[3.5e / Opinions needed] Variant: Rolling For Initiative Every Round

[Isamu Dyson]

For those of you that ran games using this rules variant, or played in such games, please, do share how rolling for initiative each round positively/negatively impacted the flow of combat.

[OldTrees1]

I have not run such a game however I do see this one "exploit".

High initiative modifier character: Delay your action so you go last in a round and then go first next round (since you reroll initative each round)

[eggynack]

Seems like a bad idea. Keeping track of and rolling for initiative is kinda annoying already. Doing it every round seems like it'd make combat interminable. Also, double actions, whether forced or naturally imposed, seem kinda swingy.

[Thurbane]

We used to play this way in earlier D&D editions, but not in 3.5.

Not sure how it would interact with Readying and Delaying, though?

[OldTrees1]

We used to play this way in earlier D&D editions, but not in 3.5.

Not sure how it would interact with Readying and Delaying, though?

I would make Readying/Delaying cause a decaying penalty to initiative.
Let's say you delayed 8 points, next turn you have a -4 penalty to initiative. Followed by -2, -1 and 0.

[Pex]

It can allow a spellcaster, either side, to cast two spells in a row before the opponent gets to do anything. That will be devastating.

It's also makes melee combat devastating. Someone gets two full rounds of attacks on his opponent before the opponent can strike back. Some creatures at low levels get claw/claw/bite. That's 6 attacks against a low-mid level PC. He's dead Jim, or close to it.

There are monsters that grapple then do something with the one they're grappling, such as swallowing. With no chance to escape or a party member allowing for escape, bye-bye PC.

[Piggy Knowles]

Blargh, my last IRL group played this way and I hated it. It slowed things way down, and it made it way more difficult to coordinate attacks with the rest of the party.

[Duke of Urrel]

A good explication of this variant rule appears on page 22 of the Dungeon Master's Guide.

This rule gives a greater advantage to creatures with higher Dexterity and the Improved Initiative feat, and I think that's a good thing.

However, as Pex has pointed out, with greater unpredictability comes the possibility that one creature may get two turns in a row in combat. This may strike some people as unfair, but I don't believe it happens very often, because it can happen only for a creature that acted last in the previous round and gets lucky in the next. The penalties mentioned by OldTrees1 (and also in the Dungeon Master's Guide) prevent the abuse of the delay action for the purpose of giving yourself two consecutive turns.

[Firechanter]

Several groups I played in used this, and it didn't seem to be a big deal. Yes it takes a bit of extra time but I've felt that the battle actually feels more dynamic.
The point about creatures potentially acting twice in a row is correct but it luckily never turned against the players in a catastrophic way, so we didn't realize the problem. Still when I DM I use static Ini.

We also used it in Conan D20 where it was even less of a problem as the PCs typically have a much better Ini than most enemies.

Last not least, we also play AD&D2 where shifting Ini is a core concept of the game. You roll Ini every round (with a d10), modified by weapon speeds and suchlike. It's what makes spellcasting in combat risky, because any damage you take while casting makes your spell fizzle, no Conc check or anything.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Here's one thing to consider how often does your group get distracted by side talk and forget whose turn it is? If you do initiative every round, that not only eats up time reordering the initiative but you also makes it easier to lose track if whose doing what if you lose focus even fore a minute.

To me it seems like a huge time sink that serves only to drag out combat for no real reason.

[Swaoeaeieu]

I am not a very experienced player, but since i started playing every game i was in did initiative every round... How do you guys do it?
And the delaying so you get 2 turns has always been taken care of with the gentlemans agreement at our tables.

[Lord Vukodlak]

I am not a very experienced player, but since i started playing every game i was in did initiative every round... How do you guys do it?

You roll once at the beginning of combat and keep that initiative until you either delay(which lowers your initiative) or combat is over. The only time you'd roll initiative after the first round would be if someone new entered the battle.

[TrollCapAmerica]

I always hated the single initiative roll determining battle order followed by wooden soldiers mechanically clanking along in the same fixed order.Not just because one bad roll can screw you but because its going to become way to meta with everyone planning all actions around a predetermined order like its Final Fantasy Tactics

[Isamu Dyson]

How about instituting methods to raise one's Initiative at the expense of an action for a round?

[Firechanter]

How about instituting methods to raise one's Initiative at the expense of an action for a round?

You mean, automatically losing initiative?
Even going last in a round is preferrable to not going at all.

[Swaoeaeieu]

You roll once at the beginning of combat and keep that initiative until you either delay(which lowers your initiative) or combat is over. The only time you'd roll initiative after the first round would be if someone new entered the battle.

So the person who had an unlucky roll at the start is in a bad position the rest of combat? that can get really frustrating i think.

I like rerolling each round more (in theory, i never played differently) because it gives everyone the change to take control of combat in an encounter. Someone may start up slow but be the first to charge when he recovers from the initial suprise.

But i play with a small group (3 to 4 players) so i dont see tracking init as that big of a deal, so maybe it's just me.

[Bullet06320]

its easier to roll once for init at begging of each combat
2nd edition was time consuming rolling every round, not so bad for small combats, but mass combats could take even longer
not sure if it was a house rule or actual rule, but u can skip your turn to refocus and go first in the next the round, but u had to declare it at the begining of the round

[Brookshw]

I kinda like that method but its time consuming and more things to track.

[Firechanter]

So the person who had an unlucky roll at the start is in a bad position the rest of combat?

Not necessarily. Basically just in a bad position in the first round. Going last in one round is almost the same as going first in the next. So it's kinda like losing a single turn.

edit: not counting initiative-shifting special abilities like White Raven Tactics or Moment of Alacrity.

[Rostenoc]

I've been thinking about utilizing a variant for initiative to change things up a little without dragging things out for everyone.
Every round, the DM applies each character's initiative modifier to their initiative result, with the possibility that they shift their order in combat. High initiative characters move faster, low ones slower. Once someone's result is in excess of 30, they reset to 1. Hopefully, this makes things more dynamic and unpredictable without the possibility of the double-turn-of-death.
Thoughts?

[Amphetryon]

With my old RL group, a couple of the members were unhappy with the static Initiative rolls of the default setting, so we used this (entirely unofficial, completely houseruled) variant:

For every round after the 1st, roll 1d12. On results of 1 - 6, your Initiative count drops by 1 - 6, corresponding to the number rolled; on results of 7 - 12, your Initiative count raises by 1 - 6, with a 7 corresponding to an increase of 1, and so on. The group felt like this variant increased the dynamic feel of combat without turning the Initiative count into utter chaos. They also rather liked another excuse to roll their d12s.

[Simba]

I always hated the single initiative roll determining battle order followed by wooden soldiers mechanically clanking along in the same fixed order.Not just because one bad roll can screw you but because its going to become way to meta with everyone planning all actions around a predetermined order like its Final Fantasy Tactics

In my PbP games I use one ini roll for the whole combat, but players can use their move actions to reroll their first ini rolls. They have to let me know before the next round starts, though. Thoughts?

[Ryuuk]

Every round seems kinda klunky, as has been said already. It seems like it would make combat take even longer then it already does.

We tried a different variant once, mostly to speed up combat in a PbP. Initiative was rolled once, but the entire enemy group only got 1 initiative roll. If you beat them, you acted before them once.

Initiative:
0) Party members that beat opponents
1) Opponents
1) Party
2) Opponents
2) Party
3) etc.

We had to wait for everyone to submit their action anyway, so the party got to chose their actual order within the group's initiative as was most convenient at the time.

[Temji]

good afternoon,

I've done this, though not in 3.5 ...

it worked for us, though it did slow things somewhat... the issue is that each bad guy should get individual initiative as well... and then it gets truly cumbersome...

what worked well with it though is that those high initiative characters DID get opportunities for multiple strikes in a row... and sometimes they should, if they are indeed that fast and dexterous..

bottom line... we liked it, and it made things too slow... don't do it any more...