Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="toucanbuzz" data-source="post: 8557615" data-attributes="member: 19270">This thread resurrects itself every 3-4 months and generally bogs down into the "that won't work and I'd never use it" and "we use it and it's great" camps. First, let's get past the 2 big points.Disclaimer: I've been using a variant of what the OP discussed for 5+ years. It's great.<ol> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">Rules of any kind can be complex until you play them for awhile, then they're old news. So that shouldn't dissuade people from trying something new in their game. </li> <li data-xf-list-type="ol">If something sounds cool, great, but ask what you're wanting to do in your game. What does this new rule add that makes the game more enjoyable? And, can we add this new rule without slowing down our game too much?</li> </ol>Here's what we use. [ATTACH=full]152465[/ATTACH]Is it faster/slower than default initiative? Faster, much much faster. Why? Because all 5 players and the DM are simultaneously deciding what to do, not one at a time. Players are making the best decision as they see it, not a perfect one, and it corrects "analysis paralysis." My combats run so much faster than the default days. It took about 3 combats for players to start getting used to the house rule without looking at a cheat sheet.What does it add to your game? Unpredictability and tension. No one is guaranteed to go in a particular order each round.Can I lose my turn by declaring actions? Maybe, but no differently than if you're a melee attacker in D&D and your target moves to the air and you can't reach them. In 5+ years, I've seen less than 5 times a PC made such a boneheaded decision on what to do that they screwed themselves over from acting.  Players are reading the battlefield and making optimal decisions as they see it. Ultimately, in my "notes on use," I have a "defer to letting a player act" policy so that if a PC gets grappled and had a weapon ready to attack, they can sub in an action to using that weapon to try and escape. But, if you were moving your hands and incanting fireball, you don't get to fudge those words to mean lightning bolt.Bonus actions? Aren't declared. They happen so quickly little preparation is needed. In a prior edition, they were called "swift" actions. Are monsters too much to handle? Yes, as is. Players only have to track the player, but the DM might be tracking a dozen creatures. The DM needed a shortcut. So, monsters have 2 rules. If using a Natural Attack (like claw/bite), they use the d4 unarmed strike. If you're wondering why, do a search for the bear attack on Leonardo DiCaprio's character in The Revenant. Everything else no matter the Action uses the monster's HD.Movement? Tried a variant that considered adding a die for "reserving" the option to move. Too many die rolls (see the DM). Alternately, I have toyed with the idea of simply having anyone who wants to "reserve" the option to move to add +1 or maybe +2 to their roll. This would add strategy to the round and reward attackers who "have their feet set," but so far I haven't tried it. Anyhow, to be civil folks, whatever works for your game table is best. Whatever works for my game table is best. </blockquote>

Verification