[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​

 

[stoopski]

How about that depending on the action(s) you took this round, you roll the dice according to M. Mearls rules, but only after you take your turn. Then you add this to your current initiative.


Initiative order never resets to 0, it just increases.
A round is then not when everybody acted, but whenever it's your turn again.


So for example, When first initiative comes in, everyone rolls 1d20 - DEX mod, lowest goes first.
Let's say I roll 18.
If I attack with a Shortsword I roll a d8, and get a 4.
I would add a standard "6" to any action to space it out and help average out between different types of actions.
So I would then act again at initiative 28.


What is neat is that you make this roll AFTER your action so you don't have to know in advance what to do, and it does not slow down the combat as the next player's turn may already start.

On the other hand, it might unbalance faster actions that will now act more frequently than slower actions throwing out the whole math of the system... That's why adding the standard 6 to any action might help balance it out.

 

[Dausuul]

Sorry, but Mike Mearls needs to do some sword fighting or at least some LARP and redo this entirely.

Did you seriously just claim that rules around D&D spellcasting should be changed because they're unrealistic?

 

[Warmaster Horus]

As an aside there are many RPGs out there that make you declare your actions before executing them in the turn. In this case perhaps you could change your action but then need to throw the appropriate die again on your turn, putting you further down the initiative line?

 

[The Old Crow]

Mearl's initiative system is kinda cool. Definitely has potential.

The one thing I don't like is ranged weapons being so fast. Why would they be? Especially since there are already penalties built in for moving and switching gear. It should be faster to use a weapon in hand to whack the thing standing right in front of you than to hit something at a distance when you might also have to draw and knock an arrow. I'd switch the melee to d4 and ranged to d8.

Actually, since I hate picking up d4s, unless they are those nice noncaltropian barrel d4s, I would rework this for myself so the lowest die starts at d6.

 

[Psikerlord#]

i prefer simply rolling init each round: keeps things nicely unpredictable, but simple and quick. No mods, inc no dex mod (which is plenty strong, without also needing to affect init).

 

[Cap'n Kobold]

So, what happens if one creature's action renders another's proposed action invalid? Do they get to re-specify, or do they lose their action?

Am I reading this right? This sounds like you will have to know your action before each initiative roll. If this is the case, what happens if circumstances change before your turn in that round effecting what action you want to take? What else could you do but continue in the same order regardless?

Personally, I'd let you change your action if circumstances change by adding an additional die to your initiative.

So for example you were going to take a ranged attack, but someone piles into you before you get to go. You could swap to attacking them in melee by rolling a d8 maybe and adding it to your initiative score.

As Morrus emphasised, these are not the full rules that Mearls uses, just a few-sentence summary of the basics.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I have radical idea.

How about everyone declares actions and a simple d6 is rolled each round for each side. Highest roll goes first and initiative is rolled each round.

Do you think it could work?

 

[M.T. Black]

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).

It does address it by requiring you to re-roll initiative each round.

Also, I think requiring players to state actions at the start of a round is a feature, not a bug!

 

[Blue]

I *gladly* give up a little extra realism for the play speed increase of roll-once cyclic initiative. I don't care about the borders between rounds, we just go. This introduces a delay every single round not just in rolling and working out the new initiative but also in allowing players to know who's on deck and plan their action, especially near the border between rounds.

Also, it sounds like it requires "everyone declares actions first" in order to figure out what dice are rolled, which can leave players unable to take an action. "Ooh, sorry, if you wanted to move that would have changed your initiative, so since they guy you were fighting failed a save and is dead, you waste a round." Players HATE losing their actions for reasons outside their control.

No thank you.

 

[HawaiiSteveO]

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).