Rolling Creatures into the same initiative, and delaying into the same initiative


Pathfinder Society

51 to 100 of 282 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Raymond Lambert wrote:
Did you not notice the example of play early in the book versus skeleton on a horse and several stNdard skeleton mentions the Gm rolls one for the big bad and once for hid minions? Kind of hard to blame GMs for following the example.of play
Silbeg wrote:
That is CRB p13

Thanks! I knew that example was in there, but couldn't find it.

While I agree it could be used as an "official" example of grouped initiative, it could also be dismissed as descriptive (of fluff) text and that the rules on p.179 (the crunch) trump them. YMMV and just goes to demonstrate table variation.

Human Fighter wrote:
I was asking that you clearly admitted that ignoring this initiative rule was indeed not playing by the rules...

I don't think its relevant for people to admit to breaking the rules. Your passion is commendable, but your posts DO feel like pressuring people into admitting they are cheating. That may not be your intent, but that is how it reads. Your posts "feel" like a rant fueled by a recent(?) experience where grouped initiative worked against you.

Have/Do I use grouped initiative? Yes, when the situation warrants/allows it. If it makes anyone feel better to label me a "cheater" then so be it. Every decision I make as a GM is with the intention to maximize player enjoyment.

Clearly, there is a large group on both sides of this topic. In the vast majority of cases, grouping initiative does not have a significant impact on the game. However, there are circumstances where grouped could be a major advantage. Regardless, there is supposed to be a certain level of trust that the GM will make decisions that support fair gameplay and maximize player enjoyment. Remember, that core rules are written with the assumption (and encouragement) that GM's use whatever rules they like and ignore those they don't. Obviously, that is a bit too "free" for organized play, which creates some problematic cases where the rules themselves can be a detriment to play (see the example of 32 mooks).

You have said you don't want this to be an advice thread, but what else are we supposed to do with it? Do you just want people to post a list of anecdotal stories attempting to demonstrate when grouped initiative was/not a success? Do you just want to create a list of self-admitted "cheaters"? Please help us understand your intentions.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

redward wrote:
I also use these multi-colored bases from Dapper Devil to keep track of which NPC is which. When I write their names on the combat pad during prep, I'll use matching marker colors.

Thanks for the link. The DD bases look awesome! I've never seen those before, but will certainly obtain some.

Grand Lodge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I also lump like monsters together (most of the time).If it bothers you so much that you cant stand to sit at my table, I'll be more than happy to help you find another table to sit at. :)

Lantern Lodge 4/5

I tend to roll initiatives for the same monsters together if I have a lot. For example if there is a BBEG who is a ranger then I will roll one initiative for him, then one for the wolves following around, if he hired some fighter thugs then I will roll them together. On the other hand if it's something like a fight with two Erinyes then I will roll their initiatives separately.

I haven't had any complaints about it. Most likely because when I GM my initiative rolls for the bad guys are usually terrible. I believe the party likes going first and just wasting the bad guys.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
You have said you don't want this to be an advice thread, but what else are we supposed to do with it? Do you just want people to post a list of anecdotal stories attempting to demonstrate when grouped initiative was/not a success? Do you just want to create a list of self-admitted "cheaters"? Please help us understand your intentions.

I expect that he thought that everyone was going to agree with him. Then the next time he talked to me he would use this thread as proof that I was running my game wrong and I force me to run it the way he wants it run.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Indianapolis

Terence Barton wrote:
I expect that he thought that everyone was going to agree with him. Then the next time he talked to me he would use this thread as proof that I was running my game wrong and I force me to run it the way he wants it run.

Is he a player in your games?

5/5

10 people marked this as a favorite.

This entire topic really boils down to trust.

If you can't trust your GM to be fair and have the player's enjoyment as their top priority, you need to find a different GM or a different game.

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kyle Baird wrote:

This entire topic really boils down to trust.

If you can't trust your GM to be fair and have the player's enjoyment as their top priority, you need to find a different GM or a different game.

very much agreed.

and as a judge, we should consider our players wishes, and try (when able) to run the game in a way that they will enjoy... "be fair and have the player's enjoyment as our top priority"..., just a thought.

edit: when one of our players says something like: "can we/you do this? or do it this way?" - do we assume that they "are trying to pull something" - or that "they are expressing an opinion"?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Human Fighter wrote:
Acedio wrote:
Human Fighter wrote:

"You have a problem with creatures going on the same initiative. Many others don't care."

It's more like, it's not allowed by the rules, and others are breaking the rules. If the creatures attack in a group, this doesn't reflect in the least that it's okay to roll their initiative to be the exact same thing with one roll. It's against the rules.

Pointing out that it can sometimes be an issue is a pretty great reason to never do it, because if you never did it, then it would never be a problem.

Ok. Ask your GM to not do it if you feel they are unable to do it responsibly.
This isn't an advice thread, but a discussion about the topic, and doing it responsibly is still illegal regardless. Are you saying that you feel it's okay to ignore this rule? I honestly want to know if you have other exceptions to rules to ignore in PFS, and it is not to be taken as a personal insult.

I don't see where it's illegal, especially since mooks themselves are grouped together. The time saving is an important issue with the scenarios getting larger and the convention time slots aren't getting any bigger. Nor realistically is it a problem. (Scenarios don't generally have swarms of spellcasters) And it certain cases like kobolds it makes a lot of sense.

5/5 5/55/55/5

"... why do these Kobolds all have Perform: Can can?

"Choreography

Scarab Sages 5/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigNorseWolf wrote:

"... why do these Kobolds all have Perform: Can can?

"Choreography

I bought all the goblins from Frost Fur Captives (with PP), after the Society had gotten information from them. I was teaching them to be back-up singers - so goblins with Perform: rhythm and blues. I'll have to watch for Kobolds with Perform Can-Can...

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Mark Stratton wrote:
Terence Barton wrote:
I expect that he thought that everyone was going to agree with him. Then the next time he talked to me he would use this thread as proof that I was running my game wrong and I force me to run it the way he wants it run.
Is he a player in your games?

Yes. He was at my table for two games last Saturday. We had this discussion both in game and (at great length) after the game.


LazarX wrote:
I don't see where it's illegal, especially since mooks themselves are grouped together. The time saving is an important issue with the scenarios getting larger and the convention time slots aren't getting any bigger. Nor realistically is it a problem. (Scenarios don't generally have swarms of spellcasters) And it certain cases like kobolds it makes a lot of sense.

The rules say 'At the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check.' Not each group of combatants.

If the PCs want to act together, they have to all delay until the initiative of the slowest party member. Minions do not suffer this penalty - they are as likely to act together on a 20 as on a 1. (A GM managing six kobolds could roll six d20s and use the lowest number to allow them to act in synch within the rules.)

I've used the 'roll 1d20 for the group' shortcut myself as GM, but I can see someone who values consistency highly might want to either stamp out the practice in PFS or change the rules to allow it officially.

Horizon Hunters 4/5 5/5 *** Venture-Lieutenant, Indiana—Indianapolis

Terence Barton wrote:
Mark Stratton wrote:


Is he a player in your games?

Yes. He was at my table for two games last Saturday. We had this discussion both in game and (at great length) after the game.

I wonder how this tactic worked for him.

There are two things that are clear from this thread:
1. I think we are all pretty clear on what the literal, written text of the rule requires.

2. I think we are all pretty clear that a LOT of GMs roll initiatives for groups of monsters.

Does it violate the clear text of the rule? Yes. Does it have an impact on the game that places the PCs at a disadvantage? No.

And, it would be interesting to note if there are others "rules violations" that work to his benefit that he does NOT take issue with? (I don't know that there are, it's just a curiosity on my part, really.)

I can think of a number of examples where GMs at tables don't enforce the rules (either of PF itself or Organized Play.) They don't break the rules, per se, but perhaps bend them a tad in the interest of increasing player enjoyment. It's a tough dance we do as GMs, but I think there are enough examples of "table variation" that we just live with it.

I'll tell you a real story. Last year at Gen Con, I was playing in "The Hellknight's Feast." My character died (it's my main, highest level character.) I paid to be rezzed, and used a boon to cut the cost in half. I had a GREAT time in that game, only to find out after the fact that the GM used the wrong monsters. Technically, that's a violation of the PFS rules, but I didn't care - I loved the scenario and the game session itself that I was more than happy to pay the cost, even though, technically, I shouldn't have had to.

YMMV.

Scarab Sages 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Playing online, I've seen individual initiatives a lot more often, because they can all be rolled at once and the program puts them into the initiative turn order. I experimented with doing it at a live game a couple of times, because I do think it makes a difference (though a small one). It was too cumbersome, though, and all of the players looked at me like I was insane, so I reverted back to one initiative roll per type of creature and separate rolls for unique creatures. In other words, players had more of a problem with me slowing the game down than they did with all of a group of creatures acting at once. If I sense that a situation could go really wrong, though, like the multiple fireballs someone mentioned, I'll likely revert back to individual initiatives.

I would point out, though, that the difficulty can swing both directions when rolling a single initiative. With all the complaints of PFS scenarios being too easy, a lot of that comes from the PCs winning initiative and basically the fight before any NPCs get to act. Rolling individual initiatives seems to even things out a bit all around. Less chance of a TPK and less chance of it being a cakewalk. I actually really like the way individual initiatives work in the online games.

Honestly, though, this is a situation where I haven't done close enough reading to know what the rule is. If the section in the core rule book is the only mention, then it looks like individual initiatives is the rule. I doubt it's likely that everyone will change to use it, though. I'm curious if the Gamemastery guide has anything to say on the matter.

The Exchange 5/5

I've been running individual initiatives (or close to them) as much as I can lately - as this subject came up about 3 months ago locally, and after the initial learning curve it no longer seems to be a problem.

But then the figures I use for mooks, and the counters I use when I don't have figures, are numbered (I've been playing and collecting a long time... so yes, I have over a hundred individual kobold figures and over 20 have numbered bases... and the same for goblins, skeletons, zombies... most mook types. Even humans...).

Often anymore I just use mini-pocker chips (1") with numbers on them (easy transport and pickup)... and I use the numbers in decending order by their Inititive... I've noticed that when 5 goblins attack the PCs, and the goblin cleric is #4... it doesn't seem to get singled out for targeting as fast... anyway, running Init goes pretty fast for me, it's the players that seem to have a problem sometimes. "Jo! It's your turn!"

edit: and the numbers help the Players too.
Me: "Which one are you shooting at again?"
Jo: #12

Grand Lodge 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mini poker chips are awesome. Thanks for gifting that set to me nosig. I use letters on mine though rather than numbers.

I cant wait until we have mini hologram generators where I can just create the NPC on the fly when its needed rather than carrying around a tackle box full of miniatures. Of course by then will we still be playing this silly game?

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

For the GM's, why not just pre-roll the initiatives of your monsters during prep? It might help your descriptive text at the outset of combat to know when the bad guys are acting with respect to the players.

For players, do you use the initiative order to plan your targets? If you see that monster #1 will be acting before your companion, but monster #2 will be after, do you target monster #1 first? How would your PC know that? Meta-knowledge is a powerful thing.

There are a lot of opportunities for both sides to take advantage of the initiative system. In most cases, especially with low-power minions, I don't think group initiative is as evil-bad as it is portrayed.

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

Quote:
Mini poker chips are awesome...I cant wait until we have mini hologram generators where I can just create the NPC on the fly when its needed rather than carrying around a tackle box full of miniatures

Another option is the Bestiary tokens. They are not only easier to transport, but the ones that come in multiples are color-identified around the token number. For example, the skeletons in the Bestiary I box have four different colors. Also, if you use the pfd and print your own, it is very easy to just mark the token with a number (or whatever) to keep them organized.

The Exchange 5/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

long ago in LG days, I used to use Starburst candies as monster tokens... 4 colors to a pack, and if you grab two different flavor packs that nets you 8 colors. And thus "u kill it, u eat it" was invented. It did mean the "red" goblins seemed to get shot first though...

my adult daughter still calls Starbust candies "Monsters"

Grand Lodge 4/5 5/55/5 ***

nosig wrote:
candies as monster tokens

Nothing wrong with that, but some players/GMs are sensitive to having the monster "tokens" visually represent what they are...a goblin should look like a goblin, not an orange M&M

YMMV

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Mark Stratton wrote:
Terence Barton wrote:
Mark Stratton wrote:


Is he a player in your games?

Yes. He was at my table for two games last Saturday. We had this discussion both in game and (at great length) after the game.
I wonder how this tactic worked for him.

Nobody died in either game and I don't think I even knocked anyone unconscious. There was not a single combat that made it past three rounds and the PC's pretty much walked though everything. In the first one the major bad guy did not even get a turn.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
For the GM's, why not just pre-roll the initiatives of your monsters during prep?

For the games in question last Saturday they were both season 4. I did not know ahead of time if the party was going to be play high or low tier (there was a difference in the init). Also i did not know if the table was going to have 4, 5, or 6 players so some groups of monsters would be eliminated at the 4 person table. So there is four possible combinations of monster inits for each encounter. So I made the call to do them at the table, grouping like monsters together.

The Exchange 5/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
nosig wrote:
candies as monster tokens

Nothing wrong with that, but some players/GMs are sensitive to having the monster "tokens" visually represent what they are...a goblin should look like a goblin, not an orange M&M

YMMV

oh, I can do that too. I have thousands of mini's. Love my toys...

Just this weekend I broke out 20 individually numbered kobolds for my judge (the numbers are in the cobble stones of the figures base), including one mounted on a velociraptor (I have over 300 kobolds - most mounted for a game system called Hoards of the Things - the mounted figure came from one of my Knight stands in that army). So often I have that monster or PC no one else has seen. (Halfling in full plate with a tower shield? Got it mounted on a chain shirt armored riding dog - mounted and dismounted with his dog - three figures total).

Dark Archive 3/5

nosig wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:


nosig wrote:


candies as monster tokens

Nothing wrong with that, but some players/GMs are sensitive to having the monster "tokens" visually represent what they are...a goblin should look like a goblin, not an orange M&M

YMMV

oh, I can do that too. I have thousands of mini's. Love my toys...

Just this weekend I broke out 20 individually numbered kobolds for my judge (the numbers are in the cobble stones of the figures base), including one mounted on a velociraptor (I have over 300 kobolds - most mounted for a game system called Hoards of the Things - the mounted figure came from one of my Knight stands in that army). So often I have that monster or PC no one else has seen. (Halfling in full plate with a tower shield? Got it mounted on a chain shirt armored riding dog - mounted and dismounted with his dog - three figures total).

My disclaimer is that the miniatures that I use are not representative of the creatures the group is fighting. They routinely end up fighting younglings and ewoks instead of goblins, because over half of my miniatures are star wars (for a homebrew). I have only been collecting for about a year, and I have currently filled the blueberry box that I used for APUSH notecards last year, so I am on my way.

Despite all of this, I am generally the one who brings the most miniatures to the table, and can fill in when the GM does not have something.

Digital Products Assistant

Removed some posts/replies to them. Accusations of trolling are unhelpful.

Grand Lodge 4/5 **** Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento

So, there are some things about groups of monsters all going on the "same" initiative.

One, they still have to each take their full turn in sequence. (You can't have one 5 foot step to your left, one 5 foot step to the right, and now they each full attack from flanking, for example.) (Yeah they can ready, but remember you cannot ready a full action, and once you have started taking actions, you cannot delay.)

Two, they still have to be separable. So, if I delay, and one guy moves up to me and readies until his buddy gets in position, I can come out of delay and move.

Now, with my familiar, I do usually have to go on the "same" initiative. (lots of tactical reasons) so what I do is just roll two dice, and take the lower initiatve. (but I get the benefit that the higher roller still comes out of flat footed earlier.)

Grand Lodge 5/5

Bob Jonquet wrote:
Quote:
Mini poker chips are awesome...I cant wait until we have mini hologram generators where I can just create the NPC on the fly when its needed rather than carrying around a tackle box full of miniatures
Another option is the Bestiary tokens. They are not only easier to transport, but the ones that come in multiples are color-identified around the token number. For example, the skeletons in the Bestiary I box have four different colors. Also, if you use the pfd and print your own, it is very easy to just mark the token with a number (or whatever) to keep them organized.

Ive seen nosig do something very similar, but with fender washers. Takes some effort to do all that printing, cutting, and gluing though.

Do the pawns boxes come with tokens (ones that lay flat)? I dont like the pawns themselves (which you stick on plastic bases). That is why I have been reluctant to buy them (well that plus the cost!).

1/5

Terence Barton wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
You have said you don't want this to be an advice thread, but what else are we supposed to do with it? Do you just want people to post a list of anecdotal stories attempting to demonstrate when grouped initiative was/not a success? Do you just want to create a list of self-admitted "cheaters"? Please help us understand your intentions.
I expect that he thought that everyone was going to agree with him. Then the next time he talked to me he would use this thread as proof that I was running my game wrong and I force me to run it the way he wants it run.

I have never once used a thread as any proof toward any argument I've ever made. A thread is usually only a collection of opinions, where it maybe used to persuade interpretation. Threads can be useful to have people point out where the exact source of a rule is, and I would only ever argue something to be fact by using facts. My intentions in making this thread are genuine, and within a discussion I will take my position against those that disagree with me. I find what you wrote to be somewhat insulting, but rest assured, I will never force anyone to do anything. If you're running a game, and I don't like it, then I have the right to complain, but ultimately I am the one that needs to remove myself if I feel it's necessary.

I do trust you not to intentionally do reckless things, and that you do play as honest as possible, which I highly respect, so please never think otherwise unless I tell you so. This is an ongoing issue for our area, and this in no way should be taken as a personal attack, or even focused on you. In the future I would hope you could keep people anonymous from real life, and the boards, at least concerning me.

relevant things wrote:


"As a Pathfinder Society GM, you have the right and 
responsibility to make whatever judgements, within the 
rules, that you feel are necessary at your table to ensure 
everyone has a fair and fun experience. This does not 
mean you can contradict rules or restrictions outlined in 
this document, a published Pathfinder Roleplaying Game 
source, errata document, or official FAQ on paizo.com. 
What it does mean is that only you can judge what is right 
for your table during cases not covered in these sources. 
Scenarios are meant to be run as written, with no addition 
or subtraction to number of monsters (unless indicated 
in the scenario), or changes to armor, feats, items, skills, 
spells, stats, traits, or weapons. However, if the actions 
of the PCs before or during an encounter invalidate the 
provided tactics or starting locations, the GM should 
consider whether changing these would provide a more 
enjoyable play experience."

Source: Page 32 of Guide to Pathfinder Society Organized Play

And reading under the initiative section, as pointed out by another, you can read exactly how it works.

I enjoy a game ran as true as possible, and when I show up to pfs I expect rules to be followed and enforced as best as possible, for better or worse. I have no ulterior motive that benefits me, other than the gameplay experience for everyone to be considered fairly by the rules. I don't play rogues, but it seems awful that because the grouped monsters rolled a 20, someone can't find the straggler in the init to perform their ff sneak attack, and now will face all the creatures at full ac, and lose their opportunity to shine in the game. I can list endless hypothetical situations just from not doing the correct method by the rules.

I am happy to see some people locked into doing init properly, especially having awareness of how it can indeed hurt the game, but I was actually expecting a large group to admit that you've adapted this grouping style, or learned this from the habits of others making you completely unaware of the actual rules. I wanted to gauge the community and attempt to see with my participation and others who recognize the correct rules to persuade others.

So, as I openly admitted, it is clearly more convenient for a gm to roll one dice and be on with it, but what if a player asks that pfs rules be enforced? This is what I'm concerned with, and I am all for a unanimous decision at the table to alter the rules, even though that would still be illegal, but you're hurting the gameplay experience of another who has fair expectations for your personal version of the game to be played.

5/5 5/55/55/5

5 people marked this as a favorite.
HumanFighter wrote:
So, as I openly admitted, it is clearly more convenient for a gm to roll one dice and be on with it, but what if a player asks that pfs rules be enforced?

You're talking about a rule in the core rule book so trivial even the core rule book didn't follow it in its own example.

1/5

To take notice, I personally thanked Terrance and acknowledged the fact that out of all the people that do this, he does it the most legal and responsible way that I've experienced init clumping. I asked him during gameplay if the creatures were indeed going all at once and entitled to full attacks, or if they were moving and performing readied actions to flank, and he expressed they indeed did readied actions.

Not all creatures should be tactical to delay and ready actions to flank in tandem, but this seems to be a bad habit created by using this method, and I've seen all sorts of whacky and extreme stuff at tables, and it seems it'll never get addressed when people call it "table variation". 6-8 goblins literally taking their turn at the same time where I can't delay in, and they move and full attack getting flank and sneak attack to down my ally before I could have a chance to defend or heal him happened, and when I mentioned it, I was told they were running the correct rules and that "table variation" covers their interpretation of the rules. To be clear that example has nothing to do with Terrance.

1/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
HumanFighter wrote:
So, as I openly admitted, it is clearly more convenient for a gm to roll one dice and be on with it, but what if a player asks that pfs rules be enforced?

You're talking about a rule in the core rule book so trivial even the core rule book didn't follow it in its own example.

can alike players take the same init roll?

5/5 5/55/55/5

Human Fighter wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
HumanFighter wrote:
So, as I openly admitted, it is clearly more convenient for a gm to roll one dice and be on with it, but what if a player asks that pfs rules be enforced?

You're talking about a rule in the core rule book so trivial even the core rule book didn't follow it in its own example.

can alike players take the same init roll?

If they're sharing a brain at the moment, sure.

Now mind you, I cant see why you couldn't delay into the middle of this. I mean you can hit in the middle of ONE creatures turn, why not all of them?

Grand Lodge 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

I do my best to keep separate initiatives for all my NPCs. Sometimes it gets difficult, and when they aren't meaningfully different I will put them all on the same init.

However, Roll20 makes it much easier to get and track individual initiatives, so I usually manage much better there where I devote less time and effort to it.

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I've always rolled initiative of like groups identically unless I saw this to be a particularly lethal tactic (read multiple creatures with AoE attacks). As pointed out earlier in this thread, there is even an example of doing this. Furthermore when appropriate I've had dissimilar monsters delay/ready for each other when their tactics would support acting in tandem.

I don't think anyone who does what virtually every GM I know does would accuse them of "cheating".

Edit: As pointed out by others in this tread. When I GM online I'll often roll each monster's initiative individually, because its much easier to do there.

1/5

Terence Barton wrote:
Bob Jonquet wrote:
For the GM's, why not just pre-roll the initiatives of your monsters during prep?
For the games in question last Saturday they were both season 4. I did not know ahead of time if the party was going to be play high or low tier (there was a difference in the init). Also i did not know if the table was going to have 4, 5, or 6 players so some groups of monsters would be eliminated at the 4 person table. So there is four possible combinations of monster inits for each encounter. So I made the call to do them at the table, grouping like monsters together.

Terrance, does this imply you normally prep your init rolls so they're separate, or even normally roll individually? I was under the impression this was common practice to roll in groups.

1/5

BigNorseWolf wrote:
Human Fighter wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:
HumanFighter wrote:
So, as I openly admitted, it is clearly more convenient for a gm to roll one dice and be on with it, but what if a player asks that pfs rules be enforced?

You're talking about a rule in the core rule book so trivial even the core rule book didn't follow it in its own example.

can alike players take the same init roll?

If they're sharing a brain at the moment, sure.

Now mind you, I cant see why you couldn't delay into the middle of this. I mean you can hit in the middle of ONE creatures turn, why not all of them?

so this is just going to end badly... So when you personally group creatures together, your interpretation of the creatures you're handling all share a brain?

5/5 5/55/55/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Human Fighter wrote:
so this is just going to end badly... So when you personally group creatures together, your interpretation of the creatures you're handling all share a brain?

Yes. Mine. And there's not nearly enough to go around.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

I roll separately for each person in the fight and use Init 0 for mobs of bystanders.

It just always seemed unrealistic for bad guys to all go simultaneously, to say nothing of the fact that a high initiative for all the baddies could be quite deadly and a low could make the fight overly trivial.

Similarly, I have players roll separate initiative for Eidolons and Familiars. I also do this for Animal Companions if they started the fight while performing the Guard or Defend trick.

1/5

For clarity, I'm unsure if people are intending to put words in my mouth, but I have never accused anyone of cheating in this thread, nor have I ever in my life with this topic. I've simply pointed out that grouping creatures is indeed illegal according to the rules, which I would expect if a player wishes to have the correct rules enforced should be more than enough reason to play in the correct way.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Human Fighter wrote:
In the future I would hope you could keep people anonymous from real life, and the boards, at least concerning me.

You are anonymous. I did not identify you. All I did was identify myself as the GM in question. Nobody knows your name and they do not know if you live local to me or if you were just passing through and dropped in for a game.

1/5

Terence Barton wrote:
Human Fighter wrote:
In the future I would hope you could keep people anonymous from real life, and the boards, at least concerning me.
You are anonymous. I did not identify you. All I did was identify myself as the GM in question. Nobody knows your name and they do not know if you live local to me or if you were just passing through and dropped in for a game.

people can take your identity and then take the fact you pointed out the date and games you mentioned and narrow down who I am, and I assure you people at local games have already done it. I'm not upset, but I just ask you to be more mindful with exactly what information you give out in the future.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Human Fighter wrote:
Terrance, does this imply you normally prep your init rolls so they're separate, or even normally roll individually? I was under the impression this was common practice to roll in groups.

I don't do init rolls ahead of time. I do them at the table. I wish to spend the majority of my prep time getting the maps right. I feel that is a better use of my time as drawing maps in game can take up a lot of time.

Also, I feel like a jerk for saying this but it is Terence not Terrance

1/5

I'm on a cell phone using Swype, so I apologize that it spelled your name incorrectly, and I do know how to write it, and as you know I also say it properly too.

Your efforts into making maps is really, awesome, so I hope you are now aware of my appreciation of that if you weren't already.

My question was if your statement implied you prepped them OR rolled them individually instead of always grouping. I don't presume to know what you do and don't do beyond what you've told me in person, and that was you never met anyone that rolled them individually.

Lantern Lodge 3/5

Human Fighter wrote:
people can take your identity and then take the fact you pointed out the date and games you mentioned and narrow down who I am, and I assure you people at local games have already done it. I'm not upset, but I just ask you to be more mindful with exactly what information you give out in the future.

That assumes that you use warhorn to sign up or that you were not signed up for another table and switched over.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Human Fighter wrote:
For clarity, I'm unsure if people are intending to put words in my mouth, but I have never accused anyone of cheating in this thread, nor have I ever in my life with this topic. I've simply pointed out that grouping creatures is indeed illegal according to the rules, which I would expect if a player wishes to have the correct rules enforced should be more than enough reason to play in the correct way.

It is indeed not illegal according to page 13 of the CRB.

Pathfinder has the habit of having rules that affect a single thing placed throughout the rulebook.

The writers of the book would not have included an example of clumping initiatives, if it was not intended to work that way should a GM wish to do so.

1/5

Terence Barton wrote:
Human Fighter wrote:
people can take your identity and then take the fact you pointed out the date and games you mentioned and narrow down who I am, and I assure you people at local games have already done it. I'm not upset, but I just ask you to be more mindful with exactly what information you give out in the future.
That assumes that you use warhorn to sign up or that you were not signed up for another table and switched over.

Not necessarily. People who attended could identify, and many other possibilities too, but I feel this conversation is best left in private to further elaborate. I wish to do what I can to prevent people any humiliation or bias to ensure games don't ever get affected, or people to have their spirit to game hurt, so that is why I omit information. Also, because I find such information to be irrelevant to the bigger picture.

1/5

Just looked at page 13, and it indeed says they roll once. I find it very absurd and sad anyone would use this to argue the clear RAW, but it's clearly existing here on this page to vaguely contradict RAW in this extremely poor form. I would hope that people would be reasonable to the fact mistakes have been made in this book, and not argue something like this, but it appears unless it's addressed that I must acknowledge it. Regardless, I firmly stand by my position, but I just can't have as much certainty from what's written there.

5/5 5/55/55/5

If you want games run according to absolute 100% raw all the time, you're going to have to run them yourself. Every dm has their own individual style, quirks, and interpretations of the rules of the game and the instructions in the scenario.

1/5

Bnw, I believe I've written multiple times that I expect games not to be ran 100%. What I did state as to what I wish to occur is that people run the games as honest as they can, by not knowingly ignoring the rules to make the game their "home game". Pfs allows people to have the expectation to sit down at any table and have all the same rules apply to them fairly.

51 to 100 of 282 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Rolling Creatures into the same initiative, and delaying into the same initiative All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.