Comments on: Seizing Initiative

By: ze bulette

ze bulette — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 06:43:01 +0000

Not much to add here other than I bit my tongue on reading Jame’s post you reference and feel 100% the way do. 1d6 and no individual initiative, thanks very much. In a PBP game, I could see the added time and considerations perhaps able to be overlooked & interesting (but probably not game enhancing overall), but in a live face to face game, no thanks!

By: The Rusty Battle Axe

The Rusty Battle Axe — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 05:44:16 +0000

@Erin: Each side or party gets one die to roll for initiative, as opposed to each character, npc or creature getting an individual roll. It is simple and quick–virtues–but it does mean that dex, weapon types, reach, etc are lost. Like most things in life, it is a trade off and one we have made because my current in-house group wanted to go ultra lite for combat.

@Kilgore: I use momentum with my Skype gaming group, made up of guys that I gamed with back in the 70s. We started with Avalon Hill and Stratomatic before playing RPGs. I don’t use it with my inhouse group.

By: Erin D. Smale

Erin D. Smale — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 02:49:57 +0000

Didn’t mean to imply that there was an issue – I completely get what you’re saying. I think every player/GM have certain mechanics that they like from the start and others that just beg modification. That particular initiative variant came from an RC campaign with a certain group. Another group playing the same campaign preferred 1-roll-per-side initiative. Just glad the RC was simple/flexible to accommodate both.

By: Kilgore

Kilgore — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 02:21:39 +0000

To clarify, I absolutely do think that flexibility is a HUGE bonus for simple games, and that flexibility certainly makes mods much easier. No arguments on that, and I have my own fair share of mods. Though I try to limit them as much as I can.

Also to clarify, I don’t have a problem with James’ system. I think it’s a pretty good one. It just happens that it adds complexity to what I regard as the flagship example of simplicity’s superiority, so I’m quite hesitant to mess with it myself.

I still think that simplicity is its own greatest reward, though.

By: Kilgore

Kilgore — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 02:17:48 +0000

RE: Momentum

In 2e I gave ties to the winner of the previous round in the name of “momentum.” I do like the idea, but with d6 instead of d10 the “momentum effect” was a little too great, and as we’ve gone less wargame and more descriptive in our combats, I like the idea of simultaneous actions more than I used to.

Maybe something to the effect of the previous round’s winner wins with a roll of 5 or 6 regardless of what the other side rolls. Most of those would have been wins anyway, but a few extra here or there can keep “mighty mo” something to reckon with.

Or maybe even that’s too much tinkering with a simple system that I really appreciate. I’ll have to think on that. Thanks for bringing it up.

By: Erin D. Smale

Erin D. Smale — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 01:49:14 +0000

I like the momentum factor.

Question: you’re saying one die per side – how does PC DEX figure into that? Not familiar with C&C initiative – is it individual?

By: The Rusty Battle Axe

The Rusty Battle Axe — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 01:21:49 +0000

I have always used a single die per side or party; 1d6 for years but now I use a 1d10 (Castles & Crusades). When it is the players’ time to take their actions, then I have them do it according to dexterity score (highest dexterity goes first). It is simple and has worked. I have, at times, used an addition “momentum effect” where the party winning initiative gains a +1 on the next round’s initiative roll.

By: Erin Smale

Erin Smale — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 15:44:58 +0000

I'd argue that the primary advantage of a simple system is that it's flexible. This lets people with different styles of play tweak what they need to make the game more fun for them. Degrees of "ease of play" and "realism" are subjective, and one size definitely does not fit all. A simple system can help gamers obtain a better fit, with either a little tweaking or none. You and James have different approaches to initiative, and you each want to reflect different aspects of realism, within certain tolerances of playability. Fortunately, you can both be happy with the same simple system as a foundation. BTW, here's another take on xD&D initiative; it's for individuals, but just as fast as the Official system: http://breeyark.org/first-strike