Maybe it's time for an initiative cap


Pathfinder Society

1 to 50 of 237 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
3/5

While I know that this could be a part of the general system as well, I'm posting it in PFS because in a home game a GM can control the characters more.

The initiatives I'm starting to see in PFS games are starting to get really out of a control. Last night in a game I ran there were two characters that had 15+ initiative modifiers and totals that were pushing 27-38.

Not only is this not fun for the GM, but its not fun for the players either. One of the players at my table didn't get to act in three combats for the scenario because everyone else's numbers completely blew them out of the water. If they had rolled a 20, they still would have gone after those characters.

While future scenarios could possibly introduce creatures with higher initiatives, there's no way that PFS staff could try to fix this problem for all of the previous scenarios. A hard cap of initiative would help control this problem a little bit, while also helping players explore other parts of their characters.

Example: If the hard cap on initiative modifiers were set to 10, players who wanted to have a character go first would still have a higher chance of going first, but turn order would be a little more random giving slower initiative characters more of a chance to participate in the game.

While this is a little long of a post, I've already witnessed one game that potentially last two players due to incredibly high initiative characters. Both players eventually returned, but it was a month after that game, leaving our venue to wonder if we had inadvertently chased away two players.

I do welcome any thoughts on the subject, as this isn't the first time the issue of high initiatives has come up, but this is one of the first potential solutions that I'm aware of.

EDIT: There has been some confusion as to my original intention for the cap. The intention was to cap initiative modifiers at 10, meaning that the max initiative would be 30. Max initiative of 30 would still be enough for anyone who wanted to go first to go first, while still giving people who didn't optimize the stat a chance to still participate in battles.

5/5

The issue isn't initiative, it's what people do with that initiative. If I go on a 45, and start Inspiring Courage, then it's good. If I drop an empowered heightened Fireball on the BBEG with a 15 that happens to beat everyone else, then it's no fun for anyone. Speak to the players who are monopolizing the game play and ask them to let some other people play. Point out that if nobody is willing to play with them, they won't get to play either, because you need 3 to make a legal table.

Then audit their initiative modifiers. Improved initiative, reactionary, scorpion familiar, and a dex of 20 still only gives you a 15; if people are beating that at low levels it merits a second look. And if not, they're a Dex-focused build with at least one level in wizard, and a feat, and a trait ... so going first is kind of their thing, and they've (hopefully) sacrificed other options to get to that point.

Grand Lodge 4/5 Pathfinder Society Campaign Coordinator

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Why arbitrarily put a cap limit on initiative. If we put a cap on max damage, wouldn't that also solve the problem? If you capped damage at 4 per character per round, that means every player would get at least one turn in a combat. If this is a problem, this is something that needs to be addressed at the core game level, not just PFS.

4/5

If the character with the high initiative is ending the fight on their first turn, then that's the problem, not the initiative. My diviner has +18 initiative (at one point before Improved Familiar it was +20) and always acts on the surprise round, but she usually uses that first turn to cast a quick buff or utility spell unless she feels very threatened, as she is paranoid that she will need her best moves in a later fight that day, so she only pulls that out when it is clear the characters who don't have limited spell slots are not able to handle the situation. The exception is if she identifies an encounter as being insanely powerful using Knowledge checks.

Now, if it's a gunslinger or archer with that init, who basically can't do anything productive on their turn except annihilate the enemy, then there's less you can do. It's one reason I intentionally made my only ranged character be a low-Dex zen archer. I wanted everyone else to beat me in initiative.

EDIT: Ninjaed by Patrick and Mike who both said similar things to me already!

3/5

Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:
Speak to the players who are monopolizing the game play and ask them to let some other people play. Point out that if nobody is willing to play with them, they won't get to play either, because you need 3 to make a legal table.

After the table I had mentioned earlier, the VO of the area did speak to the players in question. Even after the discussion, the players didn't see anything wrong with having the other players not make any die rolls for the scenario.

Even then, the situation then is simple reactionary, not proactive. If the players were chased away, there was nothing we could do to prevent it before the fact. The only situation then would be talk to the players in question and hope that the other players returned.

4/5

Tarma wrote:
Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:
Speak to the players who are monopolizing the game play and ask them to let some other people play. Point out that if nobody is willing to play with them, they won't get to play either, because you need 3 to make a legal table.

After the table I had mentioned earlier, the VO of the area did speak to the players in question. Even after the discussion, the players didn't see anything wrong with having the other players not make any die rolls for the scenario.

Even then, the situation then is simple reactionary, not proactive. If the players were chased away, there was nothing we could do to prevent it before the fact. The only situation then would be talk to the players in question and hope that the other players returned.

Again, I think something beyond initiative is wrong if the fights are over in 1 round every time. Were the initiative monkeys both ranged martial classes?

Sczarni 5/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Pullman

Like others have said, if they desperately want to go first let them. If while going first they are ending combats before anyone else and only they are getting to play, pull them aside and ask them nicely to let others have a turn at doing things.

I have a level 11 character that has an imp familiar and can cast a DC29 persistent Magic Jar and have the Imp fly around invisible in front of the party at all time. Take control of enemies and have them kill each other and then coup themselves. Is that fun for everyone? Not at all, so I don't do it.

Just politely ask them not to monopolize the game. Most people understand and are happy to let others do things in combat.

*Edit* forgot a word.

3/5

Michael Brock wrote:
Why arbitrarily put a cap limit on initiative. If we put a cap on max damage, wouldn't that also solve the problem? If you capped damage at 4 per character per round, that means every player would get at least one turn in a combat. If this is a problem, this is something that needs to be addressed at the core game level, not just PFS.

Because initiative would be the easiest issue to fix. If the damage was capped at 4 per attack, you could easily get extra attacks through several other means. Once the initiative modifier is in place, it's not as easy to increase as the number of attacks.

Secondly, initiative is one of the few effects in the game where once you reach a certain point a higher number doesn't matter. Once you start breaching 20+ initiatives, there's not much benefit other than simply competing with players for a chance to do something. Most (if not all) creatures that are in PFS scenarios are not going to come remotely close to reaching a 30 initiative.

Capping the initiative wouldn't actually have that much impact on how the game plays, but would fix the initiative arms race issue.

3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:
Again, I think something beyond initiative is wrong if the fights are over in 1 round every time. Were the initiative monkeys both ranged martial classes?

Thing is, there has been enough powerful options introduced in the Pathfinder system that victories can occur during the first round of combat. It's kinda frustrating, and there's really nothing any of us can do about the issues with the available options. The only thing you can do is let the offending players know your frustration, and if they continue to frustrate you as a GM and/or drive players away, then their only solution is to not invite them to your tables.

-Matt

1/5 Venture-Captain, Texas—Texarkana

2 people marked this as a favorite.

We have been known to get up walk around the table and get initiative rolls one at a time, this seems to intimidate the dice into rolling low for those who seem to always have an insanely high initiative and improve the rolls of those who don't. Go figure...

3/5

Mark Seifter wrote:

Again, I think something beyond initiative is wrong if the fights are over in 1 round every time. Were the initiative monkeys both ranged martial classes?

One of the scenarios was a 7-11 that at subtier 7-8 had three fights that were CR 3's or lower. Class doesn't even matter at that point in time, if they go first they can kill those creatures in one attack. Someone took out a creature from full to dead with a magic missile.

Sczarni 5/5 * Venture-Lieutenant, Washington—Pullman

Tarma wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:

Again, I think something beyond initiative is wrong if the fights are over in 1 round every time. Were the initiative monkeys both ranged martial classes?

One of the scenarios was a 7-11 that at subtier 7-8 had three fights that were CR 3's or lower. Class doesn't even matter at that point in time, if they go first they can kill those creatures in one attack. Someone took out a creature from full to dead with a magic missile.

I always view those fights as resource drains. They certainly aren't going to win. You can usually get people to throw some spells, waste a round or two of rage, and use up some healing before they get to the fights that they start needing those resources back.

3/5

As a note, I have seen level 4 characters reach +15 initiatives, and because of their class (gunslinger) it did not impact their combat effectiveness in the slightest.

4/5

Tarma wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:

Again, I think something beyond initiative is wrong if the fights are over in 1 round every time. Were the initiative monkeys both ranged martial classes?

One of the scenarios was a 7-11 that at subtier 7-8 had three fights that were CR 3's or lower. Class doesn't even matter at that point in time, if they go first they can kill those creatures in one attack. Someone took out a creature from full to dead with a magic missile.

To be fair, that's partially an issue with some of the older scenarios. None of the new stuff is that easy at 7-8 to my knowledge. It seems from your later post that many of these guys are gunslingers. Gunslingers are their own very special issue.

5/5

34 people marked this as a favorite.

High initiative isn't the problem. Players who don't realize this is a social experience are.

3/5

Mark Seifter wrote:
Tarma wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:

To be fair, that's partially an issue with some of the older scenarios. None of the new stuff is that easy at 7-8 to my knowledge. It seems from your later post that many of these guys are gunslingers. Gunslingers are their own very special issue.

Actually, many of these characters are not gunslingers. There are a couple, but there are also.wizards, druids, sorcerers, and monks that are all up there. While I personally havent seen any, by proxy a warrior could get up there too.

4/5

Tarma wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Tarma wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:

To be fair, that's partially an issue with some of the older scenarios. None of the new stuff is that easy at 7-8 to my knowledge. It seems from your later post that many of these guys are gunslingers. Gunslingers are their own very special issue.

Actually, many of these characters are not gunslingers. There are a couple, but there are also.wizards, druids, sorcerers, and monks that are all up there. While I personally havent seen any, by proxy a warrior could get up there too.

OK, sure, but how is the monk ending the fight on round 1?

Liberty's Edge 5/5

My sorcerer, Emilio, has an initiative of +17. He needs it to talk smack, cast invisibility, and find a good hiding place for the combat. So far, it has not proven to be "breaking" encounters. I frequently go on initiative 18 or 19.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Mark Seifter wrote:
OK, sure, but how is the monk ending the fight on round 1?

Super-Monk-Grapple/Pin the single bad guy?

Grand Lodge 5/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
High initiative isn't the problem. Players who don't realize this is a social experience are.

This.

Im sure this is something everybody could use some reminding of every now and again.

4/5

Seth Gipson wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
OK, sure, but how is the monk ending the fight on round 1?
Super-Monk-Grapple/Pin the single bad guy?

They will at most have the enemy in a grapple on their turn and able to do most things. Using all those feats to make three maintain checks a round has to be done on a maintain round (so starting at round 2). Also, even if it's pinned, the other person does at least get an action, the danger is just neutered.

3/5

Mark Seifter wrote:

OK, sure, but how is the monk ending the fight on round 1?

Trip build monk with an insane amount of AOO's with combat reflexes. Two character fight, moves up to one one guy, provokes AOO, counters and trips with vicious stomp and pounds the tar out of him. During same move goes to the other, takes standard action to attack, trips and pounds the tar out of the other guy.

3/5

Will Johnson wrote:
My sorcerer, Emilio, has an initiative of +17. He needs it to talk smack, cast invisibility, and find a good hiding place for the combat. So far, it has not proven to be "breaking" encounters. I frequently go on initiative 18 or 19.

My question to you is do you really need the initiative that high? You could achieve very similar results with an initiative of 10 or 12. With an initiative mod of 2 on a creature, there's still a 50% chance that you will go before that other creature.

3/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
High initiative isn't the problem. Players who don't realize this is a social experience are.

I agree completely. I'm just concerned that there are players who will not see it that way, regardless of being spoken to or not.

Grand Lodge 3/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think PFS groups tend to be regional and somewhat territorial. Within these groups, a general acceptable style of play becomes the standard for the small community. Some groups tend to power through a scenario, trying to inflict maximum damage with one-hit power combos. Others tend to approach the scenario with a role-playing or 'group participation' philosophy.

I personally tend to stay away from styles of play that encourage what I call 'Uber-Builds' and gravitate towards a more cooperative play style. On occasion this means I drive an extra 15 minutes to a store where like minded players gather.

IMHO, as Pathfinder (and PFS) have increased options, powers and build types, the overall power-level of the game has been ratcheted up a few notches, some players now, more than ever, approach the game as a pen and paper application of a video game, maximizing 2 dimensional character builds, zerging through the scenario, and minimizing any of the role playing aspects of the game.

And that's why I don't mind driving an extra 15 minutes, right past the store/event that encourages the Uber-Builds to a store where a more balanced role playing experience is to be had.

But ultimately, your local community has more to do with the style of play than does anything else.

Liberty's Edge 4/5 5/55/5 **

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Maps, Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Charter Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

I have Rogue with a +23 Initiative, the reason he has it that high is because early on he learned if he did not have control on where he was early it was harder for him to survive. He put all his resources into raising his initiative.

Being a Rogue though he is not going to end the battle in the first round, it is mostly about being in the right place to be the most effective with the rest of the group.

Liberty's Edge 5/5

Tarma wrote:
Will Johnson wrote:
My sorcerer, Emilio, has an initiative of +17. He needs it to talk smack, cast invisibility, and find a good hiding place for the combat. So far, it has not proven to be "breaking" encounters. I frequently go on initiative 18 or 19.
My question to you is do you really need the initiative that high? You could achieve very similar results with an initiative of 10 or 12. With an initiative mod of 2 on a creature, there's still a 50% chance that you will go before that other creature.

I technically don't need it that high. I've simply chosen to make it that high. When I say choose, I mean that I have invested two feats, a trait, and have specifically chosen a familiar that grants a bonus to initiative. I certainly could have spent these resources differently -- perhaps far more wisely.

Again, I play a character that doesn't end fights. Rather, he runs away shouting, "Not in the face!" very quickly in order to hide behind his meat shields. That's his schtick. It's fun to play a coward. However, it doesn't come up as often if I go later in the round when all the bad guys are dead.

Scarab Sages 4/5

I don't have any characters with initiatives as high as what's being discussed here. My "high" initiative characters are my ninja (+11, I think), my gunslinger/inquisitor(+12, but not a PFS character), and my Sorcerer at +7. Of those, only the Sorcerer has Improved Initiative, and only the Ninja has Reactionary (Though she has the Lantern Lodge Master vanity, too). Only the ninja typically attacks on round 1 (to get sneak attack). The Inquisitor usually buffs (Divine Favor or Divine Power plus Judgement) and moves into position. My Sorcerer wants to go first so he can cast Haste before the party scatters. Everyone seems to appreciate that but the Magus, who has a +8 to initiative but will never delay for the buff. Ok, my Sorcerer might also throw a quickened intensified Snowball or a Quickened Scorching Ray or something, but certainly not enough damage to end most high level encounters. He's post-Seeker arc now, so a +7 is really pretty unimpressive, anyway.

4/5

Hmm, just for fun, I think the most initiative you can have at level 1 is a 22 Dex Ifrit Diviner with a Cracked Shard, Improved Initiative, Reactionary, and one of the three +4 init familiars for a total of +22. Of course, at this point, you've spent so much on initiative that you probably can't do much of anything on that turn that you take first, since despite being a wizard, your intelligence is at most 17 (in which case you have something like 12 Con, 7 Str, 5 Wis, 7 Cha...).

5/5

Tarma wrote:
After the table I had mentioned earlier, the VO of the area did speak to the players in question. Even after the discussion, the players didn't see anything wrong with having the other players not make any die rolls for the scenario.

Link. :D

5/5

Kyle Baird wrote:
High initiative isn't the problem. Players who don't realize this is a social experience are.

QFT.


Mark Seifter wrote:
Hmm, just for fun, I think the most initiative you can have at level 1 is a 22 Dex Ifrit Diviner with a Cracked Shard, Improved Initiative, Reactionary, and one of the three +4 init familiars for a total of +22. Of course, at this point, you've spent so much on initiative that you probably can't do much of anything on that turn that you take first, since despite being a wizard, your intelligence is at most 17 (in which case you have something like 12 Con, 7 Str, 5 Wis, 7 Cha...).

My favorite is Time or Battle Oracle with Improved Initiative, Eldritch Heritage, Noble Scion, Reactionary, and a Circlet of Persuasion. Cranking Dex is for people who aren't royalty.

1/5 Venture-Captain, Germany–Hannover

Well, that boils down to something else.
With some builds or classes it´s more wishful to go first.
Let´s say oracle of heavens. You go second or third. Your friendly barbarian can´t wait and has to charge, splitting everything in his in two. Now it´s your turn. You wan´t to color spray, which might be your best option at this point, or perhaps even the only useful option. If only the barbarian wouldn´t stand in the middle of it......

Would colrspraying then actually be PvP? As a GM i would totally let the barbarian do a willsave and even be coup de graced.

As it seems those two persons want to win the game and behave in a not-to-support way. I wold probably review their characters very hard, ask other players if the are ok with someone behaving like that before every game or ask them not to play straight away probably.

Scarab Sages 4/5

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ferious Thune wrote:
My Sorcerer wants to go first so he can cast Haste before the party scatters. Everyone seems to appreciate that but the Magus, who has a +8 to initiative but will never delay for the buff.

I should say that the initiative battle between my Sorcerer and the Magus is all in good fun, and that sentence was meant as such. And there have been plenty of times where him delaying would have meant the enemy got to go before either of us.

I'm not in favor of a hard limit to initiative bonuses, and I agree with Mike's reasoning. If someone wants to spend their resources/feats/class levels/whatever boosting init, that's fine. Placing an arbitrary limit (+10, for example) doesn't seem like a good solution. There are plenty of characters that want to go early in the initiative order who aren't ruining the fun for everyone else.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Benjamin Falk wrote:
As it seems those two persons want to win the game and behave in a not-to-support way. I wold probably review their characters very hard, ask other players if the are ok with someone behaving like that before every game or ask them not to play straight away probably.

We should take it a step further. No one gets to make their own characters! Pre-gens for everyone. After all, we all have different standarsd so we should all be held to the same pre made one!*

*not all pregens created equal. Harsk players will be given free tissues at the end of every game.

3/5

MrSin wrote:

*not all pregens created equal. Harsk players will be given free tissues at the end of every game.

I'm fairly certain you just summoned my venture captain. :P

3/5

Ferious Thune wrote:
I'm not in favor of a hard limit to initiative bonuses, and I agree with Mike's reasoning. If someone wants to spend their resources/feats/class levels/whatever boosting init, that's fine. Placing an arbitrary limit (+10, for example) doesn't seem like a good solution. There are plenty of characters that want to go early in the initiative order who aren't ruining the fun for everyone else.

I think some of the problem with initiatives is that you don't have to sacrifice that much get obscene initiative scores. You can easily get a +10 without any penalty to combat effectiveness, with maybe a trait going towards it. That still leaves plenty of feats for anything else you wish to do.

I feel I should note that I'm not talking about capping the initiative roll as a whole, but the initiative modifier. Is there really that much difference between a +15 mod and a +20 mod if you're almost guaranteed to go before the creatures in the combat?

Some more food for thought: Flipping through bestiary 4, there are Demon Lords and old gods that vary from CR25 to CR 30 that have initiative modifiers from +12 to +15. These are the same initiatives that we're seeing on PC's less than level 10.


Tarma wrote:
MrSin wrote:
*not all pregens created equal. Harsk players will be given free tissues at the end of every game.
I'm fairly certain you just summoned my venture captain. :P

I have to ask; Is your venture captain is Harsk? Or he hands out free tissues?

3/5

MrSin wrote:
Tarma wrote:
MrSin wrote:
*not all pregens created equal. Harsk players will be given free tissues at the end of every game.
I'm fairly certain you just summoned my venture captain. :P
I have to ask; Is your venture captain is Harsk? Or he hands out free tissues?

He has quite strong opinions on the pre-gens. :P

Shadow Lodge 4/5 5/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 8

Fortunately, my sheriff of Alkenstar PC only needs that 20+ initiative modifier to be the fastest gun in the Inner Sea. Aside from going first, he's easily the weakest gunslinger I've ever seen in PFS.

Kyle is right. It's not a build that ruins a table's experience, it's someone at that table.

5/5

Tarma wrote:
Is there really that much difference between a +15 mod and a +20 mod if you're almost guaranteed to go before the creatures in the combat?

Then what's the point of capping it?

4/5

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:
Tarma wrote:
Is there really that much difference between a +15 mod and a +20 mod if you're almost guaranteed to go before the creatures in the combat?
Then what's the point of capping it?

His claim is that the uber-high mods auto-beat not only the monsters but also the other PCs, the latter of which is his issue, since nearly all combats in his venue are over before the bad guys ever get a single turn to act, so it becomes a question of which character gets to do the annihilating. If it's always one character due to init, the others did nothing.

I think in this case, the problem is not the init.

5/5

Mark Seifter wrote:
His claim is that the uber-high mods auto-beat not only the monsters but also the other PCs, the latter of which is his issue, since nearly all combats in his venue are over before the bad guys ever get a single turn to act, so it becomes a question of which character gets to do the annihilating. If it's always one character due to init, the others did nothing.

Ah! So the issue isn't that we should cap initiative at a reasonable level, but rather that we should cap it at some unreasonable level so everyone gets a chance to powergame equally?

.......... right.

(Besides, if we cap it somewhere, isn't that just going to encourage those who would otherwise surpass it to skip Improved Initiative and buy another feat, to make their first-round action stronger?)

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tarma wrote:
Michael Brock wrote:
Why arbitrarily put a cap limit on initiative. If we put a cap on max damage, wouldn't that also solve the problem? If you capped damage at 4 per character per round, that means every player would get at least one turn in a combat. If this is a problem, this is something that needs to be addressed at the core game level, not just PFS.
Because initiative would be the easiest issue to fix. If the damage was capped at 4 per attack, you could easily get extra attacks through several other means. Once the initiative modifier is in place, it's not as easy to increase as the number of attacks.

But initiative is not the issue. If your combats are ending in one round, they would end in one round whether the person ending them went on 15 or 35; the problem is the encounter being too easy or not played to its strengths, not the initiative scores being too high.

3/5

Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:

Ah! So the issue isn't that we should cap initiative at a reasonable level, but rather that we should cap it at some unreasonable level so everyone gets a chance to powergame equally?

Actually, I'm not seeing the problem with this idea. Capping the initiative modifier at 10 and max initiative at 30 would actually even the spread out for the table and increase the chance that other people at the table would get a chance to go.

I don't care if combat is over in one round. I care when there are players at my table who haven't participated in three combats because even if they rolled a 20 their check they were still going last.

4/5

Tarma wrote:
Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:

Ah! So the issue isn't that we should cap initiative at a reasonable level, but rather that we should cap it at some unreasonable level so everyone gets a chance to powergame equally?

Actually, I'm not seeing the problem with this idea. Capping the initiative modifier at 10 and max initiative at 30 would actually even the spread out for the table and increase the chance that other people at the table would get a chance to go.

I don't care if combat is over in one round. I care when there are players at my table who haven't participated in three combats because even if they rolled a 20 their check they were still going last.

So these players with low initiative, they are either also are strong enough to annihilate the encounter in one turn or else they aren't.

If they are that strong, then random chance is still going to make it so someone doesn't get to act for a few encounters in a row.

If they aren't that strong in addition to having lower initiative, I posit that going first would not increase their enjoyment very much:

SlowInitPlayer: "Whoah, thanks to the new rules, I actually went first. Okay I move up and swing my sword and hit for 12."
GM: "Okay, Gunzilla?"
GunzillaPlayer: "Okay. Is anything's touch AC higher than 14?"
GM: "No..."
Gunzilla Player: "Great, then I hit 8 times, thankfully no misfires, for a total of 186 damage. If you like, I can break that up so we can switch between enemies as I kill them."

If I was SlowInitPlayer here and also if I was the type to get frustrated when I don't get to act in combat, going first doesn't make me much happier in this situation.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hmmm... What if... The people who crank initiative, are the people who don't want to go last most...

Tarma wrote:
Patrick Harris @ MU wrote:
Ah! So the issue isn't that we should cap initiative at a reasonable level, but rather that we should cap it at some unreasonable level so everyone gets a chance to powergame equally?
Actually, I'm not seeing the problem with this idea. Capping the initiative modifier at 10 and max initiative at 30 would actually even the spread out for the table and increase the chance that other people at the table would get a chance to go.

Well, you kill some peoples build/investment, many of which aren't the guys who finish it all in one round rocket tag style, and its rather arbitrary and is an additional rule that separates PFS from normal play and doesn't actually talk to the players about what they are doing so if the problem is actually with the player you punished everyone without actually solving a problem.

3/5

Mark Seifter wrote:


So these players with low initiative, they are either also are strong enough to annihilate the encounter in one turn or else they aren't.

If they are that strong, then random chance is still going to make it so someone doesn't get to act for a few encounters in a row.

If they aren't that strong in addition to having lower initiative, I posit that going first would not increase their enjoyment very much:

If I was SlowInitPlayer here and also if I was the type to get frustrated when I don't get to act in combat, going first doesn't make me much happier in this situation.

Correct me if I'm paraphrasing this incorrectly, but are you saying that if the character has a slow initiative and doesn't get to participate in combat that it's the player's fault?

I think everyone expects that there occasionally may be some combats where they don't get to participate. But I think everyone goes into a scenario with the expectation that they won't be sitting out 50-100% of a scenario.

3/5

MrSin wrote:

Well, you kill some peoples build/investment, many of which aren't the guys who finish it all in one round rocket tag style, and its rather arbitrary and is an additional rule that separates PFS from normal play and doesn't actually talk to the players about what they are doing so if the problem is actually with the player you punished everyone without actually solving a problem.

Well, no matter where you set the bar it's going to be arbitrary at some point. And while it may effect some builds, I think everyone is over estimating the investment it takes to get a high initiative.

The difference between a home game and PFS is that in a home game a GM can say "Hey, you're starting to hit 40's in your initiative, we need to do something about this." Where that's not an option in PFS.

As for investment, I think that's getting a little overestimated. One can easily get a +8 to +11 at level one without much investment.

4/5

Tarma wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:


So these players with low initiative, they are either also are strong enough to annihilate the encounter in one turn or else they aren't.

If they are that strong, then random chance is still going to make it so someone doesn't get to act for a few encounters in a row.

If they aren't that strong in addition to having lower initiative, I posit that going first would not increase their enjoyment very much:

If I was SlowInitPlayer here and also if I was the type to get frustrated when I don't get to act in combat, going first doesn't make me much happier in this situation.

Correct me if I'm paraphrasing this incorrectly, but are you saying that if the character has a slow initiative and doesn't get to participate in combat that it's the player's fault?

That isn't even close to what I'm saying (but thank you for realizing it might not be instead of assuming--that's refreshing on the internet, cheers for that!). I'm saying that there is one of two cases:

Case 1--All characters in your venue are so powerful that they end the fight on their turn. However, some of them have high init so the others never get to act.

Effect of Limiting Initiative in Case 1: Random dice rolls will still mean that some character will probably never or rarely get to act in a scenario (for instance, if everyone had equal initiative bonus and ended the fight on their turn, the chance of at least somebody never going first by random chance is extremely high in a given 4-encounter scenario).

Case 2--The high init characters in your venue are so powerful that they end the fight on their turn. However, the low init characters, in addition to having low init, are not

Effect of Limiting Initiative in Case 2: Like the dialogue I posted above, even if the low init character goes first, the high init character annihilates everything and it doesn't seem particularly more fun for the guy who gets to act but is still outshone.

Conclusion: No matter which case is true, the problem is that the characters are too powerful compared to the scenarios. Try playing more Season 4 or 5. If they still somehow end the fights on Round 1 every time, you may have someone making a rules mistake or else some power gamers the likes of which make even the ones I know seem tame. Send them to like Waking Rune Hard Mode. If they still win in one round before anything can go, and they won't dial back, PFS just isn't right for them. They need a home game where the GM can challenge them more.

1 to 50 of 237 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Maybe it's time for an initiative cap All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.