Post/Author/DateTime	Post
ArochanoX 12-25-07, 10:48 AM	Many have debated about dnd's initiative system being undynamic, too turn based and that it doesn't allow reacting to the moment. I propose a change to that: reactive action. Few examples how the game runs now: Gnoll charges spellcaster, the fighter would like to intervene and block the charge, but he cannot. A enemy warrior charges fighter, fighter would like to disarm the soulsucking weapon before the warrior hits him, but he cannot. An enemy warlock starts to fling an eldritch blast to wizard. Wizard has a quickened dimension door prepared and he would like to teleport to safety, but he cannot. Now. The reactive action. For every action an enemy (or a creature of the opposing party) makes, all players can attempt to make a reactive action. To get the reactive action, a player must be able to act (not flatfooted etc), must be aware of the enemy and of the action it is doing and he must make an alacrity check. Alacrity check tells how well the characters read the combat situation and how alert they are to react. Alacrity check is a character level check against the DC of 10+encounter level. If the check succeeds, a character gets reactive action. There cannot be more reactive actions a round than the character's initiative modifier (minimum 1). Reactive actions are solved in initiative order. Reactive action is a free action or an attack roll with -5 penalty to hit. It can thus also be a disarm, trip or grapple. Let's take those above 3 examples again: Gnoll charges spellcaster, the fighter would like to intervene and block the charge, so he makes an alacrity check. If he succeeds he can take a 5ft step nearer the gnoll's charge path and get an aoo and possibility of tripping the gnoll. A enemy warrior charges fighter, fighter would like to disarm the soulsucking weapon before the warrior hits him, so he makes an alacrity check. If he succeeds he can make a disarm attempt by rolling to hit roll with a -5 penalty. An enemy warlock starts to fling an eldritch blast to wizard. Wizard has a quickened dimension door prepared and he would like to teleport to safety, so he makes an alacrity check. If he succeeds, he can cast the quickened dimension door and teleport behind the near wall. Some important points: Also enemies get reactive actions. Calcultate party's encounter level. Reactive actions are resolved before the creature's own action is resolved in the most beneficent way of the reactivating character. So if a character makes a reactive action to block charging creatures path, he can do so before the creature actually charged past the reactivating chatacter. While reactive action may interrupt the declared action an opponent would like to make, the opponent must have a chance to adapt to the situation and instead do something else. Shortly: * Reactive action is an action to react to opponent's action. * Reactive action can be made if you succeed an alacrity check (d20+lvl vs 10+EL) and are aware of the opponent * Reactive action can be any free action or attack action (-5 penalty to hit though). * Reactive action is resolved before opponent's "real" action. * Reactive actions are limited to initiative modifier times per round (minimum 1).
Max Octavious Xavier 12-25-07, 12:47 PM	Let's take those above 3 examples again: Gnoll charges spellcaster, the fighter would like to intervene and block the charge, so he makes an alacrity check. If he succeeds he can take a 5ft step nearer the gnoll's charge path and get an aoo and possibility of tripping the gnoll. A enemy warrior charges fighter, fighter would like to disarm the soulsucking weapon before the warrior hits him, so he makes an alacrity check. If he succeeds he can make a disarm attempt by rolling to hit roll with a -5 penalty. An enemy warlock starts to fling an eldritch blast to wizard. Wizard has a quickened dimension door prepared and he would like to teleport to safety, so he makes an alacrity check. If he succeeds, he can cast the quickened dimension door and teleport behind the near wall. You can do all these things, it's called Readying an Action. You can only do so much in combat. You have a finite amount of attention, time, action, energy, etc.... If you use that to act offensively, you have less to react with. This is where tactcs and strategy come in to play. -The gnoll charging past the fighter = the mage/fighter should have been in such a postion already (if at all possible) -The fighter wanting to disarm = reach, the right feat or spell would all let you take an AoO. Mechanically, it adds more rolls and stuff-to-keep-track-of to combats. Do you really think it's worth it? You will say "But it's only 1 more roll". 1 roll per opponent action and those rolls all add up quickly. Then, could this * Reactive action is an action to react to opponent's action be interpreted to mean opponent acts player reacts opponent reacts to players reaction etc.... (until 1 runs out of reactions) Ready The ready action lets you prepare to take an action later, after your turn is over but before your next one has begun. Readying is a standard action. It does not provoke an attack of opportunity (though the action that you ready might do so). Readying an Action You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action. Your initiative result changes. For the rest of the encounter, your initiative result is the count on which you took the readied action, and you act immediately ahead of the character whose action triggered your readied action. You can take a 5-foot step as part of your readied action, but only if you don’t otherwise move any distance during the round. Initiative Consequences of Readying Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the readied action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed your readied action, you don’t get to take the readied action (though you can ready the same action again). If you take your readied action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round. Distracting Spellcasters You can ready an attack against a spellcaster with the trigger "if she starts casting a spell." If you damage the spellcaster, she may lose the spell she was trying to cast (as determined by her Concentration check result). Readying to Counterspell You may ready a counterspell against a spellcaster (often with the trigger "if she starts casting a spell"). In this case, when the spellcaster starts a spell, you get a chance to identify it with a Spellcraft check (DC 15 + spell level). If you do, and if you can cast that same spell (are able to cast it and have it prepared, if you prepare spells), you can cast the spell as a counterspell and automatically ruin the other spellcaster’s spell. Counterspelling works even if one spell is divine and the other arcane. A spellcaster can use dispel magic to counterspell another spellcaster, but it doesn’t always work. Readying a Weapon against a Charge You can ready certain piercing weapons, setting them to receive charges. A readied weapon of this type deals double damage if you score a hit with it against a charging character.
ArochanoX 12-25-07, 02:00 PM	You can do all these things, it's called Readying an Action. You can only do so much in combat. You have a finite amount of attention, time, action, energy, etc.... If you use that to act offensively, you have less to react with. This is where tactcs and strategy come in to play. -The gnoll charging past the fighter = the mage/fighter should have been in such a postion already (if at all possible) -The fighter wanting to disarm = reach, the right feat or spell would all let you take an AoO. Mechanically, it adds more rolls and stuff-to-keep-track-of to combats. Do you really think it's worth it? You will say "But it's only 1 more roll". 1 roll per opponent action and those rolls all add up quickly. The point is that the combat is very static. I do this and then you do that. There are no option to react to the situation or "be surprised" by some event that happened. Ready action won't solve the problem as you have to specify it beforehand. And it requires an action. We're talking about 2 entirely different things altogether here.. Think it in real life: if there's a man with a knife that charges your loved one. You are somewhat far away, but if you see the threat, wouldn't you atleast try to interrupt the knifeman's charge? In dnd you can't. And what about the dice rolls, you can live without them. Then every character has a number of reactive actions equal to their initiative modifier and may use them when they see fit during their opponents's turns.
ZiggZagg 12-25-07, 06:17 PM	In that example, why were you so far from your loved on in the first place? You probably moved away (which would have been your action) to do something else. If there was nothing to move away about, you would be in position and you would keep watch on the assailant (by readying an action) and then you would act as you see fit when he came at you (by triggering your ready action). As for reacting in combat, they have actions for this. The immediate action is an action type that can be used at any time. They have certain defensive spells that are immediate actions that raise your AC for the next attack or do some manner of that, and the ToB used these actions heavily for their counter system. So the rules for what you propose are already in place, and without the added rolling. So check them out sometime. They seem to be just what you are looking for
Teh_Ninja 12-25-07, 07:28 PM	Personally I'd want those with the lowest initiative to declare actions first and those with the highest initiative actually act first. Thus we have: Orc: I wanna charge the weak little man flinging the spells. Fighter: Well, I can't allow that so I want to stop him by stepping in and clubbing him. Wizard: I wanna help my fighter friend with a buff. Thus we have the wizard buffing the fighter who then counter-charges the orc who then is left fighting the fighter instead of the wizard. It could work with a little refinement and would likely require that you reroll initiative every turn but that's the price you pay for realism I suppose.
Max Octavious Xavier 12-25-07, 10:08 PM	Personally I'd want those with the lowest initiative to declare actions first and those with the highest initiative actually act first. Yeah, I've played systems that did it that way and they do work ok. But keeping track of all those goblins, what a pain and the round robin nature of initiative makes such a system not fair to low initiatives. Hmm, how about after the first round of combat (to leave flat footed the way it is) we reroll initiative every round. Then, start at the bottom and start acting. But everyone above them (going from low to high) may choose to act after a lower person has declared, but before or as they have actually acted/act. You may not react to a person who is higher in the order than you. In other words, everyone can automatically takes a Ready Action that has no conditions to trigger and that you may take a full round action with. I might try to play test this, and explain it better. * Reactive action can be any free action or attack action (-5 penalty to hit though). I would add, "any attack uses 1 AoO".
Teh_Ninja 12-25-07, 11:48 PM	That, or you could allow a player to sacrifice his next action to act as if he had readied an action. I think that might work well. It would keep things simple too.
The_Levitator 12-26-07, 01:33 AM	Personally I'd want those with the lowest initiative to declare actions first and those with the highest initiative actually act first. Thus we have: Orc: I wanna charge the weak little man flinging the spells. Fighter: Well, I can't allow that so I want to stop him by stepping in and clubbing him. Wizard: I wanna help my fighter friend with a buff. Thus we have the wizard buffing the fighter who then counter-charges the orc who then is left fighting the fighter instead of the wizard. It could work with a little refinement and would likely require that you reroll initiative every turn but that's the price you pay for realism I suppose. I've been interested in this approach to combat. But my question is, how do you prevent this approach from being abused? If someone knows that they low on the initiative list, couldn't they force others to take specific actions by declaring a certain action that would trigger a specific action from a character/monster with a higher initiative? While I was typing this, I found myself wondering something. What if everyone were to announce their actions before initiative is rolled? Since nobody would know what the other is doing, it might be less prone to abuse and manipulation. The big problem I see with this kind of combat system is that it would seem to hamper team tactics, as nobody knows when they are going to be able to go from round to round. While it doesn't replicate the OP's idea, we've been rolling initiative every round for over a year now and the group loves it. It mixes things up a bit and gives high Dex/Initiative Bonus characters a true benefit of those bonuses. I know that the big argument of round-by-round combat is that initiative only matters in the first round, but I disagree. If you get a crappy roll in the first round, you are now stuck reacting to everyone else for the duration of the encounter. Even if you delay to put yourself higher in the next round, you essentially give up an action to move up in the ranks. And my players who invest skill/ability points and feats to get the drop on their opponents are always peeved when they roll low on the first round. Rolling every round is probably a pain for most groups, so I understand why it's not that popular. I use DM Genie to manage my game, so initiative takes a whole 2 seconds to determine each round. If I didn't use DM Genie (yikes, I hope that never happens!), I would be hesitant to roll initiative every round. But since I do use DM Genie, all of my groups really seem to like how this mixes up combat and makes it feel more chaotic and exciting. And I think it is kind of similar to the feel that the OP is going for because those that get the jump on others is different every round. I love it as a DM because it gives me even more information with which to create vivid descriptions of combat. If you have DM Genie, I strongly suggest giving "initiative every round" a chance! :D
ArochanoX 12-26-07, 04:36 AM	ZiggZagg: As for reacting in combat, they have actions for this. The immediate action is an action type that can be used at any time. They have certain defensive spells that are immediate actions that raise your AC for the next attack or do some manner of that, and the ToB used these actions heavily for their counter system. So the rules for what you propose are already in place, and without the added rolling. So check them out sometime. They seem to be just what you are looking for Immediate actions could work as well. Basically the reactive action I proposed is a conditional immediate action that has more possibilities. Sure if every character has a few levels in ToB classes or have invested a feat to get a counter, you wouldn't need that. I want to replicate the counter actions presented there so that every character can use some sort of a countermeasure. Teh_Ninja: Personally I'd want those with the lowest initiative to declare actions first and those with the highest initiative actually act first. That is a system I've tried. It reduces tactical options, and basically the highest initiative still goes uniterrupted and may do anything he wishes. We also tried that all the actions were solved almost simultaneously. The turn is the same 6 second time for all of us. So. We ended up fireballing each other up. Also declaring actions made the players rash when declaring their actions and tactics were almost forgotten. Max Octavius Xavier: Yeah, I've played systems that did it that way and they do work ok. But keeping track of all those goblins, what a pain Not to mention that. I would add, "any attack uses 1 AoO". That would work too I guess. Though AoO's and combat reflexes are just a simplification of the rule I proposed. The problem with AoO's is that they almost always are too late. When the enemy has already hit you. Reach weapons help this as do some feats like karmic strike. But what if all or atleast some of the feats and other abilities that allow to react (even as AoO) were incorporated to the rules so that every character could use them. Like fighting defensively? Teh_Ninja That, or you could allow a player to sacrifice his next action to act as if he had readied an action. I think that might work well. It would keep things simple too. Keeping track of initiative in such a system is just horrible. But what if there needs not to be the alacrity check, and for every opponent's action, you can use one reactive action. The number of reactive actions is limited. Either by initiative modifier, combat reflexes, or something. Using a reactive action uses one AoO. So now let's say there are 3 gnolls. The dex-fighter with combat reflexes chooses to make a reactive action against all their actions and the other characters let's say wizard and cleric do the reactive action (if they do it) when some of the gnolls charges or otherwise tries to harm them. No more dice rolling, just a simple rule: use aoo, make a free action on opponent's turn. The_Levitator: But since I do use DM Genie, all of my groups really seem to like how this mixes up combat and makes it feel more chaotic and exciting. And I think it is kind of similar to the feel that the OP is going for because those that get the jump on others is different every round. I love it as a DM because it gives me even more information with which to create vivid descriptions of combat. I see the chaos a bit of a problem. Also rolling initiative every round mixes the round by round mechanics. I don't want any character or creature to act twice in a row. And I think that in the long run, good initiative modifier pays it out as there are multiple fights between every level-up and in every fight the good-initiative character is more likely to go first and have a chance to strike enemy when they're flatfooted. Thanks everyone for posting! I think the reactive action system is evolving to a finished well-rounded rule in time. :D
ArochanoX 12-31-07, 12:41 PM	New take. I've reconsidered the mechanics of the Reactive action. I've deviced the mechanics to following: Each creature has one reactive action attempt per round. This number can be increased with a feat to the maximum of the amount of your AoO's. Reactive action can be attempted only on your opponent's turn that you're aware of. Attempting Reactive action uses one attack of opportunity. You must declare, after you know what the opponent is up to, that you attempt to use Reactive action. You can make the reactive action if you succeed an alacrity check (DC 10+party level. The DC is modified by dm: easy encounter -2 DC, difficult encounter +2 DC, very easy encounter -5 DC, very difficult encounter +5 DC or more) Reactive action is any free, swift or immediate action or an attack roll with -5 penalty to hit (includes trip, sunder and grapple). (note that you can use only one swift or immediate action in a round and you need not to use immediate action during your turn.) Reactive action is resolved before/during your opponent's action, in a way that is most beneficent to the creature that uses reactive action.