D&D General The Problem with Individual Initiative

[Lanefan]

Also-possibly-controversial: As does allowing delay.

I attended a game at uni where every single player had their character delay, in order to try and react to what the foes were doing I guess. The GM responsed by delaying ever single monster, and then forcing the players to go. Wasting several minutes. Every. Single. Round. You would have thought after the first round or two they would have given up, but they treated it as some sort of game against the GM, not realising (or caring) that all they were doing was wasting their own time.

Seems fine to me - they're roleplaying a standoff, much like at the start of a Western shootout where nobody wants to draw first.

Were I the DM, after a few rounds of this I'd probably stop tracking initiative and take it back to "ordinary time" until-unless someone did something aggressive enough to force us back into initiative.

Weird things like this happen when you try to model simultaneous activities in a turn-based game.

I'm not sure they are related. It doesn't matter what initiative system you use or even if you're not using init. at all, the above result - a standoff where neither side wants to be the first to act because they each feel their best tactics are reactive - can easily occur.

 

[Mage of Spellford]

Very interesting takes on the problem. I wonder if you could work some kind of take 10 into the system. Maybe let everyone roll their individual initiatives as per the rules but give the option for anybody to accept an initiative of 10 on any given round. Thus if characters with higher rolls want to do their individual thing they can choose to act on their initiative. If characters want to act in concert with others for example in my original scenario. The knight and any like minded characters could act in concert on iniative 10 and retreat together. It obviously could be abused by someone that rolled poorly but I don’t think it would be gamebreaking. On any given round two or more characters could sync with each other but this choice wouldn’t extend to the next round automatically.

 

[Quickleaf]

Very interesting takes on the problem. I wonder if you could work some kind of take 10 into the system. Maybe let everyone roll their individual initiatives as per the rules but give the option for anybody to accept an initiative of 10 on any given round. Thus if characters with higher rolls want to do their individual thing they can choose to act on their initiative. If characters want to act in concert with others for example in my original scenario. The knight and any like minded characters could act in concert on iniative 10 and retreat together. It obviously could be abused by someone that rolled poorly but I don’t think it would be gamebreaking. On any given round two or more characters could sync with each other but this choice wouldn’t extend to the next round automatically.

That could work - it presents a meaningful tradeoff. One issue would be what happens if monsters take 10 on their initiative too? You'd need to have some guideline for breaking the tie.

 

[Jahydin]

I HATE standard initiative where everyone is waiting for their turn, so adopted a more flexible version.

Basically, everyone rolls as normal, but then I (as GM) just start going with my creatures. PCs can interrupt at any time to take their turn as normal if they know what their doing. If for whatever reason I think my creatures have a shot of going before the PC's action, we compare rolls to see who would act first.

This keeps everyone engaged and on their toes, speeds up combat, and naturally slows down spellcasters.

Example:

Spoiler

Kolbolds (4) roll 12
Figther: 14, Rogue: 13, Cleric: 10, Wizard: 7

DM: "The kolbolds flip the table for cover and start throwing spears starting with the Wizard...
Fighter: "I pull out my shield and block the Wizard." (Free action, since they were right next to each other.)
DM: "No problem, looks like one misses. The others..."
Rogue: "I shoot one that hasn't gone with with my bow."
DM: "Go ahead."
One kolbold goes down.
Cleric: "I charge the table, knocking into it. I want to get them off their feet."
DM: "My init is 12 and yours is 10, so you'll need to block two spears as you charge."
Fighter: "I'll join him!"
DM: "No problem, Cleric has Advantage knocking into the table."
Wizard: "As he's charging, I'll find cover myself and pull out my crossbow."

Something like that. It's chaotic for sure and gives the PCs a slight advantage, but it's a ton of fun.

 

[Lanefan]

Very interesting takes on the problem. I wonder if you could work some kind of take 10 into the system. Maybe let everyone roll their individual initiatives as per the rules but give the option for anybody to accept an initiative of 10 on any given round. Thus if characters with higher rolls want to do their individual thing they can choose to act on their initiative. If characters want to act in concert with others for example in my original scenario. The knight and any like minded characters could act in concert on iniative 10 and retreat together. It obviously could be abused by someone that rolled poorly but I don’t think it would be gamebreaking. On any given round two or more characters could sync with each other but this choice wouldn’t extend to the next round automatically.

That's not bad at all. I'd suggest that characters who synch with each other in one round re-roll their initiatives the following round (to save having to remember what their old init's were) unless they intend their activities to remain in synch (e.g. archers firing co-ordinated volleys each round).

 

[Lanefan]

That could work - it presents a meaningful tradeoff. One issue would be what happens if monsters take 10 on their initiative too? You'd need to have some guideline for breaking the tie.

Why would you even need to break the tie? It all just happens at once.

 

[Knorrrssk]

Possibly-controversial opinion: Side initiative dramatically slows down play. It's not the worst method, but it's close.

Side initiative starts with two minutes of blank stares as no-one wants to go first, then ten or more minutes of discussion as everyone argues why they shouldn't go first then ten more minutes or arguing why they should go last.

Group tactics sounds good, but in practice if the GM hands off the action ball to the players, they just drop it.

Also-possibly-controversial: As does allowing delay.

I attended a game at uni where every single player had their character delay, in order to try and react to what the foes were doing I guess. The GM responsed by delaying ever single monster, and then forcing the players to go. Wasting several minutes. Every. Single. Round. You would have thought after the first round or two they would have given up, but they treated it as some sort of game against the GM, not realising (or caring) that all they were doing was wasting their own time.

Weird things like this happen when you try to model simultaneous activities in a turn-based game.

If your players cannot organise themselves, it is the GM's job to get them moving. In this case you want to go back to the old practice of declaring intentions. Allow only a few moments of discussion - they're in the middle of a fight after all - then point at each player in turn and ask them what they are doing. Then resolve those actions. Resolve them in clockwise order unless there is a particular need for one thing to happen before another thing.

 

[aco175]

A bit like the problem when they removed weapon speed. There was once a trade-off to taking a dagger or great axe. If you were fighting the orc with a great axe and you had a dagger, you could lose initiative, but hit first since your weapon speed was faster. Same with casting times for spells. Both were a bit fiddly and took time so they were scrapped, but we still have arguments over why can't I get a free attack on the caster if the attack round is a bunch of jabs and parries- I could hit hit 5 times before he pulled out the grasshopper leg.

The simplest thing is to bring the delay action back and let the PC hold his action until all the others have past him. There is an older thread from a year or two ago talking about this. There was some stuff on retreating and at some point the combat was over if the group left the room.

 

[Sacrosanct]

I think my favorite house rule is to do a hybrid. Everyone rolls for initiative (the GM one roll for all monsters). Then the GM calls out, "Everyone above X, (where X = monster's turn) can go." Then GM goes. Then whoever is left. That allows some flexibility to the players, but only those who went faster than the monsters, and then those who went slower.

 

[Fanaelialae]

You could simply allow two characters who haven't gone yet to swap their turns, assuming both are willing.

The description could be something like this. Imagine that the party needs to retreat. It's the fighter's turn, but the wizard is at the bottom of the order and the fighter is unwilling to leave him behind.

Joe suggests to Bob that their fighter and wizard characters swap turns. Bob agrees. "Seeing Bob's wizard hesitating, Joe's fighter grabs him by the arm and shoves him through the portal. Go! I'll keep them busy!" Bob gets to take his turn now (so his wizard can retreat) while Joe takes his turn on Bob's turn. Next round they return to their normal places in the turn order.

If you want an additional explanation, you could grant this ability via special training or a magical item.