I've always thought the d20 created a bit too much randomness when it came to Initiative, where most bonuses are between +0 and +6, and I'm not against anything that gives a little love to full martials at higher levels. We're going to start adding BAB as a modifier to the Initiative rolls and see how it goes - any thoughts on that?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd be interested to know your results
Increasing the modifiers semi-uniformly doesn't reduce the randomness of a d20 roll. I somewhat agree with you - a d10 would do the job for most games without extreme initiative bonuses. D20 *would* be required if you add BAB, since it increases the variation as you get to higher levels.
Increasing the modifiers semi-uniformly doesn't reduce the randomness of a d20 roll. I somewhat agree with you - a d10 would do the job for most games without extreme initiative bonuses. D20 *would* be required if you add BAB, since it increases the variation as you get to higher levels.
I meant specifically the size of the variable in relation to the size of the modifier. A +4 to Initiative vs. a +2 to Initiative is a much meaningful modifier if the roll is a d6 vs. a d20. I didn't want to reduce the size of the die, but rather wanted to increase the ability of the individual player to affect the outcome - increasing their modifier serves that purpose, and using BAB to do it makes a lot of sense to me as it tends to reflect the character's readiness for combat.
It would lead to an increase in people playing martial characters, especially spellbreaker or ranged type fighters that could readily win initiative against the 1/2 BAB caster classes.
This means the wizard would often become injured before attempting to spellcast in combat. With a 1/2 BAB, said caster would be less than effective with a weapon, and would likely fail a concentration check for casting due to being injured.
It might also devalue Improved initiative feat as 3/4 BAB classes would need it just to keep up. 1/2 BAB classes would only gain a benefit in the first 6 levels, then it becomes useless. Full BAB classes would already win most initiative races (save for Inquisitors), so improved initiative becomes a method of rubbing it in.
I'd be interested to know your results
We were also thinking about re-rolling Initiative at the top of every round to make for a more dynamic combat, but that might slow things down a bit too much.
D12. Give it some love.
EDIT: Dang, lots of posts that weren't here before I posted. Busy morning.
I heavily recommend against rerolling initiative every round, for one thing it screws with everybody's ability to plan and coordinate with each other, which isn't very fun. And two, yes, it greatly lengthens the amount of time each combat takes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would lead to an increase in people playing martial characters, especially spellbreaker or ranged type fighters that could readily win initiative against the 1/2 BAB caster classes.
This means the wizard would often become injured before attempting to spellcast in combat. With a 1/2 BAB, said caster would be less than effective with a weapon, and would likely fail a concentration check for casting due to being injured.
It might also devalue Improved initiative feat as 3/4 BAB classes would need it just to keep up. 1/2 BAB classes would only gain a benefit in the first 6 levels, then it becomes useless. Full BAB classes would already win most initiative races (save for Inquisitors), so improved initiative becomes a method of rubbing it in.
I don't know that it would necessarily be 'useless'. It would reduce the overall power of Dexterity a smidge, and as characters reach higher levels, I think something that skews towards martials a bit probably wouldn't be the worse thing.
A 12th level full martial would reasonably have an Initiative of +12 [BAB] +4 [DEX] +2 [Trait] +d20 for a total modified roll of 19-38.
A 12th level full caster would reasonably have an Initiative of +6 [BAB] +2 [DEX] +4 [Feat] +d20 for a total modified roll of 13-32.
Those are just very generic examples but they serve well enough to illustrate the point - its an advantage to full martials but not an over-whelming one, and one that can be somewhat mitigated should a character wish. Not to mention the bevy of options available to casters and not available to martials to improve their initiative rolls.
I also like the idea that Initiative modifiers don't remain relatively static from 1st level to 20th, that a 20th level character's combat readiness is more reliant on his experience to that point than his die rolls.
This sounds like an interesting idea. My players hate random initiative. However, initiative doesn't really play much of a role after 1st round because I usually lump the bad guys's initiative together.
I think it's a better idea to reduce the die than add BAB. I personally thing it DOES give an overwhelming advantage to full-martials. And monsters of the same CR are going to be wildly skewed in initiative based on their type, which could affect how threatening they really are. If you reduce the die size, you make Init modifiers more valuable, but I still think that value change is a better adjustment than adding BAB.
In fact, I'd rather add HD than BAB. That levels things a little more for monsters.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It would lead to an increase in people playing martial characters, especially spellbreaker or ranged type fighters that could readily win initiative against the 1/2 BAB caster classes.
This means the wizard would often become injured before attempting to spellcast in combat. With a 1/2 BAB, said caster would be less than effective with a weapon, and would likely fail a concentration check for casting due to being injured.
It might also devalue Improved initiative feat as 3/4 BAB classes would need it just to keep up. 1/2 BAB classes would only gain a benefit in the first 6 levels, then it becomes useless. Full BAB classes would already win most initiative races (save for Inquisitors), so improved initiative becomes a method of rubbing it in.
I don't see this as a bad thing.
Logically combat focused classes would be better at combat readiness so having full BAB classes dominating initiative feels right. Also it does feel like initiative has no relation to level unless Dex is your shtick. Also full BAB classes often need help when it comes to full casters who have the room to beef initiative and solve combat with a single spell.
Hmm - have you thought about adding the (base) reflex save instead of BaB ?
That would let the stereotypically 'nimble' classes have an speed advantage. Sadly not help pure fighters that much : /
The greatest flaw I can see in adding BaB to Init is when you come to brutish creatures like trolls and giants - they usually have quite a number of HD above the party, and will as such be quicker. On the contrary, Fae only have a 1/2 HD bab and will be slow in comparison. Doesn't feel quite right, does it?
However - I'd be most intrigued of you were to test this and see how it goes : )
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It would lead to an increase in people playing martial characters, especially spellbreaker or ranged type fighters that could readily win initiative against the 1/2 BAB caster classes.
This means the wizard would often become injured before attempting to spellcast in combat. With a 1/2 BAB, said caster would be less than effective with a weapon, and would likely fail a concentration check for casting due to being injured.
It might also devalue Improved initiative feat as 3/4 BAB classes would need it just to keep up. 1/2 BAB classes would only gain a benefit in the first 6 levels, then it becomes useless. Full BAB classes would already win most initiative races (save for Inquisitors), so improved initiative becomes a method of rubbing it in.
I don't see this as a bad thing.
Logically combat focused classes would be better at combat readiness so having full BAB classes dominating initiative feels right. Also it does feel like initiative has no relation to level unless Dex is your shtick. Also full BAB classes often need help when it comes to full casters who have the room to beef initiative and solve combat with a single spell.
I also think the seeming disparity is being made out to be greater than it really is. As I showed above, at 12th level (which is more or less max in PFS and middling to high for most campaigns), a full BAB gets a +3 Initiative bonus over a 3/4 and a +6 Initiative bonus over a 1/2. At lower levels the disparity would be even smaller.
Now that's over full d20 spread and doesn't include other static Initiative bonuses that all classes are capable of gaining equally. Of course the full martial would generally get to act before the caster, but not with enough certainty that it'd be automatic - far from it, in fact and again that's not counting spells which improve Initiative for the caster that martials don't have access to.
I also think the seeming disparity is being made out to be greater than it really is.
Exaggeration and knee-jerk reactions are favorite pastimes on all forums, so far as I can tell. I caught a lot of flak when I mentioned in a post we were using the "Initiative" skill from SWSE in Pathfinder (non-class skill for all, improved initiative made it a class skill).
Anyway, I like your idea, but I wonder if it shouldn't be 1/2 BAB (round down). It would still make an impact, but less of one.
Hmm - have you thought about adding the (base) reflex save instead of BaB ?
That would let the stereotypically 'nimble' classes have an speed advantage. Sadly not help pure fighters that much : /
The greatest flaw I can see in adding BaB to Init is when you come to brutish creatures like trolls and giants - they usually have quite a number of HD above the party, and will as such be quicker. On the contrary, Fae only have a 1/2 HD bab and will be slow in comparison. Doesn't feel quite right, does it?
However - I'd be most intrigued of you were to test this and see how it goes : )
Physically impressive giants/trolls being quicker than aloof Fae that are alien to this world doesn't bother me. I was never too keen on big creatures being lumbering collosi.
I thin nimble classes would get by based on their dependence on Dex.
Hmm - have you thought about adding the (base) reflex save instead of BaB ?
That would let the stereotypically 'nimble' classes have an speed advantage. Sadly not help pure fighters that much : /
The greatest flaw I can see in adding BaB to Init is when you come to brutish creatures like trolls and giants - they usually have quite a number of HD above the party, and will as such be quicker. On the contrary, Fae only have a 1/2 HD bab and will be slow in comparison. Doesn't feel quite right, does it?
However - I'd be most intrigued of you were to test this and see how it goes : )
Physically impressive giants/trolls being quicker than aloof Fae that are alien to this world doesn't bother me. I was never too keen on big creatures being lumbering collosi.
I thin nimble classes would get by based on their dependence on Dex.
Zombies are another creature-type with high hd -> good bab for their CR. And they never struck me as particularly fast :P
Now the spell casters have even more motivation to pick up Improved Initiative and either a Compsognathus, Dodo, or Greensting Scorpion familiar (and to a lesser extent a Rhamphorhynchus familiar) and hurl SoS spells at martials before they can out pace them. I also see even more diviners in the future.
But base attack to initiative does seem to make an intuitive kind of sense. If you are better at combat, you will be better at reacting in combat.
Base Attack Bonus (BAB)
Each creature has a base attack bonus and it represents its skill in combat. . . .
___
Zombies are another creature-type with high hd -> good bab for their CR. And they never struck me as particularly fast :P
See the 28 Days Later/House of the Dead/Several others fast moving zombie trope.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see "martials having too much of an advantage" as a concern because:
1) Casters have a much easier time getting initiative bonuses thanks to familiars, less stat dependency, and having builds requiring less feats and traits. It's easy for a caster to pick up a +2 initiative trait, improved initiative, and a familiar to get a +10 initiative.
2) Melee fighters typically wait until the casters lay down AoE anyway. This will enable fighters a turn to get into position.
Over all, I think this will mean a caster's initial position becomes much more important. I think this is a good thing, even though this will be a buff to ranged fighters.
I really like the idea of BAB-to-initiative. But I also like the idea of higher "speed" characters gaining some benefit.
Partial half-way suggestion: half BAB, and half base-reflex save to initiative?
It's a little more complex, but it nets a fighter, say, +13 to initiative, while it nets a rogue... +13 to initiative. Wizards, it nets a +8 to initiative.
That's about a +7 difference against the full BAB, a +6 difference in favor of rogues and similar, and a -2 difference against basic casters.
The major problem I could see is, effectively, the ranger: +10 and +6 nets a +16 to initiative.
Another option that I could see is allowing initiative to be determined by one of several concepts (depending on the creature)
- BAB
- base reflex
- ranks in acrobatics (or, if you're using it at the time, stealth)
This could easily reflect the basics of what those elements are supposed to do for initiative-style systems.
It gives a range of options, without limiting them too strongly. In the end, most classes will want to use BAB instead of reflex, but at the beginning, and for certain builds, the reflex can be higher than BAB. Ranks in movement skills also makes sense to allow creatures to "move" more rapidly than others.
... of course, if I had the time and focus, I'd love to allow those with higher initiative get to take more actions (based on some currently unknown metric - like how much larger their initiative counts are, for example), but that system is just a complex mess to even begin to suss out, and I don't have the time or inclination to try to do it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... of course, if I had the time and focus, I'd love to allow those with higher initiative get to take more actions (based on some currently unknown metric - like how much larger their initiative counts are, for example), but that system is just a complex mess to even begin to suss out, and I don't have the time or inclination to try to do it.
Shadowrun did something I've considered adapting for PF though its a bit more extreme than what's listed above.
Everyone would roll d20 (or 3d6 or whatever) and then add their total Initiative bonus along with their BAB. Players would then act in descending order at each iterative of 10... meaning that if a person's modified roll was 29, he'd get his normal actions on 29, 19 and 9. After all of everyone's actions had been resolved, everyone would re-roll and the sequence would begin again. This would result in people with higher Initiative/BAB getting to act more often, but usually not that much more often - it would also replace the iterative attacks normally granted by BAB meaning no 'full attack actions' and would allow for spells that require more than one round to cast to go off in sequence at the next opportunity to act.
Anyway, I like your idea, but I wonder if it shouldn't be 1/2 BAB (round down). It would still make an impact, but less of one.
I looked at that, but the impact would be so minimal as to make it not really worth the effort... at 12th level you're talking a 3 point disparity between full caster and full martial, still spread out over d20 + all the normal initiative bonuses for both characters.
Casters have a much easier time getting initiative bonuses thanks to familiars, less stat dependency, and having builds requiring less feats and traits. It's easy for a caster to pick up a +2 initiative trait, improved initiative, and a familiar to get a +10 initiative.
And at 1st level no less.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really like the idea of BAB-to-initiative. But I also like the idea of higher "speed" characters gaining some benefit.
Partial half-way suggestion: half BAB, and half base-reflex save to initiative?
*REMOVED*
I like this Idea, but what if you took a step back and did half BAB or base reflex save whichever is higher
giving full bab characters a +6 to init at level 12 (before any other modifiers) and "fast" 3/4 bab characters a +8 to init at level 12 (before any other modifiers). This makes the always ready and nimble rogues and bards the fastest on their feet; but still give the fighters and barbarians a feeling of combat readiness from experience. This could end up causing some otherwise nimble feeling classes, like the magus, to slow down a bit; but overall it seems to hit all the marks.
Anyway, I like your idea, but I wonder if it shouldn't be 1/2 BAB (round down). It would still make an impact, but less of one.I looked at that, but the impact would be so minimal as to make it not really worth the effort... at 12th level you're talking a 3 point disparity between full caster and full martial, still spread out over d20 + all the normal initiative bonuses for both characters.
what if you did half BAB and a D12 (D10?) roll instead of a D20.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I really like the idea of BAB-to-initiative. But I also like the idea of higher "speed" characters gaining some benefit.
Partial half-way suggestion: half BAB, and half base-reflex save to initiative?
*REMOVED*
I like this Idea, but what if you took a step back and did half BAB or base reflex save whichever is higher
giving full bab characters a +6 to init at level 12 (before any other modifiers) and "fast" 3/4 bab characters a +8 to init at level 12 (before any other modifiers). This makes the always ready and nimble rogues and bards the fastest on their feet; but still give the fighters and barbarians a feeling of combat readiness from experience. This could end up causing some otherwise nimble feeling classes, like the magus, to slow down a bit; but overall it seems to hit all the marks.
The only argument I'd make against that is that I'm trying to keep the math simple and intuitive. I mean, if you're going to do that why not add Armor check penalties to the roll? You could really get complicated trying to hammer it down to be 'as realistic as possible', but my rule of thumb for rules modifications is:
1) Keep it simple.
2) Make it worth the effort of making the change in the first place.
I really like the idea of BAB-to-initiative. But I also like the idea of higher "speed" characters gaining some benefit.
Partial half-way suggestion: half BAB, and half base-reflex save to initiative?
*REMOVED*
I like this Idea, but what if you took a step back and did half BAB or base reflex save whichever is higher
giving full bab characters a +6 to init at level 12 (before any other modifiers) and "fast" 3/4 bab characters a +8 to init at level 12 (before any other modifiers). This makes the always ready and nimble rogues and bards the fastest on their feet; but still give the fighters and barbarians a feeling of combat readiness from experience. This could end up causing some otherwise nimble feeling classes, like the magus, to slow down a bit; but overall it seems to hit all the marks.
The only argument I'd make against that is that I'm trying to keep the math simple and intuitive. I mean, if you're going to do that why not add Armor check penalties to the roll? You could really get complicated trying to hammer it down to be 'as realistic as possible', but my rule of thumb for rules modifications is:
1) Keep it simple.
2) Make it worth the effort of making the change in the first place.
I'm also not into math having to check two different numbers that aren't exactly related. Going BAB+init is just easy and covers most of the bases.
I'd like to add to this that most of the nimble 3/4 BAB classes often prioritize dex so they'd fall about even. Overall it leaves Rogue, Monk, Bard and Alchemist behind but I think Alchemist/Bard don't care that much as they are fairly strong anyway, and Rogue/Monk feel like they've been replaced in some way anyway. Plus in Pathfinder Unchained they both might get full BAB rewrites so if we really feel like those classes are weak we can just use those.
Zombies are another creature-type with high hd -> good bab for their CR. And they never struck me as particularly fast :PHmm - have you thought about adding the (base) reflex save instead of BaB ?
That would let the stereotypically 'nimble' classes have an speed advantage. Sadly not help pure fighters that much : /
The greatest flaw I can see in adding BaB to Init is when you come to brutish creatures like trolls and giants - they usually have quite a number of HD above the party, and will as such be quicker. On the contrary, Fae only have a 1/2 HD bab and will be slow in comparison. Doesn't feel quite right, does it?
However - I'd be most intrigued of you were to test this and see how it goes : )
Physically impressive giants/trolls being quicker than aloof Fae that are alien to this world doesn't bother me. I was never too keen on big creatures being lumbering collosi.
I thin nimble classes would get by based on their dependence on Dex.
Yeah but High HD undead aren't Romero 'zombies' they're crazy fast juiced up on dark magics zombies.
Increasing the modifiers semi-uniformly doesn't reduce the randomness of a d20 roll. I somewhat agree with you - a d10 would do the job for most games without extreme initiative bonuses. D20 *would* be required if you add BAB, since it increases the variation as you get to higher levels.I meant specifically the size of the variable in relation to the size of the modifier. A +4 to Initiative vs. a +2 to Initiative is a much meaningful modifier if the roll is a d6 vs. a d20. I didn't want to reduce the size of the die, but rather wanted to increase the ability of the individual player to affect the outcome - increasing their modifier serves that purpose, and using BAB to do it makes a lot of sense to me as it tends to reflect the character's readiness for combat.
Increasing the modifiers for everyone overall has no affect on the randomness of the d20 roll. Only if you apply extremely different modifiers is it going to have any real impact, other than just generating very high (and unwieldy for some) numbers. A +6 at 12th is significant, but that's also going to apply to the monsters in odd ways - I don't see BAB as the way to do this effectively.
Increasing the modifiers for everyone overall has no affect on the randomness of the d20 roll.
If the increases are all evenly distributed, of course not. That's precisely the intent behind using BAB, to increase the modifiers unevenly, yet in a reasonable and predictable manner. And no, I'm not trying to affect the randomness of a d20 roll (that would be impossible), I'm trying to reduce the significance of the random variable (the d20 roll) in relation to that of the controlled variable (PC modifiers), effectively making the overall equation less randomly dictated and more influenced by things within the player's control.
|
I'm trying to reduce the significance of the random variable (the d20 roll) in relation to that of the controlled variable (PC modifiers), effectively making the overall equation less randomly dictated and more influenced by things within the player's control.
Wiggz,
the most kiss proposal out there that accomplishes exactly this objective is using the 1d12 for initiative.that said, as my love for the rogue runs deep (20+ years), consider this kiss addendum:
Initiative:
A character may add the better of their base Reflex or BAB to their DX modifier to calculate their initiative.
A rogue may add a +1 bonus to their initiative check for each die of her Sneak Attack.
A monk may add his AC Bonus to his initiative checks (so, +WIS, then +1 every 4 levels).
I'm trying to reduce the significance of the random variable (the d20 roll) in relation to that of the controlled variable (PC modifiers), effectively making the overall equation less randomly dictated and more influenced by things within the player's control.Wiggz,
the most kiss proposal out there that accomplishes exactly this objective is using the 1d12 for initiative.that said, as my love for the rogue runs deep (20+ years), consider this kiss addendum:
Initiative:
A character may add the better of their base Reflex or BAB to their DX modifier to calculate their initiative.
A rogue may add a +1 bonus to their initiative check for each die of her Sneak Attack.
A monk may add his AC Bonus to his initiative checks (so, +WIS, then +1 every 4 levels).
I like the latter two, although if were adding things why not just copy and paste the inquisitor ability. Would be same and not alienate rogues archetypes that lose or lessen sneak attack if there are any.
I've always thought the d20 created a bit too much randomness when it came to Initiative, where most bonuses are between +0 and +6, and I'm not against anything that gives a little love to full martials at higher levels. We're going to start adding BAB as a modifier to the Initiative rolls and see how it goes - any thoughts on that?
Have you run a game this way yet? I'm curious to hear how it plays out, and what the party composition is.
I've always thought the d20 created a bit too much randomness when it came to Initiative, where most bonuses are between +0 and +6, and I'm not against anything that gives a little love to full martials at higher levels. We're going to start adding BAB as a modifier to the Initiative rolls and see how it goes - any thoughts on that?Have you run a game this way yet? I'm curious to hear how it plays out, and what the party composition is.
The group is going to consist of a Paladin, a melee-oriented Summoner and a non-traditional Oracle (Black Blooded, Spellscar, drawing spells from the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list). We'll be starting what should be an unusually epic RotRL campaign - I'll be happy to keep you apprised.
Still curious how this went.
I'm curious how this went in play too...
As for zombies, this is why it should be tied to BAB: they already have 3/4 HD and reduced Dex, and have a staggered feature. If you really want them to move slower, just add to the "staggered" feature that it simply doesn't add BAB to it's initiative (similar to how it doesn't gain skill ranks).
Fast Zombies lose the staggered feature, so it would go by it's BAB at that point, and gives both options (fast and slow zombies).
Great idea!
I would make one adjustment, however. Unchained Rogue adds their Danger Sense bonus to their initiative as well, helping to make up for a lower BAB and allowing them to get those hits vs. flat-footed in.