Combining Attempts with Initiative

#1

I thought of a different way to do initiative and attempts into 1 dice roll. Could I get some discussion on is this a good idea? And, in this system, what could I do to include the DM without over complicating it?

#2

Here are my thoughts.

I think this could totally work, especially if you have players who are good with all rolling at the same time. My only concern (and I suppose it’s a concern with initiative in general, too) is the moment of planning and the break in immersion as everyone is figuring out what to do (the pause state before you are back into play). If that moment is brief, then you certainly pick up speed on the tail end.

As for including the DM, the way to go, I think, is to handle it like Blood and Snow. The DM also rolls against the target, and then all armor just becomes soak. That would definitely keep your game fast and have the DM rolling at the same time as your players, which would be a hoot.

#3

I think it just brings back the same problem of D&D initiative, only slightly faster, but now you have to do it every round. The problem in my mind is that now, every round i have to say “ok who’s first” everyone gives their numbers, now i either need to write them all down (back to the annoyance of D&D initiative) or i let the players remember. if i let the players remember it then, because i’m managing everything else and keeping folks on track I’m going to have to ask “who’s next” as many times as there are players (-1).

I hate the time spent figuring out the d&d initiative. I’d be even less happy having to either do it every round OR have to constantly be asking “who’s next”

The ICRPG way dramatically reduces one of the most annoying downtime moments. “surprise! You’re being attacked by [dramatic description here] BUT before we get to that. let’s do some bookeeping! yaaay” With ICRPG it’s just everyone rolls, yell out your numbers, who’s highest. Excellent we start with you. i don’t have to think about anything else. i don’t have to write anything else down.

I agree with Alex that "if that moment is brief " then yeah it could work, but i don’t see it being brief. I see it being more time spent keeping track of who is next overall than the D&D method of figuring it out once and writing it down.

#4

There is nothing wrong with this…other than I am not sure of the problem it is solving or the flavor it is adding.

So add it!! Play with it refine it and then let us know how your group is using it.

For the most part ICRPG rounds go by more than fast enough. 3~10 minutes a round including descriptions.

So it is not speed.

Added chaos of combat?
If going the simultaneous combat routes I’d recommend markers, and noting the declared actions. But having a mechanic that the PCs have to adjust their actions “hero coins” or still allowed a move after the roll or something.

In ICRPG this won’t increase speed, but the dynamic of chaotic combat is added.

For example:
Player 1
I’ll throw my net of entanglement that gives the creature a heart of effort to being easy to hit.

Player 2
I’ll cast ray of befuddlement, that makes all actions other than combat hard.

Player 3
I’ll attack the target.

DM
I’ll attack player 2 twice.

Everyone rolls, the DM rolling 2 times.
Action order is
DM crit
Player 2
DM
Player 1 miss net is used
Player 3 miss

Result PC 2 is paste, and monster is befuddled until his next activation.

I personally love declaring actions prior to a round. But standard ICRPG is a bit lethal as it is. This is great for mass combat or something more complex. I am not sure I see the added value in ICRPG.

For high powered games with low lethality…where the players characters are trying to go through literally hundreds of options each…the declared actions really speeds up game play.

So imagine playing the equivalent of a level 18 ranger, with literally 34 different arrow types, and 4 augmentation abilities you might employ. The players turn can become 8 minutes of trying to calculate effectiveness and chances of each one…having all the players discuss and declare makes that interactive between the group, so it’s not 40 minutes between player involvement.

ICRPG does not typically suffer from that…I want to say 15 minutes between actions was my longest wait, and that was just once, not every time in that game.

#5

Would work fine I think. My only hesitation is the period working out who is highest, would need to test at the table with a good group.

As an alternative, someone on the forum, maybe @Chaosmeister (bad memory) suggested turn order based on the “centre of action”. So the most imminent action/danger is happening first, like if it was in a movie, what shot makes most sense to go first.
Eg. First the warrior in toe-to-toe combat with the troll.
It doesn’t always have to be literal distance to danger though. Perhaps the most pressing roll of the round is whether the mage maintains his concentration levitating the fallen rubble or its falls onto the warrior and troll below. Alternatively, the ranger wants to make a HARD shot to HELP the warrior strike the troll. In that case he could go first.
If all is equal who goes first, eg. warrior or troll? Maybe begin with always favouring the player unless it’s a specially fast foe. If it’s equal and really clutch, eg. who can grab the special key first, you could do a contested roll as both the PC and Foes turn.
On roll 20, you would give some mark for each token that has made their action per round to keep track. I reckon at the table we could just remember, or use little gems/markers if needed.