Initiative and order of action [Archive] - Wizards Community

Initiative and order of action [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
lockdar
08-31-07, 07:27 AM I have a quick question regarding initiative and the right order of action for pc's and npc's. The way we've been doing it recently is the following:

- Everyone rolls for initiative
- DM writes down who rolled what
- Character with lowest initiative states what he wants to do, then the second lowest ect. till we reach the fastest pc (highest initiative)
- Character with highest initiative does his action and we move down the line till everyone has done his action

The following problem sometimes occurs:

People want to do something (like grappling or casting a spell at a certain spot) that becomes impossible to do once several characters have moved and done their actions. What's especially annoying is that a character with higher initiative can knowingly disrupt actions by moving to a certain spot or by taking a certain action. What happens then is that (mostly) the npc's have to do something else then what they originally had planned to do. Because of this I argue that stating what you will do before you are going to do it is fairly useless since your action will either change or you have to forfeit all your actions alltogether.

How do you as DM handle initiative, is there something wrong with the way we've been doing it?

Thanks in advance for any advice and suggestions.
Empiro
08-31-07, 07:49 AM I have a quick question regarding initiative and the right order of action for pc's and npc's. The way we've been doing it recently is the following:

- Everyone rolls for initiative
- DM writes down who rolled what
- Character with lowest initiative states what he wants to do, then the second lowest ect. till we reach the fastest pc (highest initiative)
- Character with highest initiative does his action and we move down the line till everyone has done his action

The following problem sometimes occurs:

People want to do something (like grappling or casting a spell at a certain spot) that becomes impossible to do once several characters have moved and done their actions. What's especially annoying is that a character with higher initiative can knowingly disrupt actions by moving to a certain spot or by taking a certain action. What happens then is that (mostly) the npc's have to do something else then what they originally had planned to do. Because of this I argue that stating what you will do before you are going to do it is fairly useless since your action will either change or you have to forfeit all your actions alltogether.

How do you as DM handle initiative, is there something wrong with the way we've been doing it?

Yes. You don't declare your actions ahead of time. You choose and perform them as your turn comes up.
lockdar
08-31-07, 09:46 AM Yea, that would be my guess aswell. But then what is the advantage of being first, except for being able to be the first to act. Everyone can respond to your actions while you on the other hand can't because you've already done your actions...
Zavia
08-31-07, 09:56 AM that IS the point. you get to do it 1st, and u force them to respond to your actions. AND you have the option to delay your turn if u feel like you dont want to be 1st. being the last means u respond to the enemy's actions, and you dont have an option to be 1st(if say your strategy was depending on that).

strategy tip: make your enemy do what u want them to.
Nom
08-31-07, 10:19 AM Also note that the game is designed around the idea that initiative is rolled once (per encounter) to establish turn order, and then you just go round and round that loop. There's no external "beginning" or "end" to rounds, just from a character's turn to the same character's turn a round later.

Obviously, the longer the encounter goes for, the less initiative matters. That said, going first can make a big difference to many encounters.
eamon
08-31-07, 10:33 AM Initiative simply determines in which order people make there turns. No matter the initiative however, taking that turn is the same: you choose and act while it's your turn (unless you're taking special actions like Ready or Delay).

Many encounters are decided in the first one or two rounds (even if they take longer to fully mop up). Being first (or at least early) simply means you're more likely to have an impact on that outcome, something that's very very important :). Of course, there are some encounters, like when two opposing groups expect each other and see the encounter coming well in advance, when initiative isn't important. That's OK though, it just means you have a little variety in your tactics ;-).

Improved Initiative is probably one of the best feats out there, and I've never DM'd a party in which not at least one PC took it - and I think I've been in a party in which almost everyone did ;-) - so don't worry, initiative is relevant enough simply by determing the order, and there's no need to further emphasize it.
Phrennzy
08-31-07, 11:24 AM Going first happens only one time, at the beginning of combat. After that, it's a loop of actions.

Going first means that everyone else is flat-footed, and so you can move without drawing AoOs, and inflict sneak attack damage.

1. Everyone rolls initiative.
2. DM notes everyone's initiative.
3. Highest initiative acts.
4. Second highest acts.
5. Etc.
soldyne
08-31-07, 11:27 AM another way to think about initiative is that the highest initiative is the one to think and act first. the lower the initiative is the more time that character needs to create a coherent thought and understand the situation at hand. slower characters are (as has been said earlier) forced to react to the situation instead of creating the situation. but after the first round everyone is really just reacting to what has happened earlier.

but think of this, the PCs all have initiative over the enemy party (for example). they all decide to attack. when they are done the enemy party must react to taking damage by using up their round to heal, run or just lie dead on the ground or possibly counter attack. in the time spent during the PCs actions the enemies were still trying to figure out what was going on, essentially hesitating and really had no idea what their actions were going to be until it was too late (thats the key there, they had no idea what the situation was like so they could not have declared actions before the fasters PCs took theirs).

the idea of declaring actions in the opposite order of initiative just does not really make sense and bogs down combat. I don't use it. if you know what you are going to do then you should be able to do it when you know about it. hesitation of action has its roots in hesitation of thought and that is what initiative should represent.
Man in the Funny Hat
08-31-07, 05:29 PM - Everyone rolls for initiative
- DM writes down who rolled what
- Character with lowest initiative states what he wants to do, then the second lowest ect. till we reach the fastest pc (highest initiative)
- Character with highest initiative does his action and we move down the line till everyone has done his actionDeclaration of actions was dropped as of 3rd Edition, if not before, and for the very reasons you're describing. Inititative is resolved highest to lowest. When your initiative comes up you just DO what you want to do, characters and opponents ARE where they are, what's already past is past, and what's INTENDED by other characters OUTSIDE of their initiative turn is largely irrelevant because actions are resolved in ORDER of initiative. The order of initiative only gets altered when specific actions are taken to do so, like readied actions, delaying for whatever reason, or attacks of opportunity being resolved as a character moves. Even if you do take the time to declare actions in reverse order those declarations aren't enforceable.

As for who goes first, that advantage is ONLY meaningful in the surprise round and first regular round. After that, ALL advantage of being first is done. Being first is thus about doing as much damage as you can to the enemy such that the enemy is IMMEDIATELY at a disadvantage or perhaps not even able to respond. E.g., if you Slow the enemies right at the top of the first round before they've even acted they're severely disadvantaged because you were able to act first. If you Slow them in the second round you've ESTABLISHED an advantage at that point, but only AFTER the opponents were already able to act. If you do enough damage to an enemy in the surprise round or before he can act in the first round - he's dead. He doesn't GET to act against you. THAT's the advantage of going first, and after you've GONE first, that possibility is moot.
Anathema
08-31-07, 07:27 PM The biggest advantage to going first is not shown throughout the length of the encounter, but instead from the cumulative effects of going first over many encounters.
StevenO
08-31-07, 08:04 PM The only real disadvantage to going before your opponents is the possibility you give them full attacks because you are the one who spent the move action(s) to close range. Of course that problem can be remedied by delaying until after they go or using a ready an action for when they go.

As mentioned combat is just taking actions when your turn comes up on the wheel. Inititative just determines where you start on that wheel. Using that greatly speeds up combat when compared to the old system of rolling initiative every round and then declaring actions before performing them.
lockdar
09-01-07, 09:09 AM Thanks for all the good input guys, I actually agree with you all for the above-mentioned reasons. I was playing a little bit of devil's advocate to also present some decent thoughts to my players so they see why I don't want to declare actions before pc's and npc's are actually doing something.

Thanks!
Sildatorak
09-04-07, 11:10 PM Yea, that would be my guess aswell. But then what is the advantage of being first, except for being able to be the first to act. Everyone can respond to your actions while you on the other hand can't because you've already done your actions...
Since combat goes in a cycle, being first is basically the same as being last and getting an extra action at the very beginning of combat.

-----start round 1
Hero
goon
goon
goon
-----start round 2
Hero

compared to

-----start round 1
goon
goon
goon
Hero

I'd rather be the hero who acted both before and after the 3 goons instead of the one who just acted after.
PenderGrass
09-05-07, 01:59 AM I prefer rolling initiative each round.

:dragon:
****
eamon
09-05-07, 02:16 PM I prefer rolling initiative each round.
That's a variant rule with it's own up's and downs. It does make things more complex though (especially if readied actions and delay actions are thrown in the fray), and it means more die rolling and more adminstration. Since my battles are chaotic enough as is, I don't do this, but the increased randomness is kinda neat. On the other hand, it completely changes the meaning of "1 round", so that it's best to do things like cast "Summon Natures Ally" in those rounds in which you've rolled low anyhow. On the other hand, if a monk uses his stunning fist attack, it's smart to do it when he's rolled high, and if he's unlucky and the creature he hits comes before him this turn but after him the next - it's hardly had a disadvantage... So all in all... I think it makes things less balanced, and more complex. It's fun of course, but I don't use it for my normal campaigns.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
lockdar 08-31-07, 07:27 AM	I have a quick question regarding initiative and the right order of action for pc's and npc's. The way we've been doing it recently is the following: - Everyone rolls for initiative - DM writes down who rolled what - Character with lowest initiative states what he wants to do, then the second lowest ect. till we reach the fastest pc (highest initiative) - Character with highest initiative does his action and we move down the line till everyone has done his action The following problem sometimes occurs: People want to do something (like grappling or casting a spell at a certain spot) that becomes impossible to do once several characters have moved and done their actions. What's especially annoying is that a character with higher initiative can knowingly disrupt actions by moving to a certain spot or by taking a certain action. What happens then is that (mostly) the npc's have to do something else then what they originally had planned to do. Because of this I argue that stating what you will do before you are going to do it is fairly useless since your action will either change or you have to forfeit all your actions alltogether. How do you as DM handle initiative, is there something wrong with the way we've been doing it? Thanks in advance for any advice and suggestions.
Empiro 08-31-07, 07:49 AM	I have a quick question regarding initiative and the right order of action for pc's and npc's. The way we've been doing it recently is the following: - Everyone rolls for initiative - DM writes down who rolled what - Character with lowest initiative states what he wants to do, then the second lowest ect. till we reach the fastest pc (highest initiative) - Character with highest initiative does his action and we move down the line till everyone has done his action The following problem sometimes occurs: People want to do something (like grappling or casting a spell at a certain spot) that becomes impossible to do once several characters have moved and done their actions. What's especially annoying is that a character with higher initiative can knowingly disrupt actions by moving to a certain spot or by taking a certain action. What happens then is that (mostly) the npc's have to do something else then what they originally had planned to do. Because of this I argue that stating what you will do before you are going to do it is fairly useless since your action will either change or you have to forfeit all your actions alltogether. How do you as DM handle initiative, is there something wrong with the way we've been doing it? Yes. You don't declare your actions ahead of time. You choose and perform them as your turn comes up.
lockdar 08-31-07, 09:46 AM	Yea, that would be my guess aswell. But then what is the advantage of being first, except for being able to be the first to act. Everyone can respond to your actions while you on the other hand can't because you've already done your actions...
Zavia 08-31-07, 09:56 AM	that IS the point. you get to do it 1st, and u force them to respond to your actions. AND you have the option to delay your turn if u feel like you dont want to be 1st. being the last means u respond to the enemy's actions, and you dont have an option to be 1st(if say your strategy was depending on that). strategy tip: make your enemy do what u want them to.
Nom 08-31-07, 10:19 AM	Also note that the game is designed around the idea that initiative is rolled once (per encounter) to establish turn order, and then you just go round and round that loop. There's no external "beginning" or "end" to rounds, just from a character's turn to the same character's turn a round later. Obviously, the longer the encounter goes for, the less initiative matters. That said, going first can make a big difference to many encounters.
eamon 08-31-07, 10:33 AM	Initiative simply determines in which order people make there turns. No matter the initiative however, taking that turn is the same: you choose and act while it's your turn (unless you're taking special actions like Ready or Delay). Many encounters are decided in the first one or two rounds (even if they take longer to fully mop up). Being first (or at least early) simply means you're more likely to have an impact on that outcome, something that's very very important :). Of course, there are some encounters, like when two opposing groups expect each other and see the encounter coming well in advance, when initiative isn't important. That's OK though, it just means you have a little variety in your tactics ;-). Improved Initiative is probably one of the best feats out there, and I've never DM'd a party in which not at least one PC took it - and I think I've been in a party in which almost everyone did ;-) - so don't worry, initiative is relevant enough simply by determing the order, and there's no need to further emphasize it.
Phrennzy 08-31-07, 11:24 AM	Going first happens only one time, at the beginning of combat. After that, it's a loop of actions. Going first means that everyone else is flat-footed, and so you can move without drawing AoOs, and inflict sneak attack damage. 1. Everyone rolls initiative. 2. DM notes everyone's initiative. 3. Highest initiative acts. 4. Second highest acts. 5. Etc.
soldyne 08-31-07, 11:27 AM	another way to think about initiative is that the highest initiative is the one to think and act first. the lower the initiative is the more time that character needs to create a coherent thought and understand the situation at hand. slower characters are (as has been said earlier) forced to react to the situation instead of creating the situation. but after the first round everyone is really just reacting to what has happened earlier. but think of this, the PCs all have initiative over the enemy party (for example). they all decide to attack. when they are done the enemy party must react to taking damage by using up their round to heal, run or just lie dead on the ground or possibly counter attack. in the time spent during the PCs actions the enemies were still trying to figure out what was going on, essentially hesitating and really had no idea what their actions were going to be until it was too late (thats the key there, they had no idea what the situation was like so they could not have declared actions before the fasters PCs took theirs). the idea of declaring actions in the opposite order of initiative just does not really make sense and bogs down combat. I don't use it. if you know what you are going to do then you should be able to do it when you know about it. hesitation of action has its roots in hesitation of thought and that is what initiative should represent.
Man in the Funny Hat 08-31-07, 05:29 PM	- Everyone rolls for initiative - DM writes down who rolled what - Character with lowest initiative states what he wants to do, then the second lowest ect. till we reach the fastest pc (highest initiative) - Character with highest initiative does his action and we move down the line till everyone has done his actionDeclaration of actions was dropped as of 3rd Edition, if not before, and for the very reasons you're describing. Inititative is resolved highest to lowest. When your initiative comes up you just DO what you want to do, characters and opponents ARE where they are, what's already past is past, and what's INTENDED by other characters OUTSIDE of their initiative turn is largely irrelevant because actions are resolved in ORDER of initiative. The order of initiative only gets altered when specific actions are taken to do so, like readied actions, delaying for whatever reason, or attacks of opportunity being resolved as a character moves. Even if you do take the time to declare actions in reverse order those declarations aren't enforceable. As for who goes first, that advantage is ONLY meaningful in the surprise round and first regular round. After that, ALL advantage of being first is done. Being first is thus about doing as much damage as you can to the enemy such that the enemy is IMMEDIATELY at a disadvantage or perhaps not even able to respond. E.g., if you Slow the enemies right at the top of the first round before they've even acted they're severely disadvantaged because you were able to act first. If you Slow them in the second round you've ESTABLISHED an advantage at that point, but only AFTER the opponents were already able to act. If you do enough damage to an enemy in the surprise round or before he can act in the first round - he's dead. He doesn't GET to act against you. THAT's the advantage of going first, and after you've GONE first, that possibility is moot.
Anathema 08-31-07, 07:27 PM	The biggest advantage to going first is not shown throughout the length of the encounter, but instead from the cumulative effects of going first over many encounters.
StevenO 08-31-07, 08:04 PM	The only real disadvantage to going before your opponents is the possibility you give them full attacks because you are the one who spent the move action(s) to close range. Of course that problem can be remedied by delaying until after they go or using a ready an action for when they go. As mentioned combat is just taking actions when your turn comes up on the wheel. Inititative just determines where you start on that wheel. Using that greatly speeds up combat when compared to the old system of rolling initiative every round and then declaring actions before performing them.
lockdar 09-01-07, 09:09 AM	Thanks for all the good input guys, I actually agree with you all for the above-mentioned reasons. I was playing a little bit of devil's advocate to also present some decent thoughts to my players so they see why I don't want to declare actions before pc's and npc's are actually doing something. Thanks!
Sildatorak 09-04-07, 11:10 PM	Yea, that would be my guess aswell. But then what is the advantage of being first, except for being able to be the first to act. Everyone can respond to your actions while you on the other hand can't because you've already done your actions... Since combat goes in a cycle, being first is basically the same as being last and getting an extra action at the very beginning of combat. -----start round 1 Hero goon goon goon -----start round 2 Hero compared to -----start round 1 goon goon goon Hero I'd rather be the hero who acted both before and after the 3 goons instead of the one who just acted after.
PenderGrass 09-05-07, 01:59 AM	I prefer rolling initiative each round. :dragon: ****
eamon 09-05-07, 02:16 PM	I prefer rolling initiative each round. That's a variant rule with it's own up's and downs. It does make things more complex though (especially if readied actions and delay actions are thrown in the fray), and it means more die rolling and more adminstration. Since my battles are chaotic enough as is, I don't do this, but the increased randomness is kinda neat. On the other hand, it completely changes the meaning of "1 round", so that it's best to do things like cast "Summon Natures Ally" in those rounds in which you've rolled low anyhow. On the other hand, if a monk uses his stunning fist attack, it's smart to do it when he's rolled high, and if he's unlucky and the creature he hits comes before him this turn but after him the next - it's hardly had a disadvantage... So all in all... I think it makes things less balanced, and more complex. It's fun of course, but I don't use it for my normal campaigns.