[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​

 

[Chicken_Heart]

Needlessly complicated. All we need for new players is a complex system for initiative on top of already complicated combat rules. To keep things interesting in some games I just have the players re-roll initiative every turn. The initiative rules aren't perfect, but they get the job done.

 

[Iosue]

This strikes me as essentially the 2e initiative system: declare actions, roll 1d8 for initiative every round, adjust result with modifiers depending on action, lowest goes first. The difference is instead of modifiers, Mearls uses different dice, which is similar to his preference for using skill dice over straight proficiency bonus.

 

[Ath'kethin]

Hmm. I'm not too impressed. It seems to offer no real advantage over the system we use at my table, which is pretty much just rolling each round and using the weapon speed modifiers in the DMG.

 

[Osgood]

I get the idea, but it seems like it will be confusing and slow to roll various dice every round. We already have a weapon speed optional rule, why bother with this? If I were to use this, I'd be inclined to just use the weapon's damage die, and maybe spells are d10 or d12 + spell level. Rather than bothering with adding dice for movement, bonus actions, weapon switches etc., just a static +2.

 

[Anthro78]

Why don't we just play a Fantasy Flight roleplaying game and roll 73 types of dice and consult the oracle as to what they mean?

 

[Morrus]

A lot of people were indeed excited, which I think was more related to it being something new, and yes, in 2E we did roll every round, by the book, declaring actions before rolling because of speed factors. I don't remember weapon speeds in 1E, though, but my grey hair might have a word or two regarding my memory .

I thought so. So basically it's the 2E system which everybody was excited about giving up in 2001 (but with dice instead of set speeds).

SaveSave​

 

[Iosue]

I thought so. So basically it's the 2E system which everybody was excited about giving up in 2001 (but with dice instead of set speeds).

Dice instead of set speeds is a major change that addresses the major problem people had with 2e initiative: remembering all those modifiers and then adding them to the roll.

 

[OB1]

I think I'm starting to get my head around this, and I think it might be very interesting. Obviously a lot of speculation in what follows. I'm assuming that if you want to change your action when it becomes your turn, you roll the appropriate die and add it to your total, giving you your new place in the order.

Start of round, 2 PCs, 2 Monsters

Rangy McRanger - Going to shoot my bow at Orc (Rolls 1d4 and gets a 4)
Gnomy Paladinick the Awesome - Going to attack with my Sword (Rolls 1d8 and gets a 5)
Orc - Move and Attack with Sword (Rolls 1d8 and 1d6 and gets a 3 total)
Dire Wolf - Move and Bite (rolls 1d8 and gets 8)

DM starts counting off initiative
1,2,3
Orc Moves up and attacks Rangy McRanger, it's a crit! Rangy goes down!
4
Rangy Makes a death saving throw and fails!
5
Gnomy - Now I'm changing my action and want to lay hands on Rangy (Rolls d6 and gets a 5, new total is 10)
6,7,8
Dire Wolf - Bite and Grapple Gnomy - Gnomy wins grapple check
9, 10
Gnomy - Lays hands on Rangy, bringing him back up
Start Round 2

I'd also assume that if a player adds a bonus action mid round after they act, they take their action at the normal time and then roll to see when their bonus action comes up. Same with deciding to move after an action or in between a multi-attack action (in which case the first blow would come at the regular initiative). There is risk reward here, say for a monk, who might want to just roll action, move and bonus die all at once at the beginning and get to do everything together rather than risk splitting apart 2 attacks, a flurry of blows and movement.

My one concern is if there might be issues with the order in which actions are declared in the first place. If I start the order saying the dragon is going to use her breath weapon, does everyone then decide to take the dodge action that round? Is that a bad thing? Would you roll declaration order at the start of combat using the regular initiative rolls with highest going last (assumes it's better to declare at the end than the beginning)?

I think there is a lot of potential here and that it adds a wonderful layer of strategy when playing TOM.

 

[dave2008]

Little surprised that this is Mearls' prefers system. It adds complexity and die rolls based on variable factors rolls and is pseudo-simulationist in nature, neither of which seem to really be what 5E is about. I don't see the benefit over the base system honestly.

I was hoping his system was more about declared actions and resolution choice or something. A system like that would be much more cooperative.

It seems to me that this system requires declared actions. Otherwise you wouldn't know what to roll.

Also, in other places in the article Mearls professed his preference for die rolls (proficiency for example), but this was not instituted because the survey's showed a strong preference for static numbers.

 

[dave2008]

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?

On the surface, that doesn't seem any better to me than one 20-sided die roll for initiative at the start of combat. It's more die rolls and more for a DM to track with negligible benefit in my humble opinion.

I welcome any corrections if my interpretation is in error.

We don't have the mechanics for the whole system, so there are a lot of things that would need to be ironed out before it could be added as an option to the game. In addition, it seems the main reason he likes it is that it is less predictable. Not sure why everyone is getting hung up on whether or not it is faster.