What is your way for doing Initiative?

[5ekyu]

I'm pretty sure that unreasonable outcomes is actually a feature for combat. Combat is supposed to be chaotic. You aren't always able to capitalise on an effect due to
(a) having to defend yourself against others;
(b) having to catch your breath;
(c) being hampered by terrain and weather conditions;
(d) momentarily turning your attention elsewhere (fallen comrade, someone saying something, noticing something);
(e) the effect was shaken off faster than you expected or was not as effective; and
(f) supernatural/unexplained phenomena (suffering from an effect yourself, seeing an image of long lost friend, hearing your deity's voice)

Other times, combat is just perfect, everything lines up and you're unbelievably deadly or maybe just lucky.

I. Unreasonable I meant within the context of the game world.

Put simply nobody would build a spell for combat where even if the spell took effect it would not do anything useful half the time.

In a world where random reset initiative was the norm you would not see so many effects based on that hairs edge of adding "hit or pass the save:" **and** get the right init results next turn too. Spells and magic effects for such a world would be keyed for how many times they affected something or some other useful timing.

It's not that combat need ABC degree of chaos but that the tools created within the game make a lot less sense for a world that works that way.

You seem to want to see "unreasonable" as unpredictable or chaotic... but it was intended to mean "nonsensical" in the context of the system and what it presents.

To be clear - let's give this same chaotic fun to fighters... you roll to hit the AC and if you hit then you do damage - unless you lose unit next round in which case you do zero.

Yay yay yay... chaotic, unpredictable - gotcha covered.

No, nonsensical for whether or not your "effect" works needing to also be the right combo of init rolls next turn.

That's the difference between fog of war, chaotic and nonsensical results.

 

[Immortal Sun]

When there's no consensus, I default to round robin, and space the bad-guys out accordingly.

Otherwise, I'm a really big fan of "squad" initiative. No die rolls needed but heavy reliance on "held" and "readied" turns and actions. It can be interruptive of the flow of things, but it also makes the game very coordinated. The party and the bad-guys end up acting more as tactical units coordinating their efforts for greater reward than acting individually, not knowing what anyone else is going to do.

 

[MechaPilot]

I use 2d10 + 1/2 of Dex modifier + any other relevant bonuses.

I find the 2d10 evens out the extreme highs and lows of the d20, and using half the Dex mod makes Dex less important.

 

[Imaculata]

I use the system as written, but often roll group initiative for enemies that are of the same type.

So while a boss-enemy may gets his own initiative, his minions tend to share one group-initiative. Because this just means I have less rolling to do, and it is easier to keep track of enemy turns when they're not all out of order.

 

[Maxperson]

In a world where random reset initiative was the norm you would not see so many effects based on that hairs edge of adding "hit or pass the save:" **and** get the right init results next turn too. Spells and magic effects for such a world would be keyed for how many times they affected something or some other useful timing.

Sure they would. They would understand that there's an off chance of the spell being wasted, but in the vast majority of instances the "initiative results"(which they are not even aware exists), wouldn't stop the spell from being effective.

We see that right here in the real world. If what you say is true, then the police wouldn't train to shoot center of body due to the off chance of someone wearing a bullet proof vest. Except that the do train that way, despite the off chance that their shots will be wasted due to the presence of a vest.

To be clear - let's give this same chaotic fun to fighters... you roll to hit the AC and if you hit then you do damage - unless you lose unit next round in which case you do zero.

Considering that there's the exact same chance for double effectiveness if you roll well for initiative with a spell, I would absolutely take that as a fighter. If I roll badly, I do no damage. If I roll well, I do double damage. The vast majority of the time I simply do normal damage. Works for me. The damage over time works out to be the same as if you have static initiative.

 

[Blue]

Where does it say that the 1 round is based on the caster's initiative and not 1 round based on the target's initiative?

It's neither, it's the length of time the spell persists (PHB 203). Which starts from it's casting, so is on the same beats as the character's turn. Though there are a bunch of features and some spells that are "Until the start (or end) of your next turn" which is pretty clear when it ends as opposed to a duration listed in time units.

Though maybe that's a solution, to make it duration based on the target. In general if initiative is changing it is an improvement. Good idea.

There are still some outliers. To give example of the category, you have things like Shield, which normally will protect against one turn for each opponent plus all OA. Or Booming Blade, where the target is I guess you but the effect triggered on movement of a foe. But it does clear up a number of cases.

 

[5ekyu]

Sure they would. They would understand that there's an off chance of the spell being wasted, but in the vast majority of instances the "initiative results"(which they are not even aware exists), wouldn't stop the spell from being effective.

We see that right here in the real world. If what you say is true, then the police wouldn't train to shoot center of body due to the off chance of someone wearing a bullet proof vest. Except that the do train that way, despite the off chance that their shots will be wasted due to the presence of a vest.



Considering that there's the exact same chance for double effectiveness if you roll well for initiative with a spell, I would absolutely take that as a fighter. If I roll badly, I do no damage. If I roll well, I do double damage. The vast majority of the time I simply do normal damage. Works for me. The damage over time works out to be the same as if you have static initiative.

Ok so we all know that we are looking at things within a context of this game., right? It's in comparison to other options that exist within that context.

Police practice shooting for CoM because that is the best and safest option. It produces the most reliable choice. Their is not a better option. Also, most body armor that renders a bullet ineffective instead of simply non-lethal is highly visible before the policeman decides to shoot. So if he sees the heavy gear that can have plate insert he can make an informed decision - perhaps opting for gas if that's an option or containment or waiting for heavier firepower. Key is the body armors that can reduce the effectiveness to zero are rare.

In this 5e house ruled example, we have the exact opposite situations.

The "added thing" that renders a subset of the effects sometimes ineffective even when they work is not rare and not visible.

And the key difference is **there are alternatives** and thatsxehere the rub comes in.

You see, while you go off on damage the effects mentioned were mostly not damage, not double damage but control. That control is initially bought at the expense of extra damage.

So let's do an easy example.

Ray of Frost vs Firebolt.

Both require the to-hit for any effect at all.
One does more damage flat out everytime on a hit.
One does less damage and (RAW) reduces the enemies move for what is pretty much guaranteed one turn of their action.

But add in the house rule of re-rolling order and even possibly not knowing your order when you pick attacks and now that control speed reduction shifts from "trade damage for control" to "trade damage for a random chance at conttol."

That takes Ray of Frost from an arguably balanced trade-off to really not even close. In the context of the game those choices are now not a balanced pair of options and essentially it makes no sense now for them to be presented as such.

Now, one can try the "overall it balances out" but really for most of them that fails to be true.

To give up damage for Ray of Frost, one usually has a specific "need it slower now" need, and the fails vs goes twice does not "even out". This is particularly true in 5e given that more than a few combats dont see lasting that long on many foes.

A good example was a fight tonight vs skellies, where Ray's of Ftost could keep allies from reaching attack range, adding a bit of damage and then the shellie did not survive for the theoretical second move at slow. Here the initiative rework would result in sometimes wasted, sometimes did not matter but firebolts eould still be the 100% alternative.

Similarly booming blade for instance, it goes off once... so the random initiative shaft-me roll gives you the option for it going down before the enemy gets to move or no other gain from the field lasting longer until they move.

So, no, those results are nonsensical in the context of the options presented and they add not a degree of uncertainty or s sense of risky double or nothing but just a sense of "this gameplay seems not very thought out" --- which makes sense when one sees the proponent asking essentially if there are spells that would be hit this way.

There are already built into the options and effects presented chances of success and failure to reach a desired degree of "trade offs" between comparable alternatives. This change, made without due diligence, kicks that for a number of effects and options with the hope that it works out somehow.

Not a gameplay I would inflict on my players, but hey, to each their own.

 

[Maxperson]

It's neither, it's the length of time the spell persists (PHB 203). Which starts from it's casting, so is on the same beats as the character's turn. Though there are a bunch of features and some spells that are "Until the start (or end) of your next turn" which is pretty clear when it ends as opposed to a duration listed in time units.

That's an assumption. Page 203 doesn't say that, so this is a ruling case for the DM, not a rule. You are free to rule that way in your game, but it's not wrong for other DMs to rule differently for the spell.

 

[Laurefindel]

Similar experience for me; renewed initiative slowed thing-up significantly.

It wasn't the extra roll that took time, it was all the calculations and speculations whether which spell would be more optimal than that other one, trying to milk two rounds worth of an effect before duration expires or the caster switched concentration to another spell, favoring ally buffs in some situations, lasting effect in others, etc. Even melee manoeuvres to push someone prone for two consecutive player rounds, or getting two-rounds worth of distance to avoid melee etc.

It did add a whole new level of strategy and tactical thinking, but keeping the pace flowing was more important in the end.

 

[FXR]

I've tried both RAW initiative and Greyhawk-style initiative and I didn't like it. RAW initiative makes the combat too static while Greyhawk initiative slows it down.

I'm toying with the following house rule:

All creatures roll initiative (d20+ Dexterity or Intelligence modifier). Creatures take their turn as normal, but a creature with higher initiative can let a slower creature act before.

However, each creature's initiative roll isn't set in stone. The roll may be modified (and accordingly, the order in which creatures take their turn) depending on some events:

A creature adds 5* to its initiative :
i) when it uses its inspiration ;
ii) when it scores a critical hit ;
iii) when it reduces an opponent's HP to 0.

A creature substracts 5* to its initiative :
i) when it fails a saving throw ;
ii) when it fails an attack roll by a margin of 5 ;
iii) when it becomes incapable of acting, frightened or prone ;
iv) when it takes more damage from a single source than its Constitution score.

Modifications to initiative take effect immediately unless the creature has already taken its turn, in which case they take effect at the beginning of the next round.

Examples:
During the first round, a barbarian PC acts on initiative count 13 and strikes sucessfully an orc (initiative count 10) and an ogre (initiative count 14). For some reasons, both the orc and the ogres take more damage than their constitution score and accordingly substract 5 from their initiative result. The orc will act on initiative count 5 for this round and later rounds, while the ogre, who already has acted, will act on initiative count 9.

On the second round, the barbarian acts first (initiative count 13), followed by the ogre (initiative count 9) and the orc (initiative count 5). If the orc strikes a critical hit, on this round, he will act on initiative count 10 on the third round.

What do you think?





* I'm still unsure if I should use a flat value or a random dice (say 1d6).