Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9708527" data-attributes="member: 18">This is the huge one for me.Throwing out essentially both initiative and actions was something that I kind of went back and forth on (strongly considering the "3 tokens" optional rule they suggested), and I think would have been very scared of had I not had good experiences with PtbA games already (which operate this way, or at least the ones I've played do). One of the players was also very suspicious of it, telling me that like, detailed individual initiative was clearly the Gold Standard (TM) for initiative but he'd be open to trying this.But MY GOD it's such an improvement for me and the entire group - including Mr Suspicious - at least from what they said/we saw at the table! Just made things flow vastly better and so much faster. Like, my god, the hours we spent tracking initiative and actions/minor actions/move actions/reactions/immediate actions/interrupts etc. etc. in 3.5E and 4E (and to some extent 5E, which did at least try and put a lid on this a bit). It helped as well that you can often help another PC - either 1 Hope to give them Advantage, or 3 Hope to do the Attack Together option (I forget the term) which is very powerful (and also further biases things slightly in favour of the PCs, as, as long as both rolls beat the Difficulty of the monster, you can pick the one that's with Hope, and you each get a Hope, meaning the total cost to the group was 1 Hope!). That really helped keep people engaged as you say.I'm not sure I'd ever run individual initiative again outside of a simulationist-oriented realism-leaning anti-heroic RPG. Even for other D&D-likes I suspect side-based is the way to go for me.</blockquote>

Verification