|
Post by makofan on Nov 23, 2007 12:38:25 GMT -6
The word "initiative" appears nowhere in any of the three books. Do we make up our own combat sequence and rules of who strikes first?
|
|
jrients
Level 6 Magician
Posts: 411
|
Post by jrients on Nov 23, 2007 12:59:01 GMT -6
Are such rules even necessary? One could simply opt to judge each situation on its own merits. The goblins have suprise so they go first, but the goblin archers do not have arrows drawn and readied, so perhaps the thief with dagger in hand can throw his blade before the enemy arrow fire...
Heck, I've played plenty of games, including D&D, where I dropped all the fancy initiative rules and turn orders and such and simply went 'round the table like any ordinary boardgame. Worked just fine.
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Nov 23, 2007 13:08:03 GMT -6
Historically, I think that was one of the things one was meant to borrow from Chainmail. AD&D and later Basic editions more or less did that.
Doing it your own way, though, is certainly in the spirit of the game! Holmes Basic used Dexterity. I've played (and run) games in which actions were considered simultaneous (with mutual kills thus possible).
In general, I've come to find a side A / side B sequence (high roll goes first) easiest.
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Nov 23, 2007 14:22:15 GMT -6
I like jrients' idea. I tend to game that way anyway - we talk about things and then make rulings based on our stated actions and the current situation
|
|
|
Post by philotomy on Nov 23, 2007 15:02:19 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Finarvyn on Nov 23, 2007 15:32:24 GMT -6
I just let each player roll a d12 and add their DEX modifier. I roll once for all of the monsters. Then I count down ... anybody got a 12? 11? 10? Everybody gets to act on their turn, or they can defer to a lower number later on in the same round.
I tried having everyone declare actions low-to-high and then act high-to-low, but it seemed like too much of a bother.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Nov 23, 2007 16:43:05 GMT -6
I'm planning on having everyone declare their actions and then roll 1d6 for the players and 1d6 for the monsters. Whoever wins goes first. Thus Magic-Users have a chance of their spell being lost. Also, ties are simultaneous, so you can never have absolute knowledge of what's going to happen.
Also, I can remember my own early playing days where the party lost initiative on one round and got it on the next, and so got two actions in a row. Those were fun (and saved my bacon on a few occasions!)
The important thing to remember, no matter how you do it, is that it's a game and it should be fun. Not a chore.
|
|
korgoth
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
Posts: 323
|
Post by korgoth on Nov 24, 2007 10:59:59 GMT -6
Are such rules even necessary? One could simply opt to judge each situation on its own merits. The goblins have suprise so they go first, but the goblin archers do not have arrows drawn and readied, so perhaps the thief with dagger in hand can throw his blade before the enemy arrow fire... Heck, I've played plenty of games, including D&D, where I dropped all the fancy initiative rules and turn orders and such and simply went 'round the table like any ordinary boardgame. Worked just fine. I really like this approach. I recall when I was younger and my stepdad was DMing AD&D and then Classic for me and the family (he had played the original game) he handled initiative like this: you just make the judgment call based on the situation, with the benefit of the doubt usually going to the party.
|
|
|
Post by tgamemaster1975 on Nov 25, 2007 12:49:00 GMT -6
Are such rules even necessary? One could simply opt to judge each situation on its own merits. The goblins have suprise so they go first, but the goblin archers do not have arrows drawn and readied, so perhaps the thief with dagger in hand can throw his blade before the enemy arrow fire... Heck, I've played plenty of games, including D&D, where I dropped all the fancy initiative rules and turn orders and such and simply went 'round the table like any ordinary boardgame. Worked just fine. I really like this approach. I recall when I was younger and my stepdad was DMing AD&D and then Classic for me and the family (he had played the original game) he handled initiative like this: you just make the judgment call based on the situation, with the benefit of the doubt usually going to the party. I do it this way; however, if you have initiative you keep initiative - the party or the monster(s) unless there is a big difference in the quickness. In some situations even if you surprise the monster(s) you will only have initiative for the first round or in other the monster(s) will only have initiative for the first round.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 25, 2007 16:35:33 GMT -6
I used initiative rolls for a long time, but now I'm more simplistic (thanks, guys!! ; Now I determine initiative by Dexterity score (highest goes first); for adversaries & monsters, I just assign them a score pre-game (I now have "average" scores for most creatures written, so that gives me back a lot of time in terms of pre-game prep).
|
|
|
Post by makofan on Nov 25, 2007 17:56:41 GMT -6
I was just re-reading Men and Magic. It mentions that Dexterity is used for who can get a spell off faster, etc.
So I was thinking something like this: Situation dictates everything Ceterus Paribus, higher DEX acts first In combat, longer weapon strikes first Monster DEX = move in inches (a monster with 12" move has 12 DEX)
|
|
|
Post by philotomy on Jun 11, 2008 17:24:27 GMT -6
I'm still using the combat sequence I linked to, up-thread (although more and more often, I'm using the simplified version). However, here's another method that appeals to me (stolen from here): Each side rolls 1d6, with the lowest roll going first. Spells take effect at die roll + spell level* Ties are simultaneous** * Referees would need to make any exceptions known to the players, of course. ** Ties could also be resolved by highest Dex, or by weapon, if the referee wanted to assign or import ratings.
|
|
WSmith
Level 4 Theurgist
Where is the Great Svenny when we need him?
Posts: 138
|
Post by WSmith on Jun 11, 2008 18:00:05 GMT -6
Here is another idea. Except for surprise, all combat is rolled as if initiative is tied in later editions, that is all rolls are done in some kind of insignificant order, (players first, round the table, DM first, etc.) and the results are applied at the end of the round after all combatants have gone.
|
|
busman
Level 6 Magician
Playing OD&D, once again. Since 2008!
Posts: 448
|
Post by busman on Jun 11, 2008 18:03:49 GMT -6
Here is another idea. Except for surprise, all combat is rolled as if initiative is tied in later editions, that is all rolls are done in some kind of insignificant order, (players first, round the table, DM first, etc.) and the results are applied at the end of the round after all combatants have gone. This is how we used to do it. Everything resolved simultaneously, unless there was surprise.
|
|
tank
Level 3 Conjurer
Posts: 58
|
Post by tank on Jun 12, 2008 6:20:48 GMT -6
My understanding of the Chainmail initiative system is this:
Both sides roll a die for initiative, with the high roll moving and firing missile weapons first. The side the rolls high may also elect to allow the other side to move first. After both sides have acted, magical spells are cast and melees are resolved. Morale rolls are made during the missile, spell-casting, or melee portion of the combat round, as required. Morale is checked as each third of a group is killed (or something to that effect). Then the initiative roll is repeated.
When melee is first joined, the attack from the character with the longer weapon is resolved first (if it's two size categories larger or so). In subsequent rounds, the attack from the shorter weapon is resolved first. If the weapons are of roughly the same length, the attacker may strike first. A character on significantly higher ground (castle wall, table, mounted) may always attack first.
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Jun 12, 2008 10:34:44 GMT -6
I think tank's second paragraph refers to rules from the man-to-man appendix, but my memory of Chainmail is not so good.
Such detail is rather at odds with the abstract nature of the combat turn in D&D, but "out of sight is out of mind." The incongruity tends to rear its head in AD&D with all the trimmings, so perhaps one lesson is to keep things simple.
Special cases may call for special rulings, but considering every factor all the time can be a drag (YMMV).
It's an aid to player-character survival to have a chance of doing unto others without letting them return the favor. Dead orcs don't strike back.
That tends to be a bigger deal at lower levels. When folks have 20+ hit points, "simultaneous moves" may be preferable as speeding up the process. At that level, combat may come down to, "How many points do I lose this round?"
Although it may seem odd given the time frame -- especially if one is not in tune with the abstract concepts -- I generally find it best to limit combatants to a single activity per turn. One can move or fight or target a missile or cast a spell or use an item or do something else (such as get something from a pack).
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jun 12, 2008 10:56:00 GMT -6
I always used simultaneous initiative for D&D. I'm not even sure I used surprise all that much. D&D 3.x's initiative system definitely slows things down, I like being able to go round the table in order. Of course old school D&D had initiative for sides, so you could still go round the table in order for the players.
With simultaneous initiative, I will often resolve monster attacks as we go round the table.
Frank
|
|
edsan
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
MUTANT LORD
Posts: 309
|
Post by edsan on Jun 12, 2008 12:57:09 GMT -6
I'm the heretic here.
My EPT group uses playing cards for intitiative. We flat out stole the Savage Worlds initiative system.
We did it because it's the easiest way IMHO, of knowing who goes first, who's already acted (turned cards) and who has had the chance to act but is withholding his action fo rsome reason (tapped card).
It is also totally random and independent of character stats and abilities, but we like it that way.
Oh, yeah. The best thing about it: there are NEVER any initiative ties.
|
|
|
Post by Zulgyan on Jun 12, 2008 13:01:01 GMT -6
I see no problem with that method and cards could also have some random boons or penalties like: "You slip with a bone, you fall down this round" or "Feeling brave tonight, +2 attack rolls", "Pelor is by your side, heal 1d6+1". For a change, looks quite fun.
|
|
edsan
Level 5 Thaumaturgist
MUTANT LORD
Posts: 309
|
Post by edsan on Jun 12, 2008 14:12:29 GMT -6
Jokers grant +2 to hit and an extra die of damage. Everyone wants them. ;D
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Jun 12, 2008 14:18:15 GMT -6
I just use the old "each side roll a d6, high roll wins" method I remember from AD&D.
I grew to really hate individual initiative in my last 3.5 game. It took forever (but part of that was one of the players...)
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Jun 12, 2008 15:28:49 GMT -6
Real MenTM use the plucking-chest-hairs method.
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Jun 12, 2008 15:58:30 GMT -6
Real Men TM use the plucking-chest-hairs method. Nah, I'm cool. I don't have a dog, and I wouldn't let him eat my dice.
|
|
|
Post by Random on Jun 14, 2008 18:44:26 GMT -6
Here is another idea. Except for surprise, all combat is rolled as if initiative is tied in later editions, that is all rolls are done in some kind of insignificant order, (players first, round the table, DM first, etc.) and the results are applied at the end of the round after all combatants have gone. That sounds like a good idea. It makes for rolling around the table nice and easy. I like it. One thing though, is that there might be a lot of simultaneous killing in the low-levels. How about just saying that an even roll (for the PC) for attack indicates that that attack happens first, and an odd roll indicates it happens last. So, a PC battling a couple of orcs swings his sword (rolls a 17), he hits, but only if the orcs don't do him in first. Had he rolled an 18, he could have blasted at least one of them before maybe dying to the other. [Edit] It also cuts a die roll for initiative by using one you rolled anyways. Greetings, by the way.
|
|
|
Post by Stormcrow on Jul 1, 2008 10:51:02 GMT -6
I just let each player roll a d12 and add their DEX modifier. I roll once for all of the monsters. Then I count down ... anybody got a 12? 11? 10? Ugh. I find nothing squelches the excitement of D&D combat faster than doing that kind of countdown. "Bueller? ... Bueller?"
|
|
|
Post by dwayanu on Jul 1, 2008 11:08:21 GMT -6
At least ditch the multiple rolls, IMO.
For a long time, I used Dexterity order a la Holmes (and a lot of other folks).
Don't screw with the excitement of uncertainty only to bring it back in a form that requires more work.
|
|
|
Post by badger2305 on Jul 11, 2008 8:10:14 GMT -6
My experience has been different than Stormcrow's; in most of the early campaigns I played in, we all rolled individual initiative on a d6, with a Dex modifier, if I recall correctly. And it went fast, mostly because players knew that combat had to keep moving. Sometimes getting the initiative would save a character's life, and even the arguments about who did what when were worthwhile, if only for trying to explain what was happening in the round. Sure, there were frustrating moments, but the pace was independent of the actual rolling - things moved along because that was what the players and referee wanted.
|
|
wulfgar
Level 4 Theurgist
Posts: 126
|
Post by wulfgar on Jul 11, 2008 8:51:21 GMT -6
How does the no ties work? What if two people both get dealt a Jack? Or do you reduce the deck to one suit of cards?
|
|
|
Post by coffee on Jul 11, 2008 9:03:46 GMT -6
And it went fast, mostly because players knew that combat had to keep moving. That's the key, right there, no matter what system you use. If the players have no sense of urgency, things will go slower than anything.
|
|
|
Post by ffilz on Jul 11, 2008 11:52:04 GMT -6
A deck of cards has an assigned order of importance of the suits. For example in bridge the suits rank downward in the order Spades, Hearts, Diamonds, Clubs (I'm not sure if this same ranking also applies to poker).
Frank
|
|