I've always been intrigued by the AngryGM's recommendation to veto the combat rules for roleplay purposes and preserving tension, though many are still very reluctant to embrace that since you'd often have to throw initiative rules out the window with it. Trying to figure out who goes next from the instigation of conflict can boil down to who interjects first, assuming everyone is polite about it, and AGM's own popcorn initiative idea disappoints more for the process than the name: This will devolve into a popularity contest at worst, or constant deferrals from the shy player in the room at best, given enough time.

I'm not deeply familiar with the breadth of game designer attempts to resolve this problem; if my memory serves enough, the initiative system doesn't change much at all from the foundational assumptions of OD&D (not strictly a complaint) and more prominently the individual initiative system introduced between then and 3rd edition, and this has general consensus across all roleplaying systems.

So I'm offering this outline of an idea as a means to open outside of the box thinking a little, but I won't take for granted that I'm the first person to think of this.
And if you decide you don't like it for any reason at all, no one will force you to use it.

I've been mulling over this idea that tries to nigh fully-automate the initiative system, only rolling to change the order for special cases. Ultimately, I want to preserve the wargame nature within this rules proposal in accordance with the heritage of the roleplaying game concept.

My idea borrows from marching order on an action cue, with balance for group and single initiative, and it goes something like this:

Core Assumptions:
0. Individuals from all parties list their individual passive initiative scores for the referee, with play generally proceeding from highest to lowest initiative in order, for each party throughout play (barring some other effect that might reverse or adjust this order in any manner).

• Every party in any conflict must have an average passive initiative score. On the referee's call, this passive party initiative can also be modified with a separate bonus that is the average level of that party.
• This work must be done during character creation sessions and during adventure preparations before play.
• When two or more entities in the same party tie for individual initiative, their actions are resolved all-at-once; the only time that one may act before the other is when one of these tied challenges to roll some kind of opposed reflex check, ie individual initiative as known.
• Optionally, on referee call, the winner of tie breaking roll either acts first for rest of that conflict, or you always make separate checks when there is a desire for one to break your tie throughout each conflict.
• Optionally, individuals who tie on initiative order between parties may counter-attack their tied foes on their turn, if they are not otherwise engaged with something else, but this is not the same as a readied action trigger.
• Optionally, military rank and lack thereof may also modify turn and round order within parties.
• Note: All initiative orders are separate from all party marching line-ups.

General Protocol:
1. The entity who goes first in any conflict is the instigator of the aggression.

• This means who ever shoves or strikes with a weapon first.
• This permits having an ambush "readied" for a conflict to take the first turn, much like a spell can be readied, but a third party who ambushes the first ambushers and/or the secondary target will always go first.
• Actions of the readied ambushers are resolved all-at-once on their surprise turn (if they have surprised their foes), and their own individual initiatives aren't considered.
• If no one is surprised, then play proceeds as normal; otherwise, the entire other party resolves their own actions all-at-once after their ambushers have resolved their post-ambush bonus turn, which are first resolved in passive initiative order as normal.

2. The entity to go next is the original target of the instigation, and the individual initiative score is not immediately considered.

• If the target of the instigation is rendered unconscious, or temporarily or permanently disabled, etc, then any personal attempts to wake up or regroup without assistance must be done at the bottom of the initiative order in the party that individual belongs to.
• Note: A spy in the midst of a given party acts within the party being spied on, according to the spy's individual initiative, as do turncoats, cowards, and outright traitors, or the charmed or otherwise controlled.

3. Parties and individuals then go in order according to individual initiative within their party initiative.

• The instigator and the target(s) comprise a sort of separate party which provides the set piece of that conflict until is resolved in any manner. There is no need to calculate a party initiative score for this group of belligerents, it just goes next after all other parties have had a full turn.
• Assisting any entity in any different party of the conflict does not change that individual's initiative party status from one to another.
• Readied actions triggered by an entity from a different party puts that entity at the third last position in their own party, before the unconscious or disabled, and all these before the newly resurrected individuals within that party should that happen.
• Note: Attacks of opportunity do not change an individual's initiative order within their own party.

This framework can also be used for heated discussions and debates in strictly social interaction with other parties or even within the player character's own party. The system automatically engages as soon as aggression begins, so you can start insulting someone and that would initiate turn order once they raise their fists or draw their swords, or just fire back with their own insult. It ends automatically when all parties cease to be aggressive. You only ever roll if you want to, and in summary may give design space for new spells, feats, supernatural abilities, etc. Readied actions are still taken into consideration, and also provide additional incentives for design space that change initiative order for a price.

Critique is encouraged, but I can only offer modest suggestions and work-arounds, since I have not play-tested this myself and have no record of game design experience, just my personal experience and familiarity with some prominent opinions; furthermore, I don't have any opportunities that won't take a year or two while running up to three games myself simultaneously.
This is strictly experimentalist theory.


I have also chosen to write this rules proposal in a style that considers the broad range of sentient life within fantasy gameplay, so I thank you for entertaining my mortally-indifferent ideas.

(Edit, 22/02/03: Bullet & misc. formatting for easier reading)

Please write out an example of play (2-3 rounds) showing your concepts in action.

Quote from: Spinachcat on January 30, 2023, 06:20:48 PM
Please write out an example of play (2-3 rounds) showing your concepts in action.

Yes, please.  This would help a lot.

Quote from: Eirikrautha on January 30, 2023, 06:48:29 PM

Quote from: Spinachcat on January 30, 2023, 06:20:48 PM
Please write out an example of play (2-3 rounds) showing your concepts in action.

Yes, please.  This would help a lot.

Well, I can't very well go this far just to withhold what y'all really want...


{Scene: Rough Rock Inn; outskirts of the Pleated Vale Forest on the road to Ivanville}

Roland, Sylvanae, Heirthvir, and Clippins have requested their meals, and settled by the winter fire to mull over their opening drinks.
Finger foods are presented shortly after their top up; Roland takes a bun, dips it into his gravy, and makes dour a face after his first bite.

"Oi Sylvie! Mind passin' the salt, love?" He doesn't even look at her as he takes a disinterested swig.

"Thine manners tempt the vultures, knave--oblige those arms which have no want for reaching."

"Come off it lass, but I can ask yu wit' me pretty-pleases if that suits yor womanly tempers..."

"Thou audacious boar! A pox on the name of the tramp that sired you with his hut-whored mother!" [Aggression initiated; Roland next]

"Aye, 'tis another great misfortune for a dainty thing such as yorself to be prancin' 'round wit'te likes o' me! I bet yor dear ol' man must be quakin' in 'is boots with such rages to call yu 'is daughter!" [Heirthvir and Clippins are tied for initiative, but they sit and continue their drinks; the few weary travelers seated about the inn have frozen in place, craning their necks to absorb the ruckus, while the serving wench begins to nervously look for the burly bartender Olger]

"CURSES upon you claymen! I shall smite the audacious teeth from thine peasant mouth!" [Sylvanae draws her sword, casting her stool behind her in her hasty leap to her feet; on Roland's turn, he shoves the table over, tackling Sylvane to the ground; Heirthvir and Clippins have taken attacks of opportunity actions to save their drinks and snacks from falling to the floor; the bar patrons are leaned over to the view the fight better, some gapping their mouths and a few beginning to rummage from their coin purses to begin the pot.]

[Olger has now just come into the scene, holding a tenderizer mallet in one hand and is astonished to see a large human and an athletic elfess wrestling on the floor... He is about the yell "Right, wot's this then?!" at the mess and commotion, when Roland pins Sylvane's arms to the floor--they stare at each other, their eyes burning upon each other fiercely for scantly a third of a moment, and that's when she locks her lips to the man above her. Everyone stares in confused silence, as Heithvir chuckles and waves Olger over; the conflict has now ended.]

"Mine friend," began Heithvir as Olger approached close enough for a confidential exchange, "Our party once found ourselves in some dire straights, and our two bright lovers here once put on such a show to distract some unsavoury excuses for nobility from trying to burn our miserable selves alive. The ruse worked, so we fled and made good upon our escape--"

"Wot, yu mean the Kleibold House? Are they going to attack you here?!"

"Nay, good sir," Clippins chuckled with a wink, "The Kleibolds believe we are still crossing the mountain past in the east. As for your wild wonder of them, they've now recounted the full story so many times as to have grown a tad fond of their theatrical motions, if you catch my meaning..."

"Ja, and every tavern they have blessed with their performance has drawn quite the crowd for at least the season."

Olger was only flabbergasted long enough for the sounds of tinkling coin in generous piles to grace the humble space between his ears, then smiled and thanked them for their patronage. Clippins interjected as the barkeep began to turn about:

"One more thing, my good Olger, if you would be so kind?" and upon hearing this, Olger turned back around, grabbing a knocked over stool and sat with his ears cupped against the song and commotion behind him, with a curious expression of intent. Heithvir cleared his throat, and changed his tone to a controversial whisper:

"Our party doth travel towards the Great Badlands, as we do seek some trinket of interest in our plight against yon Kleibold scallywags--perhaps there's a good man such as yourself whom could kindly inform us of a reliable path and a stalwart guide through their birthright hunting grounds?"

I don't think your example made it all that more clear, but to boil it down as I understand it:
The instigator goes first, then the immediate victim; after that, normal initiative follows, with the two aforementioned characters forming a separate "group" for the purpose of group initiative for the rest of the combat.

My take on it (as I understand it): While that works and makes sense, I believe a more mechanically elegant solution would be to have the instigator and his target fight a separate combat round first, with the former having initiative; and then to use normal initiative procedure, including the two, for subsequent rounds. Essentially, this borrows the "surprise round" mechanic from newer editions.

Quote from: Wulfhelm on February 03, 2023, 05:51:32 AM
I don't think your example made it all that more clear, but to boil it down as I understand it:
The instigator goes first, then the immediate victim; after that, normal initiative follows, with the two aforementioned characters forming a separate "group" for the purpose of group initiative for the rest of the combat.

My take on it (as I understand it): While that works and makes sense, I believe a more mechanically elegant solution would be to have the instigator and his target fight a separate combat round first, with the former having initiative; and then to use normal initiative procedure, including the two, for subsequent rounds. Essentially, this borrows the "surprise round" mechanic from newer editions.

This is exactly what I was going for, and your insight really cleans up my muddied presentation.

I'm not sure about 1. Does it support a fast response to initiated violence?

For example: Two foes arguing. Biff pulls out his dagger and starts to lunge at Rodger. But the latter is much faster, and whips out his rapier and slashes Biff across the cheek.

Quote from: rytrasmi on February 06, 2023, 02:27:12 PM
I'm not sure about 1. Does it support a fast response to initiated violence?

For example: Two foes arguing. Biff pulls out his dagger and starts to lunge at Rodger. But the latter is much faster, and whips out his rapier and slashes Biff across the cheek.

Maybe not as written, I'd have to add additional rules for that situation.

I'd think the speed at which Biff tries to attack would count as an attempt for a type of surprise round, a "Reckless Lunge"; but Rodger succeeded his surprise check and reacts with an attack of opportunity, due to Biff's Reckless Lunge considered with Rodger's higher Dex.

So Biff's gambit fails, and after he takes that 1 damage, regular combat begins around Biff and Rodger's own fight.

This is situational, but so are Setting Spears against Charges, since you don't always have them. For another example, if you weren't sure if someone was bluffing about peaceful intentions for you, roll a surprise check, and on a failure you're surprised after turning your back.

I'm primarlly a wargamer so not only have I played just about every RPG initiative system created, from Champion's 12 Impulse system to Bushido's Zanshin, but I've also used a huge variety of wargame initiative systems, from Gunslinger's second by second to your basic IGOUGO.

In all that time I've come to two conclusions:

1) Initiative systems cannot add tension or excitement to a battle. All they do is slow down resolution and the more complex they are the more combat drags

2) In that majority of cases, which action is resolved first has no effect on the outcome of a conflict. If two foes are fighting and one of them misses, then it doesn't matter who went first. Same if both of them miss. The only time it matters is when both foes hit each other and one or both of the hits incapacitates or kills it's target. And even in the case where both kill each other, a double kill result is probably more realistic anyway.

Which is why I've dropped Initiative from my game entirely.

So, the question I have for the OP is what advantage does your system have over the most basic system which is: "Players go then Monsters go"? [Incidentally, this was the initiative system that OD&D originally used until Gygax added his d6 roll, which Arneson never did.]

1.  It's exactly because people roll mid-session which really breaks tension that I was thinking of trying to maintain the structure at all.
     But I guess pre-rolling is easier than a chart that needs constant adjustment.

2.  Didn't care even slightly about how the combat is finished, it's done when it's done (final blow, morale failure, retreat, et cet).
     Anyone telling you anything otherwise, has zero common sense--at least I can say they have less than me, due entirely by own minimal play experience.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on February 10, 2023, 10:14:36 AM
What advantage does your system have over the most basic system which is: "Players go then Monsters go"?

None, do that instead, I entirely missed that while skimming OD&D altogether, day to day life and other distractions got in the way.
I am far more in favour of OD&D's comparative lack of initiative method if that's easier, that's not a hill I want to die on.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on February 10, 2023, 10:14:36 AM
Initiative systems cannot add tension or excitement to a battle. All they do is slow down resolution and the more complex they are the more combat drags

To start with, I agree with this to a large extent. I have not found a published initiative system which adds tension or excitement. What I have personally done to remedy this is that when I have utilized HarnMaster ruleset, I have houseruled that I require all participants to roll their initiative each combat turn. Failing the roll or botching the roll leads to further rolling on a a so-called Initiative Testing Table, which can cause anything between hesitation to act (pass the turn), fleeing from combat to going berserk, which all happen in real combat. A few characters have died by going berserk and running towards overwhelming number of enemies after their injuries and exhaustion has caused severe penaties to rolls and the player rolled a critical failure on the Initiative roll. Other characters in turn have caused massive casualties to a group of enemies also by going berserk. Losing control of your character´s actions momentarily does wonders to tension, excitement and feeling of desperation. Of course, some GM´s and/or players might hate this, so far it has worked wonderfully in our group.

Quote from: Angry Goblin on February 28, 2023, 02:26:45 PMI require all participants to roll their initiative each combat turn. Failing the roll or botching the roll leads to further rolling on a a so-called Initiative Testing Table, which can cause anything between hesitation to act (pass the turn), fleeing from combat to going berserk, which all happen in real combat.

That reminds me of a old wargame called Ambush where your Initiative roll not only determined what order the actions were resolved but only how many actions you get. You could get one or two actions or panic and get no actions that turn. As the character gained experience and improved his Initiative value, he was less likely to panic and more likely to get two actions. You also had a leadership option to hand your actions over to nearby soldiers.

I'm fond of the idea that more experienced characters get more actions per turn but this isn't a very common thing in RPGs. Hero does it as does Bushido (sort of). Like I said, I've used a huge variety of initiative systems over the years.

One thing that hasn't been discussed is whether or not the OP uses a "statement of intent" at the start of each turn. I know that this isn't fashionable today but I've recently switch to it. Having the players tell me what they want to do creates more chaos and allows me to structure the order of actions in the most interesting way possible. Obviously, this system leads to conflicts but since I don't use a general iniative roll, I have time to use a specific roll to resolve these conflicts with the important distinction that you only need to determine the order of actions for significant events. You can also adjust the die roll according to the intended actions: shooting a bow uses Dex, running uses a speed modifier, and casting a spell uses Int (etc). This way one character isn't always the fasters regardless of what he's doing.

Quote from: hedgehobbit on February 28, 2023, 10:05:00 PM

Quote from: Angry Goblin on February 28, 2023, 02:26:45 PMI require all participants to roll their initiative each combat turn. Failing the roll or botching the roll leads to further rolling on a a so-called Initiative Testing Table, which can cause anything between hesitation to act (pass the turn), fleeing from combat to going berserk, which all happen in real combat.

That reminds me of a old wargame called Ambush where your Initiative roll not only determined what order the actions were resolved but only how many actions you get. You could get one or two actions or panic and get no actions that turn. As the character gained experience and improved his Initiative value, he was less likely to panic and more likely to get two actions. You also had a leadership option to hand your actions over to nearby soldiers.

I'm fond of the idea that more experienced characters get more actions per turn but this isn't a very common thing in RPGs. Hero does it as does Bushido (sort of). Like I said, I've used a huge variety of initiative systems over the years.

One thing that hasn't been discussed is whether or not the OP uses a "statement of intent" at the start of each turn. I know that this isn't fashionable today but I've recently switch to it. Having the players tell me what they want to do creates more chaos and allows me to structure the order of actions in the most interesting way possible. Obviously, this system leads to conflicts but since I don't use a general iniative roll, I have time to use a specific roll to resolve these conflicts with the important distinction that you only need to determine the order of actions for significant events. You can also adjust the die roll according to the intended actions: shooting a bow uses Dex, running uses a speed modifier, and casting a spell uses Int (etc). This way one character isn't always the fasters regardless of what he's doing.

If Initiative is treated as skill (as in HarnMaster) which can be increased with combat instead of it being derived attribute, you can utilize it like what you said about Ambush. Even if there are not exactly multiple actions per turn allowed for an character, if less experienced NPC´s freeze around your character, you basically get "extra actions" against them.

Regarding the statement of intent, could you give an example of what it would look like ingame, the more mayhem, the better 

Quote from: hedgehobbit on February 10, 2023, 10:14:36 AM
I'm primarlly a wargamer so not only have I played just about every RPG initiative system created, from Champion's 12 Impulse system to Bushido's Zanshin, but I've also used a huge variety of wargame initiative systems, from Gunslinger's second by second to your basic IGOUGO.

In all that time I've come to two conclusions:

1) Initiative systems cannot add tension or excitement to a battle. All they do is slow down resolution and the more complex they are the more combat drags

2) In that majority of cases, which action is resolved first has no effect on the outcome of a conflict. If two foes are fighting and one of them misses, then it doesn't matter who went first. Same if both of them miss. The only time it matters is when both foes hit each other and one or both of the hits incapacitates or kills it's target. And even in the case where both kill each other, a double kill result is probably more realistic anyway.

I'm primarily a 1E gamer, and I think both of these points could not possibly be further from the truth.

1) Nothing about each side rolls d6, highest goes first slows down anything. But what it does do is open up the possibility of the loser of one round winning the next round and thereby their entire side gets to go twice in a row. This can create dramatic swings that most certainly can add tension and excitement to a battle.

2) The baseline in 1E is the 0th level human, we're talking one-hit kills. Dead men do not retaliate. That makes first strike vital. Yeah, sure. This becomes less significant for higher level characters. But that just means a wider variety of weapons are "optimal" according to situation, level, and genre.