his shot off before getting taken out); 2.) most of the delay in combat at my table is spent talking, not rolling dice. (Hmmm, I wonder what would happen if I enforce a "no talking during combat" rule--would players retreat from combat in order to confer with each other? Might be worth experimenting with.) However, it certainly does make things a lot more exciting because of the decoupling between decision and resolution. I hope you get to try it out someday. [/QUOTE]

Verification