thoughts about rolling init every round

[chaoticgoodGM]

hey everyone,

watching tutorials to do my first game sometime soon and on actual table top it's so much easier to use same init every round and group the bad guys. now on here i'm seeing the system can keep track of it and roll it every round. i personally think this is a neat idea but want to see what the community thinks. i like the idea of the people with high dex or initiative not getting screwed over because of one bad roll. on the other hand it makes me nervous if the bad guys go at the end then the beginning of the next round. so any kind of thoughts and comments would be much appreciated.

[mrgrey]

Honestly, I'd discuss this with your players first. Remember that in the long run, increased randomness hurts players more than it does their enemies, since their enemies only usually last one fight.

[Moon Wizard]

Also, if you have a fixed initiative ordering, you also get advantages to overall gameplay speed. People can plan ahead to when they are going to move or act; and can handle things like bio breaks right after their turn. With random, while more "realistic" potentially, it also introduces chaos/randomness, which can slow down games.

Regards,
JPG

[DrakePD]

For years at the Table, we always rolled initiative one time for the encounter. I am running 4 games in FG at the moment and we have FG set to re roll Initiative every round and I as the DM love it as do the players on all the tables. The randomness keeps everyone on there toes, and pulls a bit of the meta game out of know exactly when its someone's turn in the order.

[Zacchaeus]

Yes, I don't like the idea of re-rolling initiative every round for much of the same reasons that Moon Wizard points out above. My player slike to plan it all out and 'metagame'; but there are those that don't like their players to do that and would rather mess their plans up - or have them not be able to plan at all. So it depends on what camp you fall into/ And @mrgrey makes a good point here as well. It isn't just you that's affected it's your players as well.

[Trenloe]

Changing initiative every round can also screw up effects that last a round - as they terminate at the wrong time, or end up with an effect lasting close to two rounds, or hardly any time at all. If you're OK with that, then cool...

[Dax Doomslayer]

I like the re-roll option within FG. Live, at the table, I just keep as is for speed. However, when using FG, I find it's easy enough as it's done automatically. Our group finds that the chaos of battle needs to be portrayed a bit and initiative is one way to demonstrate that...

[amerigoV]

I play Savage Worlds - initiative is redone every round. The system uses playing cards to its easier to have a visual of the results (which FG could take care of anyway). Even the few times I have played D&D in recent years I ported the initiative deck over since I like the variability.

[Garmorn]

This more play style and rules system dependent then most things. For 1st and 2nd edition which had few if any multiple round effects it was great. Less so in 3rd where multi round effects where more common. 5th edition class balance seems to rely on it to some degree. I have played both ways with the older versions and have found that it something that the group needs to agree on if it is different than the base rule for that game.

[Imagix]

We do initiative every round. And we don't have FG do the initiative roll either, the players each do a roll. Seems to make them feel more involved. We kinda like the additional bit of chaos added to the combat. However, we hadn't really completely thought through the implications with "until (the end of) your next turn" sort of effects.

[Griogre]

In face to face I would not roll initiative every round for time reasons, but with FG I do since it is fast and automatic. There is a free extension by Celestion that updates durations to match the new initiative order each round here: https://www.fantasygrounds.com/forums/showthread.php?43430-5E-Change-Initiative-Update-Effects

[Shady Allie]

My players opted for a one time initiative roll at the beginning of the encounter, and I am glad.

They each roll their own die, and I roll once for the enemies.

Speeds up play, allowing everyone to settle into a set arrangement, giving everyone time for their battle plan (which may or may not change as others take their turns...you know how d&d often goes.)

[CaptJack2883]

I think this is definitely a question for each individual group, as well as each individual game system. I'm sure some players prefer the predictability of having the same initiative each round, and others might enjoy the chaos from new initiative each round. I'm the kind of person that enjoys both sides of this, so I would probably be fine either way, but I also know several players that would each have a very strong preference for one or the other.

[The Decepticon]

I agree that this is different for each group. I have yet to play a game with re-rolling each round as all my players vote for once due to 5e rules or something lasting one round.

If my monk hits someone with a stunning strike and I am one of the last people in the round, then first, then it is a total waste of a ki point and a waste on beating up the baddie. In fact, more I think about it, I don't think I would like to play a game where we are re-rolling each round.

[SilentRuin]

I dislike any mechanic that allows the player to "game the system" by magically knowing when someone else will absolutely be going and make plans that depend on that.


Roll every round. Don't be a clown. :ogre:

[Three of Swords]

I want to reroll every round. My players either do not, or are neutral. So we don't do it.

Combat should be chaotic, not nice and neat like with cyclical initiative. If you do go that round, I suggest you adjust encounters to be slightly easier than normal since it does hurt the players more than the enemy.

[esmdev]

I generally leave these sort of things to my players, as I don't really care fixed or random. My players picked roll every round as it better simulates the randomness of a battle and find that randomness makes things a little more exciting.

As for bios and that, anyone can call a bio-break at any time and we all just take 5.

The group has played together for 40 years (longest) to 23 years (newest) so we kind of have a system.

[Mytherus]

I used 1 initiative roll per PC forever until recently, a player of mine asked about it so i tried it. I gotta say i like it.

Especially for 5e which is all i play atm.


5e is not the most exciting ruleset for combat if we are all being honest.

There's 10 baddies and 5 other players in the CT that player who rolled a 1 for init might take a nap after a while especially if you go beyond the 3rd or 4th round.

Changing it up each round keeps players on their toes. In game terms its justified as "in an actual RL fight the participants dont go ...ok i have to wait for jim to punch someone first before i can punch someone else again..."

[superteddy57]

I use a side initiative. Group goes, NPCs then respond or vice versa depending on the circumstance. I have the players describe what they are attempting to do and weave it in with the NPCs reaction to it. I don't keep track of initiative and just follow the cues the player's actions leave. This also works in reverse with the NPCs going first and I ask how the player wishes to respond. I keep initiative bonuses in mind for both sides to help with who responds when. I even break an NPC action if a player's initiative bonus would dictate them responding first. Not exactly the rulebook way to run combat, but keeps it cinematic and flows not slowing down combat. The biggest slow down is turning combat into a board game. I keep it a story with the way I approach combat.