Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Masterful_Norg 04-08-04, 11:58 PM	I have summarized this in a subsequent post. Hello! Its me! I have another "Sacred Cow" in my crosshair and this time its all about initiative. This is for use in my own campaigns. You can take it or leave it. Here is how it works in a two person example: Bill rolls his initiative as 15. George rolls his initiative as 13. Suppose that these numbers not only stand for the order of turns in a round but also point values and that each action has a point cost. With this supposition in mind, for the purpose of my example, Bill will attack George and spend 5 of his initiative points in order to do so, thus bringing his initiative point total and initiative count to 10. Bill begins to launch an attack. Anyone with an intiative count of higher than 10 will get to choose their actions and possibly execute them before Bill is finished his attack. Anyone with an initiative count of 10 or lower will be able to act once Bill's attack is executed. George may now decide what he wishes to do seeing as his initiative count is 13. George chooses to spend 10 initiative points to raise his armor class by 4 (this is taken from the house rule where you can forfit your turn and subsequent turns (at your decision) to gain a +4 dodge to your armor class); however, I have decided that this AC bonus can either be a dodge bonus or a sheild bonus if the character has a sheild on hand. This action will take George's initiative count and point score down to 3. This means that Bill's attack will either be dodged or blocked by George depending on George's decision to gain a dodge bonus or sheild bonus. This creates the visual effect of George either dodging or blocking Bill's anticipated attack. Bill can make two other attacks because he has a remaining initiative point total of 10. He strike and misses and as he is about to make the third strike of this round George's turn kicks in again because his initiative count comes into effect. George decides that he's not going to take any more from bill and launch his own attack; however, that attack will not resolve during this round. The round ends and Bill scores a hit on George because gorge is no longer in defensive mode. For the second round Bill gets an initiative result of 18 and George a result of 15. Because Gorge was just in the midst of making an attack the attack will resolve 2 initiative points later at the initiative count of 16 seeing as the highest initiative count in the encounter this round is Bill's 18 and George's action costed his 3 remaining initiative points last round and will require 2 more points in this new round in order to be completed. Those 2 points will be subtracted from George's initiative points this round bringing his initiative count and and initiative points down to 13. Bill descides to block the blow much like George had done; however, Bill descides to only spend 5 points this way thus only gaining a +2 bonus to his armor class. His initiative points and score are lowered to 13. Seeing as George is the weaker fighter his attack fails (as usual) and we arrive at a canundrum. Both Bill and George's initiative counts have fallen on 13. The solution? If Bill and George are both players they must whisper their actions into the DM's ear and they will be enacted at the same time. They both launch simultaneous attacks and each confirm crits on one another. Its a lucky this thing is just a snow ball fight. Under this system there are no iterative attacks. I am still in the process of deciding whether all attacks will be made at the maximum base attack bonus or if each susequent attack after the first will have an accumulative -5 penalty and be allowed to go into the negatives, with the penalty removed at the beginning of each new round. The cost for an action that is usually considered a full round action is 10 because that is the average number of points that a commoner of 1st level has to spend. An attack costs 5 points at first level because one gains initiative points quite slowly and I think one should at least have the ability to strike twice in six seconds. The cost for moving 1/2 the listed movement speed is also 5 points. If two characters decide to move in perpendicular lines simultaneously with the chance of bumping into one another determine whether they collide by deviding the distance they intend to travel by 5 (exactly) and determine if they would ever occupy the same space at any of the initiative counts between the beginings of their individual movements and the ends. A single flurry of blows or flurry of strikes strike costs 4 points instead of 5 and free actions cost 1 point. Each round you get a complimentary 5 foot step that resolves on the next initiative count down and can be performed in combination with any other action that is not a move action. Finally a character may cancel any action at any initiative count and then act at the next initiative count unless he has cancelled an action that has carried over from a previous round and has not yet reached his initiative count for this round. Now that I've shown you my system I have some questions: Should defending yourself from an attack using your full armor class cost 1 point where as omition of the cost make you use your flatfooted armor class instead (seeing as you aren't moving out of the way)? Should I make each square of movement have a cost defined by your base land speed (eg. 2 points for 5 feet if you have a base land speed of 30 (which comes out to 25 ft. which as close as I can get) and 1 point if your base land speed is 50)? Should I give players the ability to carry actions over to the next round (that's the way it is now) or should I allow players to take remaining points from one round (up to 5 points) over to the next round to be spent on actions then? Please give me your thoughts on this system and feel free to point out any flaws it has. I am already aware that this system is more complicated.
bolobaby 04-09-04, 02:57 AM	I must admit, there was so much text here on such a simple thing (initiative) that I had no interest in reading it all. What that basically boils down to is that your initiative system might be too complex.
Masterful_Norg 04-09-04, 03:39 PM	True there is a lot of text. Let me summarize the points. Initiative rolls are also initiative point values. Someone who rolls a 13 with a +5 bonus has 18 initiative points to spend over the next round. Initiative points are spent in order to perform actions. One's initiative count is always equal to their initiative points. If you spend 5 points and have an initiative count of 18 (18 initiative points) then your count and point total are lowered to 13. An action is said to resolve on the new initiative count. If my initiative count is lowered to 13 from 18 and someone has an initiative count of 17 they will be allowed to act before the action I chose to perform at initiative count 18 has resolved. I may choose not to spend as many as 5 initiative points in a single round to add to my initiative count and point total in the subsequent round. I cannot choose to make an action which costs 5 points when I only have 3 remaining points. It simply becomes too complicated seeing as the action would have to resolve 2 initiative counts lower than the highest initiative count of the next round although any susequent actions would have to take place on your rolled initiative count and this would be abbused while fighting apponents with much higher initiative. Two players or creatures that have the same initiative count will act simultaneously. Attack's cost 5 points and represent one swing of the sword or club. There are no such things as iterative attacks. One simply buys as many attacks as they have initiative points for inflicting an accumulative -5 penalty on each susequent attack after the first until the base attack bonus is reduced to 0. Movement costs 1 point to move 1 square (five feat) or anywhere from 3 to 5 squares if running. For every 5 foot increment over 30 one gains a +1 bonus to initiative. For every 5 foot increment under 30 one receives a -1 penalty to initiative. There are two ways to deal with the monks improved base land speed and flurry of blows. Remove flurry of blows (seeing as a monk gains extra initiative points from improved base land speed) or give the monk a bonus to initiative (perhaps +2/5 levels) and remove base land speed bonuses. An action can be cancelled by a player in any initiative count before the time at which the action resolves. The character will be able to act in the next initiative count after the cancellation of an action. It costs 1 initiative point to defend oneself from an attack and one can spend 5 initiative points to raise their dodge or shield bonus to +2 (to raise your sheild you must hold a substantial sheild or weapon) and 10 points to raise that bonus to +4. Choosing not to spend 1 initiative point to defend yourself leaves you flatfooted. As a rule full round actions cost 10 points, standard actions 5 points and free actions 1 point. Non actions cost no points. This system works to nerf the Dragon who has a very ordinary initiative. No longer does the dragon become a swirling mass of claws, wings, tail and teeth when it attacks, but at all other times an unreflexive lumbering beast (not suggesting that it doesn't get a reflex save bonus). Now wizards can call off their spells if they're not needed and fighters can kill each other simultaneously much like in the Iaijutsu duel. However you wish to deal with the numerous attacks that characters will get at epic levels is up to you. I would just give a an average attack roll of 10 and average dammage roll for all but 4 of the attacks (players choice which ones). This system makes a round of battle have multiple turns for single characters, which might make your players devote more attention to the game. You could choose to use this in conjuction with players rolling all the dice to make them pay attention for the whole duration of combat. I am aware that this system is complex. My friends and I do not care. We already use this system to great effect. However, if there is anyway for me to simplify this system while still pulling off the overall effect, I will simplify it. The summary above is still quite large, but at least its smaller than the first post.
TieraStarr 04-09-04, 09:11 PM	I tried something similar to this in AD&D. My method was as follows: Roll initial delay on a d10. (remember in AD&D, 1 one was best, 10 was slowest) When your turn came, specify your action and include the delay of that action (weapon speed, casting time, or 3 for a miscellaneous action). When your actions turn came, execute your action - if you still can. Roll 2d4 for the delay until your next turn. I called it continuous initiative, and we playtested it once. It worked great for a solo combat (1 vs 1), but the next combat involved the whole party (5 characters) and a bunch of orcs (six orcs if I recall correctly). Even though I used counters on a grid, one side indicating your next turn to declare an action, and the other when you get to execute the action, the bookkeeping really bogged down combat and it wasn't fun. We quickly abandoned the house rule and returned to normal initiative.
Degobah 04-10-04, 03:12 AM	So we meet again! Your system does look rather complex, though not without merit. I'll just make a couple of suggestions/questions quickly since I have to go somewhere soon. 1) I'd suggest using 3d6 rather than d20 for initiative since otherwise a low initiative roll is deadly for characters. Or replace the initiative roll completely, and give characters say 10 initiative points, with a Dex check or Reflex save giving bonus points (say +1 point per 3 points over DC 10. The system would probably work better if you put a "ceiling" on initiatives each round- for example have a round be 20 initiative points long. Rolling over 20 puts you into the surprise round, and delaying below 0 means you go into the next round. Also, how do you handle characters using two weapons in this system? OK must run.
Kainy 04-10-04, 03:56 AM	Seems like a damn lot of rolling and figuring. Combat in most campaigns I've seen goes slowly enough. I can see this making combat more interesting, with the interplay of actions and whatnot, but also... god, I'd really start to miss a good old one init check per battle.
Dumb_N00b 04-10-04, 04:07 AM	Originally posted by Degobah 1) I'd suggest using 3d6 rather than d20 for initiative since otherwise a low initiative roll is deadly for characters. Or replace the initiative roll completely, and give characters say 10 initiative points, with a Dex check or Reflex save giving bonus points (say +1 point per 3 points over DC 10. [/B] I like the ref save idea instead of d20 but it should it be for every three, I would have to play test it.;)
Tenzhi 04-10-04, 04:21 AM	By definition, shouldn't a full-round action take/require all of your initiative points? Otherwise you could end up doing more than one full-round action in a round which seems counter-intuitive.
Masterful_Norg 04-10-04, 04:56 AM	Originally posted by Tenzhi By definition, shouldn't a full-round action take/require all of your initiative points? Otherwise you could end up doing more than one full-round action in a round which seems counter-intuitive. The full round action is listed as costing 10 points because that is the point average of the lv. 1 commoner for each round. Iterative attacks are gained by having more initiative points available and increase in speed is reflected through giving bonuses to initiative. For all purposes these actions are no longer called "full-round actions". To Degobah, I already use 3d6 for all my rolls so this is not really a concern for me. It also crossed my mind that I might just make initiative points the fixed average though I thought that might make the book keeping a bit more confusing. The way to successfully determine the actions of multiple opponents and their initiatives, without getting bogged down, is to use the faceless horde rule. All members of the enemy horde use the same initiative count and point values, using the same armor class, attack rolls, dammage rolls and pooling all of their HP together. Works well on a visual level for battles involving monks surrounded by ninjas. This also happens to be the best rule for PC combat within large scale battles including thousands of participants. Important NPCs are never faceless so they don't get covered by this rule. I didn't actually mention this fact, but initiative is rerolled each round. As to Dumb_N00b, Perhaps after you've play tested that you can tell me how it worked out. ;)
Tenzhi 04-10-04, 05:12 AM	Shouldn't Medium and Heavy Armour/Encumbrance reduce your initiative points? I notice that a typical move & attack action actually takes longer/uses slightly more points than a full-round action in this system. Personally, I would suggest upping the Full-Round Action cost to 15. Also, how does spellcasting work with this system? 5 points per spell (a standard action) so a caster can cast an insane number of spells per round?
Masterful_Norg 04-10-04, 05:29 AM	Originally posted by Tenzhi Shouldn't Medium and Heavy Armour/Encumbrance reduce your initiative points? Yes. The armor check penalty should do nicely for this. I will reiterate; full-round actions don't really exist under this new system. A full-attack has no meaning under this system seeing as one buys the amount of attacks they would like using initiative points. Personally, I limit a spellcaster to one spell a round unless he or she is quickening spells.
Tenzhi 04-10-04, 05:42 AM	A full-attack action isn't exactly the same as a full-round action, so the fact that you can buy attacks with initiative points doesn't alter the fact that a full-round action seems too cheap/quick in comparison to typical actions one would take in a round (IMO). And with spellcasting only taking 5 points of initiative, I wager that spellcasters will often be banking a full 5 initiative points each round. I'd personally bump spellcasting to 10, but that's just me - I'm often unkind to spellcasters. ;) I'd also say that you can spend 5 points for a full move action or 1 point for a 5' step without the need for niggling over fractions of a character's movement rate.
Masterful_Norg 04-10-04, 05:13 PM	In response to Tenzhi That's your oppinion. 10 points for casting a spell is a fair cost. Quickening a spell could reduce the initiative cost to 5 points. I think you noticed that in order to move 30 feet it costs 6 points and therefore an attack and a move costs 11 points while two attacks cost 10 points. This is on my part, a purposeful decision. The reason why I chose each 5' square to cost 1 initiative point is to allow for people to make 10' moves without wasting a move action. The other reason I did it was so that I could figure a character or creature's location in relation to the initiative count so that a character has a definite position when another character or creature's turn kicks in. This way when two character's choose to cross paths we know if, when and where they will collide rather than having to devide the full move action's distance by the points they spent to get the exact location to the foot. This system gels with my earlier attempt to make base land speed dependant on a character's dexterity score.
howlerhawk 04-10-04, 06:25 PM	i told u it was too complex its good though just simplify
Masterful_Norg 04-10-04, 09:04 PM	That's what I'm trying to do! :behold:
Masterful_Norg 04-10-04, 09:11 PM	Here is a problem with the system in its current form. Tell me if you have any ideas for a solution. I will tell you my own. John rolls 180 for his initiative. Dave rolls 12 for his initiative. Option 1: Every second John gets 30 initiative points to spend and Dave gets 2. When John spends 5 initiative points he will have progressed 1/6 or 0.166... seconds into the round. When Dave spends 5 initiative points he will have progressed 5/2 or 2.5 seconds into the round. Daves actions are much slower moving than John's. Dave gets to act at the beginning of the round just as John but his actions culminate at different times. Warning: Much Too complex! Option 2: Each second stands for 30 initiative points. John moves very rapidly throughout the round. Dave is only able to act in the last four fifths of the sixth second in the round, but technically moves just as fast as John when he does get to act. Warning: Very Unrealistic! Solutions: Each round has only 20 points to be spent by any participant and as a character's initiative rises the point costs for their actions lower (even into fractions). By this means we are still able to instance the locations of characters and determine what actions are happening simultaneously, but we now have the added hassle of dealing with fractions. Each character begins receiving 2 initiative points each second at first level. (Yeah! You heard me!) The amount of initiative points they receive increases by 1 every time their initiative bonus rises to a multiple of 6. This means that a character with an initiative bonus of 6 gets 3 initiative points to spend and 1 initiative point is equal to 1/3 of a second. Initiative points cannot be kept for use in a susequent second. One takes single actions over many seconds. There are no initiative rolls. Fractions will be easier to keep track of in this system because they will rise allong this pattern: 1 IP= 1/2 sec, 1 IP =1/3 sec, 1IP =1/4 etc. All one needs to do is make all point fraction equivalencies have the same denominator as that of the person with the highest initiative. If John has a +180 bonus to his initiative, Dave has +0 and Jill has a +6 bonus to initiative, then 1 point for John will equal 1/30 of a second, 1 point for Dave will equal 15/30 of a second and 1 point for Jill will equal 10/30 of a second. Now if John has an initiative bonus of 174 then 1 point will equal 6/174 for him, 87/174 for Dave and 58/174 for Jill. Way too complex! This is a varient of the above solution. As normal you receive 2 points per second in the begining; however, when you receive a +1 bonus to initiative your initiative points double from 2 to 4. Each +1 bonus doubles the amount of initiative points you receive. However; every action's cost is first reduced by 1 (5 to 4) then doubled (4 to 8). (5 to 8, 8 to 14, 14 to 26, etc.) This system makes it easier to keep track of the fractions and its even easy enough to determine the new cost of all actions each level. Here is the formula for determining the new cost when generating NPCs: (for the example the initial cost of the action will be = 5) {(5-1)2^(initiative bonus) = new cost of action}. If the initiative cost is one multiply by 2 the first two times then begin to subtract one. This system works better than the other solutions above. I still need to find better solutions. This might not even be such a big problem, after all, the old system is completely abstract about this sort of thing.
Tenzhi 04-11-04, 01:27 AM	This truly shows why real-time combat is only done in computer RPGs. ;) The "simple" solution would be to place a realistic limit on the number of initiative points that can actually be spent in a round. I'd say 30 is a decent number to set it at. Most initiative rolls will generally fall under that and it's divisible by 6 seconds with 5 points per second giving a good meter of precisely when things are happening within each round. Of course, this would just further accentuate the problem that characters are moving the same speed in combat, as the initiative cost for movement is the same for all characters regardless of their actual landspeed. For instance, if you have a character with a movement rate of 30' and one with a movement of 60' if they both start moving on initiative 20 and stop at initiative 15 they will both have gone the same distance when the latter should have been able to go twice as far. Another "problem" with the system is that characters could conceivably go multiple rounds without being able to act because of their initiative rolls.
Necron013 04-11-04, 12:45 PM	This system is similar to the one I am using in a game I am trying to create. How my system works is you roll initiative, and get one action on it, and every 10 points thereafter (not much in a d100 system). On this action, you can move, attack, or do something else. How I would adapt this system to D&D is you get your move for 5 initiative points, 1 attack (including a off hand weapon, with normal limits) for 5 attack points, cast a spell for 5 points, do any miscelaneous standard action for 5 points, do any miscelaneous full-round action for 10 points, or do a free action for 1 point. Another possibility for this system is to create feats that allow you to take some actions multiple times, like for 10 initiative points, cast a second spell, move again, or (depending on which feat(s) you have) make extra attacks.
Masterful_Norg 04-11-04, 01:53 PM	I have thought of another solution to my initiative point problem. John rolls out a total of 172 and gets 180 initiative points because that is the number = 10 +(initiative bonus) Dave rolls out a total of 12 and gets 180 initiative points as well because John is the participant with the most initiative points so everyone uses his points to determine initiative count and IP costs. Dave has a flat initiative point score of 10. An attack action costs 5 points for John and 1 square of movement costs 1 point. An attack action costs 90 points for Dave and 1 square of movemnt costs 18 points. In this system one rolls initiative via the old. Because John rolled higher than Dave, Dave must wait a 1 point equivalent action (18 points in Dave's case) before he may act. To determine the IP cost equivalencies for each character devide the initiative points belonging to the character who has the highest by all other participants' IP totals individually (round down). Multiply the number's received by the costs of the actions. In this case I devided John's point total by Dave's point total and got 18. Then I multiplied the cost of an attack action (5 IP) for Dave by 18 and got 90. This is a better contestant than the third solution in my above post because you don't need to calculate exponents such as 2^180. This solution succeeds in restoring the realism of my system, but adds an extra level of complexity. DMs are encouraged to be familiar with the common multiples at levels 1-20 and to prepare the point equivalencies before the session. If you're in my gaming group you don't have to worry about a game being bogged down by this system at all.
Masterful_Norg 04-11-04, 10:41 PM	:D I probably like this solution the best and should have thought of it first, but I guess I'm an idiot! :D The round is devided up in to 10 parts. Players begin having 1 point to spend in each of these 10 parts. When one's initiative bonus increases to +1 one gains 1 extra point to spend on any one of these parts. When one's initiative bonus increases to +2 one gains 2 extra inititiative points which they can spend on any two of the ten parts of the round. These two points cannot be spent on the same 1/10 of the round. When one's initiative bonus increases to +181 one spends 19 points on each 1/10 of a round and has an extra 1 point to spend on any of the 10 parts of the round. This makes the system really quite simple and I wonder why I didn't think of it earlier. I choose to stick with 10 divisions because I think it should be possible for two people to instantly kill each other 0.6 seconds apart. You could go for 12 divisions, make an attack cost 6 points and a full round action 12 points and be perfectly sane in doing so. Its just easier to divide initiative points by 10 rather 12, although you will only have to do this each level. I wouldn't go lower than 10 though because then you loose that 5' square movement accuracy unless you give 2 points/second, which is just fine.
77IM 04-12-04, 10:39 AM	I wanted to reply to this thread earlier! Oh well. I'll use a list too! I don't like paying attention to seconds and I think dividing the round into 10 parts is extremely clunky. On the other hand, 1d20 + Dex is too high variance -- ability score hardly matters. So, I'd rule that everyone just takes 10 on every initiative check after the first. So on the first turn, maybe Bill rolls a 23 and George is stuck with a -2, but each turn thereafter Bill gets a 13 and George an 8. To answer a question from your original post, I would no longer allow people to spend actions into negative initiative. Instead, unspent points carry over to the next round (a max of 10 points carries over). Under this system, Improved Initiative probably shouldn't be a +4 bonus. I'd go with +2. I wouldn't add a bonus for class levels. This should solve your problem involving action-points-per-second since no one will really have an average initiative point pool higher than around 22 (and that's a dude with 30 Dex and Improved Initiative). I really don't like your idea of dividing the round into 10 segments -- it would take like a half hour of action-bidding just to resolve a combat turn, and this system is slow enough already. The haste spell simply grants a person +10 initiative for the duration. Slow is a -10 initiative penalty. I think that each iterative attack made should cost as much as a normal attack and be at a cumulative -5 penalty. However, the cost of these additional attacks goes down as your BAB goes up. BAB 6+ = 4 points. BAB 11+ = 3 points. BAB 16+ = 2 points. (Your initial attack always costs 5 points though.) Letting a high-level fighter make 7 or 8 attacks in a round may seem unbalanced, but realize that those extra attacks are at such a bad penalty (-30 for your 7th attack) that it's not a big deal. I'd charge 5 points to move your speed. It's just easier that way. 1 point for a 5-foot step, which you can make even if you've already moved or are going to move, but you can only do it once per round. Running at 4x speed is 10 points. I'd keep spellcasting at 5 points but only allow one spell per round (plus one quickened spell, if available). I don't think it's fair to shaft multi-attacking monsters too much. I mean, the six attacks are part of the dragon's bag, and if he really only does a bite and maybe a claw or two each round, why even list his tail attack? I'd let monsters make identical attacks together -- so the dragon could make his bite for 5 points, both claws for 5 points, both wings for 5 points, and a tail for 5 points. It's still harder for him with his 10 Dex to make all the attacks, but it's no longer impossible. I love the idea that you declare your action on count 18, but then it doesn't take effect until count 13. However, this sort of gives a benefit to the guy with lower initiative -- he sees the attack coming before it lands. For example, if Bill attacks on count 18, and then George goes on 15, why on earth would George raise his sheild instead of spending 1 point to step 5 feet back? (Assuming that George really dosn't want to be hit.) The problem here is not that George can step back -- it's that maybe George would have stayed and attacked Bill if Bill had done something other than attack (such as draw a potion). I don't have a great solution to this problem. One is that people write their actions on cards so they are secret, but that's functionally equivalent to simply having actions resolve as they are declared. A better solution might be to have actions resolve halfway. So Bill's attack occurs on count 16 (a 5-point action resolves after 2 counts, rather than 3) but he still can't act again until count 13. Readying and delaying: I don't think it's right to save up action points and then release them all at once later in the turn. But someone who choses not to act shouldn't just lose everything either. I propose a single action called "Hold," in which the character pauses but remains alert. Holding costs 4 points, but then you get back 2 points when it's done. In other words, if you wait around, you gain flexibility but do lose half the points spent waiting. I'm not sure I like the idea of actions resolving simultaneously. Or rather, I really like the idea, I just don't like that it happens on a fluke (2 people with identical initiatives). I'd make two tied people make opposed initiative checks until one of them won, and that person would declare their action second but it would be resolved first. To add back in some simultinaitey (sp?), you could say that an action is resolved half-way through, but the results don't take effect until it is over. So if Bill's attack on count 16 drops George, George can attack on count 15, it will be resolved on count 13, and then he drops (when Bill's attack result takes effect). I'd like to point out that I, personally, would never in a million years use a system like this -- I find turn-based initiative so, so much easier than countdown initiative, and it is realistic enough to suit my tastes. But it's fun thinking up new rules so I had to pipe in. ;) -- 77IM
Necron013 04-12-04, 01:03 PM	Well, the rules are simultaneusly getting more complicated and simpler. I'm not sure I like where some of this is going, but some of it is good. Since Everyone's doing lists, I will too. What I like Actions occur at the halfway point. Delaying provides some benefit Moves happen all at once Actions are hidden until performed; possible addition-use a bluff check to act as if you are using a different action Similar natural attacks are used as a single action What I don't like Any of the things comparing a round to a second; rounds have been 1 second to several minutes, depending on the game Any example using initiatives a lvl 50 charecter would be hard-pressed to get. The best initative a lvl 20 charecter should be able to get is 20(d20 roll) +4(improved initiative) +7 (natural dex:elf with all extra stats in Dex) + 33 (best I could come up in items) or 60 total. Don't use examples in the hundreds. Costs differing by when the action is. An action costs a set amount, and no matter how good you are, it still takes the same amount of time
Masterful_Norg 04-12-04, 04:54 PM	I'll update the rules with these suggestions in mind. However; I must remain adamant that 1 point = 1 square of movement because moving 10 ft. would be a waste of 5 points and it helps me locate everyone's position at any point durring the round. It would also help me if I wanted all of the characters to play a game of football. I will continue to devide the round up into sections whether it be 6, 10 or 12. The reason for this is to determine simultaneous actions. I have tested this system and found a way to use it that is not laborious and overly time cosuming. Here are a list of possible rule changes: Initiative is not rolled. Getting the best of the opponents is done by catching them in a surprise round. Initiative points are fixed at 10+ dex mod + 1 per every five feet over 30 in base land speed movement (remember dragons will get a bonus from this). Rounds are divided into segments and all initiative points are devided as equally as possible among these segments. It is for the DM to decide how he would like to devide the rounds. 12 segments make it possible for all participants to declare their actions 12 times for one round. 6 divisions of a round allow all participants to declare their actions 6 times a round. That's 24 turns a round with 4 players and 30 with 4 players and the faceless hoard or 36 turns with 4 players the faceless hoard and 1 important NPC or monster. If you want to go with six devisions then each division has 2 points and the base of 10 points becomes 12 points. Alternately you may choose that the points simply guage the amount of actions you can take in the full round and go by normal initiative count to see who gets to spend their whole points first. This doesn't support the visual aspect of the round division rule, but I must admit that it is roughly 100 times simpler. In the divided round system attacks can cost 1 point but inflict a -5 penalty on attack bonus, which is geared to a game where there are many swings of the sword, but only a few landing hits. It also solves the problem in the devision system where a person seeing an attack coming just decides to get out of the way. Now one can only see an attack coming if its a charge and seeing as I use the facing rules the target of the attack will have to move backwards if he would like to be fully protected from the attack. This would not work in the alternative suggested above. As for running, a character can spend 4 times his constitution ability score on points running before he must make a Fortitude save for each additional points. One recuperates their stamina for running at a rate of 1 point for every point spent not running. I will definitely include the hold action in these rules when I get around to finalizing the rules for this system. The same goes for the use of the bluff skill as suggested by sciborg2. I will also have similar natural attacks used as a single action. I still want to find a simpler way of doing round devisions. I must go now and playtest.
Shaftiel 04-13-04, 04:06 AM	Hah! You are recreating the old Aftermath system... for d20... for those of you who never played, it's kinda like putting a V8 on an electric car... Anyway in Aftermath you have two numbers, one indicating how quickly you react and one how quickly you can act. You divided one into the other. So you could go first and only get one action, or last and get four. The problem was stacking - in that if you were fast, but had a low initiative, you could get four actions oneafteranotherwithoutanybreaks so there was no chance for your opponents to react. I.e. they go on 7, 4, 1 and you go 4, 3, 2, 1. You don't have that problem with your system but I dunno... the bg problem seems to come with the BAB progression. In the normal rules a 6th level fighter with a 5 Dex gets just as many attacks as an 18 Dex fighter. Under your system... then again, it does stick it to clerics, which might be good... Hmmm.... -Shaftiel
Masterful_Norg 04-13-04, 06:40 AM	I'm all for sticking it to clerics! :D