SPECIAL NOTICE
Malicious code was found on the site, which has been removed, but would have been able to access files and the database, revealing email addresses, posts, and encoded passwords (which would need to be decoded). However, there is no direct evidence that any such activity occurred. REGARDLESS, BE SURE TO CHANGE YOUR PASSWORDS. And as is good practice, remember to never use the same password on more than one site. While performing housekeeping, we also decided to upgrade the forums.
This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Favorite initiative systems?

Started by kosmos1214, May 28, 2021, 06:09:39 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

kosmos1214

We just asked about core resolution whats every ones thoughts on initiative systems?
Have see every thing from pass to the right to card systems and dice I rather enjoy the simplicity of d20 add bonuses go in order but I think my favorite might just be shadowruns system because I like the idea of mutipul turns in a round so much.
sjw social just-us warriors

now for a few quotes from my fathers generation
"kill a commie for mommy"

"hey thee i walk through the valley of the shadow of death but i fear no evil because im the meanest son of a bitch in the valley"

Mishihari

I like ticks, where each action costs a given number of them.  I used this in 2E and I've heard it's used in some other games.  Frex, if you swing with your sword, then your neaxt action is 4 ticks later, with a dagger it's 2 ticks, a spell might be 10, movement is 2 per space, and so on.  It's a bit fiddly, but I found it fast enough to be fun once everyone was up to speed.  And it greatly increases tactical complexity without adding a lot of rules, which is great.

Lurkndog

#2
I used a tick/shot counter system when I made my homebrew system. Basically, attacks are a three-tick action, defense is a two-tick action. At the end of every round, your shot counter clicks down one, and whoever has a 1 gets to go that round. The action you take then adds points to your shot clock, which has to count down before you can go again.

Making attack cost more than defense was intended to give a back and forth flow to combat. Parry and you'll get to riposte before the other guy can attack again.

My primary inspiration for this was the initiative system in Feng Shui.

Steven Mitchell

I prefer some form of sides-based initiative over individual initiative.  For one thing, I like it to be rolled each round to change the order.  That's prohibitive handling time with individual initiative except in the very smallest fights. However, my larger reason is that I don't like how mechanistic that individual initiative can get in the flow of the fight and even the way the players start to think about it.  I didn't care for raw Hero System phases with speed values in the 2 to 4 range for a similar reasons (i.e. the "I can do anything I want in phase 9 because I know I'll go before anyone else in phase 12" thing that low-speeds get in the Hero chart).

My ideal system is one that clumps a handful of actors together on a routine basis.  Some of the D&D versions that distinguish between movement, melee, ranged, and magic phases are one way to do that.

Mishihari

Quote from: Lurkndog on May 28, 2021, 07:31:26 PM
I used a tick/shot counter system when I made my homebrew system. Basically, attacks are a three-tick action, defense is a two-tick action. At the end of every round, your shot counter clicks down one, and whoever has a 1 gets to go that round. The action you take then adds points to your shot clock, which has to count down before you can go again.

Making attack cost more than defense was intended to give a back and forth flow to combat. Parry and you'll get to riposte before the other guy can attack again.

My primary inspiration for this was the initiative system in Feng Shui.

That's an extremely cool idea.  I didn't count defense as an action.  Now I want to try yours.

Ratman_tf

More complex systems (phased, skill roll, even d20 with more mods than justDex) appeal to me, but at the table, I always wind up using d20 plus Dex. Initiative should be snappy and not bog down the flow of the game.
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

capvideo

I just go around the table, and then handle the creatures, but that's not initiative—there's no specific order to actions. Even if a PC or NPC is disabled/killed before the player goes, they still get to act. I tried all sorts of initiative systems and eventually just dumped the whole thing. It's easier and creates sense of the fog of war that I prefer in my games.

I thought I was doing this cool new thing, but it turns out initiative-less/simultaneous systems were fairly common. Apparently original Traveller had it, or was interpreted to have it by several people, and Daredevils seems to have it, too. I'm not sure in either case, because their rules mention simultaneous actions, but don't actually explain what simultaneous means. (I'm more likely to be wrong on Traveller than on Daredevils, as I haven't read Traveller for a long time but just recently read Daredevils all the way through.)

Mishihari

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on May 28, 2021, 09:37:42 PM
I prefer some form of sides-based initiative over individual initiative.  For one thing, I like it to be rolled each round to change the order.  That's prohibitive handling time with individual initiative except in the very smallest fights.

I'll beg to differ on this point.  I've run combats with 12 player, 40 enemies, and individually rolled initiative, though I did group the monsters by type, usually.  It worked just fine.  You do need to have the methodology down to keep it moving though.

moonsweeper

My two favorites are

1)  Hackmaster...tick system with an initial roll.  As long as everybody has the weapon speeds on the character sheet it works pretty well after a few combats to get used to it.

2)  Original Deadlands for the sheer fun.

I dislike side initiative.  When I run B/X, I either use individual or else everybody goes at the same time (although still following the move/missile/magi/melee hierarchy)

For 5e I use a house-ruled version of the DMG optional system that has simplified weapon speeds, etc.  Tacked on casting times for spells and OSR style interruption to go with it.  Actions declared 'before' initiative roll (declarations in ascending INT order).  Seemed to work well for my Primeval Thule campaign.
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

kosmos1214

Lots of talk of tick systems one of the systems I'm not super familiar with
They basicly work out to action based initiative if I under stand corectly?
Quote from: Lurkndog on May 28, 2021, 07:31:26 PM
I used a tick/shot counter system when I made my homebrew system. Basically, attacks are a three-tick action, defense is a two-tick action. At the end of every round, your shot counter clicks down one, and whoever has a 1 gets to go that round. The action you take then adds points to your shot clock, which has to count down before you can go again.

Making attack cost more than defense was intended to give a back and forth flow to combat. Parry and you'll get to riposte before the other guy can attack again.

My primary inspiration for this was the initiative system in Feng Shui.
Wow this sounds impressive if I'm groking correctly you more or less where able to work out table top atb system that is very cool.
sjw social just-us warriors

now for a few quotes from my fathers generation
"kill a commie for mommy"

"hey thee i walk through the valley of the shadow of death but i fear no evil because im the meanest son of a bitch in the valley"

deathknight4044

I like the idea of split side initiative (I believe that's what its called)

Basically everyone rolls initiative independently (though monsters are grouped together) and anyone who goes higher than the enemy is "group A", while anyone who goes after the enemy is "group B".

Every round is group A, enemy, group B.

I think it does a good job of merging the strengths of group initiative with the strengths of individual initiative.

S'mon

I prefer side-based initiative (whether iterative or declare-then-roll-each-round). It runs much faster and is more exciting. But my 5e players insist on individual init. Many of them freak out if they don't get their special focus time. So I just run with it.
Shadowdark Wilderlands (Fridays 2pm UK/9am EST)  https://smons.blogspot.com/2024/08/shadowdark.html
Open table game on Roll20, PM me to join! Current Start Level: 1

Ratman_tf

Quote from: moonsweeper on May 29, 2021, 02:20:50 AM

I dislike side initiative.  When I run B/X, I either use individual or else everybody goes at the same time (although still following the move/missile/magi/melee hierarchy)


I usually have player characters roll individually, and then I either use individual initiative for the opponenets if there's a manageable (1-5ish) number, or batch initative, where similar enemies get an initative roll for their group. Like orc archers get an init roll, orc axe fighters get an init roll, and the orc shaman gets an init roll, that kinda thing.
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

moonsweeper

Quote from: Ratman_tf on May 29, 2021, 05:41:33 AM
Quote from: moonsweeper on May 29, 2021, 02:20:50 AM

I dislike side initiative.  When I run B/X, I either use individual or else everybody goes at the same time (although still following the move/missile/magi/melee hierarchy)


I usually have player characters roll individually, and then I either use individual initiative for the opponenets if there's a manageable (1-5ish) number, or batch initative, where similar enemies get an initative roll for their group. Like orc archers get an init roll, orc axe fighters get an init roll, and the orc shaman gets an init roll, that kinda thing.

Yeah, I should have clarified that I do use batch init for the groups of monsters.

The group A, monsters, group B that deathknight mentioned would be pretty good. I might have to try that one.
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

Steven Mitchell

Quote from: deathknight4044 on May 29, 2021, 03:52:25 AM
I like the idea of split side initiative (I believe that's what its called)

Basically everyone rolls initiative independently (though monsters are grouped together) and anyone who goes higher than the enemy is "group A", while anyone who goes after the enemy is "group B".

Every round is group A, enemy, group B.

I think it does a good job of merging the strengths of group initiative with the strengths of individual initiative.

That is what I use in D&D, typically.  It has the immense advantage in 3E through 5E that the Dex mod, individual initiative modifier still matters.  And of course, each player making one roll before each round is not nearly as cumbersome as the GM making a lot of rolls.  The DC that the players need is set by the main monster init mod + base of 10.

As far as handling time goes, I measured it carefully.  In 3E, when switching from book initiative to this style, I got combat down to taking on average about 40% of the book time, at least with 7+ players.  (I didn't play enough with 4-5 players to get useful data.)

For my own system I use a variation on that idea that has Fast/Middle/Slow slots for initiative, with players rolling to see which slot they are in (based on the DC).  Monsters can be in any slot, but always go after the players in a given slot:  That is, fast players, fast monsters, middle players, middle monsters, etc.  I only roll for a few of the monsters, typically, with the rest defaulting to Middle. 

I'm not too worried about the details, actually.  I merely reverse-engineer the initiative process to be easy to do, likely to clump small groups together, but still allow some variation round to round.    My own system is still in play testing.  I think when I get into some of the bigger fights, I'm going to break it down further into Fast Melee/ Fast Ranged / Fast Move & Act, and so forth.  The idea is that anyone doing one simple thing in the phase goes first, then ranged attacks, then everyone else.  Then again, that might be overly detailed for what I'm trying to achieve.