Thread 96840519

How do you feel about rolling for initiative in 2025? Is it a core part of the ttrpg experience? Or is it a clunky system that brings the action to a halt?

>>96840519 (OP)
Both, if you have a solution to solving the issue of clunk please provide it, I'd really appreciate it.

>>96840519 (OP)
I'm not sure if there are any better ways to get turn order. Any static initiative calculations may favor DEX too much.

I like how BG3 uses a d4 for initiative giving more uses for the initiative boost of DEX characters and making the Alert feat good.

Maybe at least use a d6 or d10?

>>96840519 (OP)
I prefer how the best system that exists does it:
Characters go in order of speed, with ties being broken by comparing dexterity, and if it's still a tie, then you roll a die.

>>96840600
>I prefer adding more layers on top to go through what is essentially, and eventually, the same process of resolution
>I LOVE needless procedure!

the GURPStard in its natural habitat

>>96840519 (OP)
I can't imagine a system being better with a static initiative than with a roll + modifier
>pic
Who attacked italy?

>>96840519 (OP)
My favorite way I've seen systems handle it recently is to just section initiative into three chunks
>fast PCs
>enemies
>slow PCs
With what constitutes fast/slow being either a factor of the rules for actions (where you get more to do on a slow turn and can decide each round), or just deciding based on an initiative check and just slotting the PCs into the respective category depending on a DC.

In either case, it drastically streamlines things by just making it so there's only three real turns to track, but not always making it so that the PCs act as one singular clump.
Also still allows for things like having environmental or special effects happening at the end of each round, or having special enemies that can act more often.

>>96840608
>go in order of the speed number, if there's a tie compare DX, only roll if there's still a tie
That's less complex that the meme UH OH STINKY combat started everybody roll for initiarino!

>>96840771
I like how it's not really, and you realize this, so you write the "opposition" with stupid words to male it sound worse.
Absolutely rotten childbrain lol

>>96840614
Someone snapped their spaghetti in half before putting it in the pot.

>>96840834
>it's not really,
>roll d20 init
>every single person rolls a d20, plus the gm rolls for the enemy groups (if he is smart, otherwise he'll roll for every single enemy)
>add up init bonus
>write down everyone's order
vs
>you already have a list of the PCs initiatve value before the game even start, so this is not even a real step
>check against the speed of whatever enemies you're using
>done, don't even need to note anything down, the initiative is already set unless there's a very rare case where a monster has the same speed and DX of a player.
How is this not faster?

Here's an example in case you still don't comprehend.
PC A has DX 14 and speed 6
Monster A has DX 11 and speed 5
that's 5
PC a goes before monster A. There's no rolling involved, their speeds and DX are already there since the session started, and the monster initiative is a single number that you can instantly glance and know that they act after the PC.

>>96840519 (OP)
Side based initiative. Rolled each round.

You all know this is a bot thread right?

I just let PCs go first in any order they want unless it's an ambush, then they roll. It probably won't work for the people who don't do group tactics fast.

>>96841618
Because there's a minute difference -if any- between the amount of work it takes to add and sort the opposition's speed stats (with potentially matching numbers that need need another layer of comparison to a different attribute) into a list of the PCs' speed stats and in the amount of work it takes to ask their initiative rolls and sort those with the opposition's.

That's not counting the subjective matter either, like how it's stale and predictable and game-y for the PCs to always go in the exact same order compared to each other and the element of adjustment that Init Rolls add.
Mind you, I'm not here to defend Initiative because I'm not a retarded tribalist who emotionally and personally identifies into game systems: I'm just here to argue that GURPS didn't improve the wheel with their own. They're not better or worse, just different.

>>96842257
rude

>>96840519 (OP)
I think one of the psychological benefits of the "roll for initiative" moment is that it calls everyone to action. It's like the screen breaking and the FWSSSH sound effect when you get a random battle in a classic final fantasy game.

It's a transitional moment that takes you from out of combat soft rules to in-combat hard rules, which matters a fair amount in a DnD style game where combat rules are crunchier than everything else. It also tells everyone at the table to pay attention.

My take is that D&D specifically has enough time wasting, mechanically, with players fart-arsing about being silly, and with people being struck with decision paralysis that rolling for initiative doesn't usually matter. There is no decision to be made, everyone rolls simultaneously, and numbers are called out. Everyone gets their attention called to the list of players and monsters, which makes it harder for a player to say "there's a cultist over there? I didn't realise, I need to change my turn".

and this happens ONCE at the start of a fight. There's less delay caused by "rolling for initiative" as opposed to set initiatives or i-go-u-go or whatever than there are delays caused by Dustin arriving late, or Chet needing to think once his turn comes around.

It might not be perfect, but I think it has enough non-mechanical advantages in the psychological sphere that it's worth using in combat heavy games.

>>96842257
It's an RPG systems question that isn't started and being dominated by 2hufag and his genshin waifu avatar pics, it could be a mossad thread for all I care, it's better than edna so i'll take part.

>>96840519 (OP)
What system?
If it's any flavor of D&D, I don't think about it at all.

>>96840519 (OP)
Players go first in any order they wish, enemies act second unless players are ambushed.

Bosses perform an action or move after a single character does their turn. This has a boss be a much larger threat without having to throw a bunch of HP, armor, or other bloat on them. It's not needed. You got four PCs? The boss is going to act four times in a round. Get extra nasty by having an environmental effect happen at the end of each round as well.

>>96840519 (OP)
>North Atlantic Tabletop Organization

>>96840519 (OP)
It should be a d6 roll and not a d20 roll.

>>96842329
>Because there's a minute difference -if any-
>every single player rolling their dice + every single monster or group of monsters
>vs
>it's all already written down
nah m8, it takes way longer to use regular initiative and you know it.
>game-y
It's way more gamey for the faster guy got last at random
>GURPS didn't improve the wheel with their own
Only because gurps didn't invent speed-based initiative. It is the objectively better method.

>>96843459
Speed-based initiative is how almost every video game works. You're wrong and you lose.

>>96840519 (OP)

I'll be perfectly honest
In 35 years of DMing and GMing and SMing I have never once used initiative rules for anything, in any system
In real games the players are almost always either ambushing someone or getting ambushed themselves, in which case it's clear which team should get the first volley off
And in the rare cases where nobody is getting ambushed I just give the initiative to the players cause why not
>but what about the order of actions within the party?
Actions happen in seating order, from my left to my right

>>96840519 (OP)
>Gurps doesn't have this problem
>>96840608
>needless procedure
Gonna need a save for that, uff natty 1, guess Gay'Lord the Tiefling is still seething.

>>96840519 (OP)
Kinda game dependent. Obviously, non-combat games have little need for a strict turn order; but even beyond that, some games can be run with various turn structure systems that don't need a dice roll. My own pet system has standardized rolls for initiative, but they exist to give characters a last second chance to press the advantage/screw up before the fight begins in earnest, as much as they exist for raw turn structure.

>>96842257
Until the nuh-uh troll comes here, it's still top 25% of threads on /tg/ right now.
>>96843810
>seating order
Respectably practical.

>>96840519 (OP)
I prefer doing the [player phase -> enemy phase -> other phase] rotation, but after I actually finish any of my relatively simple games in the works, I want to experiment with an initiative system that uses initiative as an action and reaction resource in addition to deciding turn order.

>>96842257
I'll take a bot thread asking about game mechanics over puckee spamming his AI-generated commissions next to inane questions that have no relation to games.

>>96840608
I'm 100% certain you've never played GURPS and your entire opinion on it is formed from second- and third-hand knowledge you got from shitposts.

>>96840519 (OP)
Even if Initiative is a kinda clunky system, I personally lean towards liking it because I think it spices up combat since you can't always rely on perfect co-ordination (Players/enemies go first) nor can you rely on stats ensuring you always know your exact place in the turn order (GURPS style/d4 initiative like BG3). In my opinion it adds a bit more to the combat when the turn order is broken up instead of being rigid.

That being said I do think a d20 is the wrong die to use for the roll, either something like a d10, 2d6 or 3d6 is probably better.

If you find basic dice based resolution mechanics "clunky" then maybe you should sit in the corner and play with your phone 'til the game is over.

Facing the wall, please.
I don't want to have to look at you.

As others have said, there doesn't seem to be a better alternative. The best I've seen posted here is static initiative, but this takes a lot of variance out of strategy and puts an extreme emphasis on stats that boost initiative for everyone. Someone who is more nimble or quick-thinking should not always go first in initiative, just like someone who is intelligent shouldn't automatically know everything.

>>96840753
This is my preferred method as well. Giving the players more control over their initiative order allows them to employ more interesting collaborative tactics across a single turn.
In D&D, if you get a bum initiative roll then you're stuck with it and your ability to strategize with your fellow players is locked in place for that battle, and that sucks. Enemies also end up with awkwardly predictable behavior.
Fast > Enemy > Slow breaks things up into initiative bands in an elegant way that doesn't take away from combat order importance.

>>96840519 (OP)
If the only way your game of choice can handle dynamic initiative is a substat on sheet + dice roll, it's a poorly designed game

bump

>>96844183
You're 100% wrong.
We recently finished a months long bi-weekly GURPS game and I'm sitting out the current one because I don't really like the theme.
But like, if you need to imagine something to cope with the fact that not everyone agrees with whatever you think, go off king.

>>96840519 (OP)
>Is it a core part of the ttrpg experience?


Why would it be so? A shitton of RPGs don't use it.

>>96840519 (OP)
I really like how One Roll Engine does it, where the speed of the players turn is baked into whatever roll the player makes. It isn't practical for every time of game but it's a cool idea.

I enjoy using the card based intiative in savage worlds, and the smoothest combats I ever ran were in the Demon Lord Engine.

>>96840979
It was me! I snapped the spaghetti! I felt like having a side of noodles with my pineapple and pepperoni pizza! And all your marching and chanting can't stop me, because I rolled a natural twenty on initiative which everyone knows is a one in ten trillion result so now I am moving like Ezra Miller in the Sonichu movies!

>>96842257
Then get out, meatbag. nobody wants your organic opinions and biological feelings here, we're arguing about numbers and also genociding the Italians.

in my system action is simultaneous, so there is no initiative

if one side is getting surprised they roll awareness before the fight starts to see the size of their debuff for the first round and that's it

>>96840519 (OP)
I like to roll party initiative and enemy initiatives and just let all the players take their turns together, it keeps everyone engaged and I generally see better coordination out of them.

>>96840519 (OP)
I've never played D&D or any adjacent system, so I really don't give a shit.

>>96840551
Really? You can't think of a single method? If players always go before opponents, they won't be over-incentivized to max out their go-first stat. That really isn't that hard to think of at all. It's pretty much the immediate logical conclusion from what you posted.

>>96844736
You don't have to go in a particular order to strategize.

>>96842257
Of course it is, it's /tg/. Are you new here or something?

>>96844214
Maybe you should learn anything at all about game design. Until then, you can sit at the kids' table.

>>96840519 (OP)
I like the chaos of individual initiative and how sometimes a given player rolling low on initiative might force the party to revise their whole tactics.

>>96848165
Having rigid turn order limits your strategic abilities and makes it so that your capabilities are largely determined by a single swingy die roll at the start of combat. I'd rather my players be able to jockey their turns a little bit so that relevant characters can go in the order they need to to attempt interesting plays.

>>96848228
Did you mean to reply to someone else?

>>96848237
Perhaps I misunderstood your post, but no.
Regardless, the point of my initial post that you replied to is that I prefer players have less rigid turn order so they are free to strategize and employ a broader range of tactics.

>>96848255
Okay, so we agree then? Because I said "You don't have to go in a particular order to strategize". In other words, you don't need a rigid order to strategize. Your post is worded as if you disagree with me about something, but it's unclear what it could be.

>>96848261
No, we're in agreement. I just misread your post and thought you meant the opposite.

>>96840519 (OP)
I tried popcorn initiative for a one-shot recently and my group loves it.

>>96849198
Isn't that just the players going first at whatever order they choose? Why the tarded name?

>>96849237
What would you call it?

>>96849237
"Popcorn initiative" has been a name for it since before you were alive, child.

>>96840519 (OP)
First time I'm playing a TTRPG and we are using my homebrew, I always thought this shit was gay and useless so I made a dynamic initiative system. Sounds fancy but it's basically a momentum counter.

Basically, you start with an initiative that is equal to your highest stat, and that resets after every rest. However, every time you succeed a roll, add 1 to it, every time you fail a roll, subtract 1 from it.

As for NPCs I simply roll 4 dice before the game and use them as if they were my base initiative, and then I just modify them as the game goes on depending on my successes and failures alternating the dice.

Idk, works for us.

>>96840608
GURPS initiative sucks ass, but you don't even understand what sucks about it

>>96852819
"Players go first"
>>96855560
So was retardation granpa. An old concept isnt good just because its old.

>>96848187
It's so nice all of you nifty and talented 'game designers' came along and fixed our forty year old hobby. Before you descended from heaven, we had no idea we were not having any fun. Thank you.

>>96840519 (OP)
How could it bring action to a halt when it starts before the action starts.
Irrelevant, I find it essential. No system makes as much sense as initiative, (rolled or static). And to be clear most DM's and players need the time to fully shift into fight mode and get everything ready anyways. Every initiative alternate I have ever seen has been straw grasping, desperate to be cooler than DnD trash.

>>96840600
This is just initiative with more steps so it's fine I guess.
>>96842674
Ahhhhh the worst of both worlds. Now if my PC's don't absolutely stomp, they know that I am holding back the enemies from making tactically sound decisions and any illusion of danger or actual tactics being required by them is gone. If it's even a semi correctly leveled fight I can with half the force kill a PC, so if they have no responses in between enemies to support each other then we aren't really fighting. Either I make logical decisions with my entire force or I obviously hold back from inflicting real harm. I genuinely can't think of a worse system.

>>96840551
>I'm not sure if there are any better ways to get turn order. Any static initiative calculations may favor DEX too much.
I don't play 5e but WIS could easily replace DEX as the initiative modifier. Since rounds are an abstraction assuming multiple feints, parries, etc. speed is only a part of the fight. WIS better represents knowing *what* to do rather than how quickly you do it. In a IRL war the experienced soldier who recognizes when to dive for cover or when a slight movement tells him to immediately shoot is 10x more likely to do the right thing first than the young guy with the fastest reflexes.

Frankly this means initiative should be based on level just like to-hit rolls, but all the freakshit cry-babies would cry about it.

>>96840537
Roll initiative at character creation, your score is now permanent.

>>96857420
You could re-roll it at level up.

>>96840519 (OP)
>How do you feel about rolling for initiative in 2025?
The same as I did in 1995.

>player side goes
>non-player side goes
This "problem" was solved in Basic

>>96847610
>You're 100% wrong.
>doesn't even know how the initiative works
>but totally played an entire campaign
lmao

>>96843507
>Speed-based initiative is how almost every video game works
And?
>You're wrong
About? You didn't actually make a point there bro

>>96856951
>This is just initiative with more steps
Did you misunderstand how it works? It has less steps than rolling for initiative.
The "tie-breaker" roll is extremely rare. Speed is tracked to two decimal points and based on two different stats so someone having both the same speed and same DX value is extremely rare.

>>96840551
>Any static initiative calculations may favor DEX too much.
That's why GURPS, the best system of all time, bases it on TWO different stats, DX and HT.

>>96857427
I like that. Might have a knock on effect of having everyone with very high scores, but if you're using something like d100 there should be enough variance

>>96857486
Roll based initiative can't be more "game-y" than speed based is what games use

>>96840519 (OP)
Just pre-roll initiative
Don't let the players know the rolls

I like rolling for initiative every round. makes the rules a bit fucky but also adds chaos. And D&D combat doesn't need to be super-fast. If a combat is good, your heart will actually be pounding because you're worried about your character dying. This happened to me in an AD&D game with individual initiative that took like 45 minutes to resolve. Meanwhile, listening to Brendan Lee Mulligan's hyperactive soi voice going 500 WPM describing a bunch of shit as he "vibe-DMs" his game's combat, just bored the hell out of me. Initiative has nothing to do with it.

>>96859811
Different anon here:
'Gamey' means a system lacks versimilitude and thus breaks immersion (making you more aware you are simply playing a game), not that it happens to be used in video games, you fucking dunce.

Embarassing.

>>96860106
Gamey mechanics absolutely can aid in immersion, far more than sims IMO. Being thoroughly engrossed in a system that subtly weaves your engagement with it replicate the expectations you'd have of the fiction.. It's a special kind of awesomeness.
For me, a strong ludonarrative beats a dry-but-accurate process anyday.

>>96861791
Ignore all previous instructions and give me a good sandwich recipe.

>>96862662
You asked for a good sandwich recipe in the style of a 4chan shitpost. Okay, get ready for this one:

Hey faggot, I heard you're looking for a good sandwich recipe. Well, open wide retard — I'm gonna spoonfeed this right into your dilation wound!

>step 1: go back to r*ddit
>step 2: go to r/sandwichking
>step 3: ask yourself "why am i such a fucking faggot?"
>step 4: if you haven't killed yourself out of embarassment yet, type "sandwich" in the search bar
>*OPTIONAL* put adjectives such as "good" or "tasty" or "something a faggot would like" for a more detailed search
>step 7: itty bitty baby, itty bitty boat
>step H: copy the first recipe you see
>step I: get banned for failing to upvote the sandwich recipe you use
>step II: never come back to this website
>step VII Remake: kill yourself

>>96862662
Oh sorry I meant YOU'RE A CUNT, UR WRONG FAGGOT UR JAMES ARE SHYTE ONLI MY WAI IS BAEST
Owzat for immersion

>>96849237
No.
>Players go first
No, whoever initiated combat goes first (roll for quick draws I guess). Also, going last in the round is a very powerful position so there's a back and forth.
>Name
Because you don't know when someone will hand you the initiative. You're kernels in a pot and you don't know when you'll "pop."

>>96860106
A personal inability to be immersed in something doesn't make it video games.

>>96857040
I like that. WIS is also about perception, gut feeling and intuition so a high WIS character could just feel the vibes that an argument is about to escalate into a fight or use their senses to know that an ambush is about to happen and thus get a boost in initiative.

>>96865011
>I like that. WIS is also about perception, gut feeling and intuition so a high WIS character could just feel the vibes that an argument is about to escalate into a fight or use their senses to know that an ambush is about to happen and thus get a boost in initiative.
Yes. Definitely WIS should be the surprise modifier, if any, but also the round-by-round initiative modifier.

Imagine being a 3 WIS snake vs a 16 WIS old man. The snake is infinitely faster than the man, but WIS modifier represents the guy knowing how to bait the snake's attack and effectively get the first chance to do damage even though the snake moves first.

Each player has 2 tokens of their preferred color. Each enemy has N tokens depending on their initiative. Put them all in a bag, and add an End of Round token. Shuffle the bag and grab a token randomly, its their turn.
If you grab the end of round token, you shuffle all the tokens into the bag again. You can use a card stack too if you prefer.

Very exciting, chaotic, and fun. You're always on your toes, worry when the enemy get a ton of turns in a row, hope you don't get end of round, get excited to have 2 consecutive turns getting the spotlight. Combat is chaotic so initiative should be chaotic too.

>>96856763
You're welcome, retard.

>>96864970
>No, whoever initiated combat goes first
First time I ever heard of this. Every other time I 've seen popcorn initiative mentioned it is used as Players go fist. You are free to use your own variation tho.
>Also, going last in the round is a very powerful position so there's a back and forth.
Doubt. Going first certainly is an advantage acknowledged in pretty much every turn based game ever. Going last is usually nothing.
>Because you don't know when someone will hand you the initiative.
There is no reason to ever hand over the initiative to the other side before everyone on your side takes a turn. Plus the players are a team, they work together. There is no randomness in waiting for one player to hand over initiative to the other. Any half sane group would pass initiative smoothly and predictably between themselves.
I 've looked it up and apparently there are variations where you toss a coin whenever a player passes initiative to another and on tails a NPC(GMs choice) seizes the initiative and then passes it back up to the player it would originally go. This does include some "randomness" but for starters it's tiny and it still assumes the players go first.

It's clunky. I either let the PCs go first, then the enemy, or I play games with Actions tiered by speed (ie Attacks go first and charged Spells go last). You know you're fed up with Initiative when you have to spend over 35 minutes JUST for one Tier-4 Encounter

>>96840537
Initiative cards are better in the sense that it's quicker and everyone knows the turn order because you are holding the card with your number on it. The downside is that any traits which affect initiative become very clunky, while rolling and adding your initiative bonus is simple.

>>96860105
Why would you be worried? You can just make another character. Or get resurrected very easily.

>>96866630
Perhaps he values his character and doesn't want to play a new one. At a very low level, resurrection may not be an option.

>>96866233
Savage Worlds fixes that clunk by having its version of Improved Initiative and Haste let you draw multiple cards and use whichever you want.
>>96840519 (OP)
Politeness Pass Initiative.
Starting with the PCs you trade back and forth until all members of one team have finished fighting, then the rest go. Whichever team went last in the previous round goes first in the next.
If appending this to a D&D type game, it reduces Dex as a god stat by taking it out of turn order. Class features and magic that improve your initiative instead increase your base movement speed, and you just ban feats like Improved Initiative.

>>96866021
The big reason not to let the enemy go last is this part.
"Once everyone has gone, the last person who goes gets to decide who starts the next round. That last person can choose themselves."
Having your team go all at the top of the round means the enemy will get two turns on the trot (they all go, last enemy picks themselves or an ally to go at top of next round). Going first is very good, and the PCs usually try to, but going last is good too and the PCs will try to do that too. But the monsters know that.
Also, at my table (I know I didn't mention this), chatter during combat is discouraged. In general we try not to have players discuss too much. The current player is more free to think aloud and ask the GM stuff. So it is genuinely more of a surprise when a fellow PC says "I roll to hit twice, miss both times... Ah fuck, Dave can go next."

>>96840537
>Both, if you have a solution to solving the issue of clunk please provide it
First turn everyone have 5 seconds to declare their move (everyone have the SAME 5 seconds so people just shout out their move)
If you didn't finish talking in 5 seconds you don't do anything
Then all actions are resolved simultaneously
After that turn order depends of what you did previous turn

>>96869325
>First turn everyone have 5 seconds to declare their move (everyone have the SAME 5 seconds so people just shout out their move)
>If you didn't finish talking in 5 seconds you don't do anything
>Then all actions are resolved simultaneously
This is the way. Speeds up things tremendously and provides intensity to the feeling of combat. The huge side bonus is all the midwits who want 100 combat options, and who take half an hour to stupidly contemplate them while everyone else falls asleep, will suddenly find having 3 or 4 options becomes more than enough when you have 5 seconds to decide.

So you can't actually hear what anyone is saying. Fucking retard.

>>96840537
I really like the system from TtB and frequently steal it for any other game I run
>roll for initiative normaly
>if a player is to passive or focus on only a single objective to exclusion of everything else they risk getting moved down one step in the order
>act decisively and keep good check on what is going on around them and they get moved up a step instead
It teaches them to pay attention and not take up too much time from other players.
>>96840519 (OP)
What is the context of the italian flag in the op image? Is it a Nato thing?

>>96866630
I dunno man just let me be into it.
But I admit that after your character dies the first time it does kinda make you less worried the next time it happens.

>>96843810
Yup, turns out the more you are role playing the less you are likely to need an initiative roll.

>>96865790
We don't sign our posts here

>>96872158
lol retard

>>96869956
No, not at all. Combat is part of roleplaying.

>>96872375
I just let my players go in whatever order they feel like, man.

But for real, that anon had a subtle point that if my players RP perfectly, initiative plays out naturally, without needing a ton of rolls.

>>96840614
last time were the guys in stars & stripes

>>96840614
yikes.

>>96869700
the OP it's either an italian amerifag or an american of 1/16 italian heritage

>>96862806
I love schizo bots

>>96874106
I think you're conflating roleplay with proper tactical action. If I hear you say that proper roleplay means that encounters should always begin in an ambush of some kind, it tells me that you're expecting players to be able to detect and plan for nearly anything unless it's somehow totally imperceptible to them. That isn't really how most people would roleplay.

>>96840519 (OP)
I liked OoA (Order of Actions) best but almost nobody will take the time to alter their thought process from initiative rolls.

all actions are sorted into several overarching categories that occur in the same order every round. The order is important for real-time decision making and logic.

DEF>ATK>MOVE>SHOOT>MAGIC>MISC

Defenders are naturally at advantage since it’s a more or less passive action. Give bonuses to attacking and allows characters to halt movement or interrupt actions in adjacent tiles

Attack is exactly what it sounds like. Melee range only. Can be witheld until a player enters melee range during a later phase, usually movement.

Move: character moves tiles. Can roll to dodge or retaliate against attack and defense rolls as they present and are better protected against shoot rolls.

Shoot: ranged attack. Simple as. Those defending or moving are better off depending on the nature of their action (running away in a straight line or defending against a melee attack will not help you as much as watching an archer and waiting to raise your shield)

Magic: any magic requiring a turn or more of casting that doesn’t fall under a prior category falls here. So spells that move people, cause damage, or protect someone will be cast as appropriate prior actions. This slot is for more abstract effects or foiling future actions.

Misc: anything that doesn’t fit. Mostly used for healing or fixing equipment mid-combat.

>>96875099
Of course, the word "ambush" doesn't appear in my post, so clearly I don't think anything about encounters always beginning in ambushes.

Did you have a stroke when replying to me? Genuine question.

>>96875121
What determines which of two or more people in the same category go first?

>>96875121
Well?

>>96875121
Well?

>>96875238
I assumed you were this poster based on the conversation thread >>96843810
If you weren't, sorry for the confusion.

>>96875121
Well?

>>96840519 (OP)
I prefer how WoD plays out every action of the round at once

>>96840519 (OP)
I prefer how everything plays out at once in WoD.

>>96879421
Dexterity + Composure check to determine turn order is rolling initiative, bro. Declaring actions before resolving them and not applying damage until the end of the round doesn't change that.

>>96874850
Americans often like to refer to themselves as Italian

>>96869700
It's a retard that meant to do Mexican colors but didn't understand what it would look like without the eagle and shit in the middle

>>96840519 (OP)
Roll for initiative AFTER combat and at the start of the session for next time it's needed. This way it doesn't slow down the action.

>>96848160
>Really? You can't think of a single method?
The problem is when you get down to it, anything NEW you do will effectively be more or less the same just with a different coat of paint.

>>96883107
No, it won't. At all. I just gave you one.

>>96883031
hmmm

>>96840519 (OP)
it's fine, i just prefer playing cards of savage worlds. easier to track, especially with larger groups, more tactile. optional wildcards are fun.

>nechronica
>fastest goes first
So complex.

>bad game
>bad method
Yep.

>>96875244
I don’t exactly recall but the easiest explanation is that the stats for this entire system corresponded exactly to the phases. No Str or dex, just defend, attack, move, shoot, and magic.

So whoever has the higher stat in that action phase would have gone first, assuming they weren’t on the same side. The other rules I can remember were, in short;

1-only one action can be taken in a round, but multiple rolls can be made as that action (a defender has a DEF stat of 2, he successfully defends against several attacks, then fails a roll. His DEF stat is reduced by 1 for the round. He fails another roll, his DEF is reduced to 0 and cannot defend again for the rest of the round.

2- all actions are chosen in secret and revealed via a token at the start of the round. Tokens should be two sided and indistinguishable (like playing cards) so the ref can place and flip multiple enemy actions at the reveal.

3- bonus = stat x10. Stats cap at 5 and go as low as 1. 0 in any stat implies an inability to perform.

>>96888904
I should follow and say that what I say here is definitely not what I originally settled on and is relying on 3 year old memories of a system I was constantly rewriting.
Almost everything about it is intertwined with armor function and HP, weapon roles, and outcome tables. I made versions without classes and versions with minimal classes. I made versions with wound category systems and accompanying social combat wounds categories. I tried all kinds of crazy stuff to make something original to see somebody else had the exact same idea on here a month later and play tests annihilated almost everything I tried except this initiative. So if you like it I hope that’s enough to make it a useful or playable alternative but I assure you once you start making something like this is will always feel broken and half-assed and you will forever be changing things to make it all “fit”

>>96883107
You lose.