[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​

 

[Flamestrike]

So no connection to any ability score, then?

Not only do you get to roll a very quick d4 instead of a d8, you also don't need to add the d6 needed to charge into melee...

As if the rules needed to give ranged combat any more advantages over melee...

Of course, why am I surprised Mmearls managed to find an eleventh(!) thing to tweak in favor of ranged combat...? By now it's apparent he is on a personal crusade to destroy classical fantasy tropes and how they rely on melee combat.

Sent from my C6603 using EN World mobile app

You may be the first person I put on ignore.

All you do is whinge and whine about the game. On an Internet forum dedicated to discussion of the game. It's like every time your posts come up I know what they going to say before I even read them... and then foolishly I read them and they just anger me.

Out of the hundreds of role-playing games available why do you play this one?

I mean you seem to hate it so much that you log onto the Internet and spent several hours of each day whining about how bad it is. On a forum for people that like the game no less. Sounds like you've wasted months of your life complaining about a game that you waste months of your life playing that you don't even like.

It's just really super weird.

Like I hated fourth edition. I loathed it. But I didn't waste any time or my life whingeing about it histrionically on the Internet on a daily basis; I just went off and found a different game to play.

Why do you play a game you so clearly hate? Why do you spend your leisure time so?

On the topic of the initiative variant, I hate it. I'm more than happy with a d20 and cycling initiative.

 

[JeffB]

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?

FFG star wars initiative is fast and an unopposed roll. its not really any harder than 3/4/5e D&D. Because it also does not tie to specific characters every round but which "side" gets to go next, it's also far less boring than D&D cyclic initiative.

 

[Iosue]

By the by, here's my homebrewed side-initiative system, based off B/X's combat sequence:

Both sides roll 1d6, highest roll goes first.
1. Roll morale, if needed, and Death Saves.
2. Initial movement, and all other various non-attack Actions.
3. Missile attacks and any remaining movement.
4. Magic spells and any remaining movement.
5. Melee attacks and any remaining movement.
6. Saving throws and endings of effects/conditions.

I find this works great in person, but not so great with Roll20 online play because people get distracted, mics get muted, etc.

 

[Blitzner]

he also said that initiative slows the game and disrupts the tension of a fight "look, a dragon! Let's roll some dice and do some math". How does THAT helps with it? It's way worse

 

[Staccat0]

I might be compelled to try something like this, but I think it would need to be less frequent.

It's less thematic but I might say that there are "triggers" for rolling initiative including a PC dropping and new combatants entering the battlefield. When one of these events occurs you reroll initiative based on the LAST action you took instead of the NEXT.

 

[dave2008]

This sounds like the most asinine thing I've heard. Why would anyone want to do initiative like this? I can't see how it would make combat move faster. Faster USUALLY = Simpler, such as both opposing parties roll d6, add highest init mod from each member and then each opposing parties move as a team. THAT'D be faster.

Then you need to get out more - there a lot more asinine things out there. But to your issues:
1) We don't have the full rules
2) What is asinine for one group is not for another (it may even be essential)
3) The primary reason he states is to achieve unpredictability, not speed
4) It could be faster if, as it appears, you are required to declare your actions first, and this forces players to make quick decisions, players who otherwise take a long time to decided what they want to do

It is clearly not for everyone, and it is not intended to. It appears it also works for him and his group. See point 2 again.

 

[Zaukrie]

Intriguing ideas on this thread. For those actually contributing, thank you. I like a lot of this, and might use some of it.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

I may be tempted to use the the initiative from Shadow of the Demon Lord from Robert Shwalb. Each rounds is divided in 4 steps:
1. Players and Dm choose if they want to do a Fast Turn (only one action or move) or a Slow Turn (Whole turn as normal)
2. Resolve fast turns, players first then monsters.
3. Resolve slow turn, players then monsters.
4. End of the Round. Roll death saving throws if any.

Players decide who goes in what order. Surprised creature stays surprised until the end of the first round.

 

[dave2008]

By the by, here's my homebrewed side-initiative system, based off B/X's combat sequence:

Both sides roll 1d6, highest roll goes first.
1. Roll morale, if needed, and Death Saves.
2. Initial movement, and all other various non-attack Actions.
3. Missile attacks and any remaining movement.
4. Magic spells and any remaining movement.
5. Melee attacks and any remaining movement.
6. Saving throws and endings of effects/conditions.

I find this works great in person, but not so great with Roll20 online play because people get distracted, mics get muted, etc.

Other than copying a previous work, why would spells and ranged attacks go before melee. I am somewhat proficient with a bow and throwing knives, less so with a sword. However, it is still much faster for me to accurately hit something with a melee weapon. Since there is not range accuracy penalty I assume the characters are taking time to aim, and thus should be slower to act.

 

[kalil]

Puh. Good thing MM does not always get his way. This is awful. Clunky, fiddly and requires a declaration phase. What would be the order of declaration anyway? Pretty big advantage knowing what the enemy is doing before you declare your action. Bleh.