Yes, this is really basic....
I was reading through the combat section in the Beta book yesterday and it appeared as though initiative is fixed for an entire combat. You roll your number and that's that until the combat is done. The initiative order remains fixed for each round of the existing combat. Am I reading that right? Why doesn't initiative change each round (aside from the very practical desire not to slow down combat)?
Thanks!
It's actually been this way for a while; all of 3.X at least, though I can't remember if it changed in 2E. In the more recent editions, you could delay your initiative and go at a lower number, or refocus to give yourself the equivalent of a 20 on the next round. Set initiative has some quirks, but so does a new roll every round. It's entirely possible that you could hit a person on your round before they act with an effect that lasts a round, stun them (as a monk for example), then have the opponent win initiative next round, resulting in your foe losing one action but you'd never get to hit them while stunned. Cutting down on a few die rolls also helps, especially with newer players or higher-level games with lots of options.
Creative Director
|
It's basically because fixed initiative speeds up combat incredibly; re-rolling new initiative each round might make for a more chaotic combat, but it also makes combat grind to a halt. With fixed initiative, things quickly get into a rhythm during battles. This was a change that 3rd edition made to the game, and at the time it was met with much skepticism (including by me), as until that point, D&D always had everyone re-roll initiative each round. But now, having played with fixed initiatives for a decade or so... the thought of going back to rerolling each round fills me with dread and makes me shake my head that I ever thought that method was better... :-)
It's basically because fixed initiative speeds up combat incredibly; re-rolling new initiative each round might make for a more chaotic combat, but it also makes combat grind to a halt. With fixed initiative, things quickly get into a rhythm during battles. This was a change that 3rd edition made to the game, and at the time it was met with much skepticism (including by me), as until that point, D&D always had everyone re-roll initiative each round. But now, having played with fixed initiatives for a decade or so... the thought of going back to rerolling each round fills me with dread and makes me shake my head that I ever thought that method was better... :-)
Forgive me, James, but i beg to differ...
I prefer re-rolling initiative for each round.
I find it more dynamic, less mechanical, opposed to a repetitive pc/npc/pc/npc/pc/npc.
The way i see it, there are many things happening in a fight, and i don't think it makes sense to keep the same initiative order along an encounter.
That's actually a variant from D&D3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide.
And to make it better/worse, i use weapons speed factors and spells casting time. I try to enforce a chronology of actions, using the old segments in a round, like in AD&D 1st edition.
I know many people hate that. But in my games it makes sense, and believe it or not, it doesn't slow down the combat.
Once again, that's personal opinion, and personal preference.
No need to flame, guys ;)
|
But now, having played with fixed initiatives for a decade or so... the thought of going back to rerolling each round fills me with dread and makes me shake my head that I ever thought that method was better... :-)
That's kinda funny because when I first started playing AD&D, we used fixed initiatives as a house rule.
|
Creative Director
|
Forgive me, James, but i beg to differ...
I prefer re-rolling initiative for each round.
I find it more dynamic, less mechanical, opposed to a repetitive pc/npc/pc/npc/pc/npc.
The way i see it, there are many things happening in a fight, and i don't think it makes sense to keep the same initiative order along an encounter.
That's actually a variant from D&D3.5 Dungeon Master's Guide.And to make it better/worse, i use weapons speed factors and spells casting time. I try to enforce a chronology of actions, using the old segments in a round, like in AD&D 1st edition.
I know many people hate that. But in my games it makes sense, and believe it or not, it doesn't slow down the combat.Once again, that's personal opinion, and personal preference.
No need to flame, guys ;)
Agreed; and the fact that the game can be played so many different ways is a strength of the game.
That said... you should at least try a session or two of fixed initiative to see how it feels. It's different, but in my experience it does make for a faster and thus more enjoyable time in combat. And since it's fixed (you can still delay or otherwise adjust when you go once combat starts, so it's not REALLY fixed), it does open up some really fun new tactical choices for players to make in combat, making it feel more like a game.
One other way I feel that fixed initiative is good for the game.
Random elements hurt PCs more than NPCs, because the PCs are in EVERY encounter, and thus random rolls impact the PCs more often. As a result, PCs get hit with bad luck more often than an NPC. By using fixed initiative, you're actually stacking the deck in the PCs' favor, since they're not being hit by as much randomness. This empowers the players and gives them a bit more control over the fates of their characters.
Agreed; and the fact that the game can be played so many different ways is a strength of the game.
That said... you should at least try a session or two of fixed initiative to see how it feels. It's different, but in my experience it does make for a faster and thus more enjoyable time in combat. And since it's fixed (you can still delay or otherwise adjust when you go once combat starts, so it's not REALLY fixed), it does open up some really fun new tactical choices for players to make in combat, making it feel more like a game.
One other way I feel that fixed initiative is good for the game.
Random elements hurt PCs more than NPCs, because the PCs are in EVERY encounter, and thus random rolls impact the PCs more often. As a result, PCs get hit with bad luck more often than an NPC. By using fixed initiative, you're actually stacking the deck in the PCs' favor, since they're not being hit by as much randomness. This empowers the players and gives them a bit more control over the fates of their characters.
Oh, absolutely. I agree with all these points.
Anyway, the system i mentioned is only the one i use when i am running the game.
I actually did try to play with fixed init, but i didn't really enjoy it, and my players neither, so we went back to variable initiative, rolled for each round.
When i am playing (which is rare), that's in a pretty core game, so with fixed initiative.
And i agree about the overexposure of characters to danger and hurt. This is why i give them quite a bunch of options to keep a chance and even an advantage, as heroes.
|
And to make it better/worse, i use weapons speed factors and spells casting time. I try to enforce a chronology of actions, using the old segments in a round, like in AD&D 1st edition.
Hey Seldriss, any chance of getting you to further elaborate on your weapon speed and casting times, possibly in an e-mail since I imagine it would be fairly extensive in length. I have been thinking about re-implamenting round-to-round initiative, but all of my older edition stuff is in storage (my parents house) a good 13 hours away from me.
I suppose you use them as a negative modifier to the initiative roll?
Though I agree the 3.x approach is easier overall, I think there was something lost, more so in regards to Spellcasting Time and Weapon Speeds (like Daggers and loaded Crossbows being signifigantly faster) than the re-rolling Init every round. I believe 3rd Edition also changed the conventions for "calling" actions which also relates to the whole mess :-)
Thanks for all the replies....
I would also be interested in the weapon speed info. Feel free to post here! :)
And to make it better/worse, i use weapons speed factors and spells casting time. I try to enforce a chronology of actions, using the old segments in a round, like in AD&D 1st edition.Hey Seldriss, any chance of getting you to further elaborate on your weapon speed and casting times, possibly in an e-mail since I imagine it would be fairly extensive in length. I have been thinking about re-implamenting round-to-round initiative, but all of my older edition stuff is in storage (my parents house) a good 13 hours away from me.
I suppose you use them as a negative modifier to the initiative roll?
** spoiler omitted **