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?
>>96840519Both, if you have a solution to solving the issue of clunk please provide it, I'd really appreciate it.
>>96840519I'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?
>>96840519I 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
>>96840519I can't imagine a system being better with a static initiative than with a roll + modifier>picWho attacked italy?
>>96840519My favorite way I've seen systems handle it recently is to just section initiative into three chunks>fast PCs>enemies>slow PCsWith 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 tieThat's less complex that the meme UH OH STINKY combat started everybody roll for initiarino!
>>96840771I 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
>>96840614Someone 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 ordervs>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 6Monster A has DX 11 and speed 5that'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.
>>96840519Side 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.
>>96841618Because 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.
>>96842257rude
>>96840519I 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.>>96842257It'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.
>>96840519What system?If it's any flavor of D&D, I don't think about it at all.
>>96840519Players 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>North Atlantic Tabletop Organization
>>96840519It 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 downnah m8, it takes way longer to use regular initiative and you know it.>game-yIt's way more gamey for the faster guy got last at random>GURPS didn't improve the wheel with their ownOnly because gurps didn't invent speed-based initiative. It is the objectively better method.
>>96843459Speed-based initiative is how almost every video game works. You're wrong and you lose.
>>96840519I'll be perfectly honestIn 35 years of DMing and GMing and SMing I have never once used initiative rules for anything, in any systemIn 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 offAnd 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>Gurps doesn't have this problem>>96840608>needless procedureGonna need a save for that, uff natty 1, guess Gay'Lord the Tiefling is still seething.
>>96840519Kinda 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.
>>96842257Until the nuh-uh troll comes here, it's still top 25% of threads on /tg/ right now.>>96843810>seating orderRespectably practical.
>>96840519I 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.
>>96842257I'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.
>>96840608I'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.
>>96840519Even 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.
>>96840753This 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.
>>96840519If 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
>>96844183You'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>Is it a core part of the ttrpg experience?Why would it be so? A shitton of RPGs don't use it.
>>96840519I 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.
>>96840979It 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!
>>96842257Then 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 initiativeif 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
>>96840519I 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.
>>96840519I've never played D&D or any adjacent system, so I really don't give a shit.
>>96840551Really? 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.
>>96844736You don't have to go in a particular order to strategize.
>>96842257Of course it is, it's /tg/. Are you new here or something?
>>96844214Maybe you should learn anything at all about game design. Until then, you can sit at the kids' table.
>>96840519I 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.
>>96848165Having 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.
>>96848228Did you mean to reply to someone else?
>>96848237Perhaps 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.
>>96848255Okay, 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.
>>96848261No, we're in agreement. I just misread your post and thought you meant the opposite.
>>96840519I tried popcorn initiative for a one-shot recently and my group loves it.
>>96849198Isn't that just the players going first at whatever order they choose? Why the tarded name?
>>96849237What would you call it?
>>96849237"Popcorn initiative" has been a name for it since before you were alive, child.
>>96840519First 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.
>>96840608GURPS initiative sucks ass, but you don't even understand what sucks about it
>>96852819"Players go first">>96855560So was retardation granpa. An old concept isnt good just because its old.
>>96848187It'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.
>>96840519How 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. >>96840600This is just initiative with more steps so it's fine I guess. >>96842674Ahhhhh 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.
>>96840537Roll initiative at character creation, your score is now permanent.
>>96857420You could re-roll it at level up.
>>96840519>How do you feel about rolling for initiative in 2025?The same as I did in 1995.
>player side goes>non-player side goesThis "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 worksAnd?>You're wrongAbout? You didn't actually make a point there bro
>>96856951>This is just initiative with more stepsDid 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.
>>96857427I 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
>>96857486Roll based initiative can't be more "game-y" than speed based is what games use
>>96840519Just pre-roll initiativeDon'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.
>>96859811Different 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.
