Which stat for init?

[YRUSirius]

I'd use the pretty casual style of initiative rules that Chris Perkins used in all his video sessions and podcasts with celebrity gamers: One initiative roll at the start of the combat, which is basically just a dexterity roll. Highest number goes first. THEN the turn just goes clockwise.

DM rolls for all different monsters or just takes ten for his monsters. If one of his monsters gets the highest number the dm just takes turns for all of the monsters.

I like it, because it's quick and dirty. (Kinda like group initiative, but with a degree of success between the players). No hassle, no cumbersome initiative list to write down, easy to understand and it might remind some casuals of basic boardgame rules.

I mean: Did anyone miss something big at the Chris Perkins celebrity sessions? Me neither.

-YRUSirius

 

[Argyle King]

level + d20 roll


Why?

I would like to avoid the 'super stat' problem others have mentioned.

With the math supposedly being more flat, it may be possible to view level as a sort of '7th stat' which measures experience. The 7th level fighter has been through more battles, and has a better concept of tactics than the 1st level fighter. As such, he has a better idea of how and when to act; using his experience in tactics to get an edge over his opponent. Feats such as improved initiative could still be available.

Thirdly, it's simple.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Is there an issue with treating initiative as a skill?
I suppose it depends upon how a skill actually works but this would be my preference.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[The Shadow]

Is there an issue with treating initiative as a skill?
I suppose it depends upon how a skill actually works but this would be my preference.

Perhaps 'Initiative' is simply the active version of 'Reflex'? If you would use a Dex save in 5e to avoid certain perils, perhaps a Dex check for initiative. Which could be enhanced by a skill, as usual.

 

[Tovec]

I like the star wars saga way of doing it and I've adopted it into my current game.

Initiative becomes a skill same as any other. DEX is the base stat but you can put ranks into it, have class bonuses, a feat, etc.
So if you want to have DEX + roll you can. If you want to have extra ranks equal to level then go ahead. It just feels like a quick and easy way to do initiative while allowing more flexibility and range offered than by the existing improved initiative feat alone.

Oh, I'm playing a base 3e game as I'm sure that would make a difference.

 

[Ratskinner]

I'm liking simple: roll a 1d10, go on that "segment." (Maybe a d12, d12 always needed love.)

If I had to go more complicated, I'd prefer a method similar to Old School Hack*. I know many other games have used a system like this (particularly war games), but its the one I've played most recently. However, its not a typical D&D system, so I wouldn't expect it to be core.

*OSH has initiative based on action type, rolls only occur when two character both move and you need to tell who moves first. There are 6+1 phases: Defend/Protect, Shoot, Focus(i.e. cast spell)/Impede, Move, Attack, Push/Throw, and Effect(resolve spells).

 

[Thalionalfirin]

I'm in favor of divorcing initiative from ability scores.

I'd like for weapon speeds and casting times to make a comeback. The guy with the smaller and lighter weapon should have an advantage over the guy with the heavy war ax or two-handed sword.

The higher level a spell is the longer it should take to cast the damned thing. This might help in making those alleged super powered casters eat some humble pie once in a while.

Woud exp you but I need to spread the love around more, I guess.

Would love to see a return of casting times a la 1e. It would definitely rein in spellcasters if they went with a 1e'ish kind of initiative system.

 

[dangerous jack]

From what I remember, during the development of 4e they considered making Initiative a skill, but dropped that because it became a must-have skill that everyone trained.

Personally, I'd favour removing ability modifiers from initiative checks, but I'd also like to remove ability modifiers from to hit rolls too (e.g. level 7 fighter has +7 to hit, regardless of whether he's a str fighter, a dex fighter, or an int fighter). So I'm special like that.

 

[BobTheNob]

Personally, I'd favour removing ability modifiers from initiative checks, but I'd also like to remove ability modifiers from to hit rolls too (e.g. level 7 fighter has +7 to hit, regardless of whether he's a str fighter, a dex fighter, or an int fighter). So I'm special like that.

To me it does work if your detach all modifiers from init and treat it as totally random. Can make for a more interesting, less predictable combat experience IMHO.

I have often thought about removing stat bonus's from to hit rolls as well. The problem with it is not removing the stat bonus from toHit, its removing stats from your ability to defend, which you inevitably would need to do to counter the balance the idea.

 

[Izumi]

I get why. Dex = reactions, faster reaction speed = act earlier. No problem with that....

Except that I have played enough 4e combat (SO much 4e combat) to realise something else. Thats what it is intended to do, but in practice, initiative is more tactical in nature. The guy who acts first has the tactical advantage, he has the power to act or to delay/act whenever he likes. This means he can pro-actively strike, pro-actively control or reactively counter. This is where I start to get an issue with its association with Dex.

Tactical capability is not a question of reflex's, its really about smarts. My gut feel is that Initiative should be based on intelligence (or wisdom...even charisma if your half mad), not Dex.

Wisdom + Level is the most realistic way to go.
Intelligence can't reliably guess intentions in time, and fast reflexes don't guarantee your brain makes the decision/act dynamic quicker. With Wisdom and experience you can force reactions, change their intentions, and therefore discover an intention you can then thwart.