Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="redrick" data-source="post: 6677762" data-attributes="member: 6777696">5e has no built-in mechanic for moving any faster than "Dash", other than possibly Rogues taking a second Dash action as part of Cunning Action. Not saying that it's not an appropriate thing to allow under some circumstances — but I'd rule it more individually.In the particular example you gave, the per-turn initiative really has no impact on the believability of that scenario. It takes Able a while to string his bow. How far Zarl has managed to travel before he can get a shot off is entirely dependent on their respective reaction times (ie initiative). Able might be able to get his first shot off quickly, and then stumble a little bit on his second shot. Zarl might stutter step a little bit, falling behind a bit for one round.On the other hand, I imagine that I could come up with examples where a character moving continuously at high speeds breaks down the illusion of simultaneity. Everything up to initiative 13, for instance, happens to Zarl at position x_0 (30', say), and everything after initiative 13 happens at x_1 (150'). The problem is not one of varying initiative — Zarl still jumps 120', regardless of whether he does it on the same initiative or a different one — but one of continuous action with a duration equal to the duration of the round, with meaningful states at every point. In other words, the problem is one of movement. Nobody cares what is happening up until Able actually fires his shot, because all we really care about is whether or not it hits. But the various states of Zarl's movement mean something to us, so it is weird to just skip over them in one flick of the initiative.For this reason, I think it is no accident that even "Dashing" in 5e moves a normal human little more than a brisk walk for 6 seconds. Under most circumstances, characters moving in combat are not moving at a constant velocity for the entire duration of the combat round. They are starting, stopping, turning around, taking little moments of cover behind obstacles, looking for the moment to advance. I dunno. I've never tried to walk across a battlefield, so I'm sort of winging this, but you get the idea. I think, in the case of your sprinting Zarl, if it mattered for the resolution of other actions, I'd probably break his movement up into 4 discrete moves at initiatives 20, 15, 10 and 5. For the round that he decides to start sprinting, his initiative roll would probably determine just how many increments of 30 feet he could actually manage, at a minimum of 60. (So, if Zarl rolls an 11 on his initiative, he is slow to start sprinting while everybody else is chopping and shooting at him, only making 30 feet and init 10 and another 30 feet at init 5. If he rolls a 21, he's running the second Able's hand starts reaching for his bow, and he gets all 120' before Able has his bow strung.) If Zarl is just going to continue sprinting for each consecutive turn, no need to roll initiative — he's just continuing his action from last turn. Maybe an increasingly difficult athletics check?Anyway, thanks for the brief thought experiment!--EDITED TO ADD--While I know all this talk of non-cyclical initiative is a bit of a derail, I'll finish by saying — every "problem" I solve when moving from cyclical initiative to non-cyclical initiative results in, to my mind, much more elegant solution than the original, with no additional cost, other than the cost of having to roll and possibly recalculate initiative every round. Which is not everyone's cup of tea.On the other hand, I hate writing down and tracking initiative at the start of combat. With the short length of 5e combats, being able to just keep the d20 with your initiative roll face up in front of you saves me time vs having to go around, ask everybody's initiative, write them down, figure out the order, etc.</blockquote>

Verification