[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​

 

[schnee]

Yes it does, which makes me wonder why Mearls' has suggested this at all... but we are talking about Mearls' idea to bring some realism into initiative, so what you are saying is moot, actually.

I think it definitely adds realism. But I think that's not the whole story.

I think it also mixes things up a bit and make combat less meta-gamey and more frantic. It's six seconds; most people don't decide what their character does in less than 15. Having to declare your actions first, then having a penalty to re-assess and choose another action if that first one is invalidated.

Since the dice rolls are so low, you still may be able to go before someone else who rolled poorly - and having to draw or sheath a weapon becomes an actual tactical concern.

It's growing on me.

But I'd only consider it if I could literally write out all the dice needed for each type of action on every character's sheets beforehand. No way I'd ask them to remember that off the top of their heads.

 

[Lanefan]

The problem here is that you potentially miss out on a lot of attacks at advantage.

Attacking a stunned creature is at advantage and they automatically fail strength and dexterity saving throws.

A Monk's Stunning Strike should allow all of their allies and themselves a full round of actions against that target until they aren't stunned again.

I suggest having the stun take away the creature's next turn and last until the initiative count on the next round.

True; if they haven't acted this round they lose that action and are considered stunned until their initiative next round. Sometimes you'll get less than a round to whale on the victim, occasionally it'll be exactly a round, and sometimes you'll get more than a round - it depends on the initiative rolls for all involved; it'll even out in the long run, and a bit of randomness is always fine.

 

[Lanefan]

But I'd only consider it if I could literally write out all the dice needed for each type of action on every character's sheets beforehand. No way I'd ask them to remember that off the top of their heads.

You could make up little cards - the back of a standard business card would do - with the rolls on, that people could paper-clip to their character sheets...?

 

[Lanliss]

This reminds me of my chaotic system I was trying to work out something like a year ago. Everyone rolls initiative at the start of combat, as normal, but whatever order they go in the initiative starts at 0. Then various actions add to their initiative as they progress, meaning that someone making a lot of fast weak actions would act more often, while slow things push you further up the initiative.

Way less finicky than MMs system, which I honestly do not like at all.

 

[Caliburn101]

Explain to me why it is "realistic" for spells to take more than 1-2 syllables and a single quick hand gesture to cast. What is the real-world spell that requires a lengthier casting time?

Oh, that's right - there isn't one, because there are no real-world spells. Therefore 1-2 syllables and a single hand gesture is as realistic as anything else.

Stop trying to muddy the water with a strawman argument - nobody said magic was real did they?

I clearly said try what RAW spellcasting amounts to yourself, you know, in the real world with no magic in it - a hand gesture, a few words and a component all at the same time mid-combat. Any half decent sword wielder will already have hit you 2-3 times and you will probably drop the component etc.

Don't however use a real sword - they DO exist... lol

 

[Dausuul]

Stop trying to muddy the water with a strawman argument - nobody said magic was real did they?

I clearly said try what RAW spellcasting amounts to yourself, you know, in the real world with no magic in it - a hand gesture, a few words and a component all at the same time mid-combat. Any half decent sword wielder will already have hit you 2-3 times and you will probably drop the component etc.

I can say a two-syllable word and point my finger in a fraction of a second. It's a clever technique in which I speak and point at the same time, instead of one after the other. I can even do it while holding a stick (focus) in the other hand. I'm just really talented, I guess.

Now, if you can find someplace in the rules where it says the verbal component of a 1-action spell is more than a two-syllable word, or that the gesture is more complex than pointing, I'll concede the argument.

 

[Pauln6]

I can say a two-syllable word and point my finger in a fraction of a second. It's a clever technique in which I speak and point at the same time, instead of one after the other. I can even do it while holding a stick (focus) in the other hand. I'm just really talented, I guess.

Now, if you can find someplace in the rules where it says the verbal component of a 1-action spell is more than a two-syllable word, or that the gesture is more complex than pointing, I'll concede the argument.

You still have to decide when, in that six second period to start casting and trigger that spell. There's a sword swinging your way. Do you try and dodge or gamble that you can get your spell off first? The dice effectively decide for your character. They are your character's thought processes mixed up with the ebb and flow of battle. Initiative isn't pure luck to the characters; it's luck, skill, judgment, and practicality. The dice represent many things and one six second round bleeds into the next.

Casting a spell takes years of training. Anybody can swing a sword. Swing a sword badly, you miss. Cast a spell badly, it doesn't work. A poor initiative check could be the caster fluffing the words, or being jostled while waving their wand, or failing to find that spell component on their first attempt. You are isolating the act of casting the spell itself but a lot can happen either side of that. If you get hit after casting your spell, why couldn't that pain slow down your casting of your next spell leading to a worse initiative? What about your damn allergies?

 

[Ratskinner]

It's not a bad solution but it is finicky. I have to deal with attacks for every spell cast and then futz about with templates.

Or I can just make all spell effects square, get the same results and greatly speed things up.

Yes, I get that the results are less "accurate ". Fair enough. But then again we've already dropped 1-2-1 counting for movement since it's too much of a PITA. I'd just apply the same thing to spells.

I kinda favor the idea of replacing AoEs with die rolls for #of targets while using TotM combat. IIRC, the DMG has suggestions for this.

Sent from my LG-TP450 using EN World mobile app

 

[Ratskinner]

You are isolating the act of casting the spell itself but a lot can happen either side of that. If you get hit after casting your spell, why couldn't that pain slow down your casting of your next spell leading to a worse initiative? What about your damn allergies?

Seems to me you are doing the same with a sword swing. In our world, the swordsman can ignore the wand-wielded entirely, in D&D he can't.

...just saying.


Sent from my LG-TP450 using EN World mobile app

 

[Pauln6]

Seems to me you are doing the same with a sword swing. In our world, the swordsman can ignore the wand-wielded entirely, in D&D he can't.

...just saying.


Sent from my LG-TP450 using EN World mobile app

The sword swinger also has to roll for initiative. Mearls simply decided that casting a spell in a fight takes more precision than a weapon swing. A shoddy swing can still cause minor injuries. A mis-pronounced spell does nothing.

I come at this from a 1e perspective, where magic was rare and powerful and your first level wizard was aged 30 compared to your 15 year old Fighter. I think younger players may come at it from a computer gaming perspective where sword and spell both take effect at the push of a button. I can understand how those backgrounds might skew perspectives but I personally have no problem with spells being slower on average. It gives martial characters a slight edge to offset their more limited versatility.