Unearthed Arcana Unearthed Arcana: "Greyhawk" Initiative

The latest Unearthed Arcana by WotCs Mearls is up. "Mike Mearls introduces an alternative initiative system, inspired by AD&D and the journey to Lake Geneva, Wisconsin—the birthplace of D&D—for Gary Con 2017. While the initiative rules in fifth edition D&D are great for keeping the action moving and being easy to use at the table, the Greyhawk initiative variant takes a different approach. These rules add complexity, but with the goal of introducing more drama to combat."

He's calling it "Greyhawk Initiative". It'll be interesting to compare this to how we interpreted his earlier version of alternative initiative.

Mearls also talks about it in this video.

[video=youtube;hfSo4wVkwUw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hfSo4wVkwUw[/video]


​

 

[Lord Twig]

Fair enough but that argument applies just as well to the two weapon fighting argument that you claimed was an exception to the rule. Seems like it's not.

A matter of degree. Having 2 to 5 attacks plus a bonus action instead of 1 to 4 attacks plus a bonus action isn't the same as allowing 2 to 5 attacks plus 4 bonus actions (or whatever).

 

[Mistwell]

A matter of degree. Having 2 to 5 attacks plus a bonus action instead of 1 to 4 attacks plus a bonus action isn't the same as allowing 2 to 5 attacks plus 4 bonus actions (or whatever).

Can you name me two bonus actions, ANY two bonus actions, which would break the game if they could both be done by the same PC in the same round along with their regular and move action?

 

[ninjayeti]

Why are you married to keeping Dex in initiative?

Even if I were to go back to the normal way I would leave Dex out. It's just not needed.

Mearls states that the point of different dice types is to help you remember what you declared. I think he has a point. I am not convinced that we need to roll for action, bonus action, and movement but I'm going to give it a try next session. Currently we are just rolling for action and it is working quite well.

My point is to show that you can get the benefits Mearls touts with a couple of simple tweaks to the existing rules, rather than completely rebuilding the system. In this context I don't see a strong case for dropping the Dex bonus so I am sticking with the existing PHB rule rather than changing it for the sake of change. Personally, I also think it makes sense that characters with great reflexes and agility usually act more quickly, but YMMV.

Even assuming players need help remembering what actions they declared, there are easy ways to do this that don't have the downsides of Mearls' different action dice, so I don't really think this justification holds a lot of water.

 

[Lord Twig]

Can you name me two bonus actions, ANY two bonus actions, which would break the game if they could both be done by the same PC in the same round along with their regular and move action?

So are you suggesting that the limit on bonus actions should be increased to 2? Honestly nothing "breaks", it just slows down the game. Even allowing the extra attack from two weapon fighting in addition to a bonus action slows down the game. It is just whether you think the extra time is worth the benefit.

But for an example I guess, with no bonus actions, a Fighter 2/Monk 5 could use 2 shortswords, Action Surge, spend 2 Ki point, and get 10 attacks, each doing 1d6+4 damage. (Standard action attack action for two attacks, bonus off hand attack, Ki point 2 unarmed attacks, Action Surge attack action for two attacks, bonus off hand attack, Ki point 2 unarmed attacks. That's 10.)

Cast a cantrip and two bonus action spells? Maybe a wizard casts Firebolt, moves his Flaming Sphere and Misty Steps in the same turn? Not really game breaking though. I already have suggested that the cantrip limit be dropped from bonus actions spells as it causes confusion that is not needed.

Now if you have a Barbarian/Bard/Monk/Rogue/Wizard that Extra Attacks, Shadow Steps, uses Martial Arts, Misty Steps, Dashes, Bardic Inspires, then Rages it starts to get a little silly, but by then you already have so many classes it is already silly. But just two? Probably not broken.

 

[mellored]

Hey, if I have two attacks and I throw a dagger and stab with another, do I roll just d4 (like I'd do if I threw 2 daggers), just d8 (as if I stabbed two daggers) or d4+d8 even though it's just one action? As a side note, no matter what you answer, I can argue it's wrong. The initiative system and 5e interact so poorly there is no right answer.

d8.
The larger of the 2 dice.

 

[jrowland]

Could you expand on this a bit - I'm missing something (probably obvious) and thus don't understand how this works.

Lanefan

Did you just suggest a format where people could get multiple turns per round?

Or did you suggest a format like I did: You pick your actions, and then roll to "recharge" your turn next round, based on what you did in the current one?

Hmm...ok

Combat Starts
Player A: 1d20-Dex (+3) = (11)-(3) = 8
Goblin A: 1d20-Dex(+2) = (12)-(2) = 10
Goblin B: 1d20-Dex(+2) = (15)-(2) = 13
Player A wins initiative (lowest number) and goes first, followed by Goblin A then Goblin B

Round 1 begins
Player A makes a Ranged attack on Goblin B (1d4=3) and moves back from the goblins (1d6=5).
Goblin A Dashes (1d6=3) and Moves (1d6=4)
Goblin B Moves into cover(1d6=1) and makes a ranged attack (1d4=1)
Round 1 ends (because everyone has taken a turn)

New initiative is calculated:
Player A: 8+3+5=16
Goblin A: 10+3+4=17
Goblin B: 13+1+1=15

Round 2 Begins
Goblin B makes a Ranged attack (1d4=2) and Hides (1d6=3)
Player A makes a Melee attack by dropping bow to ground (free) and drawing sword (part of attack) (1d8=6)
Goblin A makes a Melee attack (1d8=3)
Round 2 ends (because everyone has taken a turn)

New initiative is calculated:
Player A: 16+6=22
Goblin A: 17+3=20
Goblin B: 15+2+3=20

The goblins go before player A in round 3

etc

Hope that clarifies my thinking. Add dice each round to a running total for initiative, lowest goes first. A round is defined as everyone taking a turn (so if in round 20 we had initiative 30 60 90, 30 goes first. the degree of separation is largely irrelevant except that the person with initiative 30 can 'afford' some heavy actions and still go first for a few more rounds

 

[Guest 6801328]

Relative to standard 5e, where you can drop one enemy and move on to another & attack on the same turn, not being able to move, and thus change targets in melee, between your Extra Attacks is a nerf. It's arguably a 'harder' (never struck me before, but that's ironic) nerf that just making them roll d6+d8 vs d4 or d10 and being merely slow, but still having a fair chance of getting all their attacks, if they live that long.

One thing I didn't understand from the PDF was how movement after your Action works. Was that specified? I would rule that movement after your Action is free (in terms of initiative cost, that is).

EDIT: Ah, I see, we're talking about two different things. NVM.

 

[Remathilis]

It's entirely possible that Mearls' "willful ignorance" is, in reality, due to the fact that he derives so much entertainment from trolling the sort of player who gets his panties in a knot over these things.

Probably not, though. Presumably maturity is one reason (among many) that he is lead designer and I'm not.

You should see Mark Rosewater, aka MaRo, who oversee's MTG. Mearls is a saint compared to that Level of FanTroll...

 

[mellored]

There've been a few questions about rolling difference dice for different weapons.

1) Can you roll for a dagger and then draw a greatsword?
2) Can you roll for a greatsword and then draw a dagger?

I would say no to the first, yes to the second. Whatever dice you roll, you should be allowed to take any option that would require a dice roll less than or equal to your roll. That is, you can always switch to quicker options.

This opens up flexibility. For example, if the melee attacker who didn't roll to move found he couldn't attack, he could substitute the move option because a move requires a d6 and his melee attack roll was a d6. If he was using a dagger and rolling a d4, however, he would be unable to substitute a d6 move, but could perhaps take a d4 dodge or similar.

The rules say you take the largest die.

 

[Lanefan]

Hope that clarifies my thinking. Add dice each round to a running total for initiative, lowest goes first. A round is defined as everyone taking a turn (so if in round 20 we had initiative 30 60 90, 30 goes first. the degree of separation is largely irrelevant except that the person with initiative 30 can 'afford' some heavy actions and still go first for a few more rounds

Ah, that's what I'd missed - that it was a rolling initiative rather than restarting from '1' each round.

My only worry is that after a few rounds the separations would become so great as to in effect just make it more or less cyclic again...which kinda defeats the purpose.

Lanefan