Rolling initiative each turn

[id143910]

(As always I'm a french speaker who is sorry if he makes dumb english mistakes)

I was searching alternative ways of handling initiative that could be simplier when I came accross rolling each round and popcorn initiative and really liked the two Idea. It make combat less predictable and players focus more. I also really like the Idea that players get to choose when to act based on something else than pure luck. Its true than in a fight you dont really choose when to act. You often do it when you can. However, I can think of situations where a player with a good initiative doesnt want to play his turn at the moment the dice dictated and is punish for that. Realisticly, if he is faster than the others to react than he should be able to wait a better time to act. So I tought about another way to handle initiative.

There is in the center of the table a number of d20 coresponding to the number of actors in the fight. At the start of a round, the players each take one die and the dm as many as there is monster on the board. At the start of each TURN, those who want to act at that specific moment roll initiative. The winner get to play his turn and must let his initiative die in the center. Repeat this until there is no remaining initiative dice to roll. It mark the end of a turn and the begining of a new one.

With this method there is no such thing as initiative tracking or punishment for rolling high. Players also focus more as they are alway searching the best time to intervene. I think the only negative point (If you dont lack d20 ;) ) is for spells lasting one turn. They could be more or less effective depending of when casted but in a sense it force strategic thinking which I think add more to the game.

I didnt try this method yet and would like to hear feedback from you before doing so. :)

[Lord Vukodlak]

In almost all cases the PC's will want to go before the enemy does. If they don't such as to cast a spell at the right moment. They can still ready an action. For instance a wizard who won initiative a few rounds back could ready an action to cast fireball after his allies disengage.

Your method would still bog down the game more then tracking initiative does. In almost all cases PC's are going to want to act before the NPC's do so you'll probably find EVERYONE rolling every round.

Then as you said there are one round abilities well.

For instance a monk's "Stunning Strike" lasts until the end of your next turn. Now say you went LAST in round one and stunned the target but you go FIRST in round two. Well the rest of the party was denied the opportunity to benefit from the foe being stunned by gaining advantage on their attacks. Furthermore because the enemy went before the monk in round 1 and after the monk in round 2. He wasn't stunned during his turn and still got to act further devaluing the ability because the monk rolled better on initiative in the second round. On the other hand if the monk goes first in round one and last in round two. The rest of the party got advantage on attack rolls twice and the enemy was denied his turn twice. Your system would allow the party to game the system to do that intentionally. Allow the monk to go before the rest of the party in round one then if he succeeds at stunning the foe he elects to go last.

And its not just ONE round effects many spells offer a new saving throw every round such as hold person and such.

The following is the 3.5 rule for delaying an action.

Delay

By choosing to delay, you take no action and then act normally on whatever initiative count you decide to act. When you delay, you voluntarily reduce your own initiative result for the rest of the combat. When your new, lower initiative count comes up later in the same round, you can act normally. You can specify this new initiative result or just wait until some time later in the round and act then, thus fixing your new initiative count at that point.

You never get back the time you spend waiting to see what’s going to happen. You can’t, however, interrupt anyone else’s action (as you can with a readied action).
Initiative Consequences of Delaying

Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the delayed action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed an action, you don’t get to take a delayed action (though you can delay again).

If you take a delayed action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round.
It does not exist in 5e but there's no reason you couldn't add it as a house rule. Choosing to delay can also have certain abilities like a monk's stunning fist tick at that moment.

[sir_argo]

I was searching alternative ways of handling initiative that could be simplier when I came accross rolling each round and popcorn initiative and really liked the two Idea.

The first half of your opening statement was that you wanted to make initiative more simple. In the same sentence, you suggest rolling initiative each round. I don't think that's making initiative more simple, your stated goal.



Realisticly, if he is faster than the others to react than he should be able to wait a better time to act.

Initiative is just an abstraction that determines when players take their turns. If this were realistic, every character would be acting simultaneously over the course of 6 seconds. A fighter would not be able to run up 30' and engage an archer because simultaneously, the archer would be running away. A guy with a shortsword would never get to swing first as he closes on a guy with a pike. None of this is realistic. It's just a way to make combat go smoothly and let each person take nice orderly turns.

Now, I don't want to deride those who want more realism. There are game systems that are very realistic, but are also tediously complicated. But some people enjoy those games.

I see no problem with your proposed initiative as long as it makes the game more enjoyable to you. I would just say that your goal is realism, not simplicity.