In case the ‘Part II’ in the title didn’t give it away, this Feature’s the second part of my two-part attempt to make turn order and Initiative in modern Dungeons & Dragons even just a tiny little marginal bit less shit. The first part was an ugly rant. My point was basically that this is something I care about and it’s something I want to do and so it’s what I’m doing.
I also said, flat out, that I know it’s not going to make a huge-ass difference because of how modern Dungeons & Dragons is, but that it would make some difference and that was enough for me.
If you want to continue those debates and tell me I’m wasting my time making games better or I should be playing different games, comment on the previous part. I promise I’ll give just as much of a shit about your opinions there as I would if you posted them here.
Today, I’mma share my variant turn order and Initiative system for modern Dungeons & Dragons. Actually, I’mma share you three. You’re meant to stack them all up and use them all, but you don’t have to. It’s down to how much of a change you want. The first just makes it easier to track turn order at a physical table and facilitates rerolling Initiative every round. The second introduces the core rules of Angry’s Recovery Time Initiative System. By itself, Angry’s Recovery Time Initiative System will improve Dungeons & Dragons combat gamefeel. It’ll give you better-paced and more dynamical-feeling fights at your table. But for a real, mechanical impact, you’ll need Angry’s Full-On Recovery Time Initiative System. That’s the third variant.
Like I said, I built this for me. I’m sharing it with you for free. You can use it if you want it, or you can keep using the basic Fire-and-Forget Cyclical Horseshit Turn Order D&D is saddled with it. It’s up to you. Frankly, I don’t give a crap what you do.
Let’s get started…
Variant 1: Turn Order on the Table
In my rant, I said that turn order is a pain in the ass to track. It’s not a huge pain in the ass. It’s not, “Oh, shit, I thought that cactus was a chair.” It’s more like, “I got a pricker burr in my undies.” That’s why every Game Master has to invent their own clever turn-order tracking system and why Etsy is lousy with turn-order tracking solutions.
Because it’s a pain in the ass to track, it’s also a pain in the ass to adjust or reroll. Hence, the whole Fire-and-Forget Cyclical Horseshit Turn Order. If I want a more dynamical turn order and Initiative system, though, I can’t have any burrs in my ass. Those burrs add up.
Here’s the actual rules…
Turn Order on the Table
When you roll Initiative to determine your place in the turn order, take an extra d20 and set it to your Initiative Score. That die is your Turn Order Tracker. Put it next to your miniature or token on the table or, alternatively, put it in front of you where everyone can see it.
I recommend you use a spin-down die.
If you’re using Angry’s Recovery Time Initiative System, you’ll want to use a d10 instead.
If you’re a Game Master and you’re grouping similar monsters together with one Initiative Score, put a sticky note on the table for the group and put their Turn Order Tracker on that.
If the turn order changes every round, after you take your action, remove your Turn Order Tracker. Roll Initiative for the next round right away, but keep your Turn Order Tracker off to the side until your Game Master asks you to put it out at the top of the next round.
It’s that easy.
Moving on.
Variant 2: Angry’s Recovery Time Initiative System
In my prior rant, I talked about Speed Factor Initiative. That’s when the action you’re planning to take affects when you go in the turn order. As far as adding meaning to action choices in combat, Speed Factor Initiative is a pretty good idea. But in terms of actual practical utility, it sucks bushcricket balls. Not only does it require this whole process of polling and recording action declarations, then rolling and modifying Initiative Scores, then resolving the declared actions in the proper order, but it also turns combat into a slow-ass strategic slog more akin to big armies smashing together like glaciers instead of a quick, tactical skirmishes where seconds count and choosing fast is as important as choosing right.
But there is a possibility here if we ask ourselves why big, heavy weapons are actually slower than small, light weapons. The issue ain’t entirely about the actual, physical speed of the weapon. It ain’t just down to how fast you can make the weapon move. That is part of the story, but it ain’t the whole story. It ain’t even the biggest part of the story. You don’t even need to know anything about armed combat or physics to grok it, either. You just need to have played any modern video game with melee combat and have noticed the different parts of a full attack animation.
See, what really determines how quickly you can crank out attacks with a weapon is how easily you can recover and reset after each attack. After you swing or thrust a weapon or lunge with it or whatever, the weapon’s out of position. You can’t attack with it again until you bring it back into position. Sometimes, it’s as easy as just pulling the knife out of the wound so you can stibbity-stab again. Sometimes, it’s pulling your whole body back out of a lunge. Sometimes, it’s about checking a heavy, unbalanced weapon’s momentum — or redirecting it — to bring it back into the right place to swing it again.
I don’t want to do a long-ass explanation about moments of inertia and the difference between balanced and unbalanced weapons and the biomechanics of human combat here because I think you see my point well enough to come on this journey with me. The only thing I’ll add is that a lot of this shit is more about muscle strength and explosive power than it is about agility and reaction time, but that’s just to stop anyone from pissing and moaning about my taking Dexterity out of the Initiative equation.
Seriously, fuck Dexterity.
My point’s just that Speed Factor Initiative is about front-loading everything involved in attack-and-recovery time. It’s putting it all before the Initiative roll. It’s just as valid to shove it all in the back door and put all the attack-and-recovery time stuff after the Initiative roll. The action you just took determines when you can act again because you need to recover from your action, whether that’s to make another attack with the same weapon or to do something else. You can’t back out of a fight until you stop your axe from swinging and shift your feet from a firm axe-swinging stance to actual running. Even if your action isn’t a weapon attack, it’s still got a recovery time. After you open a door, you ain’t in a position to get all stabby right away. Your stance isn’t right, you might not be facing the right direction, and your knife might not even be in your hand, what with the need to operate a door handle or whatever. Even if it is, you probably had to change the grip to door. If you used your off hand, you need to get that out of the way of the fight.
As for spellcasting, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to assume that using your immortal spirit like a lightning rod to ground out the eldritch forces that can unmake the cosmos and then redirecting and reshaping those forces to make manifest your will in the tissue of lies we call reality might leave you needing to catch your breath and clear your head.
I also think this makes a good case for removing stat modifiers from Initiative rolls altogether. Sure, you could argue that you could use different modifiers for different recoveries, but that adds a layer of totally unnecessary complexity, and it just means everyone will be using their best stat for Initiative almost all the time, which means a pretty level playing field. So you might as well take it out.
Besides, it’s best when the turn order is highly randomized and mixed up and changes drastically from round to round. Assuming you want well-paced, exciting, dynamic combats.
Really, anywhere we can remove some math and just use straight-up, naked die rolls is best. Given the Turn Order on the Table variant above, ideally, everyone can just throw a die for Initiative and leave it right the hell there. No math, no fiddling, just hold it there until it’s time to put it out for the next round. But that doesn’t let us vary Initiative based on Recovery Time.
Or does it?
The obvious solution is a dice ladder. Arrange the dice in size order. First is the d4, then the d6, then the d8, then the d10. We can stop there. We don’t need more than ten phases in combat. We’ll make the phases ordinal. Phase one is the first phase, phase two is the second, and so on. So all you have to do is throw the right-sized die, and that tells you when you’ll go. If you roll a three, you go in the third phase.
You see how this all comes together? And how it meshes with Turn Order on the Table, so you can use it at a physical table. In a virtual tabletop, you can just update initiative scores manually. It’s pretty easy to do in most of them. Or maybe you can write a mod. Honestly, though, this is where virtual tabletops actually show how restrictive they are and how they run so counter to the DIY spirit of the hobby. Perhaps I’ll write a rant about that.
Perhaps I already did.
So, you take an action. When you’re done, you roll a die based on how hard it is to recover from that action. Let’s call that a Recovery Die. The straight-up, no math result tells you when you go in the turn order next round.
Meanwhile, things like Improved Initiative feats and haste and slow spells and other shit that modifies Initiative rolls — except for Dexterity because fuck Dexterity — can be modeled just by moving one die size up or down the ladder.
So what do the actual rules look like…
Angry’s Recovery Time Initiative System
Combat Rounds are divided into ten Phases, numbered from one to ten. Every creature has an Initiative Score that determines the Phase in which it acts. If multiple creatures act in the same Phase, the Game Master decides the order in which to resolve those turns.
Every creature has an Initiative Die based on its size. Small and smaller creatures have a d4 Initiative Die. Medium creatures have a d6 Initiative Die. Large creatures have a d8 Initiative Die. Even larger creatures use a d10 Initiative Die.
At the start of the first round of combat, each creature rolls its Initiative Die, and that die is set next to the creature’s token or miniature or on a card representing that creature’s group. That tracks its place in the Turn Order.
After a creature takes its turn, it immediately rolls a Recovery Die to determine its place in the turn order next round. The result is held off to the side until the current round is over and then placed on the table at the start of the next round.
Recovery Dice can be a d4, d6, d8, or d10. A d4 Recovery Die is the smallest and best Recovery Die possible, while a d10 Recovery Die is the biggest and the worst.
If a creature takes an Attack action, the Recovery Die is equal to the base damage die of the attack, regardless of the number of dice rolled or any static modifiers. If an attack does 2d8+6 bludgeoning damage, the Recovery die is d8. An attack that deals 3d12 damage uses a d10 Recovery Die.
If a creature takes the Cast a Spell action, the Recovery Die is a d8 unless the creature uses a cantrip or casts a spell at higher levels using a higher-level spell slot as described in the spell. If the spell is a cantrip, the Recovery Die is a d6. If the spellcaster is using a higher-level spell slot than the spell normally requires, the Recovery Die is a d10.
If the creature takes a Dash, Disengage, Dodge, Help, Hide, Search, or Use an Object action, their size-based Initiative Die is used for the Recovery Die.
If a creature takes the Ready action, their Recovery Die is based on the action they take when they actually resolve the readied action. If a creature ends the round without having taken the action they readied with the Ready Action, they automatically go in the First Phase of the next round. Set their Turn Order Tracker to 1. A creature can deliberately use the Ready action to act in the First Phase of the next round in this way.
If a creature takes a bonus action during their turn, increase the Recovery Die determined by their main action by one size. Thus, a rogue who moves, then uses Cunning Action to Dash, then attacks with a shortsword for 1d6+3 piercing damage will use a d8 Recovery Die. The Recovery Die for a shortsword attack is normally a d6, but using a bonus action bumps it up to a d8.
Likewise, if a creature interacts for free with an object as part of another action on their turn, the Recovery Die determined by their action is increased by one size. Thus, a fighter who draws a longsword and then attacks or one who opens a door as part of a move before attacking with a longsword rolls a d10 Recovery Die.
If a creature takes any other action, the Game Master should assign a Recovery Die on an ad hoc basis using their own best judgment. For quick, easy-to-recover-from actions, use a d4. For slow, staggering actions, use a d10.
And that’s it. That’s the core of Angry’s Recovery Time Initiative System.
Variant 3: Angry’s Full-On Recovery Time Initiative System Now With Maximized Mechanical Meaningfulness
Angry’s Recovery Time Initiative System makes the whole turn order and initiative thing way more exciting and dynamical. It also adds some actual weight to action choices. It’ll encourage the players — and the monsters — to consider the turn order when picking their actions and their targets. An archer might favor a target they can kill before that target’s turn over one that’s already gone this round. A spellcaster might notice they get to go right before a powerful creature and hit it with a debuff. That shit won’t always be a big deal, but it will get the players considering who goes when as part of their action calculus so they can spot opportunities to have a bigger impact.
But there are definitely some modifications I can make to the core system and to the base Dungeons & Dragons rules to increase the impactfultility of Angry’s Recovery Time Initiative System. Moreover, by laying out both the rules and the system for tracking them all in one go, I was able to see some mechanical possibilities I never would have considered. For example, if I were tracking the turn order with a list, I wouldn’t think of rules to change it on the fly. But, with the turn order tracked with physical counters on the table, updating the turn order at runtime — as the computer kids say — is much more feasible and practical.
This variant ain’t really a separate thing. Instead, it’s really just the rest of Angry Recovery Time Initiative System. But some of you are pussies and you’re afraid to make big changes for big gains, so I separated them out for those of you who just want Angry’s Slightly Tweaked Turn Order for Sissy Babies
Unfortunately, because this really isn’t a unified variant but rather just a selection of more rules to add, the only thing I can do is just rattle them off, lightning round style, with some topical headings.
Here they are…
Additional Rules for Angry’s Full-On Recovery Time Initiative System
Durations and Timing
One minute is three rounds of combat. I’ll leave it up to you to decide whether that means combat takes longer or whether it’s just a terminology change so that whenever you see, “Concentration, up to 1 minute,” you just replace that with, “up to 3 rounds.” I don’t really care. The idea of fixed-length rounds is stupid anyway. Even the Player’s Handbook hedges by saying rounds are “about six seconds.”
Anyway, every duration that’s 1 minute is now 3 rounds. That’s more than enough most of the time. Especially because, if you’re not an idiot, a three-round effect will proc four times. Idiots shouldn’t be playing spellcasters anyway. I did the math; don’t bitch and whine at me over this.
EDIT: I am a big enough man to admit when I fuck up. The previous paragraph is totally incorrect. You cannot get a three-round effect to proc four times however you think about it. I was just totally wrong. Doesn’t matter why. But I ain’t going to change that paragraph because it’s funny as hell that I made an idiot mistake while I was calling all y’all idiots. So feel free to point and laugh. That said, the screwup doesn’t change the rule. Three rounds is the right duration for an effect in D&D based on it’s combat math. The whole, “Don’t whinge because you can game the system” thing was just to stop all the crybabies screaming nerf. It really, really isn’t a nerf in pretty much every reasonable, practical situation. So, I fucked up and I’m admitting I fucked up and I’m leaving it there for all the world to see, but it doesn’t change the design or the balance or the fact that I’m never wrong and I never make mistakes and people who argue with me are idiots.
Durations are ticked down at the end of every combat round, including in the round in which the effect starts. Set a counter equal to the number of rounds when an effect starts and turn it down by one at the end of every round. If the counter is on 1 at the end of a round, the effect ends right then and there. Then start the new round and have people put out their Turn Order Trackers.
Now you have to care about timing your buffs, debuffs, and non-instantaneous spells and abilities.
Recovery, Reactions, and Sneak Attacks
This is going to seem a little abstract to some of you, and I don’t care. It’s a good mechanic. It’s also justifiable in-world, but explaining the justification won’t matter to anyone who complains about it, so I ain’t gonna bother.
From the start of a round until the start of the Phase in which you are eligible to act, you are considered Recovering. If your Turn Order Tracker says 4, you’re in Recovery for the first three phases of the current round.
While Recovering, you can’t take reactions. That includes opportunity attacks. Heavy weapon users might want to invest in Improved Initiative if they want to hold the line. Keep reading before you tell me how horrible this is and how much I suck.
Rogues and other creatures with the Sneak Attack ability do not need advantage on the attack roll to sneak attack against a Recovering target, nor do they need nearby allies. Recovering makes you vulnerable.
Knockback and Delay
The base damage die of an attack is the damage die rolled to determine its damage, regardless of the number of dice rolled, any fixed modifiers, or any additional damage dice from special abilities like a rogue’s Sneak Attack. If a rogue deals 1d4+3+2d6 piercing damage with a dagger on a Sneak Attack, the base damage die is a d4. Likewise, if a bugbear deals 2d8+2+2d6 damage with a morningstar using its Surprise Attack trait, the base damage die is d8.
Got it?
Edit: To clarify, some attacks have a base damage die that is two dice. Mauls and greatswords, for example have a base damage die of 2d6, so you should use a d10 recovery die. This one ain’t me bullshitting you by the way. There is actually an invisible, under-the-hood concept of a dice ladder of base damage dice used throughout the design of D&D 5E. The designers just never explicitly pointed to it, but there’s this whole underlying design thing about how damage is the expression of power level to make the bounded accuracy system work and tiers of play are delineated by adding the potential for extra damage dice onto the base damage die or multiplying the base damage dice and yaddah yaddah yaddah. It’s in the code. I’m piggybacking off of it. Frankly, I don’t think anything should do 2d6 damage. It should all do 1d12. Yes, I know the math is different is because normal vs. linear distribution, but with the way average damage is calculated for things like monster design, it’s down to using 7 instead of 6.5 which is really down to using 2.33 per three rounds instead of 2.17 per three rounds, so, come on, just use single die that fits the pattern for all the difference it makes in your balance system. But what do I know.
If you are hit by a spell or attack whose base damage die is larger than your size-based Initiative Die — not equal to or larger, actually larger — you suffer Knockback. You must bump your Turn Order Tracker up by 1. If you were set to go in Phase 6, you now go in Phase 7.
If you were set to go in Phase 10, you’re instead Delayed. Knock down your Turn Order Tracker and roll your base Initiative Die to determine when you go next round. You lost your turn.
If your Turn Order Tracker isn’t active because you’ve already gone this round, Knockback has no effect. It doesn’t spill over.
Heavy weapon users might lose some opportunity attacks, but they can stunlock even large, powerful opponents.
Checked Attacks
Finally, when you make a melee attack — not a spell or ranged attack — you can choose to Check the attack. You can choose to reduce the base damage by one or more sides, down to a minimum of a d4, in order to roll a better Recovery Die. Replace the base damage die of the attack with your chosen damage die. Damage modifiers and bonus damage dice from abilities like Sneak Attack are unaffected.
You must choose to Check the attack and specify your chosen base damage die before rolling the attack roll.
If you are entitled to multiple attacks on your turn, the highest base damage die determines your Recovery Die, so if you want to improve your place in the turn order next round, you have to Check all your attacks.
For example, suppose Ardrick is using a halberd, but his player, Adam, doesn’t want to let his foe escape his attacks of opportunity next round, so he decides to Check the attack. Instead of his normal 1d10+5 slashing damage, Adam chooses to deal 1d6+5 slashing damage with a Checked attack and roll a d6 Recovery Die to determine his place in the turn order next round.
Yes, you read that right. As a one-off bonus to this whole big thing about Initiative that none of you wanted, I also just wrote a slapdash light attack and heavy attack system into D&D in less than 150 words. You’re welcome.
Maybe next time, you fuckers will just let me run with my ideas instead of telling me what a waste of time they all are.
Oh that’s real neat! A simple but elegant way of making turn order matter a bit more, as well as the choices you make! Definitely interested in trying it out!
“[F]uck Dexterity”
Gold.
“The action you just took determines when you can act again because you need to recover from your action….”
This is gold.
All of this is gold! 😀
Angry, this looks really exciting. Two questions for you.
1) Can you please explain how a three round effect could proc four times under the rules? I must be misunderstanding something because I can’t make that work.
2) With your legion content pack you introduced an initiative variant rule allowing combatants to move their initiative phase later in a round and then act in concert with allied combatants in that phase. What are your thoughts on using that rule with this system?
Thanks!
There is an error in the text. An error I made. I will be doing a little update in the next week to correct it before I push it to General Access. Thanks beta reader.
Glad to have helped then. Thanks
Is it a bug or a feature that the Greatsword and Maul use a d6 and are therefore faster than a Light Crossbow or a Rapier (d8)?
I’m looking forward to kicking the tires on the system tonight!
Same question here.
Shit… that’s a big. I forgot those random 2d6s floating around. The base damage die for those weapons is actually, technically, 2d6. I will add a note regarding those before this goes into general access.
Cool! We played it as a bug and I had the player use a d10.
This feels semi-plausible to me. A lunging thrust with a rapier will take time to recover from, and crossbows take time to reload.
You also have me thinking this system will make it a lot easier to make renaissance firearms work the way I want them to.
Guns in D&D. Oh… you’re one of those people.
Well, I’m glad that will help you with your terrible, terrible game. You monster.
I ran several supplements with gun rules and hated all of them because it either just made them reskinned bows or resulted in anachronistic wild west gunslingers.
What I actually want is a matchlock arquebus liked those used by a janissary or a pike and shot formation in the mid to late fourteen hundreds. I suspect it’s not actually possible to do in the 5e framework. I haven’t found a balance of meaningful gameplay options, complexity, and game vibes that actually works, but it’s a fun game design exercise to try a few times a year and figure out why my latest attempt doesn’t work.
There is something to be said for the Loading property affecting your turn order phase on top of damage die size.
It’s interesting on paper and I hope it works but it adds some complexity on the player side that I wouldn’t trust my players to deal with from the get go.
I would go for the 1.5, just setting the dice to the most likely action for each character and rerolling each round to start with, and maybe add the rest later once they start checking the monster initiative order and take it into account for their own actions.
The variant 3 adds many parameters that could provoke decision paralysis, which is the price for any interesting system but I found that this can really bog down combat in unforseeable ways, just a fair warning.
I think you’re misreading something. It adds zero complexity on the player side. The Game Master simply says, “Roll a d6 Recovery Die and hold onto it, okay?”
Using full rules: they get to choose to do a strong or slow strike. Using a cantrip or full spell, and whether to use a bonus action or not depending on overall tactics for the fight. It’s interesting but it adds choice and reflexion, to me that’s complexity: some of them will swim in it like fishes and others like anvils.
Anyway playtesting will tell how it goes, that’s the only way to know in the end.
Fortunately, we’re using the real meanings of words here, not the ones people make up in their own incorrect heads.
Warning- Read my comment at your own expense. And I am completely okay with a non-response from Angry. Angry, love everything you do and I am grateful for your tutelage. You’re the best. I use a system for my old school rpg game where the slow weapon players roll a d20 and everyone else rolls a d12 at the beginning of each round of combat. Any player can choose to roll a d6 however, after the initial round. Rolling a d6 negates the ability to cast spells and any attack roll is done with a d4. so magic users can move if they’re worried or whatever and slow weapon users can do the old elbow or butt of the sword to the face etc, etc and do lower damage if they think they can kill the opponent before the opponent has a chance to strike or whatever else they can think of. To be clear, your system is 100x better, there’s a lot of straight genius in your post. As per usual. Just wanted your opinion on my janky system.
Your janky system is a little janky, but there’s good ideas in there. You’re trying to fix a lot of the same problems I am, as near as I can tell. So thumbs up.
You made my day. Appreciate you, Angry.
This looks awesome!
This is a work of genius! I put this next to the Tension Pool for how awesome and useful I think this is.
Thank you for sharing your work with us!
Damn, that feels as if you just opened a window I didn’t even know existed!
The system rocked last night!
As chance would have it, the party had the big fight at Skull Gorge in the classic Red Hand of Doom adventure. The group adopted Angry’s system very quickly. My most by-the-5e-book player was reluctant to try it, but the group overruled him. We all made a few mistakes (like the halfling bard using a d6 when he should have used a d4, me accidentally skipping a player twice. Etc)
The system *greatly* accelerated combat for us! The fight raged for over six rounds (I lost track) yet it *flew* by. Even better, it enabled all sorts of dynamic decisions. The best moment was when the player of the halfling (who was riding the shoulder of the hill giant, Old Warklegnaw) realized that he would go after the giant and before one of the guarding soldiers.
We didn’t use the additional rules for Recovering or being Delayed. But we used the full stack otherwise.
We had some lessons learned but no suggestions for the system at this point. I made a quick, one-page reference sheet for all of us and that was a big help. One thing I’m looking forward is including turn order modifiers for “masterwork” and magic weapons.
Thanks, Angry!!
What made it greatly accelerate combat for you, and are you still having the same experience?
Man, this here is an absolute brilliance! It’s elegant, it’s deep, and it’s dynamic. Thank you so much for putting this out! And thanks to all the Live Chat audience that facilitated it happening.
I’ve been crafting a new melee combat system for Year Zero Engine (vis-a-vis Alien or Forbidden Lands), and you’ve just solved my one last dilemma.
Wanted to mention for anyone that runs YZE games, that in those systems Initiative is randomized by a deck of playing cards that are meant to be placed in front of the player/GM in RAW. Add to that re-drawing Initiative for every round and factor in the Fast/Slow actions to emulate Recovery Time, and you’re golden. I’ll be taking the principles and design goals underlying your system (thanks to the rantalysis in pt. I) and work them into a smooth and dynamic re-working of YZE combat. I already feel it’s gonna be a blast!
Again, thank you for your game design sexiness and genius!
My sincerest wow’s,
A.
I was on the fence while reading Variant 1, but the Recovery logic sold me. Absolutely amaze-balls!
Questions:
1. In Variant 2, die size depends on character size. But then that die can be modified by: attacks, bonus actions, spells, and free interactions. That’s almost everything, except those pesky Class Features or “Just Move + Bonus Action”, which almost never happens. So, about 99% of the time, the character size doesn’t influence your recovery, except on the first Initiative Roll at the start of a combat, or when using a feature, or when it’s just Move+BA. Is that correct, is it intentional, or am I misunderstanding something?
2. Duncan mentioned accidentally skipping players. What are your recommendations/instructions for DMs on how to handle this in a way that is easy for them and avoids that? And how can DMs make sure that NPC dice are also visible to the players? Should they even?
Thanks!
Regarding not skipping players, my advice is try it and see what works for you and your table.
In our case, I put a post-it note on the table for each monster or NPC group (ex “dragon”, “hill giant”, “soldiers”) and placed the initiative die *on* the note. When the monster or NPC had gone, I moved the die to the side of the note. Letting the players see when the monsters were going was great for letting them plan their actions.
I skipped players for two reasons 1) I’m a dumbass and 2) the player had left his initiative die near his character sheet rather and other dice rather than clearly out on the battle map. That is easy to fix.
Right. Your size-based Initiative die is for when you’re doing things dependent solely on your whole-body coordination, explosive power, and so forth unhindered by the need to manipulate the forces of magic that bind the cosmos together or unaided by the leverage and momentum that a balanced weapon design or the action efficiency inherent in using a thrusting a weapon designed to need minimal movement and recovery time. Hiltless shortswords — the gladius-like thrusting swords D&D uses as it’s “shortsword” — are very efficient weapons in terms of the human actual required. They stay in line through the thrust and recovery and require on hip, shoulder, and arm movements that are extremely natural biomechanically and thus they’re very efficient little DPS machines.
I love the idea of removing ability modifiers from initiative and recoveries. Removing valueless
complexity is always appreciated.
Two questions.
Where is the downloadable, half page cheat sheet that I need to put in front of all the players when we are lucky enough to be F2F?
Who is writing the plug in for Foundry for all those times that life gets in the way and we resort to online gaming?
Seconded
Now if only someone would take this idea that is reasonably well patched onto DnD that wasn’t designed for it, and make an RPG with something similar built into the basic systems from the start…
Yes please
Love the second variant, I have an issue with the Recovery system…
Let’s say that you take your action on Phase 5 of turn 1. The recovery rule only applies to the start of each round, so on Phases 6-10 of turn 1 you can make a reaction and you are not recovering? Then you roll a 3 on your turn order tracker, so on Phases 1-2 of turn 2 you are in Recovery, but come out of recovery for Phases 4-10 of turn 2, and then go back into recovery at the start of turn 3?
If you are “recovering” your posture and guard, why don’t you gain the Recovery condition as immediately after making an attack? I don’t understand why you make an attack, are fine, then get this condition after a few other characters have had a turn?
I’m guessing because getting an advantage over an opponent because you’re slow feels wrong and being unable to react quickly because you’re swinging a big ol’ hammer around feels right
Recovering is simply the label for a penalty for not going in the first phase of the round. Without using this variant, you can use your reaction before or after your turn, so your action has no impact on realism “recovering” anyways. With Recovering, the condition, at least your actions now have impact on your ability to react. Another incentive to win initiative and go first. If you choose an action to increase your odds of going first you also maximize your odds of using your reaction. I dig it.
Curious about your thoughts on if rounds are still necessary if you use a system like this. I’ve been toying with a roundless initiative that has similar ideas with recovery time based on the dice ladder but where each roll adds to a running total. Each player/npc has their own running totals and I the GM just keep counting up to determine who acts next. Do you think rounds still add anything meaningful to combat with your system that I would be missing out on? I’m sure my in progress system has issues that I’m still working through and I am not trying to waste your time getting you to fix my system but I am definitely interested in your thoughts on Rounds in general.
Pausing at the top of a round to set the scene contributed to the single greatest climax, and the greatest dragon fight, I have ever experienced in any tabletop roleplaying game. Rounds are meaningful; you would be missing out.
Thats a really good point, and exactly the kind of thing I was hoping to hear. I was thinking only about execution and mechanical expression and forgetting about the pacing aspect (mechanical and narrative) that round structures could provide. Now I’m either back to the drawing board or just stealing this!
I don’t think this is a problem. You can pause at any time and set the scene as wish.
Incredible and elegant! I read through it several times, trying to get it all in my head, and I think I only have one comment: initiative ties. If there is a tie in a phase, who goes first? You wrote that it’s at GM discretion, but I could see it causing friction at the table in a situation where maybe several monsters are tied with a PC. How would you resolve that at the table?
My first instinct is smallest creatures go first to keep the logic of your base initiative. If that doesn’t resolve it, simple roll-off? Or maybe just DEX, even though fuck DEX?
With my judgment. At the table. The way Game Masters resolve anything. Put me at a table and I’ll resolve it.
Fair enough, thanks for the reply! And as always, great work! As much as I like the True Game Mastery courses, I have missed the Angry Hacks.
I’d say that the first requirement for an initiative system should be producing results without ties, because ordering unordered list is what the initiative is supposed to do.
Otherwise you’d need another tiny initiative system running inside your big system (“gm chooses” is a system), and then players would have to utilize two systems at once.
Really? That’s the first thing? That’s like the top-tier criteria for what an turn order and Initiative system must do? I disagree very strongly.
Secondly, every Initiative based on random, independent number generation has the potential to produce ties. They also all offer a system to break random-number ties like, “Use Dexterity as a tie breaker,” or “Players go first,” or whatever. Of course, things like, “Use Dexterity as a tie breaker” or “Players go first” have the possibility of generating further ties. There’s only so many Dexterity scores, for example, that actually come up and “Players go first” doesn’t break ties between players. That’s where my system shines, because, “Game Master resolves the tie,” never results in a second order tie. If two people are tied based on random numbers, the tie-breaker criteria, “Game Master decides,” never leads to further ties and more tie-breaker criteria.
It’s amazing that, try as I might, I can’t ever imagine what tiny little stupid bullshit people are going to take irrational issue with.
Am I correctly understanding that in the full system, the “Initiative Die” is just the Recovery Die of the first round, set by your size instead of your action because you haven’t acted yet?
Yeah, it’s basically “recovery when you’re not recovering from anything.”
Reminds me a lot of the system White Wolf used in Scion and I think also Exalted, with the main difference being that WW’s approach sacrifices the concept of the “round.” All weapons and other combat actions have a Speed — a slightly counter-intuitive name, since a high-Speed action is one that takes longer to recover from. What they gain by giving up rounds is the ability to make multiple actions a consequence of what those actions are, rather than pegging it to character level and class, the way D&D does: somebody stibbity-stabbing with a knife might hit the great-axe wielder three times before that guy manages to swing again, but they won’t do it all at the same time. It’s also a flat number rather than a die; knifing will always be Speed 3 or whatever, rather than rolling to see when you’ll go again.
I did like that system a lot!
I came here to point this out, this is almost exactly the White Wolf initiative system. Interestingly, while it was used in Exalted 2e, it’s been entirely dropped in 3e in favor of their new system where initiative is a form of health that you gain and lose during combat.
For the “base” initiative die, why did you prefer to use the size instead of the hit die of the creature (or class) in question?
Then Wizards would be a lot faster to act than Barbarians. Doesn’t make the most sense imo
That seems considerably more impactful than the lead in lead me to believe…
I like the ideas, not sure how players will take them.
Brilliant, some food for thought
Versatile could be a cool property if let you decide d8 or d10 for example dor damage/recovery
In theory i like the finesse/heavy thing, in practice the smaller granularity feels to me like it devour a lot of design and play space, like for example choosing or switching a weapon that matter in the situation
i want to play this so hard, but with no d20 to hit, i want actions to manipulate turn order tactically instead of a fake coin flip on top of my damage dice, that alone have a lot of variance build in (no double dice weapon would be a correct decision).
i don’t see to much issues about d12 damage/recovery, you just removed a lot of shitty procedures to enhance play experience, so there space for it.
i really hope slapdash would be build around this damage/recovery system
Slapdash will not use this system or anything like it. But it’ll be so good you won’t notice or care.
Damn you, sexy ass@#%&…
Surprise. I’d imagine if you’re using or liking the 2024 approach, just give the side that gained surprise, a lower die or advantage on the roll, depending on how much of an advantage you want surprise to be. Of you like the 2014 approach, maybe have another think.
Either way, this is a very interesting idea Angry, and I’d expect laying it on my group, would start with variant 2 so we can keep it in our little brains, then maybe expand to the full monty based on feedback.
I’d also expect the dex monkey types arguing that their Dex mod should factor in their first round roll, but who knows. I’ve certainly seen lots of players optimising their init, assassin style, so they can lay down the smack first.
Given the base damage of some weapons is 2d6 or 2d8 maybe an easier way of figuring out weapon Recovery Dice could be “Start with your Initiative/Size Die, then increase or decrease it in die code if the base damage die is higher/lower, and increase it by one die code if it uses 2d. So a Medium (d6) creature uses a 1d6 weapon nothing changes; a 1d4 weapon they lower to d4; but a 2d6 increases them to d8 and a 2d8 or higher increases them to d10 recovery.”
Wow, great system! Definitely gonna test it out.
How would you deal with creatures that don’t take actions (for example, due to being incapacitated)? They still need a turn for potentially moving or triggering any ongoing effect and the like, and they could “capacitate” halfway through a round or something.
If I had to take a call, being incapacitated at any point during a round would push all subsequent turns to Phase 10 until it can act again.
That would technically mean that surprised creatures would all have their turn on Phase 10, and as such couldn’t take reactions until everyone else had gotten a turn, and then use their size based initiative die for the second round.
Here’s a quick and dirty cheat sheet I made for the system (it includes the full and the reduced version without the third variant): https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1TfZ8sM7pCj9BG48gXXLTSAu4DyvMBowp-yzMZCkiPU4/edit?usp=sharing
Thank you!
Maybe I’m a jerk for posting a personal preference instead of just copying and modifying for my own use, but, if the “Ready” section could also include a quick note about being able to purposefully postpone to be in phase 1 of the next round I think that would be a useful note for players.
I’m sorry. I posted my message about the Ready action, but you already included that in the main section, just not in the shorthand action-list at the bottom. I should have double checked. I got excited and overzealous and that’s on me for not double checking first.
It’s my first time commenting, and also I’m not a native English speaker, so please apologize my (probably) mistakes.
I think it’s a great system, but I think it has an unexpected consequence ina fight against a Large or greater Solo creature.
If the characters’ tema start using a high-damage weapons and spells (like Toll the Dead, a cantrip that does 1d12 damage), they can force the opponent to skip turns. With a little bad luck on the Solo’s side, even two turns…
I will glad to read your comments about this issue, and congratulation for the good work.
I love this modified system for initiative.
I might add that when you become Bloodied you suffer Knockback as if from a heavy weapon hit. That would further the Elden Ring dynamic just a little for me and also allow the smaller weapon wielders to participate in the stun-lock possibility just a little, with good timing.
I love how heavy and light attacks are built in without extra mechanics and features required.
Angry,
This is brilliant, but you already know that. It’s right up there with the Tension Pool from what I can tell after a first reading. I will have to play test this a little for a more informed opinion, of course.
That said, I have one comment and one question. The comment is that I was hoping this would bring back the ability to interrupt spell casting, but it does not. I suppose for that to be a thing you need some form of accomodation where the caster announces their intent to cast at the top of the round then it resolves on the phase they rolled up. If they take damage in the interim they would have to succeed on a Concentration Save or lose the spell. Unfortunately, that method overlaps with recovery, and it robs the caster of the ability to respond to the evolving combat situation dynamically; so, it’s probably not an improvement.
Now, my question. Would you consider or recommend amending effects that last “Until the end/begining of their next turn” to instead last merely until the end of the round, or possibly the following round?
Option: when casting a spell, you begin incantations on your turn at the beginning of the phase and complete them on a subsequent phase.
Cantrips: complete at the end of the same phase they are cast on. If you take damage during that phase, you have to make a concentration check.
Spells: you complete the casting of a spell 2 phases after you start incanting. If you take damage before you finish casting, you have to make a concentration check. Spells are always completed at the end of a phase.
Upcasting: increases the casting time of a spell by 1 phase.
May you expand on why Initiative Dice get up to d10, instead of d12?
Because one to ten.
Interesting. What happens during ambush, are the ambushed considered Delayed?
Great stuff, does the knockback rule stack for every attack received such as being hit several time from a multi attack ?
Admitting to my own reading comprehension failures at my own peril.
In part 1, you indicated that an ideal solution system should be able to allow players to take additional turns within the same round if they are fast / choose specific actions.
Did that not make the cut into this system or did I just fail to read the section that explained it?
Great system regardless. Personally, I really like the dice tracked initiative counters by the players. I don’t know why, but I have such a pet peeve about the part of combat where I go “Mark, what’s your initiative? Keith? Sara?” and sit there trying to write their names in ascending numerical order without knowing how many of them rolled a 13. It’s not “hard” but I hate it.
It’s possible to defend yourself with most weapons before you recover enough to use them in an attack. The haft of hafted weapons is used more than the head for defense. Likewise, the base of a blade is better for defense than the tip. Video game animation usually skips defense. Therefore someone should not lose their defense while recovering. They should only lose their attacks of opportunity.
I like what I wrote better.
What about monk? It’s seem weird when we level up as a monk but our initiative is slower because the martials art die.
I imagine the monk could vhoose to use whichever damage die they wished to use, same as checking an attack. Light quick punches vs an off balance full body kick or something. 🙂
We? You know you’re not *really* a monk, right?
You could adjust if you want to. But it makes sense to me that as you master more complex, more powerful attacks, they take more effort to execute and require more commitment. You can check your attacks, which you could consider to be using your easier, faster moves, doing less damage to go earlier in the round.
It’s also worth noting that the difference between the average result on a d4, a d6, a d8, and a d10 is only a single point. Yes, the results have more variance, but on average, they’re actually far closer together than it seems. It’s just that when you look at the die types, it FEELS bigger.
Where do you telegraph a monster’s attacks in this system? Would you stick it at the end of a monster’s turn, or during the end-of-round recap?
I ask because I’d want characters to be able to alter their choices based on ‘incoming fire breath’ but it seems like by the time they know it’s about to happen, they’ve already committed. Which maybe means ‘when you’re fighting a big slow thing with nukes, stay nimble as a matter of course’ but maybe there’s a cool way I haven’t thought of.
That’s an awesome question and something I should have addressed since I left the perfect place for it. I tend to telegraph at least some basic monster intentions at the transition between rounds. I guess what you’d call the “end of round recap.”
I might say something like this, “Ardrick is still locked in melee at the top of the stairs with the two orcs, who show no signs of backing down. Meanwhile, the shaman that Danae has cornered against the wall is shrinking back and it looks like he’s considering his options to escape. Cabe is unconscious and bleeding out at the ogre’s feet and it looks like the ogre has just noticed Beryllia on her own and is preparing to charge. That looks like trouble.”
How would you run a bunch of enemies, 5-10 units under this system? I find those kinds of battles really fun and since I really disliked basic initiative I just got rid of it in favor of “we go in order you sit at the table and enemies are bulked in groups between you”.
Grouping enemies and simplifying initiative to such a degree does make it less mechanically engaging, but allows for running a great variety of battle scales. Is there a way to achieve that with reactive initiative?
I may have not made myself clear, but the question is:
How do you adjust initiative if a unit is a group of monsters? Like if I hit a goblin with a greatsword and goblins have initiative score 7, should all the goblins move back to score 8? Or should that be a 1-in-4 chance?
I’ve been waiting for a chance to try these rules out and therefore thinking about them a bunch. I say:
If the 4 monsters are in skirmish order, roll d4 and knock them all back on a 1.
If the 4 monsters are in close order, just knock them all back. They have to support one another.
Close order would be standing in adjacent spaces, “shoulder to shoulder,” with probably a bonus to defense and a malus to speed. Think phalanx, not triplex acies. I’d suggest only skilled fighters trained specifically in close-order formation fighting be treated this way.
I would just put another d10 next to the individual that got knocked back. Or I would simply write +1 on the notepad I am using for their reaction die.
I do what Lucas suggested.
Hello Angry,
Very interesting topic and very clever solutions. I always hack the rules I’m not convinced by, and you inspire me a lot.
I’m not a native English speaker, so please excuse anything that sounds strange, although I have run this through an AI filter.
The thing is that in your first part you talked about why rounds have to exist, and about why we shouldn’t let one player act twice before another. However, in your solutions you seem to bypass that issue. While I was reading the second part, I expected some solutions addressing these points, and I don’t know whether you missed them, discarded them, or tried some approaches that didn’t turn out to be workable. I came up with a few suggestions, which I’ll explain below.
In your system, we still have a full round scheme and everybody can perform only one action (unless the action is delayed beyond phase 10 which would be lost). If we changed the die counter to 1d100 instead of using recovery dice as counter, we would have a linear count of phases covering the entire combat. With this solution, when a player rolls for recovery for second and subsequent actions, the result would be added to the last phase. So if a character acted at phase 7 and rolled a 3, their next turn would be at phase 10, and so on, potentially up to 50 or 60. No player would ever fall behind completely. It could happen that, with a new recovery roll, a character might act again before any other participant and take two actions in a row, but that could be acceptable, couldn’t it? And this would continue until the combat ends.
With this system, in the worst-case scenario, using for instance a d6 recovery roll, player A could roll 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 and act on phases 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5, while player B rolls a 6. Player A would act five times before player B could do anything. To solve this, I would suggest adding a fixed +2 modifier. That way, the recovery roll would be 1d6 + 2, and in the worst case player A would act on phases 3, 6, and 9, while player B would act on phase 8. That means only two actions for A before B can act. Do you think this adds much more complexity to my proposal?
Did you come up with anything similar and discard it? What do you think about this solution? You think it increases interest in the action parts of the game in a fair way? In any case, I’ll try it in my next session. I’m really eager to see how it works.
Thanks for everything.
Sorry, I missed some previous comments, and I’ve just realized that Pajamin already suggested that. I’m developing it a little here, and I would be glad if you Pajamin, share you issues with this variant.
Dear Angry,
I don’t think I’ve understood it yet, even though I’ve been sitting at my computer since yesterday evening.
My only question is this: Can a character take actions more than once per round?
Example:
Round 1
Everyone rolls a size-based dice. (I roll a 2)
Everyone is assigned to a phase according to their dice. (I’m assigned to Phase 2)
After their phase, everyone immediately rolls a recovery die. (I roll a 4)
Option A: In the next round, I start in Phase 4.
OR
Option B: In the same round, I’m allowed to act again in Phase 6.
If Option A is correct, what exactly is the fundamental difference between your Recovery Time Initiative and Speed Factor, assuming I modify Speed Factor so that after each action in a round, that action determines the initiative value for the next round.
Best regards
The fundamental difference is that speed factor is based on what you *intend* to do in the current round. If you change your intention (because the situation changed, for example) then the system gets wonky.
Angry’s Recovery Time is based on what you did in the previous round. That makes it much clearer and less subject to debate.
Cool?
“If the spellcaster is using a higher-level spell slot than the spell normally requires, the Recovery Die is a d10.”
Late to the party but I just wanted to point out that this disproportionally affects warlocks since they don’t have lower-level spell slots.
Warlocks still have cantrips. They can choose to cast a cantrip using a d6, or a spell slot using a d8 recovery.
“One minute is three rounds of combat.”
While the rest of the system is quite intriguing, (and brilliant, as always) this part kinda hits a pretty huge snag. It indicates that a round is 20 seconds long and that, consequently, creatures with a normal 30′ Move can only move 90′ per minute. (180′ if they Dash) That equates out to a top speed of 1 to 2 miles per hour. A normal human’s walking pace is just over 3 MPH. Doing nothing but moving (i.e. taking the Dash Action) should not make you as slow as my 74-year-old mother. (or as slow as her using her walker if you DON’T Dash)
With the normal “6 seconds per turn” rule, the average human can move at a normal walking pace (3.4 MPH) every turn or Dash at a jog (6.8 MPH) if that’s all they do. That sounds about right.
If turn length gets increased by a factor of 3⅓, so should movement distance. That would make all 30′ Move creatures have a Move of 100′ (20 squares) or 200′ (40 squares) if they’re Dashing. (20′ becomes 65′, 15′ becomes 50′, etc.) That retains a realistic rate of movement (3.4-6.8 MPH… a walk or a jog) while keeping the turn length the desired at 20 seconds.
The rules DO say “about 6 seconds”, but increasing them by a factor of more than 3-to-1 is more than “about”.
Unless of course you were simply intending to reduce the effect of spells and effects that currently last 10 rounds down to only lasting 3, in which case I think a better way of putting it would be just to explicitly state just that and not change the turn length at all.
YMMV, as always.
I’d like to double check that “Knockback” is on a per hit basis. So, for example a Fighter with three attacks per round with a long sword (1d8) could Knockback a Medium creature (with a d6 Imitiative die) up to three phases. Right?