...inspired in part by some old Shadowrun games.
BAB is included in the Initiative bonuses, each character rolls a d20 and determines their modified Initiative roll. They then get to act on each iterative of 10 in descending order.
Character A rolls a modified 33
Character B rolls a modified 28
Character C rolls a modified 19
Character A acts on 33
Character B acts on 28
Character A acts on 23
Character C acts on 19
Character B acts on 18
Character A acts on 13
Character C acts on 9
Character B acts on 8
Character A acts on 3
Then everyone re-rolls and you begin again, repeating as often as necessary until combat is over with. In this version, each person treats their opportunity to act as a standard round, except that iterative attacks go away - each person gets a Standard, Move (or double move) and a Swift action on their turn. Spells that require a full round to cast go off at the beginning of the caster's next turn as normal.
Martials lose the nuke effect of iterative attacks all at once, but a higher BAB means that they should get more overall actions and each of those will be made at full BAB.
There would be some other tweaking of the rules obviously, but on the surface of it, what do you think?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is cool but I see a few problems:
This introduces iterative spellcasting. That's not a good thing because spells are designed to scale much better than standard action attacks. Sure, the 20th level Wizard might only get three turns to the Fighter's four, but those three turns will each be used to cast a 9th level spell and a quickened spell, all of which will be more powerful than a standard action used to attack.
Initiative is already very important, but this rule makes stacking it more vital than ever. Dexterity is the god stat because it multiplies your damage, versatility and move speed in addition to its other benefits. Improved Initiative is a compulsory low-level feat for everyone, which will hurt feat-hungry builds.
Mounted chargers will be ridiculous.
This rule will invalidate natural attack builds if you're not allowed to full attack with them and make them flat out better if you are. That will need a creative solution.
Too much is riding on the initiative roll If I roll a 20, I might get 3 times as many turns as I'd get on a 1. That's the difference between between crushing my foes in a round and not having a chance. When you consider that the monsters get to roll too, any fight with a significant initiative imbalance is over before it starts. Anything that allows initiative results to be modified or re-rolled is also too good now.
Obviously most of this is solvable, so I recommend something like this:
Spellcasters may not cast more levels of spells in a single round than the highest spell level they can cast from their class. This limit includes effective spell-levels imposed by metamagic. Quickened spells don't count against the normal limit. Instead they count against their own quickened spells limit which is four levels lower.
Base initiative on multiple stats. Maybe it uses the lowest of Dexterity and Wisdom, for instance.
Lances grant a flat bonus to charge attacks. Spirited Charge doubles it.
Characters with natural attacks may make full attacks, but they cannot include iterative attacks in them. No natural weapon may be used more than once each round.
Don't use the roll result to determine the number of times a character gets to act. Instead, base it on their bonus +10. That, or just re-roll at the start of every round.
This is cool but I see a few problems:
This introduces iterative spellcasting. That's not a good thing because spells are designed to scale much better than standard action attacks. Sure, the 20th level Wizard might only get three turns to the Fighter's four, but those three turns will each be used to cast a 9th level spell and a quickened spell, all of which will be more powerful than a standard action used to attack.
Looking at this again, I think I see a good argument for keeping iterative attacks as they are in-game. Remember each time someone's name comes up, they should get their full normal actions since they are effectively taking their normal turn - some people might get three turns in a sequence, some might get four. Allowing full attack actions and keeping the iterative attacks during those turns would balance things better in my opinion than what I first posted.
I don't worry quite so much about Dex being a 'God stat', in part because BAB will usually be a more significant modifier (as it should be imo). You are right though about having a high Initiative becoming very important, not just to the point of pushing Improved Initiative as a feat but I also suspect we'll see a whole lot of Greensting Scorpion familiars, etc.
I still really like the idea, in part because it puts a mechanism in place that may help solve some of the problems of Bosses getting overwhelmed by action economy. I'm going to have to play around with it a little more.
As for the question asked regarding readied and delayed actions:
Readied actions would last until the next time a person's opportunity to act came up, at which time they would have the choice of acting or continuing to ready. Delayed actions would allow someone to 'push back' their action to any later point in the initiative chain, up to the point where they would normally get to act again - they could not, for instance, push a bunch of actions back to where they all take place at initiative counts 4, 3, 2 and 1. Each time you reach your opportunity to act, readied and delayed actions 'reset', so to speak.
There would be some other tweaking of the rules obviously, but on the surface of it, what do you think?
Spend more time figuring out whose turn it is, in order to increase caster/martial imbalance. Great f%*!ing idea.
Spend more time figuring out whose turn it is, in order to increase caster/martial imbalance. Great f@@&ing idea.
There would be some other tweaking of the rules obviously, but on the surface of it, what do you think?
Yeah... that's not really what's happening here. But thanks!
Yeah... that's not really what's happening here. But thanks!Spend more time figuring out whose turn it is, in order to increase caster/martial imbalance. Great f@@&ing idea.
There would be some other tweaking of the rules obviously, but on the surface of it, what do you think?
That's not what you WANT to be happening here. It looks to me like it's what IS happening, however:
Assuming equal initiatives, the wizard will cast as many spells as the paladin makes attacks, since each attack and each spell are a standard action.
The paladin, being more MAD than the wizard, probably has a lower dexterity, so he'll probably actually have a lower initiative.
There's no advantage any more to two-weapon fighting, so you've just nerfed away a whole slew of builds --- for the martials.
Regardless of your intentions, this looks like a huge middle finger to the martials.
Also, it does nothing at all to solve the gang-bang problem of solo bossfights.
That's not what you WANT to be happening here. It looks to me like it's what IS happening, however:
Assuming equal initiatives, the wizard will cast as many spells as the paladin makes attacks, since each attack and each spell are a standard action.
The paladin, being more MAD than the wizard, probably has a lower dexterity, so he'll probably actually have a lower initiative.
There's no advantage any more to two-weapon fighting, so you've just nerfed away a whole slew of builds --- for the martials.
Regardless of your intentions, this looks like a huge middle finger to the martials.
Also, it does nothing at all to solve the gang-bang problem of solo bossfights.
Both of you PLEASE read my second post on the subject. To best utilize this option, I've already acknowledged that full attack actions need to be kept. Also, since martials generally have a much higher BAB than casters, they are more likely to gain additional turns than casters - specific cases like MAD Paladins are issues that particular class already had.
Still, a 12th level Paladin with a 12 Dex (and no other bonuses from traits or feats which is unlikely) would have an Initiative bonus of +13 while a 12th level Wizard with a 14 Dex would have an Initiative bonus of +8. Both could take Reactionary and/or Improved Initiative and either could benefit from a Belt of Dexterity as well.
Part of the inspiration of this was the double actions granted to Mythic creatures, and an Initiative bonus to bosses under this system would help immensely with the 'gang-bang problem of solo bossfights'.
Allowing casters to keep standard and swift actions in all parts of the initiative is where you get lost. BAB is +10 over 20 levels, ok. Well, first level as a wizard I take a scorpion familiar, and improved initiative, and reactionary, and I have a high DEX because I'm not a MAD class, and I'm a diviner so my INI mod will scale with your BAB. So at level 1 I have a +13 to initiative compared to the fighters +7 (generous) I automatically get to cast two spells a round starting at first level with the possibility of casting as many as 4 spells a round at first level if I roll high enough. I will keep my initiative gap vs the fighter no matter what he does because my abilities allow me to do so, and I will make better use of each part of my round than he will.
Yeah, dude. Caster/Martial disparity all up in this rule.
Allowing casters to keep standard and swift actions in all parts of the initiative is where you get lost. BAB is +10 over 20 levels, ok. Well, first level as a wizard I take a scorpion familiar, and improved initiative, and reactionary, and I have a high DEX because I'm not a MAD class, and I'm a diviner so my INI mod will scale with your BAB. So at level 1 I have a +13 to initiative compared to the fighters +7 (generous) I automatically get to cast two spells a round starting at first level with the possibility of casting as many as 4 spells a round at first level if I roll high enough. I will keep my initiative gap vs the fighter no matter what he does because my abilities allow me to do so, and I will make better use of each part of my round than he will.
Yeah, dude. Caster/Martial disparity all up in this rule.
At 1st level, IF you created a build solely designed to get the caster initiative as high up as possible then yes, you could do exactly as you say... but let's keep in mind the martial/caster disparity in the opposite direction at those levels. Most casters only hand a small handful of spells and all you're doing is burning through your limited utility that much faster.
To use your example, I'm not sure why a caster would take Reactionary and Improved Initiative but a Fighter wouldn't, so that's a wash. A
Fighter's Dex should remain more or less apace with a Wizard's and as for the specific Diviner example, you're talking about ONE archetype from ONE class that would gain a +4 to +6 advantage over the Fighter over a d20 variable and he'd have to pull out all the stops to do it (special archetype, no bonded item, sacrifice of a trait and a feat) - the vast majority of full casters (Sorcerers, Oracles, Clerics, every other Wizard school, etc.) either wouldn't have that option or wouldn't be inclined to take it due to wanting to explore and enjoy other options.
I'm not trying to put in place a system that's utterly impervious to the very small percentage of players who would do everything they can to break it. I'm trying to put in place a system that makes combat more dynamic and generally skews in favor of martials - which this does with the sole specific example that you chose to use. In the vast majority of cases, martials would 1) act 1st and 2) gain an extra action every third or fourth round.
Wiggz did just say that this ought not to be a replacement for iterative attacks after all, so if the wizard makes better use of his actions that's all down to the base game, not this rule.
If iterative attacks ARE allowed in addition to this system, it actually favours the martial types over the spellcasters, since it's based on BAB and the martials aren't giving anything up. The greensting scorpion becomes too good, but that's true of all initiative boosters.
This version of the system works better, for sure, but I would still be concerned about stacking up that initiative bonus. You pretty much outright need high Dexterity, Improved Initiative, Eldrich Heritage for that scorpion, the Reactionary trait and initiative/dexterity class features.
Consider, for example, a 5th level Goblin Swashbuckler with the feats and trait above. You're looking at something like +20 initiative. That's a great many turns.
I also want to reiterate my concern that too much is riding on that one roll. If you roll low, you mysteriously move at half your normal speed for the entire battle. It needs to be based on your bonus +10 or rolled at the start of every round.
I also want to reiterate my concern that too much is riding on that one roll. If you roll low, you mysteriously move at half your normal speed for the entire battle. It needs to be based on your bonus +10 or rolled at the start of every round.
Well theoretically to start, figure Initiative bonuses to be between +2 and +12 at the greatest extremes, but more likely between +4 and +8. Initiative is rolled and characters act in descending order, but once the Initiative count reaches zero (after everyone has acted 1-3 times at most), that initiative gets re-rolled and the countdown begins again. Only in very brief combats is anyone locked into a particularly bad roll.
Choosing a smaller variable die would help close that potential gap, but that would make Initiative modifiers all the more significant and I'm trying to not change any more than I would have to.
Ah, I misunderstood then. Even so, If I'm able to act three times to a monster's one, that encounter will most likely end before the extended round does, and when you consider that the whole party is likely to have an initiative build because extra actions are great, you will probably see that happen a lot.
If that goblin swashbuckler is accompanied by a diviner, a tactics domain archer inquisitor, I don't see the bad guys action more than once.
Allowing casters to keep standard and swift actions in all parts of the initiative is where you get lost. BAB is +10 over 20 levels, ok. Well, first level as a wizard I take a scorpion familiar, and improved initiative, and reactionary, and I have a high DEX because I'm not a MAD class, and I'm a diviner so my INI mod will scale with your BAB. So at level 1 I have a +13 to initiative compared to the fighters +7 (generous) I automatically get to cast two spells a round starting at first level with the possibility of casting as many as 4 spells a round at first level if I roll high enough. I will keep my initiative gap vs the fighter no matter what he does because my abilities allow me to do so, and I will make better use of each part of my round than he will.
Yeah, dude. Caster/Martial disparity all up in this rule.
At 1st level, IF you created a build solely designed to get the caster initiative as high up as possible then yes, you could do exactly as you say... but let's keep in mind the martial/caster disparity in the opposite direction at those levels. Most casters only hand a small handful of spells and all you're doing is burning through your limited utility that much faster.
To use your example, I'm not sure why a caster would take Reactionary and Improved Initiative but a Fighter wouldn't, so that's a wash. A
Fighter's Dex should remain more or less apace with a Wizard's and as for the specific Diviner example, you're talking about ONE archetype from ONE class that would gain a +4 to +6 advantage over the Fighter over a d20 variable and he'd have to pull out all the stops to do it (special archetype, no bonded item, sacrifice of a trait and a feat) - the vast majority of full casters (Sorcerers, Oracles, Clerics, every other Wizard school, etc.) either wouldn't have that option or wouldn't be inclined to take it due to wanting to explore and enjoy other options.I'm not trying to put in place a system that's utterly impervious to the very small percentage...
Even just playing a diviner wizard (not an archetype, core rule book choice!) then you will pace INI with martials, and that means that you are casting more spells per round than the current rules on an even playing field with martials. No special build, no tricks. This system lets casters do more of what they are best at, and that increases the disparity. Full stop.
I'd add casting times back in, then.
Something like Spell level / 3 in "casting actions" that take the place of iterative attacks.
It has interesting implications for the Caster-Martial Disparity, in that it becomes a LOT easier to disrupt a casting in progress.
Still, very complicated though. But it's not without merit.
I think the best way to handle this, which would solve all the problems with it in one sweep, is to decouple it from initiative. Make the deciding factor Dexterity mod + BAB, with no roll and no modifiers. That takes away all the perceived problems with this other than the way it strongly favours finesse characters over smashy characters.
If we do that, we're left with a system that gives higher level characters extra turns, with full martial characters getting the most and full arcane characters getting the fewest. Whatever details like luck and bonuses are added to the rule, this is what seems to be at its heart.
The question that leaves us with is "Does this do what I want?" If not, I'm afraid it's right back to the drawing board.
I'd add casting times back in, then.
Something like Spell level / 3 in "casting actions" that take the place of iterative attacks.
It has interesting implications for the Caster-Martial Disparity, in that it becomes a LOT easier to disrupt a casting in progress.
Still, very complicated though. But it's not without merit.
Not sure if you or others recall, but AD&D 2e had initiative penalties for spellcasting, roughly equal to the level of the spell cast (some spells ignored these), ie. -1 for a 1st level, -6 for 6th level. I'd think that would need to make a comeback for a system like this and would certainly counter, in some respects, the initiative stacking wizard depending on spell cast.
Ok, but at that point we have "more turns the higher your BAB gets" AND "Fewer turns the higher level your spell is". At this point the rule has completely transformed from a system of extra initiative passes in place of iterative attacks into a system of hosing spellcasters, particularly the four full arcane casters.
That's pretty hyperbolic.
Or do you genuinely feel a caster should be able to cast as many spells as typical melee gets actions in terms of move and standard?
Ok, but at that point we have "more turns the higher your BAB gets" AND "Fewer turns the higher level your spell is". At this point the rule has completely transformed from a system of extra initiative passes in place of iterative attacks into a system of hosing spellcasters, particularly the four full arcane casters.
A caster is only ever behind their spells by 1 and you can't roll lower than a 1 on the die. With a good dex and a good roll you could even sneak in an extra cantrip, which is actually better than what casters usually get to do.
The system seems interesting, but looks tedious. I'm just not sure what the overall goal of this is though.
Both of you PLEASE read my second post on the subject. To best utilize this option, I've already acknowledged that full attack actions need to be kept.
Once you put normal rounds back into your system, you're left with "roll to see how many actions you get this turn, add modifier". Literally, that's exactly what your system is. It doesn't balance anything in any direction, except towards higher initiative modifiers.
If you use this system to give certain bosses more action by way of a higher initiative modifier, you're going to have the boss going 2 or 3 times before players can react. Does that sound like a fun fight to you?
Also, since martials generally have a much higher BAB than casters, they are more likely to gain additional turns than casters - specific cases like MAD Paladins are issues that particular class already had.
Oh please. Do a quick search for "initiative" on the SRD. Inquisitors, Clerics, Wizards, Oracles all have massive initiative boosts available from class abilities. Charisma-based characters (that is, casters) can take Scion of War. Everyone will be casting Anticipate Peril.
On the martial side, Gunslinger & friends gain +2, Rangers have Favored Terrain, and that's that.
That's pretty hyperbolic.
Or do you genuinely feel a caster should be able to cast as many spells as typical melee gets actions in terms of move and standard?
I don't think it is hyperbolic. You just described exactly how the game already works. I'm working from Wiggz's revised version of the rule in which a character can make a full attack every initiative pass, so like Pusocket says, characters are essentially rolling to see how many turns they get. Wizards cast a spell every turn, martial characters charge or do their full attack routine.
In its current form, this rule gives higher BAB characters higher initiative and makes your initiative result give you some variable number of extra turns. Martials currently gain more than casters and lose nothing, so I think adding a penalty to spellcasters on top of that absolutely does turn this rule into a caster nerf. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but it's no longer the same house rule we were discussing at that point.
Re: Mortuum - Apparently, I misunderstood his round breakdown entirely. My apologies: my reading comprehension normally doesn't suck.
|
What about if we borrow a little from Hackmaster?
Quick, rough rules.
Do a count up from 0.
Break down actions into seconds.
A round is 6 seconds.
Free action = 0 seconds.
Swift action = 0 seconds but can only be used once every 6 seconds.
Move action = 3 seconds.
Standard action = 4 seconds. (Slight bleeding into 7 seconds into a Move/Standard action.
Full-Round action = 6 seconds.
Initiative is d12-Initiative mod.
Casting a Standard Action spell takes 4 seconds.
Making a Full-Round Attack action with 2 attacks takes 6 seconds, 1 attack every 3 seconds. 5 attack are 2 attacks every 3 secs.
|
OK. Crazy BAB to initiative idea. Roll initiative as normal. On your turn, do normal full round of actions. If you have iterative attacks, you get an additional standard or move action 5 initiative counts lower. If you have three iteratives, you get another at 10 lower, and 15 lower if you get 4 iteratives.
Keep swift actions capped at one per round. Five foot steps too.
Yes, this eventually means spell casters could get multiple spells in a round, but you could restrict spells to once per round (plus one quickened).
Might give a little boost to the martial types and high BAB monsters.
Just a thought.
What about if we borrow a little from Hackmaster?
Quick, rough rules.
Do a count up from 0.
Break down actions into seconds.
A round is 6 seconds.
Free action = 0 seconds.
Swift action = 0 seconds but can only be used once every 6 seconds.
Move action = 3 seconds.
Standard action = 4 seconds. (Slight bleeding into 7 seconds into a Move/Standard action.
Full-Round action = 6 seconds.Initiative is d12-Initiative mod.
Casting a Standard Action spell takes 4 seconds.
Making a Full-Round Attack action with 2 attacks takes 6 seconds, 1 attack every 3 seconds. 5 attack are 2 attacks every 3 secs.
What about saying a round is 7 seconds instead of 6 and a swift action is 1 second and in the Pathfinder universe there are 70 seconds in a minute? Though that might not be too relevant if the idea below has legs....
I like some of what the OP proposed but thought that there should be a limit of one non-quickened spell per round. How about a recovery time of 3 seconds between spells where the caster can perform any other action but cast a spell. Likewise, a character with a high BAB, TWF or multiple attacks divides the standard action time by the number of attacks they have to give an attack action. Movement time is similarly divided (a character with a move of 30 divides moves one square every 1/2 sec)
If initiative was turned round so it was a delay to act, with 1 acting first, 2 acting next etc the system might work better. Roll 1d12 to give the number of half seconds before the first action.
|
|
What about saying a round is 7 seconds instead of 6 and a swift action is 1 second and in the Pathfinder universe there are 70 seconds in a minute? Though that might not be too relevant if the idea below has legs....I like some of what the OP proposed but thought that there should be a limit of one non-quickened spell per round. How about a recovery time of 3 seconds between spells where the caster can perform any other action but cast a spell. Likewise, a character with a high BAB, TWF or multiple attacks divides the standard action time by the number of attacks they have to give an attack action. Movement time is similarly divided (a character with a move of 30 divides moves one square every 1/2 sec)
If initiative was turned round so it was a delay to act, with 1 acting first, 2 acting next etc the system might work better. Roll 1d12 to give the number of half seconds before the first action.
I don't think you want swift to count as anything. Then you're pulling an 8 second round to Swift/Move/Standard when you should be able to do it in 6.
At this point the rule has completely transformed from a system of extra initiative passes in place of iterative attacks into a system of hosing spellcasters, particularly the four full arcane casters.
Eh, they had it coming.
But seriously, you're right. What is the perceived problem that this rule addresses?
Without a clearly stated design intention, we'll all default to nerfing full casters, for that is the way of house rules.
sowhereaminow, I don't know that high BAB monsters needed a boost. That boost is going on dragons and mythic thanadaemons, you know.