[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​

 

[guachi]

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.

^^^^^^^^^^

This. So much this. In principle rolling initiative once and going cyclical should take less time. But in practice, the above is too often how it's implemented.

In practice, having to redo initiative every round (as long as there aren't a lot of modifiers) and declare actions before rolling (even if it's just an Action as defined in game) can end up being faster as players stay more engaged.

 

[Aldarc]

With this response, it is obvious you never actually watched it. Otherwise you'd realize what a very odd statement for you to make.

Because no one could possibly be skeptical of your video sources or the claims they make?

 

[Sacrosanct]

Because no one could possibly be skeptical of your video sources or the claims they make?

No, because if you did bother to even watch them, you'd see your claims to be as ridiculous as possible because they directly contradict what you've been saying. You're dismissing evidence without even looking at it and making claims that are directly addressed in said evidence. That's not just disingenuous, that's incredibly lazy. Stop digging a hole man. And while you're at it, go look up who Lajos Kassai (the man in the last video) is.

 

[Aldarc]

No, because if you did bother to even watch them, you'd see your claims to be as ridiculous as possible because they directly contradict what you've been saying. You're dismissing evidence without even looking at it and making claims that are directly addressed in said evidence. That's not just disingenuous, that's incredibly lazy. Stop digging a hole man. And while you're at it, go look up who Lajos Kassai (the man in the last video) is.

You keep saying that I haven't watched the videos, but I have. Twice each at this point since apparently my first time didn't count. Am I supposed to watch and simply agree? Repeating that assertion that I have not watched these videos at this point is just false. I just don't particularly buy into what you are arguing or the often hyperbolically exaggerated claims made on the History Channel, and I don't know why you find that incredulous. At your suggestion, I have looked up Lajos Kassai. He does indeed sound impressive from his accomplishments and his shooting expertise, but it's also competitive shooting.

 

[Sacrosanct]

You keep saying that I haven't watched the videos, but I have. Twice each at this point since apparently my first time didn't count. Am I supposed to watch and simply agree?

No, but if you did watch them, then why would you continue to repeat false claims that are directly contradicted in the videos? Just to troll everyone and waste our time? I never said you couldn't be skeptical, but the things you are claiming are irrefutably addressed in those videos. I.e., it doesn't matter who Lars is, the video evidence clearly shows arrows easily penetrating chain mail armor at a rapid fire rate. They all clearly show how someone can fire accurately and quickly with a bow. There is no denying that. And in the last video, they explicitly state who Lajos is, and his credibility. So either you did not watch them and are lying, or you did and didn't pay any attention, or you did and you keep repeating claims that are false and were disproved in those videos just to waste our time. Either way, it doesn't paint you in the most positive light. Also, while competitive shooting bows are a lighter draw weight than war bows, they are about the same as hunting bows, so any comments (not just from you) that states they wouldn't do much damage are blatantly inaccurate. Additionally, if a PC in D&D can be stronger than an ogre, then having a 100# draw weight would be insignificant to the rate of accurate fire compared to the woman in that second video did with the 40# bow she had.

But again, you're missing the point completely. In D&D, melee attack rolls encompass many strikes, and ranges weapons only count as one. Therefore, it's entirely reasonable that in the context of initiative, a ranged weapon would be faster than a melee weapon

 

[LordEntrails]

Or just use current init rules and re-roll at the start of every round. Or go back to weapon speeds from 1e (?) that no one ever used. And then figure out how spell durations work and delayed actions and...

Or, just say say KISS and use the system as is.

 

[dagger]

I see. Carry on then.

We do it that way in our 1e game and always have (default 1e initiative is rough)

 

[Tony Vargas]

Next thing you know, we're going to have Weapon Speed initiative modifiers and then a slippery slope to bonuses/penalties to hit Specific Armor Types...

We can hope. ;P

 

[Nine Hands]

Been tinkering with using Savage Worlds system - deck of playing cards, counting down Ace to Deuce. Great system, easy to keep track of who's taken a turn, who hasn't, bigger groups, etc. Jokers get to go whenever they want, even interrupt another turn and so on. High DEX etc get to draw again (like Quick Edge - discard & draw again if less than 5) if they get a card lower than X (depending on DEX bonus).

I've been using this system for quite some time in my Mekton game and it works well.

I even chose certain cards (Ace of Spades) to give the player's a bonus when drawn. This was because they were members of the Black Aces squadron.

 

[dagger]

1e and 2e..,


In our 1e/2e game we declare before the roll but it's mainly to identify who is going to start casting (but not the actual spell) for spell disruption.