What would happen, you think, if someone were to play D&D (or any other RPG) without using initiative rules? What if the GM just got to pick who went first? Or it was assumed that actions went simultaneously more or less, based on common sense?

Would hamburgers eat people?

Have any of you actually done this?

RPGPundit

For most games I don't use initiative rules. I just let the player characters go first (unless of course it's a ambush). It's quicker this way and it gives the party a bit heroic edge allowing them to take on a larger number of foes than a more formal initiative system would allow.

I will use initiative rules if they are hardwired in the system or if I want combat to feel more scary, but mostly I find I can do without them.

Tunnels and Trolls has no initiative system.  Mercenaries Spies and Private Eyes has a sloppy phase system.  Both are decent games in play but require a great deal of narrative decision making.  Classic Traveller is similtaneous combat so sequence doesn't matter but there are a suspicious number of dogs and cats living together eating cheese burgers in Classic Traveller.

Yes. I stopped using most forms of RPG initiative systems more than a decade ago as they were so cumbersome.

Initiative is pointless in any game without one-shot kills (where grinding through encounter takes typically 3-10 rounds). In such a case I use a system where side A that ambushes the other side B gets a free attack (actually a turn) followed by A -> B -> A -> B et cetera ad nauseatum grinding...

I use have used following initiative system in my own game system for games where one-shot casualties are rule (for example game simulates firearms use). if one side ambushes the other the ambushing side gets a free attack (actually a turn) followed by A -> B -> A -> B. If one sides does not ambush the other there is a single roll for initiative per side at the beginning of encounter which states which side gets to be A and then the game goes as A -> B -> A -> B.

The advantage of my system is that it is very fast and I as well as my players have better things to do than grinding. However, for last few years I've occasionally used a system where player characters simply go always first (A). It makes the game go even faster.

Since there are wargames with rules for simultaneous attacks (like Warhammer) I don't see why those rules couldn't be taken as the norm in an rpg.

I've done this with D&D.

I thought it was a useful exercise, because it put initiative in perspective and made me realize exactly how useful and important common sense should be, when determining who goes first.

It went like this:

Players tell me what they want to do.  I decide the order of events based on common sense and situational factors.

Often, the answer was obvious.  For example, if an orc is charging from 30' away, the PC crossbowman shoots before the orc can reach him and attack.  If the orc is charging a spearman, the orc will cross the space but the spearman gets a chance to hit before the orc.  If the orc and the PC are both trying to reach a magic portal, their speed and the distances involved determine who gets there first.  A magic user casts sleep on some charging goblins.  Sleep takes 1 segment (6 seconds) to cast; if the goblins' movement rate allows them to reach the magic user, they get to attack, first -- if not, then spell goes first.  Et cetera.

However, other answers were not so obvious.  For example, in a melee already joined, two swordsmen attack one another.  Who goes first?  You could go by Dex.  Or you could flip a coin.  Or you could...(wait for it)...roll a die!  A magic user is engaged with an orc and is casting shocking grasp, while the orc is attacking with an axe.  Who goes first?  Again, this seems like a good place for a die roll and/or some additional rules.

So what I ended up with is that common sense will cover the demands of initiative for many situations, but a die roll and additional rules are useful in some cases.  Coupling common sense with group initiative in this manner works fast and well.  This is basically what I do, now.

Quote from: Soylent Green;501550For most games I don't use initiative rules. I just let the player characters go first (unless of course it's a ambush).

I have pretty much done the same with Swords & Wizardry. The good guys go first unless surprised. Individual party members go in whatever order they want, or we just go left to right around the table.

Big Bads still get to soliloquize before the action starts obviously.

Philotomy, do players get to revise their actions after hearing what others want to do?

Quote from: two_fishes;501568Philotomy, do players get to revise their actions after hearing what others want to do?

Not typically.  I don't recall it coming up as an issue.

In our OD&D game the players go first, then the monsters. It doesn't seem to run any different than running D&D with initiative rolls.

Quote from: RPGPundit;501547What would happen, you think, if someone were to play D&D (or any other RPG) without using initiative rules? What if the GM just got to pick who went first? Or it was assumed that actions went simultaneously more or less, based on common sense?

A few experiences:

(1) When I first started playing OD&D, I used simultaneous action. (Everyone told me what they were doing, then I wove the action resolutions into a single, continuous moment.)

After a few sessions, I modified this slightly by ruling that characters who are knocked out of the action during a round don't get their action for the round. (Exception: Two characters are allowed to knock each other out.) This generally favored the PCs and could also lead to good moments of tension. ("I know that the goblin is going to hit me for a pretty nasty blow unless I succeed on this roll and knock him out first.")

This worked well with 3-5 players. It became too difficult to keep everything simultaneous once I got up to 6-10 players each running multiple PCs, hirelings, etc.

(2) I now use a Combat Sequence for OD&D based on the Mmmmmmm! system and the pre-Runequest Perrin Conventions. This doesn't use an initiative system in the sense of determining which character goes first, but instead determines the sequence in which different actions are resolved. (With all actions of the same type still being resolved simultaneously.)

This has worked well, although some experienced players really struggle with the conceptual shift.

(3) I've recently been playing and running a lot of Technoir. It uses a sequence system to resolve all conflicts (whether combat or otherwise). It has no initiative system: The only rule is that each participating character gets to take one action before anyone gets their second action. The GM is given the power to determine who goes next, with the general advice that going PC-NPC-PC-NPC is a pretty effective way of handling it.

This, too, has worked pretty well.

I use group initiative, and then within each group I pick the order people go in. Sometimes I sweep left to right, or vice versa, and sometimes I let whoever shouts out what they're doing first go first, and sometimes the logic of the situation makes it obvious what has to resolve first. Players announce their character's actions and then we resolve them before going on to the next person. People will occasionally shout out advice to one another, which I sometimes treat as IC (especially if the guy with the Crystal of Unfortunate Truths says it).

In one case, I resolved everyone's saving throws to survive an explosion from the periphery inwards, to heighten the tension, as saving throws across the group went from easier to harder.

The remarkable thing here, I suppose, is that it causes no confusion whatsoever and basically works without a hitch.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;501629This doesn't use an initiative system in the sense of determining which character goes first, but instead determines the sequence in which different actions are resolved. (With all actions of the same type still being resolved simultaneously.)

Interesting.

What I'm doing is a phased sequence, but the phases are always in the same order.  Within a phase, the group initiative for the round determines the basic order.  So, for example, missile fire and movement always goes or begins before melee attacks, but if both sides are firing bows, the side with initiative gets to roll its bow attacks first.

http://www.philotomy.com/combat_sequence.html
http://www.philotomy.com/simple_sequence.html

For those that have responded (except those on my ignore list), why do you rule that the player characters ALWAYS go first when it is combat situation and you do NOT use initiative???

The common thread is that it is faster.

It's something I've never considered - but it makes good sense. It's easy enough to compensate for any advantage it gives the PC's, if you feel that's necessary.