[UPDATED] Here's Mike Mearls' New D&D 5E Initiative System

In his AMA yesterday, WotC's Mike Mearls frequently referenced his dislike for D&D's initiative system, and mentioned that he was using a new initiative system in his own games. He later briefly explained what that was: "Roll each round. D4 = ranged, d8 = melee, d12 = spell, d6 = anything else, +d8 to swap gear, +d8 for bonus action, low goes 1st. Oh, and +d6 to move and do something ... adds tension, speeds up resolution. So far in play has been faster and makes fights more intense." That's the short version; there's likely more to it. Mearls mentioned briefly that he might trial it in Unearthed Arcana at some point to see what sort of reaction it gets.

In his AMA, Mearls indicated it was cyclic initiative he didn't like ("Cyclical initiative - too predictable"), which the above doesn't address at all (it merely changes the die rolls). Presumably there's more to the system than that quick couple of sentences up there, and it sounds like initiative is rolled every round. So if your initiative is based on your action, presumably you declare your action before rolling initiative (as opposed to declaring your action when your initiative comes around).

_____

UPDATE: I asked Mearls a couple of quick questions. He commented that it "lets ranged guys shoot before melee closes, spellcasters need to be shielded". He also mentioned that he "tinkered with using your weapon's damage die as your roll, but too inflexible, not sure it's worth it".

How is this implemented in-game? "Roll each round, count starts again at 1. Requires end of turn stuff to swap to end of round, since it's not static. In play I've called out numbers - Any 1s, 2s, etc, then just letting every PC go once monsters are done". You announce your action at the beginning of the round; you only need to "commit to the action type - you're not picking specific targets or a specific spell, for instance."

Dexterity does NOT adjust INITIATIVE. Mearls comments that "Dex is already so good, i don't miss it".

So what's the main benefit of the system? "Big benefit is that it encourages group to make a plan, then implement it. Group sees issue of the round and acts around it. I also think it adds a nice flow to combat - each round is a sequence. Plan, resolve, act, encourages group cohesion. Resolution is also faster - each player knows what to do; you don't need to pick spells ahead of acting, but groups so far have planned them."

Picture from ThinkGeek
SaveSave
SaveSaveSaveSaveSaveSave
SaveSave
SaveSave
SaveSave​

 

[dagger]

True "old school" had each side rolling initiative at the start of each round.

Yep, but we want combat to be even faster, so its been 'modernized'.

 

[Grazzt]

Yep, but we want combat to be even faster, so its been 'modernized'.

I see. Carry on then.

 

[Dausuul]

I like the idea of declared actions. I get incredibly frustrated with players who disengage from the game as soon as their turn is over. This of course leads to the situation where the new round comes around and I say "Joe its your turn" for the 3rd time and only then they stop discussing politics/sleeping/sketching and start to think of what they are going to do. Which kills momentum for everyone as they have to look up spells and have the rest of the party get them up to speed on what happened while they weren't paying attention. If they have to think of what they are going to do each round in advance maybe that will help things and help focus attention. More likely I'll just keep having to throw dice at certain players as they start killing the game at the start of each round rather than at the start of their individual turns.

I don't think switching initiative methods is the solution to this one. I would solve it as follows:

• First, talk to the players in question about whether there's something that could help them stay engaged.
• If this conversation does not lead to improvements, institute a 10-second policy: If you don't announce your action (not just start deciding on it, but actually say what it is) within 10 seconds of your turn coming up, you lose your turn and the next person gets to go.
• Upon instituting this policy, enforce it rigorously, fairly, and without mercy.

 

[Aldarc]

Also, this:

A trick shot archery video with questionable use of historical sources that has been debunked and well-criticized?

 

[robus]

Well, I guess my response is that in a sword fight, you're not just swinging your sword. You're also aiming (looking for an opening), and you're taking several swings that all factor into the same attack roll. Unlike ranged weapons which is one attack roll per shot.

Also, this:
[video=youtube;BEG-ly9tQGk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BEG-ly9tQGk[/video]

Wow! That guy is intense!

 

[Sacrosanct]

A trick shot archery video with questionable use of historical sources that has been debunked and well-criticized?

A video that clearly shows that a person can fire a bow a lot faster while aiming than people assume, and directly what I was responding to in that quote. But if you choose to miss the point completely and focus on items that aren't really all that related (my argument had nothing to do with historical accuracy, but only on how fast someone can accurately fire a bow), I suppose I can't stop you.

 

[flametitan]

Also, this:
*Lars Andersen*

Lars Andersen is a show shooter. He doesn't draw his bow to its full length, and it's likely a low poundage bow to begin with. You wouldn't get away with that in an actual fight, and that he presents is as a viable combat manoeuvre is dishonest, based on art (which has had issues regarding realism before) and mythology.

Here's a more detailed breakdown of it: https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/2v5km2/in_which_lars_andersen_uses_bad_history_to_rake/

As for swords also having to look for openings, that is true, but then everything else is quicker. You can retract a your sword arm to parry, you can find an opening and thrust without having to first draw and arrow and be exposed.

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

I don't think switching initiative methods is the solution to this one. I would solve it as follows:

• First, talk to the players in question about whether there's something that could help them stay engaged.
• If this conversation does not lead to improvements, institute a 10-second policy: If you don't announce your action (not just start deciding on it, but actually say what it is) within 10 seconds of your turn coming up, you lose your turn and the next person gets to go.
• Upon instituting this policy, enforce it rigorously, fairly, and without mercy.

Oh I've done it all. I ask them that specific first question and get "Man your games are the best and love you DM'ing". So I ask them why they have trouble paying attention. Then I ask them again as they quit paying attention...

The main issue is half the group is there to play D&D, and half is there to hang out with the guys and knock back a few cans as much as play D&D. Half of them are hyper political and don't see each other save for D&D night and have to catch up. I have a lot of fun but it may be time to get out the mini hourglass and start timing.

 

[The Old Crow]

A video that clearly shows that a person can fire a bow a lot faster while aiming than people assume, and directly what I was responding to in that quote. But if you choose to miss the point completely and focus on items that aren't really all that related (my argument had nothing to do with historical accuracy, but only on how fast someone can accurately fire a bow), I suppose I can't stop you.

Or, maybe it's high level and high DEX. Perhaps it isn't the bow which is making him aim fast, but skill. Like someone might have with a sword, too, if they put time and effort and had a talent for it.

 

[schnee]

A trick shot archery video with questionable use of historical sources that has been debunked and well-criticized?

The only parts that have been 'debunked' are the parts where he's talking.

His shooting is still bad ass.

If he can pull that sort of amazing stuff in 'closing to melee range' space in reality, then imagine what is possible if you add the requisite amount of Hollywood heroic nonsense that's been added to every movie sword fight over the decades.