D&D 5E Weapon and Spell Speed Factor Module

[gweinel]

Mike Mearls in a yesterday's tweet:

@ Lawngnome4hire Will there be a module that lets you add weapon and spell speeds to emulate 10 segmented combat similar to 2e.
@ mikemearls doubtful, but I can always add it to the book...

Weapon and Spell Speed Factor is one of my favorite features of the 2nd edition. The above tweet rekindled my hopes to see it again as a module in the 5th edition.

Here is an Ad hoc module imitating the 2nd edition weapon speed factor and spell speed factor rules.

Weapon and Spell Speed Factor Module

• Every weapon category gets a -3 to the iniative. So Light Weapons get a -3, Medium Weapons -6 and Heavy Weapons -9.
• Each spell get a minus for each spell level to the iniative. So, a 1st lvl spell gets a -1, a 2nd lvl spell gets a -2, ..... a 9th lvl spell gets a -9.
• If the weapon's wielder iniative is greater than the spell caster and the attack hits the caster then the spell is disrupted.

What to you think?

 

[GX.Sigma]

Weapon and Spell Speed Factor Module

• Every weapon category gets a -3 to the iniative. So Light Weapons get a -3, Medium Weapons -6 and Heavy Weapons -9.
• Each spell get a minus for each spell level to the iniative. So, a 1st lvl spell gets a -1, a 2nd lvl spell gets a -2, ..... a 9th lvl spell gets a -9.
• If the weapon's wielder iniative is greater than the spell caster and the attack hits the caster then the spell is disrupted.

Does this imply that every round begins with action declarations, then an initiative roll? Because that in itself would be a pretty significant change to the core 5e combat system.

 

[gweinel]

Does this imply that every round begins with action declarations, then an initiative roll? Because that in itself would be a pretty significant change to the core 5e combat system.

I wasn't sure that's the reason I had not mention it in the original post. The more I think about it i come closer to the impression that having every round an iniative with the declaration of the players action is something that suits to 5th edition. At least i think it fits more than 3rd or 4th edition. 5e having pretty quick combats can support the extra roll each round with the appropriate calculation of the iniative.

However, I am not aware of the last playtests so I don't know how it contradicts with other rules.

On the other hand, taking the most moderate path, the one that the players doesn't reroll each round the iniative how would it fit in the game? Does it has any impact? Gives the feeling of intense and unpredictability? Leads to different strategic approaches for the fighters and the casters during combat? If not then it does not worth it.

 

[GX.Sigma]

I wasn't sure that's the reason I had not mention it in the original post. The more I think about it i come closer to the impression that having every round an iniative with the declaration of the players action is something that suits to 5th edition. At least i think it fits more than 3rd or 4th edition. 5e having pretty quick combats can support the extra roll each round with the appropriate calculation of the iniative.

However, I am not aware of the last playtests so I don't know how it contradicts with other rules.

On the other hand, taking the most moderate path, the one that the players doesn't reroll each round the iniative how would it fit in the game? Does it has any impact? Gives the feeling of intense and unpredictability? Leads to different strategic approaches for the fighters and the casters during combat? If not then it does not worth it.

In my experience, just rolling initiative once takes way too long. Of course, that's assuming each character rolls initiative and the DM has to write it down. How about this:

Each round consists of 6 one-second "segments". At the start of every round:

• Announce actions
• Each character rolls 1d6 for initiative and remembers their result. The DM starts the round by announcing "1," and each player who rolled 1 can resolve their action. The DM then announces "2," and so on. It is not the DM's responsibility to remember the players' initiative rolls.
• If you're using a reaction or bonus action, you can do that whenever appropriate.
• Otherwise, your action happens on the segment you rolled.
  • Optional: If your action is to attack with a weapon, your initiative result is modified by weapon properties (cumulative): Light (-1), wielding in two hands (+1), reach (-2).
  • Optional: If your action is to cast a spell, and you take damage before the segment you rolled, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell.
  • Optional: If your action is to cast a spell, your initiative result is modified by spell level: Cantrip (-1) 2nd-4th level (+1), 5th level (+2), 6th-9th-level (+3).
  • Optional: Against large numbers of monsters, the DM can decide to divide them equally among the segments rather than rolling initiative for them. (e.g., against 24 kobolds, 4 of them act each segment).

 

[Hutchimus Prime]

Weapon Speed has fans? Huh.

 

[KidSnide]

Weapon Speed has fans? Huh.

As much as I prefer faster initiative systems, the weapon speed system did have the advantage of creating meaningful dramatic tension, especially with respect to spell timing. It was a big deal whether the wizard could get her spell off before the monster went and there was some nice rhythm to a round: (1) quick PCs go (2) spell casters and monsters race (3) slow heavy PCs get off their attacks.

I don't think the extra bookkeeping is worth the effort, but I think the outcome is more fun and less predictable than the now standard D&D initiative cycle.

-KS

 

[Giltonio_Santos]

I love round-by-round initiative, but it works better with group initiative. If I start every round with an initiative roll for every PC and every enemy, we get a lot of confusion built in. Once initiative is rolled, each player modifies the die roll with his own (reaction adjustment + speed factor) or casting time. It works. Combat in 2E has the benefit of feeling very fluid, specially with extra attacks only happening after everybody gets the chance to attack once. Fixed initiative makes it too orderly for me.

I should stop now before I give up on my 5E preorder and just keep playing AD&D.

 

[Shiroiken]

I'm a fan of round by round initiative with action declaration. I would go with -2, -4, and -6 instead, because I feel with works better with spell levels (a fireball is not as fast as a dagger, for example). The DM could easily give a modifier for improvised actions, ranging from 1-9.

 

[rjfTrebor]

you should go read the game before you try designing for it. Dexterity is the only thing that ever goes into initiative so some of these numbers are going to be too big (and that's just the beginning of the issues).

 

[Squeakula]

I like a modified system found in Swords and Wizardry.
10 segment round, everyone rolls a D10 for initiative. Start at segment 1 and move forward from there.

Everyone gets to do a standard action every 6 segments (yes, if you roll low enough you can go more than once in the first round). This 6 segment action is modified by Armor (+1 for light, +2 for medium, +4 for heavy, +1 for shield), weapon (+2 for Heavy), spellcasting (+1/level of spell) and subtract dex modifier. Plus any miscellaneous modifiers you care to add.

It can be a pain for the DM though...