The Sage on White Raven Tactics

[Rystil Arden]

...so how might that be worded so as to only pull someone "up" in initiative, rather than "down"?

How about, it gives a bonus to the ally's initiative equal to the amount it takes to put the ally just after the initiator of the WRT manoeuvre. Since I said bonus and not modifier, it can't be negative and thus can't allow the abusive bit where you push the guy before you after you. The best you can do is bring the guy who goes last to go first, and then only if the Warblade herself wins Init or spends a round refocusing.

 

[Patlin]

or spends a round refocusing.

There's no refocusing in 3.5, there's just delaying until the begining of the next round.

Also, since my group cycles through a set of index cards to proceed through combat, an effect that distinguished between later this round and early next round would needlessly complicate things. When it's my turn, my card is on top. Everyone else's card must be below mine, and pulling them up in the initiative order looks much the same regardless of where this imaginary "new round" starts. We don't normally even track where a given round begins or ends.

 

[Rystil Arden]

There's no refocusing in 3.5, there's just delaying until the begining of the next round.

Also, since my group cycles through a set of index cards to proceed through combat, an effect that distinguished between later this round and early next round would needlessly complicate things. When it's my turn, my card is on top. Everyone else's card must be below mine, and pulling them up in the initiative order looks much the same regardless of where this imaginary "new round" starts. We don't normally even track where a given round begins or ends.

It isn't imaginary though. There's a single-sided infinity stretching out never-endingly into the future at the discontinuity where the old round ends. To wit, a Warblade and her friend could continually delay to be after the other, once each round, and eventually they might be on Initiative count -1,000,000,000 and yet they would still act before the person with Initiative count 50 in the next round. That's where the rounds start to matter. Because if you did that trick and you weren't already last at the end of the round, you'd actually start passing people until you got to last, but once you reach last and border on the infinite Initiative gap between rounds, it changes.

 

[Atavar]

It isn't imaginary though. There's a single-sided infinity stretching out never-endingly into the future at the discontinuity where the old round ends. To wit, a Warblade and her friend could continually delay to be after the other, once each round, and eventually they might be on Initiative count -1,000,000,000 and yet they would still act before the person with Initiative count 50 in the next round. That's where the rounds start to matter. Because if you did that trick and you weren't already last at the end of the round, you'd actually start passing people until you got to last, but once you reach last and border on the infinite Initiative gap between rounds, it changes.

Actually, I remember reading in one of the core 3.0 rulebooks (I think...and I'm not sure it made it into 3.5) an example of two characters trying to go last in a round. Essentially, the lowest initiative count on which a character can delay to and still act in that round is [0 - initiative modifier].

For example, Rogue1 (Init +5) meets Rogue2 (Init +4). They roll initiative. Rogue1 rolls a 10 for a total of 15, and Rogue2 rolls a 15 for a total of 19. Thus, Rogue2 gets to go first.

However, on initiative count 19 Rogue2 wants to delay his action until after Rogue1 acts. So, he delays. The initiative count goes down to 15, but Rogue1 also wants to delay until after Rogue2 acts. So, they both sit there, delaying, as the initiative count goes further down.

At initiative count -4 (or 0 - Rogue2's initiative modifier) neither rogue has acted yet. However, Rogue2 now has a choice to make; me must act now or give up his action for the round. Regardless of Rogue2's choice, Rogue1 must make the same decision at initiative count -5 (or 0 - Rogue1's initiative modifier).

I really am not sure WHY the rules gave an example like the above, but I'm guessing it's important for some reason (or else why give the example in the first place)?

Later,

Atavar

 

[Rystil Arden]

It's true that whoever has the better Init mod between two in a delaying race will win if both want to delay indefinitely to the end of the round, but if one is perfectly willing to let the other delay after her and they flip-flop each round (the core of the infinite WRT abuse strategy), they can do so.

 

[MarkB]

Which apparently isn't a problem. Same situation, except instead of a Cleric they use WRT on the Fighter, who takes 2 full attack actions and drops the BBEG before the Cleric can even cast 1 spell. I'd have to ask the DM, if this is the BBEG, why does he have such crappy HPs? But anyway, if you can drop a BBEG with one use of WRT and 2 damaging spells cast, I think there is something else wrong with the scenario...

The fighter example is irrelevant, because the discussion is about expenditure of finite resources, not unlimited ones. And the questioning of the BBEG's build is irrelevant, because it is tangential to the issue illustrated in the example - that taking out an opponent before they can act will, more often than not, require a lower expenditure of resources than allowing that opponent to act.

Simply put: Giving an opponent time to act allows them to either deal extra damage that needs healing, or to put up defenses that require extra resources to counteract.

 

[Rystil Arden]

The fighter example is irrelevant, because the discussion is about expenditure of finite resources, not unlimited ones. And the questioning of the BBEG's build is irrelevant, because it is tangential to the issue illustrated in the example - that taking out an opponent before they can act will, more often than not, require a lower expenditure of resources than allowing that opponent to act.

Simply put: Giving an opponent time to act allows them to either deal extra damage that needs healing, or to put up defenses that require extra resources to counteract.

Indeed. In fact, if the Fighter's full attacks are somehow your party's best way to nova, that's surprising to me, but it's fine--you've still fulfilled my requirement and shown WRT to be broken whether you choose the Fighter or the caster.

 

[Legildur]

Actually, I remember reading in one of the core 3.0 rulebooks (I think...and I'm not sure it made it into 3.5) an example of two characters trying to go last in a round. Essentially, the lowest initiative count on which a character can delay to and still act in that round is [0 - initiative modifier].

IIRC that was from the Sword and Fist supplement.

 

[Rystil Arden]

IIRC that was from the Sword and Fist supplement.

Ah, Sword and Fist...not the first place to which I would look for sound rules advice. Or the second...or the third...or

 

[RigaMortus2]

Indeed. In fact, if the Fighter's full attacks are somehow your party's best way to nova, that's surprising to me, but it's fine--you've still fulfilled my requirement and shown WRT to be broken whether you choose the Fighter or the caster.

I see it as the BBEG is broken (or the DM is not running the encounter right).

Everything we say here is speculative. Anything you come up with could happen in a campaign proving your point (WRT is overpowered), and anything I come up with could happen in a campaign (proving WRT is just fine). In practice, the chances that everything will fall into place just right so that you could abuse WRT just isn't that realistic IMO. If a DM doesn't realize 5 out of the 6 PCs are all martial adepts each with WRT, I don't know what I can tell you... :\