I think some systems - without necessarily always spelling it out - demand a particular initiative system. If there are mechanical features that provide concrete bonuses to character initiative, one can’t really adopt a looser turn order system without rendering some player choices redundant. This is one of those cases where tinkering should probably only be attempted once one has enough of a handle on the system to understand the downstream consequences of the decision to depart from the RAW. In games with granular combat mechanics I’m a fan of ‘shifting initiative’ whereby, once established (by whatever means as discussed) characters (and sometimes opponents) can act at any point on or after their initiative to take advantage of the tactical situation as it evolves. Sometimes when a character holds their action, the stage at which they choose to act on the first round becomes their default initiative order for the rest of the encounter but I prefer systems that allow for dynamic initiative that combines rolling initiative every round and allowing for the ‘hold’ mechanic. In any abstracted or rules lite system - which usually equates to a more narrative style - then I’m happy to allow players to determine when they act in each round, but I reserve the right - if it fits with the scene as it has played out in previous rounds - to declare by fiat when opponents act and this might be before the PCs in some circumstances.
With mechanically more involved games you definitely have more of a battle to make these kind of modifications work.
I find for games where there are initiative bonuses involved, I end up using checked side, but I can see how for crunchier games that won’t always work.
For rolling each round, I kind of get the appeal, and a lot of these rolling approaches can be used at the top of each round. But I tend to stay away from that personally because I’m interested in resolving combat quickly and keeping the momentum as high as possible.
That said, for those who love the tactical/combat mini game more than me, rolling at the top of each round is a way to keep it more interesting!
Indeed. I’m not a huge fan of simulationist combat - in fact, I killed off a long-running 5e campaign when I just couldn’t face the tiresome prospect of an endless parade of hour long combats any more. But I think dynamic initiative can be made to work in a lot of OSR-ish systems that don’t suffer so much from HP and combat mechanics bloat and, in those cases, giving mechanical expression to the sense of a shifting tactical situation is worth the extra book-keeping involved.
I think some systems - without necessarily always spelling it out - demand a particular initiative system. If there are mechanical features that provide concrete bonuses to character initiative, one can’t really adopt a looser turn order system without rendering some player choices redundant. This is one of those cases where tinkering should probably only be attempted once one has enough of a handle on the system to understand the downstream consequences of the decision to depart from the RAW. In games with granular combat mechanics I’m a fan of ‘shifting initiative’ whereby, once established (by whatever means as discussed) characters (and sometimes opponents) can act at any point on or after their initiative to take advantage of the tactical situation as it evolves. Sometimes when a character holds their action, the stage at which they choose to act on the first round becomes their default initiative order for the rest of the encounter but I prefer systems that allow for dynamic initiative that combines rolling initiative every round and allowing for the ‘hold’ mechanic. In any abstracted or rules lite system - which usually equates to a more narrative style - then I’m happy to allow players to determine when they act in each round, but I reserve the right - if it fits with the scene as it has played out in previous rounds - to declare by fiat when opponents act and this might be before the PCs in some circumstances.
With mechanically more involved games you definitely have more of a battle to make these kind of modifications work.
I find for games where there are initiative bonuses involved, I end up using checked side, but I can see how for crunchier games that won’t always work.
For rolling each round, I kind of get the appeal, and a lot of these rolling approaches can be used at the top of each round. But I tend to stay away from that personally because I’m interested in resolving combat quickly and keeping the momentum as high as possible.
That said, for those who love the tactical/combat mini game more than me, rolling at the top of each round is a way to keep it more interesting!
Indeed. I’m not a huge fan of simulationist combat - in fact, I killed off a long-running 5e campaign when I just couldn’t face the tiresome prospect of an endless parade of hour long combats any more. But I think dynamic initiative can be made to work in a lot of OSR-ish systems that don’t suffer so much from HP and combat mechanics bloat and, in those cases, giving mechanical expression to the sense of a shifting tactical situation is worth the extra book-keeping involved.