What are the possible problems with Dynamic Initiative?

[Dusk Eclipse]

By dynamic initiative I mean rolling for it every combat round, changing the turn order every round. I know that at least one other game use it and it works fine, so that got me thinking on implementing it as houserule for D&D.

The thing is that I would like to know what do you think are possible problems with this. I am sure this won't fix the rocket tag issue at higher levels and it increases the dice rolling (which at least in my group isn't a problem, we like to roll dice :smallsmile:) and that it also it makes keeping track of initiative; but we are used to it.

On the upsides it will make some of the casters initiative toys extremely expensive if they want to go first every round, sure there are still some problem spells (celerity I am looking at you!).

So what do you think of it?

[kardar233]

One thing I might worry about is abuse of round-long effects, as they're stated to end at the beginning of the turn of the one who cast them. If someone has a good way to mess with their initiative count they could seriously screw over guys by manipulating it.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Haven't really thought about it, perhaps effects now are counting from when they are casted to the end of the caster turn?

[Waddacku]

I guess you could houserule it to occur on the same initiative count every round.

[Malak'ai]

One thing I might worry about is abuse of round-long effects, as they're stated to end at the beginning of the turn of the one who cast them. If someone has a good way to mess with their initiative count they could seriously screw over guys by manipulating it.

Another thing with spells that last until the beginning of the casters next turn, not so much from an abuse stand point, but it would kinda hack me off if I rolled badly for initiative to start with, ending up last in order, cast a spell with that duration, then next round rolled really well for initiative and ended up going first... Waste of a spell as it'd have absolutely no effect.

[TuggyNE]

This has some seriously weird interactions with things like readying actions, long casting times, short-duration effects (not just spells), and so forth.

There are reasons 3.x doesn't use dynamic initiative, and it's not because no one thought of it, it's because it introduces lots of complexity for little or no gain.

[Dusk Eclipse]

I see, I was just curious.

[BowStreetRunner]

It should also be pointed out that this would interact with a number of very specific effects that are relevant to initiative. Some of these would have interesting, even desirable results. Others would become problematic and require some additional house-rules to address.

For instance, a creature who is deafened takes a -4 penalty on initiative checks. With Dynamic Initiative, using effects that deafen opponents becomes a slightly more useful strategy once a combat has moved past the first round.

Since a character who’s unconscious or dying can’t use any special action that changes the initiative count on which his action occurs, you would probably have to house-rule that these characters keep the same initiative each round in order to keep things fair. The initiative count is tied to when they make their roll to stabilize, and possibly die.

The “start full-round action” standard action is another example of something that would need to lock in the character's initiative for the next round. Another similar mechanic would include casting spells with a casting time of 1 or more rounds.

Spells like Shock and Awe that impose a one-time initiative penalty (or similar spells that provide a one-time boost) might become less useful. Besides spells, there are also effects like the White Raven maneuvers from Tome of Battle that alter initiative order that would need to be taken into account.

Altogether, I believe that Dynamic Initiative is certainly an option that could be implemented. It would require a bit more work than might be obvious at first glance, but the obstacles are by no means insurmountable. I just wonder whether the result would really be worth the effort. I'm really not sure it actually makes any measurable improvement to the game.

[gr8artist]

I've considered this as well, and I would suggest trying to avoid rolling again every round. What you might want to do instead is have each player's initiative value increase every round, and increase by an amount equal to her initiative modifier.
Less rolling, more predictable, and plays a little more heavily on high initiative characters and the "improved initiative" feat, which generally get shafted in most fights.
Alternatively, there is a useful dynamic initiative system used in the Scion game system.
If you're interested:
Battle starts, each player rolls initiative. The DM keeps a turn counter with him, it looks like a circle divided into 10 equal wedges. The highest rolling player has a token in the first wedge. The next highest roller goes in the second wedge, etc. After a player takes a turn, you move their token clockwise around the circle. Quick actions, like firing a pistol, set you back 4 'ticks'. Slow actions, like casting a spell, set you back 6 'ticks', while average actions had a speed of 5 'ticks'. After all the players with a token in the first wedge have gone, you move to the second wedge and let all the players there take a turn. Then the 3rd wedge, then 4th, etc. Effects with a duration measured in rounds start and end on the same wedge, regardless of when the casting player's next turn comes up.
The advantage to this system is it keeps battles interesting and dynamic, and gives you a reason to favor quick, light weapons.
The disadvantage is that fast players using quick weapons will get more turns per round (on average) than a slow character casting spells. This adds an interesting dynamic, but really throws off D&D balance.

[Ravens_cry]

Even reading systems it was designed for, like 1st and 2nd edition AD&D, it sounded really kludgey.
Sure, a fixed initiative incurs weirdness of its own, but the benefits of simplicity outweigh the dubious benefits of dynamic infinitive at least in D&D.

[ahenobarbi]

There is a sidebar in DM describing initiative rolled on every round, you might be interested in reading it.

But IMO this introduces more problems than it solves (increasing fight complexity in a boring way).

[jmelesky]

Alternatively, there is a useful dynamic initiative system used in the Scion game system.
...

That sounds like the 2ed optional rules based on "segments". Different spells had casting times in segments and different weapons had different speeds. IIRC, there were ten segments in a round (corresponding to the d10 initiative roll, I think).

It was discarded for 3ed, likely for the reasons already mentioned.

[dascarletm]

I think the biggest problem would just be the decrease in pace of the game.

Unless you had players who were on the ball, or you have a program to roll all the initiative, I would think it would slow combat down too much.

Then again, maybe it is just my players who take 5 minutes to get me their initiatives.:smallfrown:

[theUnearther]

I think the biggest problem would just be the decrease in pace of the game.

Unless you had players who were on the ball, or you have a program to roll all the initiative, I would think it would slow combat down too much.

Then again, maybe it is just my players who take 5 minutes to get me their initiatives.:smallfrown:

For this particular problem, you can just make everybody roll their next initiative at some point during their turn, and then store all values until next part. Though I agree if it's not being done digitally you will waste a significant amount of paper and/or make the record hard to read.

[Heart]

I started out playing 3.5 with initiative being dynamic and carried it into my own game thinking that was just the rule. I like it, but I don't have much experience playing without it.

As far as rules issues, there was never a problem, but I guess that's because the groups I've played in always used it too, so dynamic initiative is just how we think. Keeping track has never been a problem either, but again, we're used to it.

I like it because it adds more tension. There have been several times where if the player lost initiative, they would have died. Sometimes they still did... But at least it was better than knowing that the BBEG was going to go before you and he was going to kill you now.

[Uhtred]

It's been said that nothing kills the buzz of role playing combat quite like the actuality of combat itself, especially if the engagement features more than a few enemies. I am imagining my entire six-person party re-rolling initiatives every round, and all of the enemies in a 9+ monster mob encounter, even with all the Melee enemies grouped together, all the ranged enemies grouped together, etc., as extending combat significantly. I had a DM once who implemented dynamic initiative that HE would roll for us, keeping both our total HP and place in initiative secret, and all of us sitting around while he rolled thirty times while muttering to himself combined with "The Bugbear hits you...and you're unconscious. Roll to stabilize." Almost made the group mutiny because we couldn't prepare for anything and had no idea what was going on.