a new init [Archive] - Wizards Community - Pages Merged by Solauren

a new init [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
zilla
10-05-06, 06:51 PM one of the things my group has done is to completely restructure the initiative roll. In our system the lowest roll goes first and you count upwards from that point. To start a battle the dm will start counting. that is the cue to the players to roll init. after your action you than immediately roll another init and add that number to your last result. This system keeps the combat rolling instead of stopping for every round and resetting while everyone rolls init again.

The other thing we've done to init is change the dice you roll. we use a derived stat of DEX and INT to represent position and awareness. instead of rolling a d20 we use two dice dependent on their attributes.
DEX / INT 8 or lower rolls a D12
DEX / INT 9 - 11 rolls a d10
DEX / INT 12 - 14 rolls a d8
DEX / INT 15 -17 rolls a d6
DEX /INT 18+ rolls a d4

for example a fighter with DEX 16 and INT 11 would roll d6 + d10 for init. for an average roll of 8
The feat improved init bumps both dice down.
so the fighter with DEX 16, INT 11 with improved init would roll d4 + d8.
spells like slow or hast double or halve the roll.

enjoy
boggle_scorch
10-05-06, 07:07 PM I have to say that upon first glance i really like this. it seems to create a more fluid system them the standard initiative system - with orders changing from round to round. I'm not entirely convinced that this would save a lot of time...

[Edit] sorry, compared to rerolling initiative every round, i guess this would be a bit quicker./[Edit]

Could you just clarify something for me though - when using this system, could someone with a very small initiative die end up acting twice before someone with a very large initiative die? (with this possibly occuring many times in combat?) This is my only concern - that characters with large initiative die will get fewer turns in combat.

If thats what your after though - i can see it as an interesting choice.
Tony Vargas
10-05-06, 07:27 PM so a series of high rolls could let you act several times for each action someone rolling high gets?

Reminds me of Shadowrun. Doesn't sound like a good idea for D&D though - the number of actions on each side of a battle are very critical.
StruckingFuggle
10-05-06, 07:32 PM And what happens to things with durations measured in rounds?
zilla
10-05-06, 10:28 PM in this system people with smaler dice do go more often than those with larger for my stats i roll 2d8s while others use difernt dice. as far as duration we call each number the dm calls "clicks" 1 round = 10 clicks 1 turn = 100 clicks so if a spell has a duration of 4 rounds and is cast on "click" 37 its effect would end on click 77.
shift244
10-05-06, 11:20 PM A few things:
#1. Why INT and not WIS? WIS is typically for perception and awareness (cue Spot and Listen skills). I know DEX+WIS will give all sorts of balance problems.. especially when the flurrying monk is considered.

#2. I agree with the point that someone with a d4 would get to act 2-3 times before someone with a d12. Does it "unbalance" combat given the rest of the rules are as is? 2-3 rounds of full attacks from a flanking rogue can bring down a powerful fighter before he can even act.
Mitchell
10-06-06, 12:59 AM ... Pity the poor fighter.
Not only are they looked upon as one of the weaker classes 1-20, but now they get messed over by an initiative system that emphasizes not one, but two different attributes that are usually not high on their priority list.
So much for being tactical geniuses...
SephDragoon
10-06-06, 02:40 AM I think this is a good system... though it could use some tweaking. Namely, the problem does become the amount of times someone can go before another person. Two questions though... 1, how does improved initiative factor into this, and 2. are there any bonuses for saving actions... or how do you handle ready actions and lowering initiative to a later time?
tarkin
10-06-06, 02:05 PM Questions:

Why Intelligence? Int is NOT supposed to be speed of thought. "Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons". How well, not how fast. It is quality, not speed.

Wisdom includes "intuition", which sounds to me like a better candidate than Intelligence. The ability to realize and react without having to laboursly think it through.
SephDragoon
10-06-06, 06:10 PM I agree that perhaps int isn't the best for this, and perhaps even wisdom could be good. I mean, wisdom is one of the less useful stats. (I know it is usually the lowest on my characters... though my most recent has cha as the lowest stat because I needed the higher will save) In either case, i plan on getting an initiative system similar to this started. I think it would help even things out in the end. I mean, the one thing that always bothered me was that dexterity had NO relevance to how fast you moved or how fast you attacked. With this initiative system, a faster character would be attacking a bit more. All in all, it makes sense that the not so smart, not so fast, but 20 strength barbarian may be a little slower on his toes than your rogue. The rogue could get in more attacks all at once, but when the barbarian hits, you feel it.

What I think needs to be done though is a limit on actions per round since you can potentially be casting a ton of spells per round if you have like in this case, high wis, and high dex. Monks would be a nightmare with this. But in any case, you are going to have to think about balance some.
DarkRhystar
10-06-06, 06:48 PM This system keeps the combat rolling instead of stopping for every round and resetting while everyone rolls init again.

Here is your problem.

You do not roll initiative more than once per battle (twice with a surprise round). (PhB 135/136)

You roll once when combat begins (after a surprise round with its own separate initiative if applicable) and you use the same turn order for the entire battle unless someone readies an action or otherwise withholds an action for a later time which changes their place in the initiative order for the battle.

I am sorry, but inventing a house-rule to fix a problem created by another house-rule is dumb.
SephDragoon
10-06-06, 10:25 PM Um... no, you roll initiative every round dude. Your system is a varient described in the DMG I think. It is a system I abhor, because that means an unlucky 1 will screw you for an ENTIRE battle.
Mitchell
10-06-06, 10:53 PM Um... no, you roll initiative every round dude. Your system is a varient described in the DMG I think. It is a system I abhor, because that means an unlucky 1 will screw you for an ENTIRE battle.

Um, no. Just no.
From the SRD, emphasis mine:
INITIATIVE
Initiative Checks: At the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check. An initiative check is a Dexterity check. Each character applies his or her Dexterity modifier to the roll. Characters act in order, counting down from highest result to lowest. In every round that follows, the characters act in the same order (unless a character takes an action that results in his or her initiative changing; see Special Initiative Actions).
If two or more combatants have the same initiative check result, the combatants who are tied act in order of total initiative modifier (highest first). If there is still a tie, the tied characters should roll again to determine which one of them goes before the other.
Seerow
10-06-06, 11:00 PM This reminds me a lot of the FFT Clockticks system.

For spells with durations in rounds, you could make one round = a 5 count or 10 count on the number for innitiative.

Realize with this though, Wizards are going to dominate even more than they already do, as they have reason for both good int and dex. They might get off 3 rounds to the one the Fighter gets.

Also, a handful of 1's on initiative will instantly turn the tide of the battle, as the player instantly gains more actions with little to no lag time.
fatal error
10-07-06, 01:23 AM Yea, there's no way I'd ever let this past my table in it's current form. Fighters, barbarians, paladins all get further screwed, especially paladins, by having MAD thrown on them. Wizards and Rogues just plain benefit.

In fact, with a high dex, high int and improved init it could end up being like giving wizards improved time stop from level 1.
SephDragoon
10-07-06, 09:04 PM Um, no. Just no.
From the SRD, emphasis mine:

Ugh... Ok, I'm going to have to re-read all of these books from cover to cover to see what my original DM had as houserules and what he didn't. I've been going off of what I learned from my first D&D session a while back. I should know better by now that he had a bunch of houserules (namely rules that only existed in 1e and 2e since he liked them).

Ok then, well I conceed then. In any case... rolling that 1 on init can be a *****... for an ENTIRE battle? o_O.

What I suggest for this system though is a system from the game I saw using one similar to this... where each kind of action, casting spells etc, have a point value applied to them... So you take the point value for your actions, and then roll your initiative, and that will even out how much a character can take actions. Lets say free actions and five foot steps all have an init penalty of 0, and for every 10ft you move, the penalty is 1 to your init. Each attack would be 1 as well, and then each spell would be say... 4. Then you use the init system you have outlined... except maybe using wisdom...
DarkRhystar
10-08-06, 02:29 AM Ok then, well I conceed then. In any case... rolling that 1 on init can be a *****... for an ENTIRE battle? o_O.

Hence why some people really really like Improved Initiative.
sacredchao
10-08-06, 03:15 AM After wrapping my mind around this, I decided a few things: a) It would definitely balance out the combat in that it it gives the rogues more turns to counteract the fighters damage (etc.). b)that is a bad thing.

Heres why: A fighter's specialty is combat. A rogue's is not. If the fighter and rogue are balanced on the battlefield, then they are no longer balanced overall. The fighter can fight well, but that's it. The rogue can be sneaky, steal, bluff, etc., but is outclassed in combat by the fighter. If the rogue is then made the fighter's equal in combat, the overall gameplay mechanic moves towards the rogue's favor.
SephDragoon
10-08-06, 06:04 AM Except if the fighter was say a dex fighter... he would still be wiping the floor with the rogue in terms of how many actions he takes... Plus the much higher rate of attacks. Now, on the other hand, I am guessing the strength based fighter is still beating the crap out of the rogue (especially if actions had weight on initiative to keep those 1's from being such a huge problem) because they would be getting higher AB than a dex based (Unless said dex based were using light weapons and weapon finesse), therefore hitting more. Plus the strength is going to be increasing the damage output, and the heavier weapons damage more anyways. Plus the fighter still has a higher AB progression, with more attacks per round on average. All in all, so long as the fighter didn't abandon his other stats entirely, in this case dex and wis, then he'll be fine. If he took the 5 he rolled for his dex, then yeah, makes sense to me he is attacking less than the 18 dex rogue...
BW0222
10-08-06, 10:09 AM zilla,

>This system keeps the combat rolling instead of stopping for
>every round and resetting while everyone rolls init again.

As others have said, you only roll initiative once. So you do this every round and it is supposed to take less time than rolling once at the beginning of combat?

It takes me about 60 seconds to do initiative and that includes rolling the monster's and writting every bodies names down on paper or flash cards. Just curious, but the average combat lasts 8-10 rounds. You are telling me that one can perform your system 8 times in less than 60 seconds? Just writing down the numbers would take longer than this.

Initiative is the fastest part of combat. It happens only once, folks are sitting and ready to go, and they can all roll at once and tell you the numbers when you call for it.
RobbyPants
10-08-06, 11:21 AM On the whole, I think I like the current 3.x initiative system the best.

For a while I thought of reviving the 2E PO Combat & Tactics initiative system, but that would take a bit of work to update it. The basic idea was that there were five main phases in a round: very fast, fast, average, slow, and very slow, with a 6th miscelaneous phase afterward if needed. Each creature size had a base phase, and each weapon had a base phase. An attacker would use whatever's slower (so a medium-size creature (fast) using a greatsword (average) would act in the average phase). Iterative attacks would happen on each phase thereafter. Each side (not each PC) would roll the usual 1d10. A 1 accelerated that side by a phase, and a 10 decelerated that side.

It was kind of cool, but it took a little more work than just adding your init mod to d20, which is why I said earlier that I ultimately like the standard rules the best.
StruckingFuggle
10-08-06, 09:55 PM Ok then, well I conceed then. In any case... rolling that 1 on init can be a *****... for an ENTIRE battle? o_O.

Really, after the first round, I haven't found the initiative order's particular order to be all that important in general.

Who goes first certainly can be, especially at higher levels, and absolutely at epic, but beyond the first round its not all that critical.
Jhaelen
10-09-06, 06:21 PM Ok then, well I conceed then. In any case... rolling that 1 on init can be a *****... for an ENTIRE battle? o_O.Well, just because you're only rolling once for initiative doesn't mean your initiative will stay the same for the whole encounter:
Using the delay action you can lower your initiative.
Using the ready action your initiative can become anything at all, it can even become the highest of all involved.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
zilla 10-05-06, 06:51 PM	one of the things my group has done is to completely restructure the initiative roll. In our system the lowest roll goes first and you count upwards from that point. To start a battle the dm will start counting. that is the cue to the players to roll init. after your action you than immediately roll another init and add that number to your last result. This system keeps the combat rolling instead of stopping for every round and resetting while everyone rolls init again. The other thing we've done to init is change the dice you roll. we use a derived stat of DEX and INT to represent position and awareness. instead of rolling a d20 we use two dice dependent on their attributes. DEX / INT 8 or lower rolls a D12 DEX / INT 9 - 11 rolls a d10 DEX / INT 12 - 14 rolls a d8 DEX / INT 15 -17 rolls a d6 DEX /INT 18+ rolls a d4 for example a fighter with DEX 16 and INT 11 would roll d6 + d10 for init. for an average roll of 8 The feat improved init bumps both dice down. so the fighter with DEX 16, INT 11 with improved init would roll d4 + d8. spells like slow or hast double or halve the roll. enjoy
boggle_scorch 10-05-06, 07:07 PM	I have to say that upon first glance i really like this. it seems to create a more fluid system them the standard initiative system - with orders changing from round to round. I'm not entirely convinced that this would save a lot of time... [Edit] sorry, compared to rerolling initiative every round, i guess this would be a bit quicker./[Edit] Could you just clarify something for me though - when using this system, could someone with a very small initiative die end up acting twice before someone with a very large initiative die? (with this possibly occuring many times in combat?) This is my only concern - that characters with large initiative die will get fewer turns in combat. If thats what your after though - i can see it as an interesting choice.
Tony Vargas 10-05-06, 07:27 PM	so a series of high rolls could let you act several times for each action someone rolling high gets? Reminds me of Shadowrun. Doesn't sound like a good idea for D&D though - the number of actions on each side of a battle are very critical.
StruckingFuggle 10-05-06, 07:32 PM	And what happens to things with durations measured in rounds?
zilla 10-05-06, 10:28 PM	in this system people with smaler dice do go more often than those with larger for my stats i roll 2d8s while others use difernt dice. as far as duration we call each number the dm calls "clicks" 1 round = 10 clicks 1 turn = 100 clicks so if a spell has a duration of 4 rounds and is cast on "click" 37 its effect would end on click 77.
shift244 10-05-06, 11:20 PM	A few things: #1. Why INT and not WIS? WIS is typically for perception and awareness (cue Spot and Listen skills). I know DEX+WIS will give all sorts of balance problems.. especially when the flurrying monk is considered. #2. I agree with the point that someone with a d4 would get to act 2-3 times before someone with a d12. Does it "unbalance" combat given the rest of the rules are as is? 2-3 rounds of full attacks from a flanking rogue can bring down a powerful fighter before he can even act.
Mitchell 10-06-06, 12:59 AM	... Pity the poor fighter. Not only are they looked upon as one of the weaker classes 1-20, but now they get messed over by an initiative system that emphasizes not one, but two different attributes that are usually not high on their priority list. So much for being tactical geniuses...
SephDragoon 10-06-06, 02:40 AM	I think this is a good system... though it could use some tweaking. Namely, the problem does become the amount of times someone can go before another person. Two questions though... 1, how does improved initiative factor into this, and 2. are there any bonuses for saving actions... or how do you handle ready actions and lowering initiative to a later time?
tarkin 10-06-06, 02:05 PM	Questions: Why Intelligence? Int is NOT supposed to be speed of thought. "Intelligence determines how well your character learns and reasons". How well, not how fast. It is quality, not speed. Wisdom includes "intuition", which sounds to me like a better candidate than Intelligence. The ability to realize and react without having to laboursly think it through.
SephDragoon 10-06-06, 06:10 PM	I agree that perhaps int isn't the best for this, and perhaps even wisdom could be good. I mean, wisdom is one of the less useful stats. (I know it is usually the lowest on my characters... though my most recent has cha as the lowest stat because I needed the higher will save) In either case, i plan on getting an initiative system similar to this started. I think it would help even things out in the end. I mean, the one thing that always bothered me was that dexterity had NO relevance to how fast you moved or how fast you attacked. With this initiative system, a faster character would be attacking a bit more. All in all, it makes sense that the not so smart, not so fast, but 20 strength barbarian may be a little slower on his toes than your rogue. The rogue could get in more attacks all at once, but when the barbarian hits, you feel it. What I think needs to be done though is a limit on actions per round since you can potentially be casting a ton of spells per round if you have like in this case, high wis, and high dex. Monks would be a nightmare with this. But in any case, you are going to have to think about balance some.
DarkRhystar 10-06-06, 06:48 PM	This system keeps the combat rolling instead of stopping for every round and resetting while everyone rolls init again. Here is your problem. You do not roll initiative more than once per battle (twice with a surprise round). (PhB 135/136) You roll once when combat begins (after a surprise round with its own separate initiative if applicable) and you use the same turn order for the entire battle unless someone readies an action or otherwise withholds an action for a later time which changes their place in the initiative order for the battle. I am sorry, but inventing a house-rule to fix a problem created by another house-rule is dumb.
SephDragoon 10-06-06, 10:25 PM	Um... no, you roll initiative every round dude. Your system is a varient described in the DMG I think. It is a system I abhor, because that means an unlucky 1 will screw you for an ENTIRE battle.
Mitchell 10-06-06, 10:53 PM	Um... no, you roll initiative every round dude. Your system is a varient described in the DMG I think. It is a system I abhor, because that means an unlucky 1 will screw you for an ENTIRE battle. Um, no. Just no. From the SRD, emphasis mine: INITIATIVE Initiative Checks: At the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check. An initiative check is a Dexterity check. Each character applies his or her Dexterity modifier to the roll. Characters act in order, counting down from highest result to lowest. In every round that follows, the characters act in the same order (unless a character takes an action that results in his or her initiative changing; see Special Initiative Actions). If two or more combatants have the same initiative check result, the combatants who are tied act in order of total initiative modifier (highest first). If there is still a tie, the tied characters should roll again to determine which one of them goes before the other.
Seerow 10-06-06, 11:00 PM	This reminds me a lot of the FFT Clockticks system. For spells with durations in rounds, you could make one round = a 5 count or 10 count on the number for innitiative. Realize with this though, Wizards are going to dominate even more than they already do, as they have reason for both good int and dex. They might get off 3 rounds to the one the Fighter gets. Also, a handful of 1's on initiative will instantly turn the tide of the battle, as the player instantly gains more actions with little to no lag time.
fatal error 10-07-06, 01:23 AM	Yea, there's no way I'd ever let this past my table in it's current form. Fighters, barbarians, paladins all get further screwed, especially paladins, by having MAD thrown on them. Wizards and Rogues just plain benefit. In fact, with a high dex, high int and improved init it could end up being like giving wizards improved time stop from level 1.
SephDragoon 10-07-06, 09:04 PM	Um, no. Just no. From the SRD, emphasis mine: Ugh... Ok, I'm going to have to re-read all of these books from cover to cover to see what my original DM had as houserules and what he didn't. I've been going off of what I learned from my first D&D session a while back. I should know better by now that he had a bunch of houserules (namely rules that only existed in 1e and 2e since he liked them). Ok then, well I conceed then. In any case... rolling that 1 on init can be a *****... for an ENTIRE battle? o_O. What I suggest for this system though is a system from the game I saw using one similar to this... where each kind of action, casting spells etc, have a point value applied to them... So you take the point value for your actions, and then roll your initiative, and that will even out how much a character can take actions. Lets say free actions and five foot steps all have an init penalty of 0, and for every 10ft you move, the penalty is 1 to your init. Each attack would be 1 as well, and then each spell would be say... 4. Then you use the init system you have outlined... except maybe using wisdom...
DarkRhystar 10-08-06, 02:29 AM	Ok then, well I conceed then. In any case... rolling that 1 on init can be a *****... for an ENTIRE battle? o_O. Hence why some people really really like Improved Initiative.
sacredchao 10-08-06, 03:15 AM	After wrapping my mind around this, I decided a few things: a) It would definitely balance out the combat in that it it gives the rogues more turns to counteract the fighters damage (etc.). b)that is a bad thing. Heres why: A fighter's specialty is combat. A rogue's is not. If the fighter and rogue are balanced on the battlefield, then they are no longer balanced overall. The fighter can fight well, but that's it. The rogue can be sneaky, steal, bluff, etc., but is outclassed in combat by the fighter. If the rogue is then made the fighter's equal in combat, the overall gameplay mechanic moves towards the rogue's favor.
SephDragoon 10-08-06, 06:04 AM	Except if the fighter was say a dex fighter... he would still be wiping the floor with the rogue in terms of how many actions he takes... Plus the much higher rate of attacks. Now, on the other hand, I am guessing the strength based fighter is still beating the crap out of the rogue (especially if actions had weight on initiative to keep those 1's from being such a huge problem) because they would be getting higher AB than a dex based (Unless said dex based were using light weapons and weapon finesse), therefore hitting more. Plus the strength is going to be increasing the damage output, and the heavier weapons damage more anyways. Plus the fighter still has a higher AB progression, with more attacks per round on average. All in all, so long as the fighter didn't abandon his other stats entirely, in this case dex and wis, then he'll be fine. If he took the 5 he rolled for his dex, then yeah, makes sense to me he is attacking less than the 18 dex rogue...
BW0222 10-08-06, 10:09 AM	zilla, >This system keeps the combat rolling instead of stopping for >every round and resetting while everyone rolls init again. As others have said, you only roll initiative once. So you do this every round and it is supposed to take less time than rolling once at the beginning of combat? It takes me about 60 seconds to do initiative and that includes rolling the monster's and writting every bodies names down on paper or flash cards. Just curious, but the average combat lasts 8-10 rounds. You are telling me that one can perform your system 8 times in less than 60 seconds? Just writing down the numbers would take longer than this. Initiative is the fastest part of combat. It happens only once, folks are sitting and ready to go, and they can all roll at once and tell you the numbers when you call for it.
RobbyPants 10-08-06, 11:21 AM	On the whole, I think I like the current 3.x initiative system the best. For a while I thought of reviving the 2E PO Combat & Tactics initiative system, but that would take a bit of work to update it. The basic idea was that there were five main phases in a round: very fast, fast, average, slow, and very slow, with a 6th miscelaneous phase afterward if needed. Each creature size had a base phase, and each weapon had a base phase. An attacker would use whatever's slower (so a medium-size creature (fast) using a greatsword (average) would act in the average phase). Iterative attacks would happen on each phase thereafter. Each side (not each PC) would roll the usual 1d10. A 1 accelerated that side by a phase, and a 10 decelerated that side. It was kind of cool, but it took a little more work than just adding your init mod to d20, which is why I said earlier that I ultimately like the standard rules the best.
StruckingFuggle 10-08-06, 09:55 PM	Ok then, well I conceed then. In any case... rolling that 1 on init can be a *****... for an ENTIRE battle? o_O. Really, after the first round, I haven't found the initiative order's particular order to be all that important in general. Who goes first certainly can be, especially at higher levels, and absolutely at epic, but beyond the first round its not all that critical.
Jhaelen 10-09-06, 06:21 PM	Ok then, well I conceed then. In any case... rolling that 1 on init can be a *****... for an ENTIRE battle? o_O.Well, just because you're only rolling once for initiative doesn't mean your initiative will stay the same for the whole encounter: Using the delay action you can lower your initiative. Using the ready action your initiative can become anything at all, it can even become the highest of all involved.