Whether it's the strike ranks of runequest, the seconds of gurps, or the ticks of feng shui, I love impulse systems. This is a turn order system that makes movement happen over time, allows reactions, and creates subdivisions of action smaller than "your turn." For me, it's a necessity for games with guns, but it seems like most gamers haven't even heard of them.

They are fairly slick for a small enough group, but I once you get over about 3-5 players and a like number of monsters, it's too much overhead for me.  It encourages every fight run in "slow motion" detail, which can be great fun but isn't something I want to do all the time.  If anything, I tend to push the other way.  Even later D&D cyclic initiative is too slow for my tastes.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on May 17, 2023, 12:16:27 PM
They are fairly slick for a small enough group, but I once you get over about 3-5 players and a like number of monsters, it's too much overhead for me.  It encourages every fight run in "slow motion" detail, which can be great fun but isn't something I want to do all the time.  If anything, I tend to push the other way.  Even later D&D cyclic initiative is too slow for my tastes.

so you're just using side initiative then? Most of my players want more tactical depth than that. Strike Ranks (BRP) is what i use, and it's much faster more me to count to 10 and wait for the players to act on their number than rolled initiative like most popular games where players roll a die, add a stat, and announce the result while i write them down in order.

This is one of the reasons HERO is good for superhero fights but also why it's bad for superhero fights. You get to see each panel of action in slo-mo with the SWOOSH and POW of every swing, but it's not very cinematic in actual play because it's so damn slow. For Starfleet Battles it's great but you know what you're getting into with a wargame like that; for roleplaying games, ESPECIALLY something like Feng Shui, I want rapid resolution. I want to see John Wick cap 37 dudes in under a minute bang bang bang not spend two hours real time having him wade through a nightclub floor to catch up to his prey. The idea is good, but it's just too slow for the RPGs it makes sense to use it in.

Quote from: Hixanthrope on May 17, 2023, 12:22:56 PM

so you're just using side initiative then? Most of my players want more tactical depth than that. Strike Ranks (BRP) is what i use, and it's much faster more me to count to 10 and wait for the players to act on their number than rolled initiative like most popular games where players roll a die, add a stat, and announce the result while i write them down in order.

I do a modified version of sides.  The players roll their "initiative" against a DC.  I don't need to know what they get.  Instead, I've broken it down into phases of (roughly): First, Fast, Middle, Slow, Last.  Going "fast" needs a 15 or better, for example.  Then I count down the phases.  On a given phase, it's "sides", with players always going before the monsters.  "Everyone fast can go now".  There are some other rules tied to this.  For example, warriors that go Fast or better, also get a bonus action in the Slow phase.

What I've found is that the most effective result is to have some uncertainty as to order every round and have more than 2 groups (i.e. "sides") but less than individual creatures.  In practice, that worked out to be about 3-4 groups per "side".  The way these rules are set, "First" and "Last" are very rare.  So normally I get a mix, but occasionally the rolls skew it, thus producing the uncertainty. 

It doesn't hurt at all that there is very little communication about rank/pulse/initiative said aloud as part of this.  And what is there is being keyed on those other minor rules, thus carrying more weight and tactical options (or at least, tactical gambling on the part of the players).  Then the typical result is that 2-4 players act at once on their side of a phase, but some of them act faster than others.  So I can process what all of them do, then narrate how it all fits together.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell on May 17, 2023, 03:12:30 PM

Quote from: Hixanthrope on May 17, 2023, 12:22:56 PM

so you're just using side initiative then? Most of my players want more tactical depth than that. Strike Ranks (BRP) is what i use, and it's much faster more me to count to 10 and wait for the players to act on their number than rolled initiative like most popular games where players roll a die, add a stat, and announce the result while i write them down in order.

I do a modified version of sides.  The players roll their "initiative" against a DC.  I don't need to know what they get.  Instead, I've broken it down into phases of (roughly): First, Fast, Middle, Slow, Last.  Going "fast" needs a 15 or better, for example.  Then I count down the phases.  On a given phase, it's "sides", with players always going before the monsters.  "Everyone fast can go now".  There are some other rules tied to this.  For example, warriors that go Fast or better, also get a bonus action in the Slow phase.

What I've found is that the most effective result is to have some uncertainty as to order every round and have more than 2 groups (i.e. "sides") but less than individual creatures.  In practice, that worked out to be about 3-4 groups per "side".  The way these rules are set, "First" and "Last" are very rare.  So normally I get a mix, but occasionally the rolls skew it, thus producing the uncertainty. 

It doesn't hurt at all that there is very little communication about rank/pulse/initiative said aloud as part of this.  And what is there is being keyed on those other minor rules, thus carrying more weight and tactical options (or at least, tactical gambling on the part of the players).  Then the typical result is that 2-4 players act at once on their side of a phase, but some of them act faster than others.  So I can process what all of them do, then narrate how it all fits together.

That's slick.  I may steal that.

I go with individual initiative for the PCs and group for their opponents.  It doesn't slow me down at all.  Either I've gotten good at doing initiative that way or I'm more tolerant of slower play, I dunno.

Quote from: Hixanthrope on May 17, 2023, 12:03:49 PM
Whether it's the strike ranks of runequest, the seconds of gurps, or the ticks of feng shui, I love impulse systems. This is a turn order system that makes movement happen over time, allows reactions, and creates subdivisions of action smaller than "your turn." For me, it's a necessity for games with guns, but it seems like most gamers haven't even heard of them.

Would you care to give more detail on what you like about them?  I'm not very familiar with those systems but this is an interesting topic for me.

Quote from: Mishihari on May 17, 2023, 03:45:34 PM

Quote from: Hixanthrope on May 17, 2023, 12:03:49 PM
Whether it's the strike ranks of runequest, the seconds of gurps, or the ticks of feng shui, I love impulse systems. This is a turn order system that makes movement happen over time, allows reactions, and creates subdivisions of action smaller than "your turn." For me, it's a necessity for games with guns, but it seems like most gamers haven't even heard of them.

Would you care to give more detail on what you like about them?  I'm not very familiar with those systems but this is an interesting topic for me.

This will be specifically about Runequest style Strike Ranks, what I'm most familiar with.
1. The ones I like have movement occur over time, not saving it all up for your turn. This gives the proper advantage to ranged weapons, the sword guy has to make it to the shooter, and he's vulnerable while he moves. With a battlemap, gives the game a feel like X-COM.
2. You can have actions per turn cooked into your stats. The Dex rank or Speed of your character determines this. And nobody takes two actions in a row, less table lag.
3. No maintenance by the GM, no inititative lists, just count to 10 and listen for the players to say me. Bosses go on 3/6/9, mooks go on 5/10.

Always thought The Riddle of Steel RPG had it right: combatants drop a die - offense or defense - if you pick the wrong one at the wrong time, combat finishes real quick.

https://writeups.letsyouandhimfight.com/hectorgrey/the-riddle-of-steel/#4

Quote from: Theory of Games on May 17, 2023, 08:42:44 PM
Always thought The Riddle of Steel RPG had it right: combatants drop a die - offense or defense - if you pick the wrong one at the wrong time, combat finishes real quick.

https://writeups.letsyouandhimfight.com/hectorgrey/the-riddle-of-steel/#4

That looked interesting up to the point it said roll 7 dice to attack and 9 dice to defend.

Ideally, I'd like some combination of randomness and skill. For example, roll 1d20+ speed to see if you act one or two times, and in which order.

I experimented with "no initiative, best attacks hits first" which has its perks - good fighters attack faster, etc. - but found it too chaotic in practice. Maybe it is the way it should be, combat is chaotic But I've since reversed to side initiative (feel too "tidy" in comparison, sigh).

https://methodsetmadness.blogspot.com/2020/08/single-roll-d.html

The thing is some players design their PCs to be fast, almost always for combat purposes.

GURPS makes it easy-peazy: highest Speed goes first.

Question though: with systems that roll initiative, thoughts on rerolling initiative each subsequent round?

Quote from: Theory of Games on May 18, 2023, 10:59:50 AM
Question though: with systems that roll initiative, thoughts on rerolling initiative each subsequent round?

In theory, it works perfectly, since it creates a more dynamic situation - MUs can be foiled in their spells, some monsters have special actions if they win initiative, tactics must be adjusted, etc.

In practice, I am just tired of rolling three times for each single attack (initiative, attack, damage).

What about the ORE (One Roll Engine, used by Nemesis, Godlike, Reign and Wild Talents)?

You roll a handful of d10s and the result determines both how fast you act AND how well you do. It's a fast (and deadly) system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-Roll_Engine

Quote from: Theory of Games on May 18, 2023, 10:59:50 AM

Question though: with systems that roll initiative, thoughts on rerolling initiative each subsequent round?

Definite yes for me, as it makes each round very different