Dnd One - Alert is probably broken [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Dungeon-noob

2022-09-10, 02:27 AM

Now i haven't played with this new version, but i do think i'm going to have to disagree here. This new version of Alert certainly is usefull, but i think it's more fun then the old version, to the point it stands out as one of the genuine improvements i think the One document makes.

The old version of Alert is completely non-interactive. It's just big + modifiers and removing options, you don't think about it and you rarely see it do anything. Not so much fun for the player, less fun for the party members who see them go before them reliably, and it makes the DMs work harder because it takes away the tool of surprise out of his toolbox.

The new version adds a bonus too, but for most of the game it'll be a much smaller one. And the rest of the feat are useable features, that require active use and cleverness to get use out of. That lets the player who took it feel cool, it incentives them to make their party members better and let them cool stuff. And the DM isn't stripped of entire types of story to tell.

If you've played with it and had a different experience, please do tell. I'd like to learn to play&DM better. But if we're both working in a white room, i think you're jumping the gun without seeing all the sides of this change.

Mastikator

2022-09-10, 03:54 AM

It's a feat that scales with the player's ability to come up with strategy and shenanigans. Wasted on a boring party, but insanely good on a clever one.
I think that makes it balanced, it rewards good and clever play.

Eldariel

2022-09-10, 03:58 AM

Old version IS active in many cases too: particularly the immunity to invisible attacker was huge. But it's true that immunity to surprise is sorta lame: it just completely negates a whole avenue of threat and stuff like False Appearance just doesn't do much. I don't think Surprise Immunity should really be a thing, period. I like the new one in a sense but the competition really needs to step it up.

DarknessEternal

2022-09-10, 01:45 PM

Yes, it is completely broken. I’ve seen this in other games before and it completely ruins things to the point of unplayability.

Atranen

2022-09-10, 03:17 PM

There seem to be two questions here: 1) is alert offering initiative swap too powerful and 2) is initiative swap a good idea for a rule?

I like the swap because it opens up more tactical options. The downside might be that the same 'optimal' initiative order works best for each combat, so e.g. the arcane caster always takes the highest score. But I think combats are sufficiently different that giving players more tools for strategy is good.

That said, I can certainly imagine it being such a good choice in actual play that casters, esp evokers and the like, end up making it a big priority. But I doubt it's so much better than an ASI that it stops being a meaningful choice to take, so I'm fine with it.

Ogun

2022-09-10, 08:33 PM

I like the idea.
It promotes team thinking.
I like it from an RP standpoint as well.
The scene where the canny rogue gives the mage a knowing nod to kick things off is easy to imagine.
Alert on a Mastermind Hobgoblin seems very apt.

MisterD

2022-09-10, 08:56 PM

To fix it make the swapping place on initiate only work with teammates with a lower Place that you.

If you 'react / Get to act' before a teammate you can 'let' then take you place to do something while you take theirs.

As opposed to holding your action to go right after a teammate but then only get to do one action.

RSP

2022-09-10, 09:05 PM

I don’t think it’s particularly powerful, but it could be annoying for someone to constantly be like “let me take your initiative spot” if they aren’t the high roller.

kazaryu

2022-09-10, 10:03 PM

+1 on the disagree side. like..its cool, definitely strong (if you have someone with a good initiative mod). but ultimately it still relies on you winning initiative. and a +11 to initiative is only an average of a 21 (and thats with max dex, and max proficiency bonus). so its still super swingy unless you're a lvl 10 rogue.

Old version IS active in many cases too: particularly the immunity to invisible attacker was huge. But it's true that immunity to surprise is sorta lame: it just completely negates a whole avenue of threat and stuff like False Appearance just doesn't do much. I don't think Surprise Immunity should really be a thing, period. I like the new one in a sense but the competition really needs to step it up. how does alert completely negate surprise? unless the entire party has alert, then you can still surprise most of the party. and if the entire party took alert then...fine? they all invested one of their feats in order to be immune to surprise, thats a pretty big investment, and likely comes from the players not enjoying being surprised. and if the players don't enjoy it...why do it?

Cheesegear

2022-09-11, 04:40 AM

The new version of the Alert feat is, IMO, totally borked. The second ability, Initiative Swap, allows you to switch initiative rolls immediately after rolling initiative with one of your allies.

Agreed.

If your character can significantly impact the fight, with either massive damage or debilitating status effects (e.g; Fireball and Hypnotic Pattern, respectively) then Alert is phenomenal.
If your character is ****, then Alert wont fix your character.

This is perhaps the biggest problem with the Feat. It's not 'I win.', it's 'I win more.', and that's perhaps it's biggest drawback. On characters that could really, really benefit from it (e.g; Wizards), it's kind of unnecessary. On characters that wouldn't benefit from it, it doesn't help them, because obviously.

It is unnecessarily good.

The other players at the table too will be under a great deal of pressure to allow the arcanes to go first

Strong agree.
As a DM who plays with a Table of Those Guys (and Girls), I have a feeling that:
Let me go first.
No. I won initiative, so I'm going first. That's how this works.
But I don't want to go last.
Neither do I, so I'm not swapping.
Will cause arguments.

And I think that's the bigger problem. You swap Initiative. Which means in order for the character who has Alert to benefit from it, someone else in the party has to take a penalty.

However, I said in my feedback that D&D seems to be moving towards a 'Party of Individuals' mentality, and less of a 'Cooperative Team' mentality; Where everyone, individually, needs to Feel Special. As I've said previously, if your party is willing to work together, and they know what they're doing; Alert is really, really, really brokenly good, because at character creation(s), your table sat down with each other and planned out who will be what, with what...Then Alert is potentially game-breaking.

If your party doesn't know what they're doing then it does nothing. However that will only last a few sessions until the party hits their stride. Then they realise how good Always Having the Nuke Go First, is, then this point is moot. It doesn't take that long to figure out.

If everyone wants their own spotlight (which seems to be a trend that D&D is moving towards), then Alert doesn't do anything because no-one is going to want to go last, just so that the player who always gets to go first, gets to go first even more.

stoutstien

2022-09-11, 05:19 AM

Just change it so you swap with an enemy not an ally.

Cheesegear

2022-09-11, 05:27 AM

Just change it so you swap with an enemy not an ally.

Oof. No.

If you roll last, and a hostile rolls first, and you swap...Your entire party benefits from swapping.

Just change it so that you - and only you - can change your Initiative to be exactly one 'step' after any other creature in the combat.

That is; Your turn happens after any creature you choose. But it can't make you go first - you have to roll for that. Narratively, you can react to anything, immediately after it happens. But you can't pre-empt an action, because you're not psychic, you know.

However, this potentially makes your Initiative 'roll' meaningless - unless you 'win' - since with a Level 1 Feat your Initiative is anything you want it to be.

stoutstien

2022-09-11, 05:35 AM

Oof. No.

If you roll last, and a hostile rolls first, and you swap...Your entire party benefits from swapping.

Just change it so that you - and only you - can change your Initiative to be exactly one 'step' after any other creature in the combat.

That is; Your turn happens after any creature you choose. But it can't make you go first - you have to roll for that. Narratively, you can react to anything, immediately after it happens. But you can't pre-empt an action, because you're not psychic, you know.

However, this potentially makes your Initiative 'roll' meaningless - unless you 'win' - since with a Level 1 Feat your Initiative is anything you want it to be.

Eh. Not a big deal really. The choice would be mostly blind so the chances of picking the enemy with the highest turn order correctly is only slightly better than even odds.

Basically all I would do is protect that player from really low rolls.

Brookshw

2022-09-11, 05:54 AM

Just change it so that you - and only you - can change your Initiative to be exactly one 'step' after any other creature in the combat.

It's better, but still seems in the realm of an autotake, so probably too good.

stoutstien

2022-09-11, 06:07 AM

It's better, but still seems in the realm of an autotake, so probably too good.

I think it's solidly in the second tier. It'd be nice for anyone to have it but it's nobody's first pick. Lucky is right there and while the advantage is coming from a smaller pool of resources you can toggle it. MI will probably also supersede alert for most casters.

Eldariel

2022-09-11, 07:19 AM

I think it's solidly in the second tier. It'd be nice for anyone to have it but it's nobody's first pick. Lucky is right there and while the advantage is coming from a smaller pool of resources you can toggle it. MI will probably also supersede alert for most casters.

Initiative win is basically a free action surge. The second ability means you get to decise who gets it. Thinking like that should put the power of this feat into bit more perspective. Lucky is also good but not being able to stack it with advantage makes it much weaker than previously. Though you probably want both most of the time, at least with the current spell list (subject to change).

Talamare

2022-09-11, 07:23 AM

The new version of the Alert feat is, IMO, totally borked. The second ability, Initiative Swap, allows you to switch initiative rolls immediately after rolling initiative with one of your allies.

On an arcane caster (or anyone with powerful ranged AoE spells), this basically gives them quadruple-advantage on initiative. Go first, lay down your best spell, GG's. Thinking about this from the DM side, this would absolutely have to be planned around. Assume the enemy forces are going to be hit by a fireball or similar before they get a chance to move, in every combat.

The other players at the table too will be under a great deal of pressure to allow the arcanes to go first, just because of how good that opening spell can be. I think this ability needs to be dropped. Not fixed, just dropped.

That doesn't sound broken, it sounds boring.

If your DM creates the encounters to be a basic room full of mobs, that also sounds boring.

Dropping it just sounds boring. I disagree with the premise that
players will be at a great deal of pressure to allow league of legends arcane to go first.
I do expect there might be some pressure to allow a dps to go first, but that's pretty whatever...

If it gets bad I will just tell them to stop

I 100% doubt that 99.9% of groups will all go Alert just to do this.

stoutstien

2022-09-11, 07:30 AM

Initiative win is basically a free action surge. The second ability means you get to decise who gets it. Thinking like that should put the power of this feat into bit more perspective. Lucky is also good but not being able to stack it with advantage makes it much weaker than previously. Though you probably want both most of the time, at least with the current spell list (subject to change).

Oh I agree initiative is good but I just can't see many PCs taking it before the others in the context of the UA format. Those who do are already planning to switch often as a more support focus so it's not going cause much conflict.
**I'm waiting on crafting rules to see where that feat falls.**

Talamare

2022-09-11, 07:36 AM

I essentially expect a tiny amount of 2 dps bickering to be first, and a support needing to decide who will

I also expect that half the times, the tank will speak up while the dps bicker and take first regardless to get in better position.

DPS players have ALWAYS bickered in RPGs
Then the Tank and Healers tell them to shut up or they will find another DPS

MoiMagnus

2022-09-11, 07:50 AM

Initiative win is basically a free action surge.

Well, it's more half of an action surge.
"Initiative win" is "1 free action + initiative loss" which is somewhat similar to "half a free action + normal initiative".

Eldariel

2022-09-11, 07:58 AM

Well, it's more half of an action surge.
"Initiative win" is "1 free action + initiative loss" which is somewhat similar to "half a free action + normal initiative".

Well, it's one free action AND bonus action AND possibly even reaction depending on if you can use it.

Hael

2022-09-11, 08:18 AM

I think this feat is of comparable power to the old alert. Which was always very strong, and definitely the strongest feat in this new UA (magic initiate is close).

Being able to affect the initiative order is incredibly strong tactically, even if its not putting the wizard first.

The only downside is that you only need one or two party members to really get the most of this. So in a party of 5, your probably don't need more than 2 with this feat. (the other meta issue is that it might cause people to waste too much time getting tactics set before a battle).

Overall, I think this will likely not make it out of playtest when people realize just how strong (and basically mandatory) this is.

Cheesegear

2022-09-11, 08:54 AM

I think this feat is of comparable power to the old alert.

No. Nooo...

+5 to Initiative is good. But 50% of the time you 'roll low', and only Dex-based classes can max it out. So a lot of time, Alert, in 5e, is simply Just Good. Like there's no reason not to take it, but you don't really lose anything by not taking it either - not really. There are many, many Crossbow Experts and Sharpshooters who don't need Alert.
Can't be surprised is...Fine.

DD1 Alert is potentially game-breaking if you have a party that is even slightly willing to work together, because it reads; The Nuke Always Goes First.

The Nuke Always Goes First is incredible, especially when compared to other Feats, for said Nuke. A Wizard who can start every (or nearly every) combat off with a Fireball or Ice Storm or Hypnotic Pattern or whatever...Has no real need for Magic Initiate. The only 'downside' is that Alert requires a party that is willing to work together, that's it. And as far as I can tell, having a party that can work together is most tables' first rule of allowing someone at the table.

even if its not putting the wizard first.

I've ran a combat or two where a Druid casting Entangle in the first found of combat, first, won the fight. Tasha's Hideous Laughter (a Level 1 spell) is also encounter-ending. There are plenty of applications to going first. The problem, is giving a character - any character - the meta-knowledge that they're going to know that they're going to go first, in most combats. That gives a character an incredible amount of power - especially if that character is already powerful.

So in a party of 5, your probably don't need more than 2 with this feat.

I agree that Alert has diminishing returns. If you give it to the Nuke, and the Tank, that's probably enough.
Two others in the party can pick up Magic Initiate (Healing Word), which, similarly has diminishing returns after two.
In a party of 5, the 5th Man picks up Musician.

You're golden.

(the other meta issue is that it might cause people to waste too much time getting tactics set before a battle).

They should only need to do that for a few sessions. Once the party has a SOP, the one or two characters with Alert should be set.

stoutstien

2022-09-11, 09:25 AM

Cheesegear

2022-09-11, 09:35 AM

I would say less than 20% of combats start in a position where going first alone is going to work on the party's favor.

Going first always works in the party's favour, and I can think of less than a handful of situations where it wouldn't.

The majority of the time it takes an active effort to force enemies into the compromised position where a big blast is going to net a larger rjan notmal return (2-3 targets)

If you can cast save-or-suck on the most powerful hostile in the fight, going first was an advantage.
If you can cast a single-target high-damage spell on one hostile, and kill it before it gets a turn, going first was an advantage.
If you can maneuver yourself into an advantageous position so you don't die, before the hostiles get to act, going first was an advantage.
If you can cast Haste on two of your party members before they start their turn, going first was an advantage.

If you can literally do anything where doing it first - before hostiles' and/or before other players' turns - is an advantage, then you have the advantage. Alert lets you do anything you want - up to and including blast. But if your party counts the Sorcerer Twin Spelling Haste as the party's 'Nuke', that works too. Whatever your party's win button is, in any combat...If you can push it in the first round of combat, first...Then do that. It's not rocket science.

If you don't want to push it, for some reason...Then don't. But Alert always puts that option on the table, in every single combat where the hostiles don't go first.

Every.
Combat.

PhantomSoul

2022-09-11, 09:44 AM

The meme that the big blaster goes first is broken only applies if all your combat start in a format where that is an applicable strategy.
I would say less than 20% of combats start in a position where going first alone is going to work on the party's favor. The majority of the time it takes an active effort to force enemies into the compromised position where a big blast is going to net a larger rjan notmal return (2-3 targets)
Of course things like evoker wizards or glamor bards can take advantage of it better but those are specific player options.

It's a good thing spellcasters (especially wizards) can have a variety of spells to essentially always benefit from going first essentially regardless of what the layout looks like at the start -- and can choose not to use the ability anyway if not beneficial. (Though really, maybe it's best taken by the person with the highest bonuses to initiative anyhow, then if a tank is what's needed they can probably make the tank first and if things are instead set up for big crowd control the relevant spellcaster can probably be made to go first.)

Hael

2022-09-11, 09:45 AM

Sometimes going last is the most important. For instance if two large groups advance 600 feet apart. You want your fireballing wizard at the end, not the beginning.

Alternatively sometimes you want the last turn to be a teleporter, who repositions the entire party after they've all already taken their actions. Another example might be where you sometimes just want to synch your summons and your actions as well.

It will be incredibly useful for many purposes, and ultimately I think the power lvl simply exceeds its lvl requirement.

stoutstien

2022-09-11, 09:47 AM

It's a good thing spellcasters (especially wizards) can have a variety of spells to essentially always benefit from going first essentially regardless of what the layout looks like at the start -- and can choose not to use the ability anyway if not beneficial. (Though really, maybe it's best taken by the person with the highest bonuses to initiative anyhow, then if a tank is what's needed they can probably make the tank first and if things are instead set up for big crowd control the relevant spellcaster can probably be made to go first.)

Which is fine and a league of difference from
"OMG the wizard is always going gofirst. OMGOP.needs NeRF! WTH!?"

If a table is having issues with "I win" buttons... wouldn't it make more sense to blame the button rather than the firing order?

Leon

2022-09-11, 10:07 AM

The feat is fine as I see it, if your got a group that's going to be difficult about whom is going first all the time that is a group problem not a feat problem. To me its going to excel in situations where someone who really could go with acting sooner rather than later has rolled poorly and needs a boost to get them out of a jam (possibly said mage who is now surrounded in a ambush and could do with Misty stepping out of there before being reduced to so much red paste)

Skrum

2022-09-11, 10:53 AM

"OMG the wizard is always going gofirst. OMGOP.needs NeRF! WTH!?"

I mean have you seen what a wizard can do that wins initiative? My concern is that if DM's have to consider the fact that the wizard (or sorcerer) will *always* go first, I don't think that's a positive effect on the game.

stoutstien

2022-09-11, 10:58 AM

I mean have you seen what a wizard can do that wins initiative? My concern is that if DM's have to consider the fact that the wizard (or sorcerer) will *always* go first, I don't think that's a positive effect on the game.

But is it anything new? If a wizard wants to go first now and grabs a few initiative boosters then that is already the case.

Like a said put the blame where it's deserved.

Skrum

2022-09-11, 11:05 AM

But is it anything new? If a wizard wants to go first now and grabs a few initiative boosters then that is already the case.

Like a said put the blame where it's deserved.

Even (current) Alert + Gift of Alacrity is nothing compared to quadruple advantage. Literally all it takes is one person in your party rolling good initiative, and the wizard gets it. It's also for comparably far less resource expenditure. I'm assuming slightly about the nature of "1st Level Feats," but considering what we've seen so far, I can't imagine any caster not taking Alert - this is contrast to the current format where taking Alert, especially early in a character's career, comes with real tradeoffs.

kazaryu

2022-09-11, 11:17 AM

I mean have you seen what a wizard can do that wins initiative? My concern is that if DM's have to consider the fact that the wizard (or sorcerer) will *always* go first, I don't think that's a positive effect on the game.

except the wizards won't *always* go first. only first out of the PC's (and then, only in a high optimization game). there's no guarantee that the PC's will win initiative. they don't get a significant boost to initiative over their enemies unless they seriously outnumber them...and if the PC's DO seriously outnumber the enemies, then initiative order is like...the last thing you should be worrying about in terms of balance.

so...yeah, its something you need to consider, but in high optimization games, you always have to consider the parties builds in order to make challenging encounters. (assuming you want to make a challenging encounter)

Eldariel

2022-09-11, 11:43 AM

except the wizards won't *always* go first. only first out of the PC's (and then, only in a high optimization game). there's no guarantee that the PC's will win initiative. they don't get a significant boost to initiative over their enemies unless they seriously outnumber them...and if the PC's DO seriously outnumber the enemies, then initiative order is like...the last thing you should be worrying about in terms of balance.

so...yeah, its something you need to consider, but in high optimization games, you always have to consider the parties builds in order to make challenging encounters. (assuming you want to make a challenging encounter)

I mean, they all have +PB to Initiative. Even at no Dex, they're going to have a higher bonus than most monsters: Alert gives +Prof (so +3 on level 5) to Initiative. And with 4 people rolling, you have a roll of at least 12 nine times out of ten. 3/4 they even have a 15. So it's like, unless enemies have significant Initiative bonuses, the party can just make use of their 20+ Initiative roll to go before any enemies vast majority of the time. Compare this to the current state of affairs where even Gift of Alacrity Alert Chronurgist with 16 Dex 16 Int with +11+1d4 is still going to lose to one enemy of four with +2 Dex 25% of the time.

Instead of needing to have a specific character roll high, now all you need is to have a SINGLE character roll high (which can be any character) - and thanks to Alert, PCs will have higher bonuses than the enemies so if PCs roll high, it doesn't really matter what the enemies roll (unless you use PC rules for NPCs - because my NPCs will sure as hell have Alert a fair amount of the time and will make sure to abuse it).

PhantomSoul

2022-09-11, 11:48 AM

I mean, they all have +PB to Initiative. Even at no Dex, they're going to have a higher bonus than most monsters: Alert gives +Prof (so +3 on level 5) to Initiative. And with 4 people rolling, you have a roll of at least 12 nine times out of ten. 3/4 they even have a 15. So it's like, unless enemies have significant Initiative bonuses, the party can just make use of their 20+ Initiative roll to go before any enemies vast majority of the time. Compare this to the current state of affairs where even Gift of Alacrity Alert Chronurgist with 16 Dex 16 Int with +11+1d4 is still going to lose to one enemy of four with +2 Dex 25% of the time.

Instead of needing to have a specific character roll high, now all you need is to have a SINGLE character roll high (which can be any character) - and thanks to Alert, PCs will have higher bonuses than the enemies so if PCs roll high, it doesn't really matter what the enemies roll (unless you use PC rules for NPCs - because my NPCs will sure as hell have Alert a fair amount of the time and will make sure to abuse it).

And if it would be useful to have rolled low because of monster/party placement, well, you swap with someone else and have more roll options that might give you that perk!

Skrum

2022-09-11, 12:15 PM

except the wizards won't *always* go first. only first out of the PC's (and then, only in a high optimization game). there's no guarantee that the PC's will win initiative. they don't get a significant boost to initiative over their enemies unless they seriously outnumber them...and if the PC's DO seriously outnumber the enemies, then initiative order is like...the last thing you should be worrying about in terms of balance.

so...yeah, its something you need to consider, but in high optimization games, you always have to consider the parties builds in order to make challenging encounters. (assuming you want to make a challenging encounter)

If the wizard goes at 19, and the enemies are 20 goblins, 10 hobgoblins, 3 trolls, and an ogre mage, sure, the wizard isn't going to go literally first. But the fact that they'll beat the vast majority of the enemy forces is enough. Only a few will get to move, the rest are probably stuck, clumped together, and they get roasted.

Against 1-2 foes it's probably not as relevant (what with legendary resistance most likely being in play), but even then - drop haste on to your tank/fighter/striker and they get a maximal first turn.

I am concerned about this level of optimization. PC's already have a ridiculous amount of options at their disposable to control how an encounter takes place. Controlling initiative strikes me as a bit over the line.

tiornys

2022-09-11, 12:59 PM

Having run a similar ability extensively in 4E, I can vouch for initiative swapping being extremely powerful in a decently optimized party that has good cooperation. Not because it means the Wizard always goes first, but because it means the best current encounter breaker always goes first. Sure that'll often be the Wizard, but it will also often be the Cleric (e.g. Spirit Guardians), the Bard (Plant Growth), the Druid (Conjure Animals), the Ranger or Fighter (burst damage), even occasionally the Barbarian (grapple).

In 4E I had the Controller go first about 40% of the time, the Striker about 40% of the time, and either myself (Leader) or the Defender the other 20% of the time. The roles don't map directly onto 5E but the tactical concepts absolutely do.

I'd guess an optimized party wants this on half their members, rounded up. Maybe round down is enough but I doubt it. It's possible you even want this on every party member--I think that's more likely than wanting it on only 1 character.

Waterdeep Merch

2022-09-11, 01:00 PM

If the wizard goes at 19, and the enemies are 20 goblins, 10 hobgoblins, 3 trolls, and an ogre mage, sure, the wizard isn't going to go literally first. But the fact that they'll beat the vast majority of the enemy forces is enough. Only a few will get to move, the rest are probably stuck, clumped together, and they get roasted.

Against 1-2 foes it's probably not as relevant (what with legendary resistance most likely being in play), but even then - drop haste on to your tank/fighter/striker and they get a maximal first turn.

I am concerned about this level of optimization. PC's already have a ridiculous amount of options at their disposable to control how an encounter takes place. Controlling initiative strikes me as a bit over the line.

As someone that runs games with this rule as a general thing anyway, it's really not that bad. But I also have the enemies trade initiative around to suit their own tactics. And give solo's advantage on initiative to overcome the weakness inherent in their action economy.

If this strikes you as overpowered in the hands of the players, have bosses and the like do the exact same thing.

Skrum

2022-09-11, 01:11 PM

PhantomSoul

2022-09-11, 01:16 PM

I don't think you mathematically need more than half your party with this ability (well, except for the prof bonus to initiative being universally helpful). But just in terms of swapping, half the party is enough....generally. I guess if you want to do extremely specific turn orders, you'd all want it. But if the goal is make sure the optimal character gets to go first, half is good enough.

Or I guess all but one gives all permutations, since the non-taker can benefit from any other character having the feat, while lacking it on two characters means those two can't swap (so there's a permutation that it's available).

Skrum

2022-09-11, 01:53 PM

Or I guess all but one gives all permutations, since the non-taker can benefit from any other character having the feat, while lacking it on two characters means those two can't swap (so there's a permutation that it's available).

Ahhhh right, yeah. Makes sense. If the wizard (or whatever character needs to go first) doesn't have it, and the character that rolled the best initiative doesn't have it, you're stuck.

tiornys

2022-09-11, 02:14 PM

Another factor is just getting party members lined up in the "right" order--this is the only 5E mechanic (so far) for changing initiative order at any point in combat.

And another is, how many extra initiative rolls does the party have. Familiars for example roll their own initiative, as do mounts.

Also, the more people have bonuses the more likely it is that the important party members beat out all enemy initiatives.

Eldariel

2022-09-11, 02:36 PM

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-11, 02:52 PM

When I did the "Lvl 14 Core Party vs. Tiamat"-fight, one of the huge issues was that especially many minions got their turns at worst possible turns which meant the first Sharpshooter shots went without Bless/Leadership for a turn and such: about a turn's worth of contributions lost due to party's internal turns (and enemy Initiative came from Portent, which is actually just about the only PHB way to fix Initiative alongside Cutting Words which can paradoxically be worth using on allied Initiative at times to get the right sequence of turns). This feat would've been a godsent there: the party would've been way stronger with DnDOne Alert.

It made a pretty significant impact in the campaign we just started, my Bard topped initiative and I offered it to the wizard so he could cast Hold Person on the enemy leader, between my Silvery Barbs and his portents the leader then spent the entire combat held, we mopped up the mooks and boom, flawless combat.

If I hadn't swapped with the wizard the enemy would have gotten a turn, with him appearing to be a spellcaster himself it likely would have changed things substantially.

PhoenixPhyre

2022-09-11, 03:08 PM

As someone that runs games with this rule as a general thing anyway, it's really not that bad. But I also have the enemies trade initiative around to suit their own tactics. And give solo's advantage on initiative to overcome the weakness inherent in their action economy.

If this strikes you as overpowered in the hands of the players, have bosses and the like do the exact same thing.

At that point... Just use a different initiative variant. Because standard rolled initiative isn't actually providing anything of value if everyone can swap on their team.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-11, 04:08 PM

At that point... Just use a different initiative variant. Because standard rolled initiative isn't actually providing anything of value if everyone can swap on their team.

I will tentatively agree with this, I believe that part of the challenge and variety in a combat comes from potentially badly ordered turns from the party. If you allow the party to put themselves in any order they like at no cost I suspect that even low optimized parties will find their ideal order and that's the order you'll see until any new variables might adjust it.

As a feat, it has an opportunity cost. If the party wants to decide their turn order, each player will need to invest and give something up.

PhoenixPhyre

2022-09-11, 04:17 PM

I will tentatively agree with this, I believe that part of the challenge and variety in a combat comes from potentially badly ordered turns from the party. If you allow the party to put themselves in any order they like at no cost I suspect that even low optimized parties will find their ideal order and that's the order you'll see until any new variables might adjust it.

As a feat, it has an opportunity cost. If the party wants to decide their turn order, each player will need to invest and give something up.

One (minor) annoyance I'm seeing with my current party is that everyone rolls super-high on initiative. One has Alert, they're all dex-focused, another is an Oath of the Watchers Paladin (+PROF to initiative in an aura), so if anyone's below 20 initiative it's rare. So it's almost always "PCs go, monsters go".

And yes, there's an element of "solved game" when you can just reorder yourselves. They'll pick a fixed order and that's it. But mostly, if you're letting everyone re-order within a team, just flip a coin to see which side goes first and do side initiative. Or alternating activations. Don't bother doing all the rolling and adding for something that won't matter much at all.

But as I see it, with everyone getting a level 1 feat for free...you'll see everyone who doesn't want Magic Initiate taking either Alert or Lucky. It's basically just "here, have more power." No more investment, since those three are head and shoulders above the rest.

stoutstien

2022-09-11, 04:26 PM

One (minor) annoyance I'm seeing with my current party is that everyone rolls super-high on initiative. One has Alert, they're all dex-focused, another is an Oath of the Watchers Paladin (+PROF to initiative in an aura), so if anyone's below 20 initiative it's rare. So it's almost always "PCs go, monsters go".

And yes, there's an element of "solved game" when you can just reorder yourselves. They'll pick a fixed order and that's it. But mostly, if you're letting everyone re-order within a team, just flip a coin to see which side goes first and do side initiative. Or alternating activations. Don't bother doing all the rolling and adding for something that won't matter much at all.

But as I see it, with everyone getting a level 1 feat for free...you'll see everyone who doesn't want Magic Initiate taking either Alert or Lucky. It's basically just "here, have more power." No more investment, since those three are head and shoulders above the rest.

What? No enhanced ability (cat) and/or BI on top ? *I jest*
No I get that. Initiative maximization is probably a little too cheap and impactful. I personally don't think his feat changes it that much because of that fact (we're going to have to wait to see what class and non level 1 feats have going on. Who knows maybe this is going to be *the* go to and I'll eat crow)

For most of my epic encounter NPCs I use multiple initiative counts anyways so I already inadvertently modified it to decrease some of that alpha strike syndrome.

Cheesegear

2022-09-12, 02:52 AM

To me its going to excel in situations where someone who really could go with acting sooner rather than later has rolled poorly and needs a boost to get them out of a jam.

If you want Alert to simply help someone who rolled poorly; Then make it add your Proficiency to Initiative. Oh wait...It does.

Alert - the problem part - actually isn't even about you. You can't do **** unless someone else in your party rolls high (or low, but let's be real), and is willing to swap with you. That's not...Being alert to danger. Actually now that I think about it more than not-at-all, I don't even know what that is. This feels like a Feat for the other person. Like, it seems that Alert is actually an active-ability that you give to someone else in your party.

Very weird. Like I don't know how you would justify this.

Hey can I swap Initiative with you?
'No.'
Oh okay, my Feat is your decision after all. :smallfrown:

Hey Rogue, it'd be really cool if you acted first since you have Advantage on enemies who haven't gone yet. Free Sneak Attack and do a million damage for me, 'kay? Let's drop a nerd before he gets to do anything, and I'll swap to your Initiative so you can Dash back in behind me when the others retaliate.
Thanks, Tank! That's a really good idea...Wait a second. This is my Feat. Why are you calling the shots?
Apparently it's my choice, not yours.

AdAstra

2022-09-12, 05:03 AM

If you want Alert to simply help someone who rolled poorly; Then make it add your Proficiency to Initiative. Oh wait...It does.

Alert - the problem part - actually isn't even about you. You can't do **** unless someone else in your party rolls high (or low, but let's be real), and is willing to swap with you. That's not...Being alert to danger. Actually now that I think about it more than not-at-all, I don't even know what that is. This feels like a Feat for the other person. Like, it seems that Alert is actually an active-ability that you give to someone else in your party.

Very weird. Like I don't know how you would justify this.

Hey can I swap Initiative with you?
'No.'
Oh okay, my Feat is your decision after all. :smallfrown:

Hey Rogue, it'd be really cool if you acted first since you have Advantage on enemies who haven't gone yet. Free Sneak Attack and do a million damage for me, 'kay? Let's drop a nerd before he gets to do anything, and I'll swap to your Initiative so you can Dash back in behind me when the others retaliate.
Thanks, Tank! That's a really good idea...Wait a second. This is my Feat. Why are you calling the shots?
Apparently it's my choice, not yours.

That's not unusual. There are plenty of spells that only work on allies if they're willing. Warding Bond especially, since there's an explicit tradeoff involved and one side usually benefits more than the other, basically like this new Alert. And there's always going to be negotiations on who should get the benefits of X ability, it's not like there wasn't usually one party member who got the most benefit from spells like Haste. At least in this case there's often going to be different characters who will get the most benefit from the swap.

Stoutstein's assertion that if one character going first breaks the encounter, then the problem is the character's other abilities, not initiative swapping pretty much sums up my thoughts on the matter. Plenty of games work off of straight up popcorn initiative and play fine, even when they have big powers that are best used early.

MoiMagnus

2022-09-12, 05:09 AM

That's not...Being alert to danger. Actually now that I think about it more than not-at-all, I don't even know what that is. [/COLOR]

Maybe that would be a "Tactician" feat? Being able to consistently have the same order of play seems something out of a "master tactician" toolbox.

Leon

2022-09-12, 05:15 AM

Its a added bonus that may not be needed/ or used every combat. Insofar has how its being "alert" you have seen the danger and are willing to hinder yourself to warn a ally. or the opposite. Its wholly your feat and thus your choice to use it or not at any given Initiative phase. If no one wants to swap with you at that point in time or ever is still works at the first function of the feat.

Waterdeep Merch

2022-09-12, 09:35 AM

I will tentatively agree with this, I believe that part of the challenge and variety in a combat comes from potentially badly ordered turns from the party. If you allow the party to put themselves in any order they like at no cost I suspect that even low optimized parties will find their ideal order and that's the order you'll see until any new variables might adjust it.

As a feat, it has an opportunity cost. If the party wants to decide their turn order, each player will need to invest and give something up.

It's rarely team players and then team monsters, though. It *can* be, especially in high +initiative parties, but you're ignoring the part where multiple rolls also means you're 4-5 times more likely to see a terrible roll, and *someone* has to take it.

It's less chaotic, sure, but in a way I find preferable- the players have to talk to each other and make plans regarding their abilities, trade initiative to get the important players up front and decide who can wait until the back of the order. And this isn't as static as you'd assume, either. The Wizard doesn't always have the perfect spell for every situation, sometimes you need to heal off a bad trap or surprise immediately, and sometimes the tank needs to position themselves to protect everyone ASAP. Sometimes you just want the DPR monsters to drop a caster as fast as possible.

And deciding on what and how requires that the players think and decide like a team from the start. It's enhanced the teamwork aspect of my players, a tradeoff I think worth it.

Cheesegear

2022-09-12, 09:41 AM

Its wholly your feat and thus your choice to use it or not at any given Initiative phase.

You can't force other players to give up their Initiative. It is not 'wholly' your choice to use it, because whether or not you use it is entirely dependent on the consent of the other person (i.e; Willing creature).

Now, there is an argument to be made where what if a character who doesn't want to go first, has Alert, so that they can trade down with any member of their party. Yes. Sort of. I can almost see the argument to be made; You boost your Dex-based character's Initiative to let another party member go first. I can almost see why that's a good idea - build a character to win Initiative but not go first.
...But I just can't see a real player actually doing that. Sure, I can sort of imagine what that character looks like. But I can't imagine a player, playing said character.

'Go first to not go first.' Good meme. I get it. This is a one-shot. Fine. But when we get to our real campaign, you'll play a real character, right? Right!?

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-12, 10:21 AM

You can't force other players to give up their Initiative. It is not 'wholly' your choice to use it, because whether or not you use it is entirely dependent on the consent of the other person (i.e; Willing creature).

Now, there is an argument to be made where what if a character who doesn't want to go first, has Alert, so that they can trade down with any member of their party. Yes. Sort of. I can almost see the argument to be made; You boost your Dex-based character's Initiative to let another party member go first. I can almost see why that's a good idea - build a character to win Initiative but not go first.
...But I just can't see a real player actually doing that. Sure, I can sort of imagine what that character looks like. But I can't imagine a player, playing said character.

'Go first to not go first.' Good meme. I get it. This is a one-shot. Fine. But when we get to our real campaign, you'll play a real character, right? Right!?

I'm not understanding your reasoning here. Believe it or not, there are builds and characters with poor dexterity scores, if you invest into initiative and have the power to put anyone willing at the top of initiative that's not a meme. Context matters and I find pretty often that my characters options might not be the best ones for starting a combat round.

Or, people can also just roll poorly even if they have a decent initiative bonus, obviously.

By the way, I made this character. My Bard has the highest initiative bonus in the party and I very rarely plan to go first. It's not a meme, I didn't make it as a joke, I made it because I value this as a supportive ability. Because of my investments into this my party members have opportunities to invest elsewhere if they want.

Cheesegear

2022-09-12, 10:32 AM

My Bard has the highest initiative bonus in the party and I very rarely plan to go first.

Why not? Why aren't you handing out Bardic Inspiration for the player coming next at the top of every combat and opening every fight with a Hideous Laughter or Hypnotic Pattern, or some other encounter-ending spell that is better, the earlier it is cast?

Supports are better going first, because it means that the characters that come after them, actually have their support, instead of taking their turn without it. How come you didn't give me Haste before my turn started so I could actually use it and not waste my turn doing a turn not Hasted?

The only player that can't benefit from going first, is the Healer...Because if they go first none of their party has taken damage yet. They can Ready an Action, but it's not the same.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-12, 10:50 AM

Why not? Why aren't you handing out Bardic Inspiration for the player coming next at the top of every combat and opening every fight with a Hideous Laughter or Hypnotic Pattern, or some other encounter-ending spell that is better, the earlier it is cast?

Supports are better going first, because it means that the characters that come after them, actually have their support, instead of taking their turn without it. How come you didn't give me Haste before my turn started so I could actually use it and not waste my turn doing a turn not Hasted?

The only player that can't benefit from going first, is the Healer...Because if they go first none of their party has taken damage yet. They can Ready an Action, but it's not the same.

Haste isn't a Bard spell, for starters. Not sure it would be my pick for magical secrets either.

Aside from that, I'm not the only supporter in the party. The wizard is better built at the moment for doing those start of combat control options. Many of the spells I'll be focusing on are pre-combat buffs or control oriented.

So I'll say it again. Context matters. I don't understand your reasoning because you're assuming every aspect is against it being useful. I can tell you, in practice, it's been noticeably impactful.

stoutstien

2022-09-12, 10:55 AM

Class "roles" don't exist in 5e which is a good thing. The idea that the support or tank going first is useless outside of the context of an individual encounter.

Cheesegear

2022-09-12, 11:05 AM

So I'll say it again. Context matters.

I disagree.

Going first is better than not going first - unless you are specifically a Healer and that's all you do (which doesn't really exist in D&D anyway...Clerics, Bards and Druids have several other options to choose from even when they do focus on 'mainly' healing).

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-12, 11:18 AM

I disagree.

Okay, you're first. Combat has started againt Archers at the edge of Longbow range. None of your control spells can reach. You take cover, Dodge, use whatever bonus action buff and end your turn.

Another party member follows, offers to cast dimension door to close the distance for you but gosh darn it you've already taken your turn, at this point, given this type of situation, it sure would have been nice to act in a different order.

Sure you could ready your control spell but in the event that your ally didn't plan on closing the distance for you, it risks being wasted. You might also not have known whether an enemy would act first and break your concentration on a readied spell.

Context matters.

Cheesegear

2022-09-12, 11:27 AM

Okay, you're first. Combat has started againt Archers at the edge of Longbow range. None of your control spells can reach. You take cover, Dodge, use whatever bonus action buff and end your turn.

Dodging and using that Bonus Action buff is a good use of your turn. Since now you are Dodging those Longbows and are less likely to die. You don't know that the hostiles wouldn't just pass all their Saving Throws, making your spell completely useless and leaving you stranded in front of a bunch of Longbows, Dimension Door'd far away from the rest of your party where they can't help you.

But you do know that Dodge works, and your Bonus Action buff happens. Solid turn. No wrong choices were made given the information available and the risks involved.

Another party member follows, offers to cast dimension door to close the distance for you but gosh darn it you've already taken your turn

That doesn't happen. Once you end your turn the offer of Dimension Door is no longer on the table, freeing that caster to do something else.

it sure would have been nice to act in a different order.

Oh. I see. You're acting as though you have all the information required for the entire fight and you've pre-loaded the dice rolls. Okay.

In that case going first is always an awful idea because moving forwards 5 ft. might land you into a trap that nobody in the party has seen, yet. You don't know. So best not do anything, ever. You can't ever make a choice, ever, because something else might happen later that renders your choice meaningless post-hoc.

Going first is never good, because something might happen, sometime. So you should always go last in case something does. Context matters.

Talamare

2022-09-12, 11:33 AM

You can't force other players to give up their Initiative. It is not 'wholly' your choice to use it, because whether or not you use it is entirely dependent on the consent of the other person (i.e; Willing creature).

Now, there is an argument to be made where what if a character who doesn't want to go first, has Alert, so that they can trade down with any member of their party. Yes. Sort of. I can almost see the argument to be made; You boost your Dex-based character's Initiative to let another party member go first. I can almost see why that's a good idea - build a character to win Initiative but not go first.
...But I just can't see a real player actually doing that. Sure, I can sort of imagine what that character looks like. But I can't imagine a player, playing said character.

'Go first to not go first.' Good meme. I get it. This is a one-shot. Fine. But when we get to our real campaign, you'll play a real character, right? Right!?

It's pretty telling that you can't even acknowledge that you can't see other people not wanting to go first.

It doesn't even need to be a thing of "I took all these things to get highest initiative."

It can often just be "I have highest initiative by accident because I happen to be DEX based."

People harping on about how 'the highest DPS will go first and murder a guy!'

Man, You know what happens next? The 4-5 enemies go next and murders the DPS that's out of position.

or

'The Mage goes first and NUKES EM'

Then the 3-4 enemies come out of the woodwork and the only thing you nuked were the 1 or 2 guards at patrol

or

'The Mage goes first and NUKES EM'
'The Mage goes first and NUKES EM'
'The Mage goes first and NUKES EM'
'The Mage goes first and NUKES EM'
'The Mage goes first and NUKES EM'

Now the mage is out of resources and we aren't even at our first short rest
I would legit rather hold back and SEE if a nuking is even needed than blow fireyball on ever couple of mobs.

Cheesegear

2022-09-12, 12:06 PM

It can often just be "I have highest initiative by accident because I happen to be DEX based."

And then you do what? Cry about it?

People harping on about how 'the highest DPS will go first and murder a guy!'

That's entirely possible.
However, the conversation quickly evolved to pressing your character's 'Win Button,' whatever it happens to be. I, myself find great value in Twin Spelled Haste cast ASAP, because that spell is used on our terms. Whatever your party's SOP is, do that.

The 4-5 enemies go next and murders the DPS that's out of position.

Then the DPS didn't do their turn right. They should've done something else.

Then the 3-4 enemies come out of the woodwork and the only thing you nuked were the 1 or 2 guards at patrol

Right. We follow this logic all the way down and we get to 'Never do anything, ever, in case something happens at some point, maybe. Actually, it's always safer to go last.'
...Which...I guess?

Going first is better than not going first.
Going last is better than not going last.

Well that's an impasse. Not sure how we resolve that one.

I would legit rather hold back and SEE if a nuking is even needed than blow fireyball on ever couple of mobs.

Then don't Fireball on your first turn? Do a Scorching Ray? Fire Bolt? Do something else. Fact is, though. Since you're first, you have the choice to do anything you want. You might even dictate the entire first round...Hell, maybe even the entire combat by going first.

Yes. If you're an idiot and open every fight - regardless of situation - with Fireball. You - the player - might have a problem.

But as has already been discussed; Full casters have many, many options to choose from. You don't have to Fireball. You can do something else suited for the fight...First. Hell, casting Mage Armour before the hostiles get to have a turn because you forgot (or it ran out) might be the best thing you can ever do, and has nothing to do with direct damage.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-12, 12:47 PM

That doesn't happen. Once you end your turn the offer of Dimension Door is no longer on the table, freeing that caster to do something else.
Huh, you mean given the context of the situation, this caster would act differently if their turn order was different.

But you said that was impossible.

Edit: And now that I think of it, surprise, nothing stops you from pushing a surprised ally to the top of initiative so that their reaction is open for the enemies turns. Very useful to bump an ally with counterspell to the top of you've been surprised by spellcasters.

Skrum

2022-09-12, 01:30 PM

Now the mage is out of resources and we aren't even at our first short rest
I would legit rather hold back and SEE if a nuking is even needed than blow fireyball on ever couple of mobs.

I think you are exaggerating the difficulty of judging what encounter needs a fireball on first round, and which ones you can conserve your resources on.

My general intuition is that if you can hit 5 or more enemies with the fireball, it's worth casting, unless you have very strong evidence that they are weak and pose no real threat at all. Doing roughly 30 damage to each target if they fail the save, hitting 5 targets means you'll do somewhere between 120-150 damage. Even if it doesn't actually take anyone out, that's a crushing alpha strike that few classes can EVER recreate, much less at 5th level. This will be the decider in many encounters; the weakened enemies can be cleaned up easily, and the party will take less damage overall. And that's just fireball; my pick for the best 3rd level spell, but hardly the only option casters have.

Sure, sometimes the guy with fireball just rolls really high initiative and they get to do this anyway. Those encounters usually go a certain way, which is the PC's winning handily. The Alert feat makes it so that could plausibly happen in *every* fight. To me, that's game-warping.

Rerem115

2022-09-12, 02:31 PM

You can't force other players to give up their Initiative. It is not 'wholly' your choice to use it, because whether or not you use it is entirely dependent on the consent of the other person (i.e; Willing creature).

Now, there is an argument to be made where what if a character who doesn't want to go first, has Alert, so that they can trade down with any member of their party. Yes. Sort of. I can almost see the argument to be made; You boost your Dex-based character's Initiative to let another party member go first. I can almost see why that's a good idea - build a character to win Initiative but not go first.
...But I just can't see a real player actually doing that. Sure, I can sort of imagine what that character looks like. But I can't imagine a player, playing said character.

You just described one of my most played characters! Kobold Rogue/Gloomstalker Ranger; the interplay between Sunlight Sensitivity, Sneak Attack, and Pack Tactics mean that I always want an ally to be adjacent to whoever needs shooting, but high Dexterity and the Gloomstalker bonus to Initiative mean that I'm usually 'stuck' going first, and then having to decide between making shots at Disadvantage, or holding my action - and losing my Extra Attack and Gloomstalker bonuses - until an ally walks up to them.

If I could swap initiative to any time after one of the party frontliners, I absolutely would.

Psyren

2022-09-12, 02:37 PM

Mastikator

2022-09-12, 02:44 PM

I disagree.

Going first is better than not going first - unless you are specifically a Healer and that's all you do (which doesn't really exist in D&D anyway...Clerics, Bards and Druids have several other options to choose from even when they do focus on 'mainly' healing).

A player going before the enemies is important. Going before another player is not important. If alert let you swap initative with an enemy it would be madly overpowered.

stoutstien

2022-09-12, 02:44 PM

I suspect we won't know how powerful Alert is until we know the new Surprise or flat-footed (if such a thing exists) rules. In general though, I think an ability that lets you swap initiative with someone is worth a feat.

Saying it's worth a feat is a much more reasonable stance than saying it's broken or even it's so good it's going to be everybody's primary selection.
I currently have it slotted in a two-way tie for third place.

MadBear

2022-09-12, 02:47 PM

Mastikator

2022-09-12, 02:51 PM

I honestly am not convinced that it's overpowered at all. It seems like a good feat worth taking, but isn't an auto take for me. The swapping feature is really cool. If I've designed an encounter where a particular character going first ruined the encounter, I'd say the encounter design was already not great. Generally, I find this feat to be better then the original, only in that it allows for some more interesting tactical decisions that weren't available in the original feat.

Is it really that much better than lucky or musician. Musician seems like it gives advantage proficiency x sleep. A human with lucky and musician seems like they would just be a wellspring of advantage for everyone. Weigh that against alert on say, a dwarf or ardling

MadBear

2022-09-12, 02:55 PM

stoutstien

2022-09-12, 03:00 PM

Is it really that much better than lucky or musician. Musician seems like it gives advantage proficiency x sleep. A human with lucky and musician seems like they would just be a wellspring of advantage for everyone. Weigh that against alert on say, a dwarf or ardling
Musicians the one I actually have it tied with. I rate lucky a little bit ahead just because it's ability to be added on the rolls you think you'll need it without an action cost. It's also one of the rare ways to apply Disdvantage to an enemies attack roll that you don't have to necessarily be able to see or even locate them.

Psyren

2022-09-12, 03:10 PM

The new Magic Initiate is going to be the one to beat imo. Every caster can melee with their mental stat, every naked character has 8 hours of 13+Dex AC, every class with lots of attacks gets Hunter's Mark, literally anyone can get a familiar etc. Not to mention you can swap the spells as you level, so powerful options at low levels that scale badly like Sleep can be dumped as soon as they're no longer useful.

stoutstien

2022-09-12, 04:58 PM

PhantomSoul

2022-09-12, 05:15 PM

... every naked character has 8 hours of 13+Dex AC ...

Which is just ridiculous -- who needs the extra 7 hours, 59 minutes and 0-54 seconds?

Mastikator

2022-09-12, 05:44 PM

Which is just ridiculous -- who needs the extra 7 hours, 59 minutes and 0-54 seconds?

Remember, just like in real life- if you are awoken mid sleep at the 7th hour and 59th minute you'll need a whole new set of 8 hours or you will suffer sleep deprivation.

That's how sleeping works.

Brookshw

2022-09-12, 05:46 PM

PhantomSoul

2022-09-12, 05:47 PM

Remember, just like in real life- if you are awoken mid sleep at the 7th hour and 59th minute you'll need a whole new set of 8 hours or you will suffer sleep deprivation.

That's how sleeping works.

I don't understand -- getting 6-8 hours of actual sleep isn't realistic to begin with!

Brookshw

2022-09-12, 05:48 PM

I don't understand -- getting 6-8 hours of actual sleep isn't realistic to begin with!

Ah, I see you have children.

animorte

2022-09-12, 06:04 PM

Ah, I see you have children.

Aye, thar be parents here. I must be an elf or something. Sometimes I just stare off into space for 4 hours and that’s just enough to get me through.

PhantomSoul

2022-09-12, 06:08 PM

Ah, I see you have children.

Haha, no, I don't have a good excuse! :)

Leon

2022-09-12, 09:19 PM

You can't force other players to give up their Initiative. It is not 'wholly' your choice to use it, because whether or not you use it is entirely dependent on the consent of the other person (i.e; Willing creature).

Now, there is an argument to be made where what if a character who doesn't want to go first, has Alert, so that they can trade down with any member of their party. Yes. Sort of. I can almost see the argument to be made; You boost your Dex-based character's Initiative to let another party member go first. I can almost see why that's a good idea - build a character to win Initiative but not go first.
...But I just can't see a real player actually doing that. Sure, I can sort of imagine what that character looks like. But I can't imagine a player, playing said character.

'Go first to not go first.' Good meme. I get it. This is a one-shot. Fine. But when we get to our real campaign, you'll play a real character, right? Right!?

No you cant force other players to do anything but it is your choice to make use of the second part of the feat, others may not at that time wish to participate with you but its your call to use it at all. (Ok due to pedantic posters Wholly was a poor choice of wording) While it seems you cannot see the value of teamwork its a bit biased to assume that all players are like you and are universally unwilling to inconvenience themselves for the betterment of the team if the situation needs.

Eh, I have a player who regularly wants to delay his turn and go later in the initiative, regardless of whether I think he's making a good decision or not, it's hardly a meme, those players definitely exist. It's not like he's a new player either (or a healer).

Yup, seen a few people over time (across all editions ive played in) who are not interested in going first for a variety of reasons and would happy trade down if they had the ability to rather than just delay, played with a few people who did Healing to the exclusion of all else as well.

Cheesegear

2022-09-13, 02:11 AM

While it seems you cannot see the value of teamwork its a bit biased to assume that all players are like you and are universally unwilling to inconvenience themselves for the betterment of the team if the situation needs.

It's pretty clear that you have been paying attention, since that's basically the opposite of what I've been saying this entire time...Except for in the very specific instance that you quoted.

Let's recap:

Alert is broken if your party is willing to work together, because it allows you to almost do anything you want - up to and including going first, if that's what you want...*Knowing* you *can* go first in almost any combat because your Team is totally willing to work together, makes almost any character you can think of, really really, really strong, because whatever your character's power move happens to be, you can get it off basically immediately, in basically any combat you want.

What if two characters in the same party, each have their own power move (because of course they do), and they each want to go first, because escapist power fantasy and spotlights and whatnot?

Okay, fair enough. Alert probably isn't going to be that good if you play with babies. That's a pretty significant downside and has been brought up a few times about how that somehow 'balances' it.
...It's not broken if your party doesn't let you use it. That doesn't change the fact that it is broken, if you can use it. But yes the point stands and those tables where you wont be "allowed" to use it do exist. Sure.

Could Alert be used the opposite way? Altruistically? What if I took Alert, boosted my DEX to go first, plus my Proficiency, but then used the feature to trade my Initiative down to someone else?

...Sure. I can see that being incredibly useful. That's an amazing idea. But, who boosts their Initiative on purpose, just to hand it to someone else? Couldn't you make a character that just doesn't try and go first, and spend your opportunity costs somewhere else? Surely you would end up with a better character who either:
a) Wants to go first, or
b) Doesn't care about going first (not they wont go first if it comes up).

I can't conceptualise a character in the middle ground that wants to go first...And then just doesn't.

Ex. Kobold Rogue. You need other party members to go first to set you up for Pack Tactics.
...That's actually a perfect example. I concede that a Kobold Rogue actually has a very good reason to use Initiative Swap, altruistically. Well played. However, I'll also note that that's a very specific reason to do that, and feels like an exception.
Kobolds are narratively, also eusocial - so the whole thing just works.

...However, to poop in the cereal; It's also a terrible example because Kobolds don't have Pack Tactics anymore.

Yup, seen a few people over time (across all editions ive played in) who are not interested in going first for a variety of reasons...

The only reasons I've ever come across where a player doesn't want to go first is when they are:
a) Unsure of what to do, or
b) Believe (rightly or wrongly) there is a dimension to the fight that they're not seeing yet.

Both have been brought up in this thread:

a) What do you mean you don't know what to do? Why not? Just pick something reasonable based on the information you have, and do it. Go first and just Dodge if you want. Ready an Action for later. Do a Talk No Jutsu, roll Intimidation and see if you can just...End the fight immediately. Doesn't matter... But 'I don't know,' is...Well I could make a whole new thread on using those three words during a combat. The game isn't that hard.

b) How far down that rabbit hole can we really go? Because right down the bottom is 'Never do anything, ever, because your DM might screw with you.' I'm sure nobody in this thread is going that far down. But seriously...How far down are we going?

Then you have the super special:
I am unsure of what to do, because I think the DM is going to screw with me.
In that case you may as well just Dodge... Just kidding the DM hits you with an INT save!
If your DM is going to screw with you, it doesn't matter what you do so you may as well do something.

stoutstien

2022-09-13, 04:28 AM

It's pretty clear that you have been paying attention, since that's basically the opposite of what I've been saying this entire time...Except for in the very specific instance that you quoted.

Let's recap:

Alert is broken if your party is willing to work together, because it allows you to almost do anything you want - up to and including going first, if that's what you want...*Knowing* you *can* go first in almost any combat because your Team is totally willing to work together, makes almost any character you can think of, really really, really strong, because whatever your character's power move happens to be, you can get it off basically immediately, in basically any combat you want.

What if two characters in the same party, each have their own power move (because of course they do), and they each want to go first, because escapist power fantasy and spotlights and whatnot?

Okay, fair enough. Alert probably isn't going to be that good if you play with babies. That's a pretty significant downside and has been brought up a few times about how that somehow 'balances' it.
...It's not broken if your party doesn't let you use it. That doesn't change the fact that it is broken, if you can use it. But yes the point stands and those tables where you wont be "allowed" to use it do exist. Sure.

Could Alert be used the opposite way? Altruistically? What if I took Alert, boosted my DEX to go first, plus my Proficiency, but then used the feature to trade my Initiative down to someone else?

...Sure. I can see that being incredibly useful. That's an amazing idea. But, who boosts their Initiative on purpose, just to hand it to someone else? Couldn't you make a character that just doesn't try and go first, and spend your opportunity costs somewhere else? Surely you would end up with a better character who either:
a) Wants to go first, or
b) Doesn't care about going first (not they wont go first if it comes up).

I can't conceptualise a character in the middle ground that wants to go first...And then just doesn't.

Ex. Kobold Rogue. You need other party members to go first to set you up for Pack Tactics.
...That's actually a perfect example. I concede that a Kobold Rogue actually has a very good reason to use Initiative Swap, altruistically. Well played. However, I'll also note that that's a very specific reason to do that, and feels like an exception.
Kobolds are narratively, also eusocial - so the whole thing just works.

...However, to poop in the cereal; It's also a terrible example because Kobolds don't have Pack Tactics anymore.

The only reasons I've ever come across where a player doesn't want to go first is when they are:
a) Unsure of what to do, or
b) Believe (rightly or wrongly) there is a dimension to the fight that they're not seeing yet.

Both have been brought up in this thread:

a) What do you mean you don't know what to do? Why not? Just pick something reasonable based on the information you have, and do it. Go first and just Dodge if you want. Ready an Action for later. Do a Talk No Jutsu, roll Intimidation and see if you can just...End the fight immediately. Doesn't matter... But 'I don't know,' is...Well I could make a whole new thread on using those three words during a combat. The game isn't that hard.

b) How far down that rabbit hole can we really go? Because right down the bottom is 'Never do anything, ever, because your DM might screw with you.' I'm sure nobody in this thread is going that far down. But seriously...How far down are we going?

Then you have the super special:
I am unsure of what to do, because I think the DM is going to screw with me.
In that case you may as well just Dodge... Just kidding the DM hits you with an INT save!
If your DM is going to screw with you, it doesn't matter what you do so you may as well do something.

Maybe If you think that including a saving throw is somehow screwing with the party then the "broken" thing is a conflict of player/DM expectations. We're not talking about simulacrum.

Cheesegear

2022-09-13, 06:49 AM

Maybe If you think that including a saving throw is somehow screwing with the party then the "broken" thing is a conflict of player/DM expectations...

If the...Joke (?) about the futility of trying to read the DM's mind is the only thing you object to in that whole post...I'll take it.

stoutstien

2022-09-13, 07:17 AM

If the...Joke (?) about the futility of trying to read the DM's mind is the only thing you object to in that whole post...I'll take it.
The rest is attaching buzz words to conjectured beliefs of what constitutes the correct way to play the game.

Leon

2022-09-13, 08:08 AM

Long post

A Party willing to work together can already do a lot, this feat allows them to tweak the Initiatives, if that's "broken" in your eyes you can talk with your DM about not having it but as a baseline feat its fine and valid as it is. It is ALSO a first draft of a feat and there are many many feats that languish in the "UA files" that were prob also "broken" on the first draft and were changed for later iterations and in a year or two the thread will be how good Alert was in the UA.

As a player i don't need to go first, i just don't like going last and from recent experiences that's been rolling a 3 or less in 3 combats in a row (and had considered taking the current version of this feat but opted for a party supporting one instead) but am also open the idea that if my going later could really help with another's actions im open for doing that by my choice. Also fine with picking up a feat for just one portion of it for multipart feats.

Mastikator

2022-09-13, 08:20 AM

^The survey is still open so you can tell WotC to buff or nerf feats that are not well balanced. I told them to buff crafter and nerf magic initiate.

Brookshw

2022-09-13, 08:22 AM

The only reasons I've ever come across where a player doesn't want to go first is when they are:
a) Unsure of what to do, or
b) Believe (rightly or wrongly) there is a dimension to the fight that they're not seeing yet.

I find its often because the player wants to see the outcome of another's action first (i.e., I want to be sure that monster is locked down, but I think my party member may be able to kill him in a round, maybe give him the chance and if he fails, then do a thing). At the end of the day though, I don't second guess my players for wanting to do something, its their character, if they want to wait for whatever reason they have, okay, more power too them.

MadBear

2022-09-13, 03:34 PM

The only reasons I've ever come across where a player doesn't want to go first is when they are:
a) Unsure of what to do, or
b) Believe (rightly or wrongly) there is a dimension to the fight that they're not seeing yet.

c) You're a melee rogue who needs a party member near by to set up sneak attack.
d) You're a melee character who wants the enemy to move forward first so that you don't have to dash
e) You want another player to lure the enemy to them before hitting them with an aoe
f) Luring the enemy into a bottle neck

These are niche reasons to be sure, but there are more then a few reasons why you might not wanna go first, and the context of the battle field absolutely is going to matter. Obvious from a white room scenario here, it's hard to say what might cause a character to not wanna go first, but in the moment you might see reasons.

Also, note that because of the way initiative swap works, maybe your willing to swap down just a single spot. Letting the Ranger with Volley of arrows fire first, before you then charge in makes a lot of sense. It's not like if you swap you're going to always go from last to first, or first to last.

PhantomSoul

2022-09-13, 05:16 PM

c) You're a melee rogue who needs a party member near by to set up sneak attack.
d) You're a melee character who wants the enemy to move forward first so that you don't have to dash
e) You another player to lure the enemy to them before hitting them with an aoe
f) Luring the enemy into a bottle neck

These are niche reasons to be sure, but there are more then a few reasons why you might not wanna go first, and the context of the battle field absolutely is going to matter. Obvious from a white room scenario here, it's hard to say what might cause a character to not wanna go first, but in the moment you might see reasons.

Also, note that because of the way initiative swap works, maybe your willing to swap down just a single spot. Letting the Ranger with Volley of arrows fire first, before you then charge in makes a lot of sense. It's not like if you swap you're going to always go from last to first, or first to last.

Another common one is that you'd be going into a danger zone (character casting Fireball or Hypnotic Pattern or whatever else goes after you... and you'd much rather go after this is done)... but after writing that, your before-last sentence got re-noticed... :)

Swaps are powerful because it gives the choice for basically whatever strategy would help!

Cheesegear

2022-09-13, 10:40 PM

c) You're a melee rogue who needs a party member near by to set up sneak attack.

Rogues don't have Extra Attack, so Ready an Action and wait.

You're a melee character who wants the enemy to move forward first so that you don't have to dash

Move forwards and Ready an Action. If the hostiles have ranged weapons, you should have Dashed (or Dodged).

You want another player to lure the enemy to them before hitting them with an aoe

IME, that's the most common use of a Readied Action.

Luring the enemy into a bottle neck

I'm not sure what you mean. But it's clear you know what to do, so I'm just gonna assume that a Readied Action is probably what you want to do.

but there are more then a few reasons why you might not wanna go first

No. You just want to do something after another player - or the hostiles - do something. There are mechanisms in the game with which you can do that. That is not what I'm talking about.

and the context of the battle field absolutely is going to matter.

And I think the vast majority of the time, it doesn't. Certainly not to the point where you're spending opportunity costs on your character.

Obvious from a white room scenario here, it's hard to say what might cause a character to not wanna go first, but in the moment you might see reasons.

So you're saying that a character will only not want to first under very specific reasons that you actually can't think of, offhand. That says to me that those particular situations are so rare that they're not really worth considering when considering and building your character.

It's not like if you swap you're going to always go from last to first, or first to last.

No. But my base assumption that you'll be using it in situations where:
a) You're giving yourself a practical advantage, by disadvantaging someone else, or
b) You're giving yourself a practical disadvantage, by advantaging someone else.

Because those situations are the ones where you impact yourself or another player in a negative way, because no-one likes having negative consequences, and certainly applying those negative consequences to another player is antithetical to most tables - and only leads to arguments. If you're talking about

'Oh, I don't want to go first...You go first do your thing and I'll go second.'
Nothing really changes. If you and another party member win 1st and 2nd Initiative with no hostiles in between...On the DM side of the table, nothing has really changed. And because you went from 1st and 2nd, to 2nd and 1st; Nobody on either side of Alert really had to sacrifice anything in order to make the system work.

(Once again, if Alert does get used in this way - and I'm sure it will - calling it 'Alert' really feels like a misnomer...Then again D&D has a spell called Detect Evil and Good, which doesn't, and another spell called Find Traps, which also doesn't...I'm well aware that naming spells and abilities is not D&D's strong suit. I'd be more than happy for Alert to be an Initiative and/or Perception bonus, whilst Initiative Swap is separated out into something else; "Tactical Awareness" maybe?)

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-13, 10:57 PM

Readied action 4x

You really can't see a tactical difference between a readied action and being able to secure that action happening during your turn?

There isn't any reason you can think of. None at all? Will this intentionally over the top line of questioning perhaps draw a reaction from you?

Or to spell it out because I'm genuinely worried it will be lost in translation, you lose your reaction when you use a Readied Action. It should go without saying, reactions are valuable, the Rogue in this example almost certainly wants it available for something else.

No. But my base assumption that you'll be using it in situations where:
a) You're giving yourself a practical advantage, by disadvantaging someone else, or
b) You're giving yourself a practical disadvantage, by advantaging someone else.
Nobody is disadvantaged here, both players agree to swap initiative. When it happens, both players are winning at D&D and having fun.

(Once again, if Alert does get used in this way - and I'm sure it will - calling it 'Alert' really feels like a misnomer...Then again D&D has a spell called Detect Evil and Good, which doesn't, and another spell called Find Traps, which also doesn't...I'm well aware that naming spells and abilities is not D&D's strong suit. I'd be more than happy for Alert to be an Initiative and/or Perception bonus, whilst Initiative Swap is separated out into something else; "Tactical Awareness" maybe?)
I disagree, quite strongly in fact, a good way of showing how alert you are is being able to incite others to act spontaneously. It's not just being alert to the beginnings of a combat but alert to who should probably be acting first.

Alert:
Adjective - quick to notice any unusual and potentially dangerous or difficult circumstances; vigilant.
Noun- the state of being watchful for possible danger.
Verb- warn (someone) of a danger, threat, or problem, typically with the intention of having it avoided or dealt with.

This is more of a semantics argument I feel, sure there could be a better name but Alert is succinct and works nicely. Kind of neat how the initiative swapping mechanic covers a separate definition of the same word. Alert is a very accurate name for this feat.

Cheesegear

2022-09-14, 01:48 AM

You really can't see a tactical difference between a readied action and being able to secure that action happening during your turn?

If you have Alert, you can choose whether or not to swap Initiatives.

In the 'I go, you go' system of Initiative, going first is almost* always better than not going first. Taking a hostile out of the fight before it gets a turn, on Round 1, is basically the dream. Buffing your friends before they have their turn, so they can use said buffs on their turns, is also the dream. There are very, very few situations where going first with whatever you've got, is amazingly helpful. *Knowing* that you have the *choice* to go first - or really anywhere you want - in *any* fight, is a huge tactical advantage.

*Now, in the "almost" bit...Nobody seems to be able to provide me with an example of 'context matters.' So, they're not wrong, I know context matters. I really do. However I also know if that if you can't think of...At least three scenarios that happen so regularly you can just drop them in a forum post...Then those 'context matters' scenarios are rare and don't happen often enough to spring to mind immediately, and being so rare...I don't care about considering those contexts in terms of character creation.

Lair Actions happen at Initiative 20, so I want to go at Initiative 19 after the result of the Lair Action...If I have a party member with Initiative 15ish-19, I'd like to swap with them, even if there's another party member (or myself) with Initiative 21+. I need to see the result of the Lair Action that I know is going to happen before I decide on a course of action. Not even Readying is a good idea.
That's good. Great example (that I myself had to come with, not anyone actually arguing against me). It's not character-dependent. It's scenario-dependent. Context matters, as has been said. Any class, any character, may have this thought process. However the problem to me, is that in said scenario, you're specifically describing Lair Actions as the impetus to stifle your Initiative, which is fine. But if you consider that a Day has 6-8 encounters...How many of those scenarios, traps, skill checks and combats have Lair Actions? One? Maybe? But none, actually probably?

So yeah. Not a great context. But it is a real context that does happen...Rarely. Is it worth taking Alert just so you can drop your Initiative to below the Lair Action that might only even happen once maybe twice per adventure? No. Probably not. Don't pretend you took Alert just so you could maybe fight the Final Boss monster in a potentially slightly more efficient way.

However, if you already have Alert because of the things you really want to do with it...You come across a Final Boss creature with Lair Actions and will you use Initiative swap to get your Initiative as high as you can get without going before the Lair Action? Of course. That might be a really good idea (especially if you know what the Lair Action, is). But that isn't why you would take Alert in the first place, is it?

Finally, if you're actively saying that Alert isn't even broken because you - as an individual - don't even want to go first...Then great. You - as an individual - shouldn't take Alert. However, that doesn't solve the problem that it is fairly broken for the characters and classes that do want it, and do want to know for a fact that in any combat at any time, they can simply choose to go first if the party is willing.

PhantomSoul

2022-09-14, 09:02 AM

Finally, if you're actively saying that Alert isn't even broken because you - as an individual - don't even want to go first...Then great. You - as an individual - shouldn't take Alert. However, that doesn't solve the problem that it is fairly broken for the characters and classes that do want it, and do want to know for a fact that in any combat at any time, they can simply choose to go first if the party is willing.

That's not even right... if a Player/Character doesn't want to go first... they STILL take Alert, but use it to swap down and not up!

So Alert still wins!

AdAstra

2022-09-14, 09:33 AM

You (Cheesegear, to be specific) seem to be blaming variable initiative for entirely separate problems that you are describing, which is spells (or just abilities in general, but it's usually a spell) that break encounters if they get cast first, and people always insisting on X character (potentially not their own) going first in a given scenario. It's a separate issue, and one that is always a problem whereas initiative swapping is not (People can and will complain about the results of random initiative way too much for my taste). There are games with popcorn initiative, where the players get a massive amount of control over who goes when, that don't break like this, and usually don't have players squabbling over initiative, even where there are strong powers that benefit greatly from going first. I've played games like this, the combination of courtesy and tactics tends to prevail, and also doesn't tend to ruin encounters that would have otherwise been challenging. On the other hand, a spell that breaks encounters when cast first is going to be an issue in every game that uses it, it will just happen less frequently if people can't swap initiative. Plus, spells that break encounters when cast first tend to be merely less broken when cast later, so curbing them is likely to be far more effective balancing than any initiative system. Like, having more initiative choice is strong, but it shouldn't be breaking anything that doesn't desperately need fixing already.

In terms of characters that rarely want to go first, Rogues are very often wanting to delay their first turn so that they have more Sneak Attack targets (less common when ample cover for Hiding is available, but still usually relevant on the first turn). But more importantly, basically any instance where one character should go first for tactical reasons (AOEs, debuffs, buffs, etc.) is correspondingly an instance where other people will want to go after them, unless they have their own ability that they think will have greater effect if done first. When a caster wants to put Haste on the melee character, or slap Hold Person on people they plan on hitting, that's not just a case where the caster wants to go earlier, but also one where the melee wants to go after so they can benefit from those buffs (or debuffs, or just not getting blasted) on more rounds. When it would be a good idea for the AOE blaster to soften up the enemies first, it also tends to be a good idea for the melee characters to go after, and at least in my experience they're happy to. It's not like, a begrudging sacrifice to them. I'd certainly be interested in playing a Rogue with Alert that stands a good chance of being able to give the top (or at least a high) slot in initiative to the person who would benefit most from it.

Readied actions are brittle and vulnerable to changing circumstance. You can run towards an enemy that you can't reach this turn, Ready your action to attack them, and hope they decide to meet your challenge head-on, rather than just avoiding your reach, but being able to take your entire turn after they've moved is often better, since if they don't play into your expectations you can do more to respond. While attacking first is usually better in most games, moving last is usually an advantage as well, you can see this in tabletop wargames that have separate movement and attack phases. The person who moves after has more say over the final positioning of units when the shooting/stabbing/casting starts.

If the issue is "some characters will have more reason to go first than other characters and that's broken" that's largely a separate issue that can and probably should be resolved by giving characters that often want to go later some notable benefits from it (whereas the Rogue is just penalized if they don't have valid Sneak Attack targets), not by ensuring initiative is random. It's another thing that usually benefits casters over martials (though not universally), something that would be better addressed by directly dealing with that imbalance, either by giving everyone powerful encounter openers or (likely better) making characters that can be expected to go later a bit stronger to compensate.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-14, 10:05 AM

*Now, in the "almost" bit...Nobody seems to be able to provide me with an example of 'context matters.' So, they're not wrong, I know context matters. I really do. However I also know if that if you can't think of...At least three scenarios that happen so regularly you can just drop them in a forum post...Then those 'context matters' scenarios are rare and don't happen often enough to spring to mind immediately, and being so rare...I don't care about considering those contexts in terms of character creation.

You've been provided with several, nearly a dozen even. The fact that you don't acknowledge them as relevant doesn't make them less valid.

It's ridiculous, honestly, if it were so simple to dismiss an argument I could dismiss every one of your points in the same way.

You haven't shown me any examples to make me believe context doesn't matter. Boom, your post is now completely invalid. It's just that easy.

Finally, if you're actively saying that Alert isn't even broken because you - as an individual - don't even want to go first...Then great. You - as an individual - shouldn't take Alert. However, that doesn't solve the problem that it is fairly broken for the characters and classes that do want it, and do want to know for a fact that in any combat at any time, they can simply choose to go first if the party is willing.
Fwiw, and I thought I'd been clear on this, I've never said I find it broken and I've also said that I personally find more value in being able to make others act first.

Which is what spawned this entire tangent to begin with, because once again you've made it apparent that you just don't see that as a strength but rather a detriment. There's apparently a fundamental difference in the way we view this feat and despite myself and several others communicating why we view this way of using the feat as appealing, giving a real actually happened in real life example of using it this way, you continue to dismiss it as useful in this way.

Cheesegear

2022-09-15, 01:23 AM

You've been provided with several, nearly a dozen even.

I've been provided with one, class-specific example; Rogues. Sure. But I'm sure Rogues are equally just as willing to go first in any combat, too. There are many ways to get Advantage on your attack rolls, that you shouldn't have to wait around for a party member to be within 5 ft. of your target. But sure. Tasha's gave Rogues Steady Aim for literally no reason, but sure - wait for your party to get within 5 ft. because you're a Melee Rogue. I get it.

The other examples could all be replaced by 'I Ready [x]', and a DM acting in good faith.

I don't want to go first because Readying an Action is slightly worse than just doing it on my turn, and I don't believe that my DM will act in good faith - or with any leniency - when I tell them what the trigger is.

The fact that you don't acknowledge them as relevant doesn't make them less valid.

It makes them less valid...To me.

You haven't shown me any examples to make me believe context doesn't matter.

That's because I don't think I should have to.

I would have thought that in the 'I go, you go' system of Initiative, "Being able to drop your opponent(s) to 0, before they get a turn, is really good, regardless of context" shouldn't need to be explained, because it would (should?) be apparent to everyone who has played this game. Hostiles can't hurt you if they're dead.

No matter the context, no matter the situation, I believe quite strongly that killing your opponent before they can even damage you, is a massive advantage...And if I need to actually explain why, that derails the thread.

'What about if...' Yep. Even in that situation. The hostile is dead and I'm fine.
'What about...' That one too. The hostile is dead before it gets to act.

If I can press 'Skip Combat' on the first player's turn in the first round, I almost always will. Some other players might complain that I'm doing a 'Steal the Spotlight,' but that's not what I'm doing. I'm not making myself look cool. I'm ending the fight quickly. So we can progress the game and move onto next combat...If I know I can go first in that fight, and I know I can end it early, I almost will certainly do the same thing there, too.

The only consideration you need to make is a) What are the hostiles, and b) Which resource do I spend to Skip Combat, if any?
If you use Fireball in every fight you'll run out of spell slots, dumdum.
I'm not talking about using Fireball in every fight. I'm talking about "Stealing the Initiative" (to borrow a phrase), in order for you to do anything you want, first.

Now, if your DM is throwing multiple Deadly+ encounters at you per day, with unseen environmental triggers in every fight, with no Short Rests between encounters...That's a very different game.

you've made it apparent that you just don't see that as a strength but rather a detriment.

Incorrect. If Alert is used in the way you want to use it; There's no problem. I don't see it as a detriment. I see it as irrelevant to the discussion, conceptually awkward, and too rare to actually care about when it comes to spending opportunity costs when building my character. If I don't want to go first, then I'm not taking Alert. I'll take Magic Initiate.

I don't see Alert being used in the way you describe as being 'worth it' when there are simply other things to do. Yes. You can use Alert that way, and yes it does work in some respect. But, iIt doesn't make sense to me to try and go first, and then not go first:

a) The player who actually wants to go first, should have Alert on their own (which is entirely possible since it's totally viable for up to half the party to have Alert), and/or
b) You could be spending your Feat, elsewhere on something more beneficial for your character.

I guess there is a massive benefit to being Human after all. You can have a good Feat, and have Alert even if your class/build doesn't even need it.

'If I use Initiative Swap in a non-broken way, it isn't.'

We agree. It's not broken if you don't break it. We did it. Thread over? Everyone go home?

However, I know that Initiative Swap wont be used that way, at my table, all the time...And not at other players' tables, either (that's why this thread exists:

Uhh...Did anyone else notice this is really, really strong?
Yes, we did. Go, go gadget feedback!
Rarely, it will make sense to go down the Initiative track, I agree (see; Lair Actions). But I know that for the vast majority of actual play time, players are going to use Alert exactly how I know they're going to use it (and other people also think this, too. See; The existence of the thread); To win combats, earlier. Because winning combat, as early as you can, is super-beneficial in the 'I go, you go' system of Initiative.

The way to counter this is to ratchet up hostile defensive stats. But I'm sure we're going to cross that bridge when that particular UA is released.

Psyren

2022-09-15, 01:27 AM

Even when you don't have Extra Attack, Readying an Attack is not equivalent to Attacking on your turn. The former uses up your reaction instead of it being available to Uncanny Dodge or Opportunity Attack among other potential uses, and you still do have to attack on your turn to make use of TWF and the like.

TWF is particularly useful for rogues because it's a second chance to trigger sneak attack if the first one misses, even when they lack the TWF fighting style to add their Dex mod to that second attack.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-15, 09:09 AM

The other examples could all be replaced by 'I Ready [x]', and a DM acting in good faith.

I don't want to go first because Readying an Action is slightly worse than just doing it on my turn, and I don't believe that my DM will act in good faith - or with any leniency - when I tell them what the trigger is.

Well, I've tried explaining it but if you can't see it being a less desirable option for anything other than the DM apparently playing in bad faith then I can't really explain it further.

Whether you believe it's useful in this manner or not isn't important, I just wanted you to understand why others might. Apparently you've played D&D in a very different manner than I have, you simply cannot comprehend how letting others act before you could be useful, and that's going to just have to be fine.

Can you at least accept that even if you personally don't find the reasons compelling that a player isn't making a meme character if they do see usefulness in this?

'If I use Initiative Swap in a non-broken way, it isn't.'

We agree. It's not broken if you don't break it. We did it. Thread over? Everyone go home?

I do want to touch on this part... How do you use Alert on a way where someone isn't choosing to lower their initiative?

You realize that someone will always be choosing a lower initiative right... Like every time, that's just how the feature works. What makes it different whether you're the character aiming for high initiative in the first place or you're the character aiming to take your allies higher initiative?

MadBear

2022-09-15, 03:24 PM

I've been provided with one, class-specific example; Rogues. Sure. But I'm sure Rogues are equally just as willing to go first in any combat, too. There are many ways to get Advantage on your attack rolls, that you shouldn't have to wait around for a party member to be within 5 ft. of your target. But sure. Tasha's gave Rogues Steady Aim for literally no reason, but sure - wait for your party to get within 5 ft. because you're a Melee Rogue. I get it.

I definitely gave you more then 1 class specific example. But if you need I'll elaborate.

Setting: Crowded corridor
Initiative:
Ranger: rolls a 19
Goblins: roll 20
Paladin: rolls 22

In this scenario if the paladin goes first, they'll be giving partial cover to the other goblins thereby making it harder for the ranger to hit. They can't move and attack with a readied action, so instead they use the alert swap to have the ranger go first, shoot and retreat behind the paladin. the paladin on their turn then charges in. Also by going later, they help choke the cooridor so only 1 goblin can face them at a time reducing the number of incoming attacks.

Setting: 3 ogres with an evil mage behind them getting ready to cast a spell
Ogres: 15
Monk: 19
Fighter: 14
Evil Wizard: 12

The monk passes the high initiative off to the fighter who engages the ogres. On the monks turn they spend a ki point to dash around the ogres to engage the wizard. Now the squishier monk isn't having to tank 3 ogre attacks and can focus on the wizard. Again, a readied action wouldn't work here because you can't use a bonus action, move, and attack in the same turn.

So there are 2 non rogue examples where you might not want to go first.

Also, a readied action eats up your reaction. So doing that would prevent the player from using any of their abilities that relied on this.

I'll also add, that sometimes it's not that you don't want to go first, but another player can make better use of going first. Passing them the first action is a good use of teamwork, which I like to encourage in my games.

And finally, I'll say again, if this feat breaks your game, you had horrible game design already. If a certain player going first wrecks all your encounters, you need to make better encounters, because it's already the case that they could've rolled to go first regardless, and now you're just noting that the design of the encounter was poorly made since it relied on certain characters going last.

Waterdeep Merch

2022-09-16, 04:12 PM

I do want to touch on this part... How do you use Alert on a way where someone isn't choosing to lower their initiative?

You realize that someone will always be choosing a lower initiative right... Like every time, that's just how the feature works. What makes it different whether you're the character aiming for high initiative in the first place or you're the character aiming to take your allies higher initiative?

This seems to be the thing that's getting completely ignored here. Detractors seem to believe New Alert somehow means everyone gets crazy good initiative, but that's just not how it works. There isn't some cache of NPC's you can steal high numbers from, you have to ask your fellow players for a trade or offer your own good result up. The wizard doesn't get to go first because they took this feat, they get to go first if someone rolled really well and they don't want that higher initiative themselves.

This is where you'll quickly realize the preferred first responder can change dramatically on a battle-to-battle basis, and/or you'll discover that one of your fellow party members is incredibly selfish and cannot be trusted to do teamwork. Except under exceptional circumstances that would render this feat moot anyway, people are going to get bad rolls and someone is going to have to accept it.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-16, 06:18 PM

This seems to be the thing that's getting completely ignored here. Detractors seem to believe New Alert somehow means everyone gets crazy good initiative, but that's just not how it works. There isn't some cache of NPC's you can steal high numbers from, you have to ask your fellow players for a trade or offer your own good result up. The wizard doesn't get to go first because they took this feat, they get to go first if someone rolled really well and they don't want that higher initiative themselves.

This is where you'll quickly realize the preferred first responder can change dramatically on a battle-to-battle basis, and/or you'll discover that one of your fellow party members is incredibly selfish and cannot be trusted to do teamwork. Except under exceptional circumstances that would render this feat moot anyway, people are going to get bad rolls and someone is going to have to accept it.

Which is why, in my opinion, the feat is even better on people who aim for top initiative with the intent to offer that position away.

Who would you rather trade with, the character who consistently rolls high and offers that position to a player they feel is better suited or the player who dumped Dex and took alert with the intention of asking anyone else to trade for his poor rolls?

My gut tells me that someone will be more willing to trade up, so it makes sense that the person dependant on a willing ally (the one offering) should be offering something worth taking. You're less likely to see success in trading initiative if your rolls are lower, or because you're rolls are lower you may simply not see an advantage in offering to have your own turn happen sooner.

That's really the simplified version of it, if your aim is to roll high and trade you can decide between yourself and all allies with a high likelihood that someone will take your offer. If you roll low and offer a trade, it's only because you think that you offer more than they do in the higher initiative slot, and if they disagree then they won't trade.

quindraco

2022-09-16, 06:44 PM

Which is why, in my opinion, the feat is even better on people who aim for top initiative with the intent to offer that position away.

Who would you rather trade with, the character who consistently rolls high and offers that position to a player they feel is better suited or the player who dumped Dex and took alert with the intention of asking anyone else to trade for his poor rolls?

My gut tells me that someone will be more willing to trade up, so it makes sense that the person dependant on a willing ally (the one offering) should be offering something worth taking. You're less likely to see success in trading initiative if your rolls are lower, or because you're rolls are lower you may simply not see an advantage in offering to have your own turn happen sooner.

That's really the simplified version of it, if your aim is to roll high and trade you can decide between yourself and all allies with a high likelihood that someone will take your offer. If you roll low and offer a trade, it's only because you think that you offer more than they do in the higher initiative slot, and if they disagree then they won't trade.

Agreed. It's better on someone who's rolling better initiative (e.g. a Rogue or Bard) who then actively desires a lower initiative (as is common with Rogues and anyone else who expects to start the fight undetected).

Cheesegear

2022-09-17, 12:13 AM

Whether you believe it's useful in this manner or not isn't important, I just wanted you to understand why others might.

Once again. No.

I admit that trading down your high initiative can be useful in some circumstances. I agree that "context matters." Sometimes.

What I don't believe, and what I am arguing, is that those "context matters" scenarios are so rare and so specific that it is not worth building your entire character around the ability to trade down your initiative.

Going first is always awesome unless you fight creatures with Lair Actions.
How often are you fighting creatures with Lair Actions?
Once every two months or so...
Okay, so not worth thinking about.
But what if I fight a creature with Lair Actions?

The main reason to Initiative Swap is to go first and do a special move. Many see this as broken. DMs will have to alter how their encounters are set up, and many DMs don't want to have to do that, as DMing is hard enough as it is without the Wizard dominating any scenario they want to from dot. DMs will have to take into consideration that in any combat, the Wizard may go first. The Bard will cast Tasha's Hideous Laughter on a boss monster before anything else happens.

In rare and very specific situations, it can be worth it to trade down your initiative to another player. However, these scenarios will be few and far between and I, personally, don't think taking Alert to do this, specifically, is worth it.

In a very specific class build (Melee Rogue), trading down your Initative is also good. I've already conceded this twice. But this doesn't (really) apply to ranged Rogues if they have Tasha's (and why wouldn't they?), and Sneak Attack mechanics obviously don't apply to any other class. Trading down your Imitative is amazing! ...on melee Rogues... Got it. I understand.

you simply cannot comprehend how letting others act before you could be useful

As I've said a few times now, that's not my argument.

I definitely gave you more then 1 class specific example.

1. [When you are in a choke point and the melee characters with Extra Attack win Initiative over the ranged characters]

2. [When you are 30 ft. away from hostiles and the Melee Tank doesn't win Initiative.]

Those both sound like situations I already covered:

The people who want Alert, should have it themselves. The two people who should have Alert are; Tanks and DPR.

Tanks and DPR (especially ranged DPR) should have Alert, that should be their character choice. Tanks especially want Alert because typically don't have DEX above +1, they're not likely to go first unless someone else gives it to them - that's where their Feat comes in.

Other members of the party, do not need Alert. If they don't want to go first, and they win Initiative, and someone asks to trade with them, they say yes. The people who want to trade down their Imitative don't need Alert, because they don't want to go first. They are the targets of the Initiative Swap.

Oooh...There's a new argument:

You using Alert to trade down your Initiative, is the same as not having Alert at all, and the DPR (with Alert) asking you to trade. So why do you have Alert, when it's the same outcome whether you have it not?

The people who want to go first, should have Alert. Up to half the party can take Alert.*

The people who don't want to go first, don't take Alert. It's fine. If they accidentally win Initiative, don't worry. Someone will ask to trade.

*Best faith; Up to half the party can have Alert and it really doesn't matter who has it. The people with Alert will always ask to trade with those who don't, one way or the other. However, it doesn't make sense to me to try and go first, and then pass it. If you don't want to go first, take Lucky or Magic Initiate. You don't want to go first, so why do you need the bonus to Initiative? The people who want to go first get the bonus to Initiative so they can accidentally go first. If you (without Alert) accidentally go first, they trade with you...It's the same effect, but you're also Lucky.

because it's already the case that they could've rolled to go first regardless

They could roll to go first. It's up to chance. They have to boost DEX at a minimum in order to get to go first. If they go first...That's fine. They spent character resources and the dice rolled hot and they've got the modifiers. It makes sense.

Alert, is a choice. I didn't boost my Initiative at all - in fact my DEX is +0. But I add my Proficiency...Oh. I rolled a 4... Just kidding I have a 22.

There is a big difference between:

'I'm going to boost my chances to go first, but it's still up to chance, more-or-less.' and
'In any encounter, I know that I'll have the choice to go first.'

Detractors seem to believe New Alert somehow means everyone gets crazy good initiative, but that's just not how it works.

No. It works as Advantage to Initiative, but you roll as many dice as players in the party, and you choose whichever one you want the highest. In a party of five, odds are pretty good that at least one of you is rolling a 16+, without modifiers.

The wizard doesn't get to go first because they took this feat, they get to go first if someone rolled really well and they don't want that higher initiative themselves.

Alert isn't broken if your party doesn't let you use it. Yes.

This is where you'll quickly realize the preferred first responder can change dramatically on a battle-to-battle basis

Half the party can benefit from Alert. Yes.

You don't get to choose where the hostiles go. True.

But if half the party has Alert, you can decide the entire Initiative order the party. Rolling Initiative for the party becomes irrelevant except as an exercise to find out in between whom the hostiles slot. The players who want to go first, will, and they'll trade with the players who don't want to go first. On a party basis, whoever has Alert, trades with the ones who don't. We know that, it doesn't matter which way for this argument.

Initiative - one way or the other - becomes a solved state. I see this as a problem.

The contention is who in the party has the responsibility of taking Alert during character/party creation. Who in the party is willing to give up their Feat for Alert? Who in the party should give up their Feat for Alert?

Hurrashane

2022-09-17, 12:40 AM

The people who want to go first, should have Alert. Up to half the party can take Alert.*

The people who don't want to go first, don't take Alert. It's fine. If they accidentally win Initiative, don't worry. Someone will ask to trade.

The contention is who in the party has the responsibility of taking Alert during character/party creation. Who in the party is willing to give up their Feat for Alert? Who in the party should give up their Feat for Alert?

In my experience the people who feel like alert fits their character concept will take it and those who don't won't.

No one has the responsibility of taking alert, just like no one has the responsibility of being a healer. Neither of these things are necessary.

Heck, for me alert is like 3rd or lower on feats I'd consider taking. Right now from the playtest the thing that interests me most is making a human fighter with the skilled feat twice, 10 skills on a fighter? Nice.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-17, 12:54 AM

Once again. No.

I admit that trading down your high initiative can be useful in some circumstances. I agree that "context matters." Sometimes.

What I don't believe, and what I am arguing, is that those "context matters" scenarios are so rare and so specific that it is not worth building your entire character around the ability to trade down your initiative.

Nobody said they were taking alert with the sole intention of always topping initative and always swapping it down. At the most extreme, I myself had said that I took Alert on my recent Bard character and plan to often trade my initiative but I don't think anyone said always. I took the feat because my party has a below average group dexterity score and my character was the most able to use this feat to our advantage as a group.

I can't make clear on your intentions because as far as I can tell your intentions have changed.

First you said supports should always go first, then that context never matters. What if I'm swapping the party support to top, like I explained to you in my real life example? Is that not context that would make this useful?

Then in the same example you suggest that a hypothetical healer would want to go last because readying an action to heal would be a worse option... but it's the "perfect answer" to the given Rogue example, as if the Rogue (or really anyone) might also not prefer to ready an action for whatever reason? These two statements are hugely contradictory, is Ready a bad option or a good option? As far as I can tell, it's whatever proves your point at the time.

Then, sarcastically, you comment as if I could only assume who could better act in front of me through omniscience but have repeatedly claimed that each proposed scenario (once again, some given of actual gameplay) is niche and that there is a better action to have taken that isn't a "meme".

To top all that off, you seem to think that those arguing in favor of it are arguing in favor of it as some foundational pillar of a characters build and that this is how they've defined their characters function in the group. This isn't true, nobody that I recall has claimed such. A character who takes Alert might simply top initiative by accident.

So lets start from the beginning.

I took this feat on my Bard. I swapped my high initiative with a lower initiative party members in 3 of the 5 combats we had. In each of those combats, myself and the swapping player felt that this was advantageous to us. I never asked to swap my initiative when it was lower than another party members because I felt that either their actions were more suitable to enter combat or that it didn't matter which order we acted.

I will not elaborate on the context, since you claim it does not matter. I'll only say that there's actually a pretty significant amount of context behind this decision but you really don't care about it or choose to acknowledge it, so it shall be left unincluded in perpetuity.

I like this aspect of the feat. I think it is useful. I took it because I wanted to be helpful to my party members. It has been helpful, my group really enjoys it.

The contention is who in the party has the responsibility of taking Alert during character/party creation. Who in the party is willing to give up their Feat for Alert? Who in the party should give up their Feat for Alert?
Nobody and no one, which is exactly why I've expressed earlier in the thread that I think this sort of initiative mechanic is good as a feat and not as a general rule. If I hadn't taken Alert, nobody in the party would have it and I suspect nobody would take it in the entire campaign. I saw an opportunity to make the character I'd already built with the intention of supporting the party able to support the party in an additional way that didn't cost me a spell known or an expendable resource, Alert being passive and just something that happens in the background makes it a meaningfully different choice than something like Fey Touched Gift of Alacrity.

Cheesegear

2022-09-17, 03:52 AM

Nobody said they were taking alert with the sole intention of always topping initative and always swapping it down.

I have been talking about the context that;

At character creation, is Down[/U]] such a viable character choice that you're going to use it so often and so amazingly that it is worth not taking other Feats; Such as [I]Magic Initiate or Lucky?

Taking Alert, means you can't take something else.

First you said supports should always go first, then that context never matters. What if I'm swapping the party support to top, like I explained to you in my real life example? Is that not context that would make this useful?

Weird. I can change my argument as people bring up good points and I factor those points into my new argument. I know we're trained on the internet not to believe that people can change their mind or even alter their viewpoint slightly. But it does happen. If you're still arguing against the first post I ever made in this thread; Yeah I'm way past that, Hell I might've even gone back on it by now (I've accepted as a good idea that there's at least one entire character build that will always want to trade down if they accidentally win Initiative). I don't remember.

those arguing in favor of it are arguing in favor of it as some foundational pillar of a characters build and that this is how they've defined their characters function in the group.

That's how I'm arguing, so yes.

I assume that players are trying to work together, including at character creation. Not only that, but Alert explicitly requires the consent of the other party character. Alert, by definition, is defined by how your character works inside a group.

'It's not broken if your party doesn't let you use it.' It works by your party - or maybe even specific players - allowing it work. It is absolutely defined by your role in the group, both as a player and as a character. Taking Alert is a Session 0 choice that you need to tell your party about. If you have a table of wargamers, half the group might want to take Alert so they're never caught on the back foot.

To your point, specifically, think of it this way:

1. I have Alert...I can use anyone in the party's Initiative I like. I effectively have quadruple Advantage on Initiative, but actually I get to pick my Initiative, not necessarily the highest Initiative - but also the highest Initiative - amongst the party. I don't actually have to do anything except have Alert on my person. This seems like a very no-brain trade off. I don't have to boost my DEX or burn spell slots on Cat's Grace. The rest of the party just...Carries me, I guess. Is this how it works? Yes. It is.
vs.
2. I have Alert...Anyone can use my Initiative. Each player, individually, has (single) Advantage on Initiative, with me and only me.

I can see the argument for the second. I can. It's just not something I'm worried about, it doesn't seem to be what most people are worried about, when it comes to what Initiative Swap is and will be used for. So when it comes to 'Alert is probably broken', that's not what people are talking about.

stoutstien

2022-09-17, 06:28 AM

If the entire party takes the alert feat and is good at arranging the initiative order wouldn't that be it working exactly as intended?
Player 1- "I took the things so I can do the stuff."

Dm- "yes that thing does stuff."

Player 2- "I also took the thing!"

Dm- "yes more stuff. Here's a different thing where that stuff doesn't work."

Player 1 and 2- "darn. Well the thing still is useful most of the time so it's still good thing."

Dm- "yay stuff.....now we play."

Cheesegear

2022-09-17, 07:03 AM

If [about half] the entire party takes the alert feat and is good at arranging the initiative order wouldn't that be it working exactly as intended?

Fixed.

Possibly.
But that's exactly the problem; If this is working as intended, it's broken, and needs to not work that way.

Mastikator

2022-09-17, 07:08 AM

Half of the party missing out on magic initiate, lucky, musician so they can choose any initiative order and be 10-20% ahead of the enemy is hardly broken or unintended. It rewards team play and creativity. Feats that reward team play is good design.

Also the party are supposed to be overpowered, that's a design goal of DnD

stoutstien

2022-09-17, 07:16 AM

Fixed.

Possibly.
But that's exactly the problem; If this is working as intended, it's broken, and needs to not work that way.

Define broken. Because based on the opportunity cost of X members of the party taking the same feat to solely gain better odds on initiative I just can't see it. It's good. Maybe on the upper side of good even but broken is a strong claim when you have infante angel armies and plane destroying option in the same system.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-17, 10:22 AM

To your point, specifically, think of it this way:

1. I have Alert...I can use anyone in the party's Initiative I like. I effectively have quadruple Advantage on Initiative, but actually I get to pick my Initiative, not necessarily the highest Initiative - but also the highest Initiative - amongst the party. I don't actually have to do anything except have Alert on my person. This seems like a very no-brain trade off. I don't have to boost my DEX or burn spell slots on Cat's Grace. The rest of the party just...Carries me, I guess. Is this how it works? Yes. It is.
vs.
2. I have Alert...Anyone can use my Initiative. Each player, individually, has (single) Advantage on Initiative, with me and only me.

I can see the argument for the second. I can. It's just not something I'm worried about, it doesn't seem to be what most people are worried about, when it comes to what Initiative Swap is and will be used for. So when it comes to 'Alert is probably broken', that's not what people are talking about.

You continue to assume in the first point that your trade will always be taken. Why do you assume that your higher initiative party members will always want to trade for your low initiative but insist to me that wanting to trade down my own high initiative won't happen often?

I'll repeat it again, since I feel you're actively ignoring it at this point, both participants must be willing. What that means is that someone is always trading down their initiative. You cannot use this part of Alert without someone trading down. It's not "niche", someone will always trade down. My point from the beginning has been that because someone will always be taking a lower initiative, it makes more sense for the person offering the trade to be offering something worthwhile.

I just don't understand your point, at all, because alert just doesn't work in a way where nobody is choosing to give up a higher initiative slot. I don't understand how it can be worse for the high initiative character to be the one offering as opposed to the low initiative one when at the end of it both players must agree.

How is "I rolled low initiative and want to trade for your high roll" more "broken" than "I rolled high initiative and want to trade for your low roll" when the answer to both questions has to be "yes" for anything to happen? The end result is always a higher initiative being traded for a lower one.

I will not repeat this again, I can't argue my point any simple than that.

Witty Username

2022-09-17, 11:23 AM

The contention is who in the party has the responsibility of taking Alert during character/party creation. Who in the party is willing to give up their Feat for Alert? Who in the party should give up their Feat for Alert?

People who both benefit from going early or late in the initiative order depending on context.

It sounds like the UA Alert feat gives an ability to swap initiative with an ally and a bonus to initiative generally.
So you want a character that has benefits from going first, since you are more likely to win initiative.
Shock attackers, blasters, control casters, high yield buffers.
A character that has benefits from going late in the initiative order.
Healers, Rogues

I happen to have a character that would fit this, (never played game fell through)
Gloomstalker Ranger, which with Wis+Dex+Alert for very high initiative generally, some high impact shock attacker and battle control spells
+life cleric with over time healing options like healing spirit due to ranger and emergency healing options like cure wounds and healing word.

If I have something useful to do, cast a battle control spell, or get some damage off with dread ambusher to try to take something out, then I could do that, if someone else has higher priority dread ambusher isn't going anywhere and may prefer to setup something like a healing spirit.

Alternatively, if you are going for something less perfect, something like a control mage that can drop a powerful spell if they go first, or drop turn order for someone else if they want to conserve slots or someone has a better fit for situation. Oh, like a War mage maybe so you have the Tactical wit, and can either drop a mad Hypnotic pattern (or be real, a fireball). Or drop that initiative for the assassin rogue that will shove a crit down their throat if that will get this done well enough.

Cheesegear

2022-09-17, 12:21 PM

You continue to assume in the first point that your trade will always be taken.

Because I assume that the party is working as a team.
If the party is not working as a team, then Initiative Swap is worthless. Discussion over.

Why do you assume that your higher initiative party members will always want to trade for your low initiative but insist to me that wanting to trade down my own high initiative won't happen often?

That's not what I'm assuming. You don't understand my argument at all at this point.

Five players at a table, are likely to roll a 16+, even if that someone is you. You will get an Initiative of 16+, if that's what you really, really want. Most combats.

You as an individual, on your own, are not likely to roll a 16+ all of the time. Trading down your initiative wont happen as often 'cause you can't guarantee that you can roll higher than the party.

What are the odds that between five players, one of them rolls a 16+ (before modifiers), and trades it with the player with Alert? Pretty high.

What are the odds that you roll a 16+ (before modifiers) and someone wants it from you? Right, about ~20%.

Trading down absolutely happens less often than you trading up. Trading down requires you to have a desirable Initiative. Trading up requires anyone to have a desirable Initiative.

I'll repeat it again, since I feel you're actively ignoring it at this point, both participants must be willing.

I am ignoring it because if you don't ignore it; Discussion over.

I said Alert is a Session 0 Feat. If you take it, you're letting the whole party know, because it's really important. If the party says 'No.', you aren't taking Alert.

What that means is that someone is always trading down their initiative.

Right. We're back to my previous argument:

If you don't want to go first, it doesn't matter whether or not you have Alert, as long as someone in the party (who does want to go first), does. If you don't want to go first, you don't need Alert, so you don't have it. Problem solved.

You cannot use this part of Alert without someone trading down.

Yep.

My point from the beginning has been that because someone will always be taking a lower initiative, it makes more sense for the person offering the trade to be offering something worthwhile.

The trade is 'I get to cast Fireball and win the combat right now if you give me your Initiative.'

I will not repeat this again, I can't argue my point any simple than that.

I've actually solidified my point:

Trading up gives you 4-6 chances of you going first.
Trading down gives you one chance of someone else going first, but, you get to pick who that person is.

There it is.

ProsecutorGodot

2022-09-17, 12:33 PM

I've actually solidified my point:

Trading up gives you 4-6 chances of you going first.
Trading down gives you one chance of someone else going first, but, you get to pick who that person is.

There it is.

If your point is that rolling a 3 means there are more people will have a higher initiative than you, sure, that's true. If your point is that when you roll a 3 that someone will trade their initiative with you, that's entirely different.

The "meme" use of Alert is exactly what you describe from my point of view. Dump dex, take alert, beg your party members to fix your bad decisions for you. Just because you have more opportunities to "trade up" doesn't mean anyone actually wants your bad initiative roll.

I believe you are more likely to see success trading your initiative down. You seem to view the person with Alert as the only one who would want to go first, so they took Alert to attempt to always take the top spot. I'm viewing Alert as a tool for the group to find who will be best to go first given what they know at the top of initiative. A character with a high initiative bonus who will more often go first in combat is a better Alert user than someone who took it only with the intention of trying to go first on their own.

PhantomSoul

2022-09-17, 12:43 PM

If your point is that rolling a 3 means there are more people will have a higher initiative than you, sure, that's true. If your point is that when you roll a 3 that someone will trade their initiative with you, that's entirely different.

The "meme" use of Alert is exactly what you describe from my point of view. Dump dex, take alert, beg your party members to fix your bad decisions for you. Just because you have more opportunities to "trade up" doesn't mean anyone actually wants your bad initiative roll.

I believe you are more likely to see success trading your initiative down. You seem to view the person with Alert as the only one who would want to go first, so they took Alert to attempt to always take the top spot. I'm viewing Alert as a tool for the group to find who will be best to go first given what they know at the top of initiative. A character with a high initiative bonus who will more often go first in combat is a better Alert user than someone who took it only with the intention of trying to go first on their own.

Don't worry, WOTC will "balance" this by giving Inspiration to anyone whose Initiative Count is lowered as a result of the Feat. (And then to "balance" that, to anyone whose Initiative Count is increased?)

Waterdeep Merch

2022-09-17, 01:14 PM

I just realized I was looking at it in the way I play with something similar and not the precise verbage of this feat. I think I'll recommend my method- that is, you can trade your roll, not your result. So your -1 Dex will still be on you, regardless of your trade.

Cheesegear

2022-09-18, 01:39 AM

If your point is that rolling a 3 means there are more people will have a higher initiative than you, sure, that's true. If your point is that when you roll a 3 that someone will trade their initiative with you, that's entirely different.

Someone will trade with you because you have an idea that wins the fight immediately because you've built your entire character around going first and your party knows this and it's in everyone's interest that you go first because that's what you decided during character creation.

If I go first, I can cast Tasha's Hideous Laughter - the most powerful enemy in the fight becomes Prone and Incapacitated. It's in your interest that I do that. Why aren't you trading me Initiative again? ...Oh because you just want to go first because "it's fun to go first". Okay, we're not really playing the same game anymore, and we're not working as a team. We're just all out for ourselves. 'Kay. ...Why am I playing Support Bard again in a team that refuses to utilise my strengths? ...I probably should've taken Musician...

The "meme" use of Alert is exactly what you describe from my point of view. Dump dex, take alert, beg your party members to fix your bad decisions for you.

Being a Plate-and-Board warrior with 10-12 Dex isn't a bad decision. You will want to go first in certain fights, but you don't have the DEX to do it, you need Alert and a willing party to shunt you to the front of the line in 30-ft. room combats.

30-ft. room combats (or smaller) are a very common occurrence - especially at tables that only seem to do dungeon crawls for some reason.

Just because you have more opportunities to "trade up" doesn't mean anyone actually wants your bad initiative roll.

No. No-one wants your bad Initiative. But they reconcile that with the fact that it's more advantageous for you to go first.

If I go first, I Fireball, all these Hobgoblins are dead or half-dead before the fight even starts and we have a massive advantage.
If I go last, all you melee characters are going to be in the middle of the combat and I wont be able to cast Fireball and this combat is going to drag on for four rounds.

I believe you are more likely to see success trading your initiative down

In a party where 'everyone wants the spotlight', absolutely. I'm not disagreeing with you. You ask the party who wants to go first and four hands shoot up. Going first is fun. I want to do my thing. If you are in a party where everyone is out to make themselves look good, because you're playing D&D as an escapist power fantasy and "stepping on each others' toes" and "not feeling special in this make-believe game" is something your table complains about, then yes. You will get a lot of use out of trading down because everyone wants to go first (whether they should or not...That's an argument for your particular table).

In a party where you work as a team, and everyone understands their role in the party, and is reasonable, you say 'Can I go first? I have a thing I can do that gives us a massive advantage.' The person with high Initiative looks down at their character sheet reads their abilities, realises that they're not gonna work, looks back at the battle grid, and says 'Yep, that makes sense. Do it.'

You seem to view the person with Alert as the only one who would want to go first, so they took Alert to attempt to always take the top spot.

Because that is the most likely use for it, because *knowing* that you can *choose* to go first, at any time, is something you can build your entire character around. Now, while it can be used on a ranged Rogue...They're only ever going to have one trick; Steady Aim into Sneak Attack. Or any ranged attacker, making ranged attacks, I guess...

But the party gets so much advantage out of full adaptable casters winning Initiative that it's...Silly.

Of course that dove-tails into Martials vs. Casters. So let's stop there.

I'm viewing Alert as a tool for the group to find who will be best to go first given what they know at the top of initiative.

Which only works if the character with it, wins Initiative, which - and this should be obvious - is less likely to happen than anyone at all winning Initiative. You can trade your Initiative to the same friend every time, if you want. But it's much more reliable (read; better) if they have Alert, because it means that they're not reliant on you - and specifically you - winning Initiative.
...It doesn't make sense to try and go first, and then not go first, because you can't even guarantee you're going first in the...first...place.

Secondly, if half the party has Alert, you can decide who will go first, and second, and third, and fourth, etc. Alert actually gets better (read; more reliable) the more people have it, up to half the party...After which point it has very quick diminishing returns.

Hurrashane

2022-09-18, 02:05 AM

The caster might go first and solve the encounter right away!? Oh no however will we solve this pro- counterspell.

Cheesegear

2022-09-18, 07:07 AM

The caster might go first and solve the encounter right away!? Oh no however will we solve this pro- counterspell.

'Just fix your encounters.' is what you mean, yes?

Once full casters (with Alert) hit Level 5, the DM is obligated to include spellcasters in every fight. 4-8 combats per session, mix 'em up so that there's Easy, Medium, Hard, Deadly and maybe a Deadly+ if the party is going well. But no matter what, all combats must include Counterspells or the DM is just asking for it.

Are you advocating for DMs to hard-counter individual players on a regular basis? ...'Cause I know from experience - and from reading a bunch of stories online - that turns into a toxic table real fast.

Full Casters-with-Initiative Swap aren't the problem.
Combats without Counterspells are the problem.

If this is your argument; I hard disagree.

Skrum

2022-09-18, 07:24 AM

The caster might go first and solve the encounter right away!? Oh no however will we solve this pro- counterspell.

A caster who is getting their spell countered can counter the counterspell. That's not even getting into multiple party members having counterspell. PC's are much more likely to have counterspell then NPC's. This is a very soft counter (heh), especially in a first strike situation.

I am honestly mystified as to how people aren't seeing the value of the PC's controlling the initiative. Whether it's good enough to be "broken" I guess depends on what the definition of broken is and how optimized your PC's are....but in my estimation, this feat significantly changes the way the game is played.

Could the caster roll high initiative already and drop the perfect spell? Of course. But with initiative swap, as a DM you must now *assume that will happen and that the PC's will be acting in something like an optimal order.* This is a significant to massive boost to player effectiveness.

From a more conceptual level, randomness is always in favor of the NPC's. The players will fight dozens, hundreds, of NPC's while each individual NPC is probably only getting one fight. Unlikely outcomes is how the NPC's put a scare in the players. Initiative Swap works against that by removing randomness, as it gives the players a pretty strong measure of control over who does what in what order. Quibble over exactly what broken means, but I think it is flirting with it at the very least.

Cheesegear

2022-09-18, 07:35 AM

Could the caster roll high initiative already and drop the perfect spell? Of course. But with initiative swap, as a DM you must now *assume that will happen and that the PC's will be acting in something like an optimal order.* This is a significant to massive boost to player effectiveness.

Thank you.

I think that on a very basic level there's a misunderstanding between what happens on either side of the table.

Player: [X] is something I can count on, and I can use it favorably in any fight I choose - easy or hard. If I want to get out of a jam, I can just push this button. Wow this is so useful and good I can't wait to use it all the time. We're gonna win encounters so easy...

DM: Oh FFS! Do I have to account for that in every fight from now on, forever? That really ****s with encounter design - and not just boss fights. Even if I do account for that button in every fight. Doesn't that potentially ruin the narrative if all fights - easy or hard - (in)conveniently have to deal with this mechanic? This seems really bad, I don't really want to have to deal with this bulls* on a regular basis.

EDIT:
I'm reminded of Twilight Cleric:
It's part of the game, just deal with it, DM.
Oh, cool. I just...Have to address the now. Great. Thanks, Jeremy.

stoutstien

2022-09-18, 08:09 AM

Thank you.

I think that on a very basic level there's a misunderstanding between what happens on either side of the table.

Player: [X] is something I can count on, and I can use it favorably in any fight I choose - easy or hard. If I want to get out of a jam, I can just push this button. Wow this is so useful and good I can't wait to use it all the time. We're gonna win encounters so easy...

DM: Oh FFS! Do I have to account for that in every fight from now on, forever? That really ****s with encounter design - and not just boss fights. Even if I do account for that button in every fight. Doesn't that potentially ruin the narrative if all fights - easy or hard - (in)conveniently have to deal with this mechanic? This seems really bad, I don't really want to have to deal with this bulls* on a regular basis.

EDIT:
I'm reminded of Twilight Cleric:
It's part of the game, just deal with it, DM.
Oh, cool. I just...Have to address the now. Great. Thanks, Jeremy.

Then...don't use it? There nothing anywhere that says ever rule works for every table and RaW isn't exactly balanced (past window dressing) to begin with.

You are worried that unchecked optimized meta will make the game worse which is correct but this feat is merely a small portion of that. In isolation it isn't a problem.

Cheesegear

2022-09-18, 08:57 AM

Then...don't use it?

Unfortunately I'm not at a magical table where whatever the DM says, goes.

Why are you telling me I can't play the character I want? Can't handle it? What are you, a bad DM?

If I don't want my players to use something, it either has to be nerfed, or not exist at all. Or in the very, very, very rare case my players might actually agree that something is "a bit much."

PhantomSoul

2022-09-18, 08:59 AM

Why are you telling me I can't play the character I want? What are you, a bad DM?

If this weren't blue I'd think you were spending too much time on this forum! xD

Hurrashane

2022-09-18, 09:32 AM

'Just fix your encounters.' is what you mean, yes?

In short, Yes.

Like, if the enemies aren't all conveniently grouped up a single caster no longer can end the encounter turn 1. Adding in spell caster enemies, enemies more resistant to the various tricks a caster can pull off, or outright immune to certain things (charm, fire,magical sleep, etc), additional enemies that show at a later turn, etc. You know, a DM doing their job to design encounters to challenge their players. If the players are constantly invalidating encounters with one simple trick, change the encounters at least -sometimes- so that doesn't work.

I really think some people are trying to make a mountain out of a molehill. A caster going first was already a possibility, and Alert's power as a feat is based entirely on how it gets used. Can it be broken under the right conditions? Sure, but so can almost anything.

stoutstien

2022-09-18, 10:12 AM

Unfortunately I'm not at a magical table where whatever the DM says, goes.

Why are you telling me I can't play the character I want? Can't handle it? What are you, a bad DM?

If I don't want my players to use something, it either has to be nerfed, or not exist at all. Or in the very, very, very rare case my players might actually agree that something is "a bit much."
That sounds incredibly toxic.

tiornys

2022-09-18, 11:47 AM

I am honestly mystified as to how people aren't seeing the value of the PC's controlling the initiative. Whether it's good enough to be "broken" I guess depends on what the definition of broken is and how optimized your PC's are....but in my estimation, this feat significantly changes the way the game is played.
The value of controlling initiative scales with the number and power level of ways the party has to lead with combat changing spells, effects, or attack sequences. I doubt that most groups have seen a moderately+ optimized party played by tactically skilled players.

MadBear

2022-09-18, 10:31 PM

At its core, there is this assumption that the DM needs (at least sometimes) the players to go in a non-optimized order for them to balance encounters. I do not see alert as even the slightest bit of a problem at all. Even if half or the entire party takes it, all it's doing is allowing them to swap between each other when they go. I don't design encounters that matter and aren't throw away encounters that can be beaten by the players going in optimized order. Sure, them going in optimized order will help them, and it'll allow them to fight as a team more effectively (something I encourage and want to see), but I'm the DM. I have infinite resources at my disposal.

On another note, when you say this:

Weird. I can change my argument as people bring up good points and I factor those points into my new argument. I know we're trained on the internet not to believe that people can change their mind or even alter their viewpoint slightly. But it does happen."

You undercut the point when you haven't acknowledged the points that others made. If you've changed your mind on any of these points, then it'd be nice for you to have done that instead of:

"The only reasons I've ever come across where a player doesn't want to go first is when they are:
a) Unsure of what to do, or
b) Believe (rightly or wrongly) there is a dimension to the fight that they're not seeing yet."

To this statement I gave 4 other examples. To which PhantomSoul replied with other (making 5). You then said:

"I've been provided with one, class-specific example; Rogues. "

So it doesn't really appear at the point of that statement that you have in fact been listening and changing your argument. If you have, you at least haven't really acknowledged it. But whatever, you do you. I just think you're completely overreacting to this feat. Having talked with my players, they almost universally have other feats that they'd rather take. I do think alert is now a powerful feat. But not really broken in any meaningful way