|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 5:51AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2007
|
I've found that the current variability of the initiative system has extreme consequences on encounter difficulty. DM rolls a 19 on the die, and drops a burst on several party members who haven't had a chance to act yet, spends an action point, and bursts them again! Bad start for all of the PCs . . . . The DM run the same adventure again, rolls a 2 on the die, and that same elite is dead before getting a turn!  Some thoughts . . . . • Perhaps for the next edition, monsters will get a static initiative "defense" that the players are rolling against, increasing the chance that some characters will go first, and some characters will go after the monsters act. • Is it possible to assign a standard array of rolls to the monsters? For example, with 3 monster types you could assign initiative rolls of 5-10-15 and add appropriate bonuses. "Pre-rolling" in this way helps encounter design, in that the author and DM know in which order the monsters will act. (And helps with synergizing tactics.) It also gives a key creature a decent initiative, so that it will likely get a chance to act. • As this approach would be easy to implement in a home game, it is not so easy for LFR. However, as a "shared experience," it would be interesting to see something done to "standardize" encounters. (i.e. Perhaps allowing authors to "pre-roll" initiative and provide the creatures initiative results in the mod, rather than having the DM make variable rolls at the table.) Again, my "brainstorming goal" is to improve encounter design (and encounter fun!) by removing a very variable (and currently unforeseeable) element of combat. (i.e. Difficulty of a combat does not depend on a "save-or-die" initiative roll at the start of combat.) Thoughts?
Dan Anderson
@EpicUthrac
Living Forgotten Realms Calimshan Writing Director
Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
Meet me at TotalConfusion:
http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 6:05AM
#2
|
|
|
Very insightful post. Indeed I've noticed the same impacts that initiative has on a combat. I'm beginning to realize more and more that for PCs - initiative is king. This becomes more prevalent at higher levels as controlling the combat from its onset becomes more important and the potential for very high initiatives increases.
As more players begin to play P2 and higher adventures, we'll likely see more posts spring up about this as people begin noticing how large an impact initiative has on the difficulty of combats.
Dave Kay
LFR Writing Director Retiree
dkay807 [at] yahoo [dot] com
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 6:07AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Jul 16, 2002
|
Bad luck/bad rolls are part of the game. It happens. The monsters and the players need to react and adapt to the situation when things dont' go their way. Yes a lucky roll from one side or the other can make an encounter too easy or too difficult, but just like any other die roll that's all it is, luck. It certainly is an element in any combat in any RPG and it necessarily is since we use dice to randomize outcomes.
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 6:12AM
#4
|
|
|
Bad luck/bad rolls are part of the game. It happens. The monsters and the players need to react and adapt to the situation when things dont' go their way. Yes a lucky roll from one side or the other can make an encounter too easy or too difficult, but just like any other die roll that's all it is, luck. It certainly is an element in any combat in any RPG and it necessarily is since we use dice to randomize outcomes.
Bad luck/die rolls are only a small part of it. When a level 16 monster has a +12 initiative, and the two strikers at the table have +22 and roll twice, guess who's more than likely going to go first?
The bottom line is that if a party is able to max out their initiative, they'll find combats to be far easier than they would be if initiative was determined simply by a "roll of the dice."
Dave Kay
LFR Writing Director Retiree
dkay807 [at] yahoo [dot] com
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 6:19AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Jul 16, 2002
|
True, but the OPs example was of lucky high or unlucky low rolls for the monster. Overall, yes, intiative can play an important part in the combat. A monster with +12 and a striker with +22... the striker is going to go first more often than not, but there are those times when the monster will go first.
Certainly there are as many different ways of doign intiative as there are RPGs. I would be all for doing it Children of the Sun style. Everyone has an init. token. You can initiate combat at any time by throwing your token in the "ring." Everyoen else reacts and throws their token in. You go in order from the bottom up. It's like Slap Jack with life or death consequences. :D
Sorry WOTC, you lost me with Essentials. So where I used to buy every book that came out, now I will be very choosy about what I buy. Can we just get back to real 4e? Check out the 4e Conversion Wiki. 1. Wizards fight dirty. They hit their enemies in the NADs. -- Dragon9 2. A barbarian hits people with his axe. A warlord hits people with his barbarian. 3. Boo-freakin'-hoo, ya light-slingin' finger-wigglers. -- MrCelcius in response to the Cleric's Healer's Lore nerf
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 6:25AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2007
|
Bad luck/bad rolls are part of the game. It happens. The monsters and the players need to react and adapt to the situation when things dont' go their way. Yes a lucky roll from one side or the other can make an encounter too easy or too difficult, but just like any other die roll that's all it is, luck. It certainly is an element in any combat in any RPG and it necessarily is since we use dice to randomize outcomes.
I agree, which I why I still think players should roll for initiative on-the-fly. Some luck/randomness is key - otherwise, why use dice at all? 
D&D 3.5 (expecially at higher levels) suffered from "the side that wins initiative, wins the combat." I'm hoping 4e does not go down the same path.
My concern is that initiative is not "just like any die roll" - in many cases, it becomes a "save-or-die" effect for the monsters (and the PCs). By standardizing the monsters (taking the luck out of one side) to some degree, it moves the focus from whether the monster rolled high/low to how meaningful the players' die rolls are.
Dan Anderson
@EpicUthrac
Living Forgotten Realms Calimshan Writing Director
Living Forgotten Realms Epic Writing Director
Meet me at TotalConfusion:
http://www.totalcon.com/RolePlaying.html
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 6:39AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Aug 18, 2007
|
DM rolls a 19 on the die, and drops a burst on several party members who haven't had a chance to act yet, spends an action point, and bursts them again! Bad start for all of the PCs . . . .
The DMG2 has something to say about this, the short version is "don't do it", and it is good advice. If you are going to be a DM I seriously recomend taking the time to read the DMG2's articles on skill challenges and running the game.
Sure the tactics might be optimal for the monster, but are they optimal for the purpose of the game - that the people playing have fun?
This is something that needs to be kept in mind when your monsters are winning the initiative; which despite those few "super initiaitve" characters is going to happen less in the player's favor than the monsters anyway.
From a purely mechanical perspective giving monsters a flat set of base intitiatives is bad - players that are tactically minded can and will plan around that.
The "Initiaive Defense" is essentially another "flat" initiative system for monsters and provides the same problems.
The random initiative system works very well, the biggest problem with 4E is that the monsters typically have to high an initiative modifier for their level and stats. Most PC's have 2 +1/2 Level, most monsters have 2+level, this significantly disadvantages the PCs once the dice start rolling.
There is the other problem that d20 probably creates to wide a range of discrepancy - for example if you have a +5 modifier and roll a 1 and I have a +1 modifier I have just under a 3 in 4 chance of beating your initiative, just because of the range of the dice.
But that is part of why there is a DM - part of the DM's role is to provide balance to the randomness of the dice, and the initiative rules in particular provide lots of ways of doing that.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 6:39AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Aug 22, 2007
|
My concern is that initiative is not "just like any die roll" - in many cases, it becomes a "save-or-die" effect for the monsters (and the PCs). By standardizing the monsters (taking the luck out of one side) to some degree, it moves the focus from whether the monster rolled high/low to how meaningful the players' die rolls are.
It's an interesting point. You could maybe tweak your idea a little further: monster A has an init 3 lower than the highest player init, monster B has an init 10 lower than the highest player init, monster C has an init 1 lower than the lowest player init... etc.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 8:23AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Dec 16, 2005
|
I have a somewhat different view on this. What is most deadly is not a single monster rolling well on initiative, but all of the monsters going at once. If one flameskull (to use a rather common LFR example) rolls well and drops a fireball on the party while they're still clustered in the stupid "PCs start here" penalty box, the party will be hurt, but it won't kill them. However, if all three flameskulls are on the same initiative and drop their fireballs on the PCs without any chance for PCs to spread out or heal in between, things are much more deadly.
And unfortunately, the method that has been suggested for dealing with the lucky monster initiative roll--the DMG 2 method of having monsters take 10 on initiative and players roll against that--takes the "all the monsters dump their AoEs on the party at once" problem from a possibility to a certainty. Every flameskull will have the same initiative every time and if the PCs happen to be grouped for a fireball at that time, they're going to eat all three without an opportunity to heal or move in between. Every time. Without Fail. Now, rolling initiative separately for the monsters does not eliminate that risk--you could roll 20s for all three flameskulls. But you're not very likely to do so. More often than not, the players will have a chance to heal or move in between the blasts.
So, in conclusion, I would urge DMs not to adopt static monster initiatives, that just makes the problem worse. Rather, run monsters on separate initiatives and if you're really worried about having them all go at once or all before the PCs, you can put them on a spread (treat one flameskull as rolling a 15, one as rolling a 10, and one as rolling a 5).
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Dec 16, 2009 - 8:47AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2008
|
I like the idea you suggest EB, but in practice, it has the probability of increasing the tracking and such you need to do as a GM. Perhaps not to the point of distraction, but enough extra work and mods can grind more.
But I think I might try a variant on your suggestion next time I GM and see how it works out.
|
|
|
