Combat Tracker order funkiness with equal Initiatives

[dr_venture]

Just wondering if anyone (Happy Easter, Source) has noticed the funkiness with the order in the Combat Tracker when you have combatants with the same Initiative values. For instance, the player CTs often show the combatants with equal INITs in a different order than the CK's CT does, and at least once I closed the CT during combat, and when I reopened it, it had reordered a couple of combatants with equal INITs.

I know you're busy, Sorce - I only mention it to 1) see if you or anyone else has any insights on the situation (as you so often do), and 2) to put it on your radar (if it wasn't already) in case it is an issue and you're mucking about in there at some point. It works ok and I'm less complaining than trying to be thorough about noting issues when I find them (especially one like this that isn't critical as far as I can tell) rather than just not say anything.

If it's getting annoying, just let me know, bud. As always, feel free to ignore/implement/light on fire and stomp on it/etc.

[Moon Wizard]

In initiative ordering, each windowlist can specify the ordering of windows using a defined sort function. If two windows have the same "sort" fingerprint, then the order is essentially undefined. If the order is undefined, then the windows can be in any order, and can vary between host/client and between different views of the same list data.

In my development version, I added a final check to each list sort function to use the database node name as the final arbiter of sorting.

Cheers,
JPG

[dr_venture]

Thanks Moon. For C&C, as far as usability is concerned, in the perfect world, I'd love the sort to be based on
1) Initiative
2) Reach
3) Dexterity if possible (monsters don't list Dex)
4) Movement rate (the combatant with the higher movement rate goes first)
5) Anything else that substantively indicates that one combatant deserves to go before the other.
6) Node Name (is that unique, even with combatants with the same name?)

[Moon Wizard]

Database node names are unique.
JPG

[Sorcerer]

I have to admit that I have never noticed this before.

As of this moment a sort is applied based on initiative value, and then if those values are the same then the windows are sorted in name order. if two windows(NPC's) have the same init AND name then the order is not set and can change between sorts (and between host and client) as MW points out.

I suppose the reason I have never noted this before is simple. All of my monsters have unique name identifiers.

under options\combat you can select "Auto NPC Numbering", "Append"

this will append a number to all duplicate entries so that you have ORC 1 and ORC 2 rather than just plain orc. This means that if the init is the same they will have a fixed order based on name and it makes it earlier to identify which ORC players are attacking.

I will certainly take on board MW's suggesting of adding a final "node name" sort in order to set order - this would be useful to those who do not like the Append option (it does take a bit of the atmosphere away).

Note: if you already have creatures in the CT and then select append this will not append to the names unless you drop an extra creature of the same type in - then all creatures of that type will be appended. Obviously if the option is selected before loading the CT there will be no problems.

Note 2: When I say order will be fixed. I mean it will have a fixed position in the order - the position however might not be in "true" numerical order. - one of the FG quirks is that it orders 1,10, 11, 2, 3, 4 as it is sorting the names as a string and not as a number. (you might have seen this if you have tried to order your story entries based on a number order)

[dr_venture]

Actually I use the automatic unique number appending feature, too, but I still get names out of sequence with matching INITs. If it matters, I normally leave the characters in the CT and swap monsters in and out for battles.

I agree that the number appending option does take some of the atmosphere away, but I find it a lot more convenient to be able to reference monsters uniquely verbally or through chat. In modules, I've been uniquely identifying some monsters with a randomly generated name, so instead of "Zombie Sailor 3" I have "Zombie Sailor - Eraich"... which is a bit more atmospheric, but tend to result in longer names, and probably won't always be appropriate.

BTW, I don't suppose that the "-" character could be the culprit, or something else about the above naming scheme?

[Sorcerer]

No I think if it was truly ordering by name it should not matter (like the numbers it might not put it in the order you'd expect, but it should be consistent). No there seems to be something a bit odd with this.

when you close the CT (and the players also close theirs) and reopen and see some reordering. Does this order then stay constant?

If so the ordering might not be updating properly.

I will have a look and see if something is wrong with the code.

anyway its now on the list.

[dr_venture]

Hey bud. Yeah, I did observe that closing/reopening the CT caused the list to reorder, at least on the DM's side. I had just had a zombie attack a PC, then the PC was next and attacked the zombie back. For some reason I decided to close & reopen the CT, then I clicked the 'next combatant' button and I got the same zombie again who had just hit the PC... at which point I noticed that they had the same INITs and their order had been reversed.

Without closing /reopening the CT, I have seen several times where the player's CT had combatants with equal INITs in a different order, causing the current combatant indicator flag to seem to skip somebody, then return to the skipped guy.

[Sorcerer]

I will have to look into it a little deeper.

but it does raise a question into my mind (whats left of it)

How do you handle simultaneous actions?

I mean if they have the same Init then the CT puts them into an order of sorts - but in reality all those combatants should act simultaneously.

who do you handle that? Ask for player actions first and the state NPC actions and then make rolls or what?

[dr_venture]

Yeah, it's a bit sticky. C&C only has a d10 for INIT, so it pretty much guarantees that you'll have duplicate INITs almost every round if you have a handful of characters & monsters. I also add the player's DEX bonus, which works well on a d20 but is a little too drastic on a d10.

My preference for handling it is listed above. As per the C&C rules, I'd give the initiative to the combatant with the longest reach, but since the CT doesn't know who's fighting who, that's probably not possible. I'd compare DEX values too, but that's probably not easy to do in the CT.

Basically, I don't know how to resolve this in an automated fashion in the CT. I guess I'd just say that if there was a way to more easily visually indicate that a group of combatants share an INIT (like grouping them somehow or color coding or something) then at least the CK would have a heads up that there is something to manually adjudicate as opposed to relying on the CT's automatic order.

Sorry that's not much help.