This is part of an ongoing series of posts about Initiative (mostly in Dungeons and Dragons, but most of this can be used in any TTRPG). I have a massive PDF I planned to sell, but I’ve decided to post it all here for free. I chose this next type of initiative by roiling a die.
This post does NOT show a new system. Instead, it lists a lot of things to think about before you change your initiative rules (or, any rules, but some of this is initiative specific). Note that while a lot of what I say here applies to any game, I’m going to mostly use Dungeons and Dragons rules in my commentary. Your game may have slightly different rules (maybe it isn’t cyclical).
The Game Assumes You Use the Rules it Came With
This should be the most obvious thing ever, and it applies to all optional rules. The game you are playing assumes you are using the rules it came with! In Dungeons and Dragons, there is an assumption that initiative is cyclical, that it is set once per encounter, that Dexterity is IMPORTANT, that some classes or features or feats give player characters (sometimes monsters) advantages over others, etc.
Changing the initiative rules can invalidate a lot of assumptions, can change balance (which is largely a myth, imo, anyway).
The point of all those words (my PDF draft has A LOT more words)? When you try new systems, some things will work out great, and some will be affected in ways you did not expect. That’s actually part of the fun for some, but some tables don’t like that as much. Using any non-standard system can (but does not have to) result in more work for the GM.
A corollary to this is that you should 100% discuss any rules changes with your players, and they should be cool with those changes (IMO). Because there are a lot of things that will change.
Non-Cyclical Initiative
One option for changing initiative is to change the order every round. This has less impact on character creation and monster use than you’d think. What it really changes is the drama, and for some tables, the time combat takes. NCI has advantages and disadvantages, some of which we will discuss here. Note, not every plus or minus is discussed, and I clearly have a bias for over simplifying things……there are long threads on the internet on the pluses and minuses of noncyclical initiative. There isn’t room here to cover all of it, but you should consider some of this before using NCI. (that is, most of the things to consider below are related to NCI)
Consecutive Turns
A lot of optional systems can result in a PC or NPC taking two turns in a row. Some tables will absolutely hate this, and others will be fine with it. Personally? I like this risk. It seems more dangerous, more involving, even more “realistic” (though that doesn’t really matter to me).
Gaming the System (metagaming)
When the players know the order every round, they can more easily game the system. Some tables think this decreases their tactics; others think it increases their tactical options. For example, if you the players know they act before or after the dragon, they will likely hold off on healing, and try to kill the dragon (some tables). If they don’t know what the order will be next round, they might choose to do more healing (or not, but generally, when there is more risk, people try to avoid it).
Engagement and Drama
Engagement: Not knowing who goes when increases player engagement, since they don’t know when they will next act, they have to pay more attention than in a cyclical system.
Drama” Given that order changes every round, there can be a lot of drama in determining initiative near the end of a battle. Indeed, one option is to only change order every few rounds, or near the end of battle.
Speed of Play and Tracking Turns
t’s true that changing order every round can slow down the game. But, some of the actor decide systems speed up play (eventually. At first, it might go slower…..that’s the experience of most groups). After all, if everyone is deciding together what to do, you aren’t taking a turn, deciding, taking a turn, deciding…..everyone decides at the same time. It’s also true that using non-standard rules will slow things down for players used to the normal system. There will be confusion at times, especially if you change up the rules more than one time (like I do, where some encounters use some rules, and others other rules).
For some tables, it is easier to write down or otherwise track the order of turns one time. For other tables, it is easier not to track things at all, but to go in order every round as determined at the start of that round (or to not have initiative at all, and not have to track it).
Disruptive to Immersion
For many players and GMs, determining initiative every round breaks the feeling of being in combat. Indeed, when I’m on the internet, even determining it one time breaks immersion for many people. This is an advantage of “players go first in any order” systems for sure, since you don’t set initiative at all. But if this is a concern for you and your table, I’d suggest not using a new system for the most part.
Player Choices
Most players are likely to change what they choose in PC creation and leveling up. If you change to not use Dexterity in initiative, less players will maximize that. If you change it to a skill, everyone will choose to be proficient in it (a tax, basically). I could write A LOT more on this, but I hope you get the point.
Magic and Abilities with Durations
Some of the biggest concerns with NCI are magic and abilities that have durations longer than instantaneous. In MANY cases, these are meant to last for 1 turn….that is, they are meant to help each PC for 1 turn, or hinder each opponent for 1 turn. Many tables find this confusing and difficult to adjudicate (and many worry about edge cases rather than the vast majority of cases). This is likely one of the hardest things to actually manage, and I’ll write an entire post about this.
Does it Really Matter? Is it Really More Fun?
This is the ultimate question, IMO. Have you made the game more fun? Has the change really changed anything (like, adding proficiency bonus or using level or HD as the modifier, does anything REALLY change?)? The goal is to have fun. Only change the rules to increase fun (frankly, I change up how we do initiative for different encounters because for me, and I hope my players, I like the variety, especially if it makes sense for the situation).
Conclusion
Frankly, this post could be A LOT longer….and I’ll be adding some pros and cons to many of the posts (going back and forward) that are specific to that specific system.
Before changing any rule, make sure you think about (and research on the internet, if possible) all the implications. Make sure your players are ok with it. Make sure you are willing to go back to the normal rules of your game.
For me? I change up initiative systems for different encounters. Sometimes we use the standard system. Sometimes I just let the players go in any order they want.