Alternative for Initiative

[Utgardloki]

I don't know what it is, but there is something about the Strike Rank/Initiative rules that I don't like. But what to do?

Well, do what I do for everything else, create my own rules 8)

My idea is that Initiative is a skill, which defaults to DEX + INT + POW. When a character enters battle, he makes an Initiative roll.

If he fumbles, he can't act in the first round (he's too busy looking for his weapon or something). He can roll again the next round.

If he fails, he can act once. Characters who fail (but don't fumble) go in order of Strike Rank.

If he succeeds, he can act before everybody who fails. Characters who succeed (but don't critical) go in order of Strike Rank. After everyone who succeeded goes, they get a second turn with all the characters who failed, in order of Strike Rank.

If he gets a critical succees, he can act before everybody who just got a normal success. Then everybody who got a critical success can go with those who got normal successes, and then with those who got failures.

If he gets a super-critical success, you see the pattern. A super-critical success is a house rule I have for those who get less than 1% of their chance of success.

A character can take an action to re-roll his initiative for the next round. Otherwise (like in D20), the initiative roll applies through the entire combat.

What do you think? The pattern is relatively simple, and may even be easier than normal initiative.

 

[algauble]

I don't know what it is, but there is something about the Strike Rank/Initiative rules that I don't like. But what to do?

Well, do what I do for everything else, create my own rules 8)

My idea is that Initiative is a skill, which defaults to DEX + INT + POW. When a character enters battle, he makes an Initiative roll.

If he fumbles, he can't act in the first round (he's too busy looking for his weapon or something). He can roll again the next round.

If he fails, he can act once. Characters who fail (but don't fumble) go in order of Strike Rank.

If he succeeds, he can act before everybody who fails. Characters who succeed (but don't critical) go in order of Strike Rank. After everyone who succeeded goes, they get a second turn with all the characters who failed, in order of Strike Rank.

If he gets a critical succees, he can act before everybody who just got a normal success. Then everybody who got a critical success can go with those who got normal successes, and then with those who got failures.

If he gets a super-critical success, you see the pattern. A super-critical success is a house rule I have for those who get less than 1% of their chance of success.

A character can take an action to re-roll his initiative for the next round. Otherwise (like in D20), the initiative roll applies through the entire combat.

What do you think? The pattern is relatively simple, and may even be easier than normal initiative.

I like it! This is very much in keeping with the use of new skills for what used to not be skills, like CON and POW rolls, but lacks the troubling implications that you find in those cases.
It makes sense that a more skilled fighter would be better at acting sooner and more frequently. Or to put it another way, it makes sense that acting sooner and more frequently could be a skill.
It seems simpler than some/most of the other suggestions.
It looks like CAs are gone (Yay!). What about flurry? Too bad we couldn't get rid of SR too (acting in order of the Initiative roll from high to low wouldn't work), unless you went in DEX order, but that's maybe too BRP.

On the second and subsequent rounds does everyone just go once, or is the whole pattern repeated? I assume you intend the latter since you mention rolling again as something that someone would have to spend an action to do.
Incidently, why include POW in the starting %, and why (off topic) is Driving based on POW?

 

[Utgardloki]

I like it!

That makes me feel good.

Flurry. Hmmmm. :? I've been thinking about whether a character could add his weapon skill to his initiative, but at the cost of not being able to defend that round. Perhaps then he has to roll the next round unless he wants to continue forgoing defenses to flurry.

I wanted to keep Strike Rank because it was a part of classic Runequest. I don't like dividing INT + DEX by 2, because that is unnecessary, but I might as well keep it that way. Perhaps I can even offer an Improved Strike Rank advantage, which gives characters the edge of having a higher strike rank.

The pattern continues each round. I plan to have a rule requiring a character to reroll his initiative if he fails a save against mental control or is stunned. Otherwise, a character who rolls a critical Initiative in the first round is really happy, especially if the other character fails 8)

The main reason for not rerolling initiative each round is the one given for the rule in D20 -- it just adds another thing to do in combat. Runequest certainly has enough to do in a combat round.

POW is included in initiative because it represents the ability to go with the flow of the situation. I guess that's the same reason POW is involved in Driving.

Thanks for the vote of appreciation

 

[algauble]

I've been looking at some methods for bringing Size and Weapon length back in, and it's got me thinking:

Basically use your Initiative Skill roll as you describe, except:

In each cycle use DEX (or Strike Rank = (DEX + INT) / 2) to determine order of action, but subtract weapon and size SR from DEX (Using RQ3 SR numbers - I think someone on rpg.net suggested this). Missile weapons would get no negative from size or weapon length, so they'd tend to go first, as in previous RQ. (also -1 per MP for spells)

Alternately, you could add a degree of success to the Initiative skill roll for missile attacks to make them tend to go earlier in the round. This would be closer to CoC's method, I think.

I'm also considering atg's suggestion here:
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=21054

I like how in his version higher Size and Length produce higher mod numbers. More open ended, but needs a different way to work it in (concerned about the interaction of missile and melee)...

let's see
Melee SR = (DEX + SIZ)/2 + (atg's weapon mod)/5
Missile SR = DEX + INT
Magic SR = DEX + POW - MP in spell

... way too complicated?

 

[atgxtg]

How about,

You replace the D10 roll with 1/10 of your "Initiative Skill"

THen you can say that criticals add double the modifer and soon. That way it is still a go by SR system, but skill plays a factor.

If you want to keep a signficant edge for the intiative skill, add 1/10th of you Intitative skill plus 1/10th of the applicable weapon skill to usccessful rools.

So FOr a PC who is +10 to SR, With an Init of 46% and Sword 75%.

Failure=SR10
Sucess=SR21 (10+4+7)
Critical= SR32 (10+4+7+4+7)

You could even give each character 1 action per 10 SR.

 

[atgxtg]

I
I'm also considering atg's suggestion here:
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=21054

I like how in his version higher Size and Length produce higher mod numbers. More open ended, but needs a different way to work it in (concerned about the interaction of missile and melee)...

let's see
Melee SR = (DEX + SIZ)/2 + (atg's weapon mod)/5
Missile SR = DEX + INT
Magic SR = DEX + POW - MP in spell

... way too complicated?

The difficulty lies in going from a low first count up to a high first count down. I can figure out how to integrerate spells with melle (sbtract 5 SR per POW point).

Essentially, by old RQ terms (modfiered to MRQ intitative):
a spell would go off on SR 40+DEX, -5% per POW point.
A missile weapon would go off at SR 40+DEX

THe big problem with this system is that we probably want to cap off the SR modifers at 20 to match up with RQ3. Otherwise very high stats or a long pike will get screwy results. For instance a SIZ 70 Dragon would have a pehnomenal SR if SIZ SR doesn't cap off @ 20.

 

[Lord Twig]

My thing is that RQ has never had a roll to see who went first. It was always pre-determined by strike rank. If you want to keep the feel of RQ, shouldn't you try to keep things basically the same? Not exactly the same, but similar.

So I was thinking of limiting everybody to just two combat actions. None of this "high Dex wins" stuff.

Then you just figure your Strike Rank as normal, except use Siz in place of Int, (Dex+Siz)/2 for you base Strike Rank. Then add a bonus for weapon reach. +5 pike, +4 long spear, +3 great sword, +2 war sword, +1 short sword, +0 dagger/unarmed.

Highest goes first. You could cap your base Strike Rank at a maximum of 20 if you wanted to keep this from getting crazy. (Otherwise a dragon would have something like a 40)

If you close on a person with a longer weapon they have to step back or subtract their weapon modifier instead of adding it.

For everything besides melee you would figure your Strike Rank as (Dex+Int)\2+5. If you are casting a spell you would subtract one for every magnitude of the spell. Ranged weapons would have a +0 modifier. Other actions could take different amounts of time if you wanted. Easyest might be to just say that Movement is +0 and most everything else is -3 (drawing weapons, picking something up, changing your stance, etc.)

Damn. I'm a genius!

Edit: Added rules for things other than melee attacks.

 

[Utgardloki]

I'm still wedded to my system which I am going to call "The Four Phase System" (super-criticals, criticals, successes, and failures).

I think weapon length would only be a factor when closing. Perhaps if a weapon is rated as "reach", a character wielding it could get a free reaction attack as a character with a shorter weapon approached, similar to the D&D concept of Attack of Opportunity. The same would apply to characters much larger than their defenders. ("Much larger" being a certain size difference, depending on whether the MRQ or my own size tables are used.)

Also, this would not apply for a creature using its natural weapons, such as a dragon trying to bite an attacker. It would be easy enough for the attacker to swing at the dragon's nose as the dragon tried to swallow her. I already have a plan for adjusting hit location according to relative size.

For spells, I suppose I could assess a -10% penalty per magnitude of the spell. The Quick Spell Legendary Ability would remove this penalty. But I don't think I'll get into that because my concept is to determine initiative without regard for what the character will do on his action. Therefore I don't really have a way to assess a penalty for spellcasting except by requiring more than one action to cast it.

 

[Lord Twig]

But I don't think I'll get into that because my concept is to determine initiative without regard for what the character will do on his action.

This is a good point. Using the meathod I just suggested, or using any of the previous meathods in RuneQuest, you would have to have a Statement of Intent phase where everyone says what they are going to do so that you can figure out when they go.

This is probably why Mongoose dropped the Strike Rank Modifier for weapon size. They wanted to get rid of the SoI phase.

 

[atgxtg]

But I don't think I'll get into that because my concept is to determine initiative without regard for what the character will do on his action.

This is a good point. Using the meathod I just suggested, or using any of the previous meathods in RuneQuest, you would have to have a Statement of Intent phase where everyone says what they are going to do so that you can figure out when they go.

This is probably why Mongoose dropped the Strike Rank Modifier for weapon size. They wanted to get rid of the SoI phase.

The change also made magic easier for newbiews to understand. One thing that people coming over from other systems used to have difficulty with in my RQ games was the intergration of mellee and magic. Throw up a bladeshrap 2? Okay attack 2 SR later. Now it takes an action provokes free attacks and works like other games.

 

[Rurik]

But I don't think I'll get into that because my concept is to determine initiative without regard for what the character will do on his action.

This is a good point. Using the meathod I just suggested, or using any of the previous meathods in RuneQuest, you would have to have a Statement of Intent phase where everyone says what they are going to do so that you can figure out when they go.

This is probably why Mongoose dropped the Strike Rank Modifier for weapon size. They wanted to get rid of the SoI phase.

The change also made magic easier for newbiews to understand. One thing that people coming over from other systems used to have difficulty with in my RQ games was the intergration of mellee and magic. Throw up a bladeshrap 2? Okay attack 2 SR later. Now it takes an action provokes free attacks and works like other games.

I think Utgarloki and Lord Twigs points are probably right. Variable SR's for different weapons is fine when you have one attack per round. But what happens when you have 3 CA's and two weapons with different SR values? It gets messy fast. Hardly simplified or streamlined.

Considering the system as a whole it is probably best they dropped weapon SR modifiers.

 

[Lord Twig]

This is a good point. Using the meathod I just suggested, or using any of the previous meathods in RuneQuest, you would have to have a Statement of Intent phase where everyone says what they are going to do so that you can figure out when they go.

This is probably why Mongoose dropped the Strike Rank Modifier for weapon size. They wanted to get rid of the SoI phase.

The change also made magic easier for newbiews to understand. One thing that people coming over from other systems used to have difficulty with in my RQ games was the intergration of mellee and magic. Throw up a bladeshrap 2? Okay attack 2 SR later. Now it takes an action provokes free attacks and works like other games.

I think Utgarloki and Lord Twigs points are probably right. Variable SR's for different weapons is fine when you have one attack per round. But what happens when you have 3 CA's and two weapons with different SR values? It gets messy fast. Hardly simplified or streamlined.

Considering the system as a whole it is probably best they dropped weapon SR modifiers.

Oh I didn't say it was better. I just meant that with out SoI it was simpler. I fully intend to use a system similar to what I suggested. Personally I don't have a problem with a SoI phase.

 

[atgxtg]

Oh I didn't say it was better. I just meant that with out SoI it was simpler. I fully intend to use a system similar to what I suggested. Personally I don't have a problem with a SoI phase.

I like that.

I agree with it too. There are several topics are rule ideas that poeple have discussed, that I do intend on implementing. I am seriously considering using the RQ2 SR system or even my modfied one posted elsewhere and just dropping CAs. Personally, I kind of like SoI's. They usualy were rather helpful in organizing things. They also worked out well for people to oppsed each other. None of that "you can't stop him from running past you and jumping off the ledge because it isn't your turn, stuff".

 

[Rurik]

Oh I didn't say it was better. I just meant that with out SoI it was simpler. I fully intend to use a system similar to what I suggested. Personally I don't have a problem with a SoI phase.

I like that.

I agree with it too. There are several topics are rule ideas that poeple have discussed, that I do intend on implementing. I am seriously considering using the RQ2 SR system or even my modfied one posted elsewhere and just dropping CAs. Personally, I kind of like SoI's. They usualy were rather helpful in organizing things. They also worked out well for people to oppsed each other. None of that "you can't stop him from running past you and jumping off the ledge because it isn't your turn, stuff".

For me SoI's and dropping CA's would go hand in hand (which pretty much brings us back to RQ2/3).

When you have potentially five combat actions available each action will depend on the results of the one before it. I suppose you could do SoI for each action phase (1st action, SoI, resolve actions, 2nd action, SoI, resolve, etc.). I think that would make combat rather cumbersome and hardly capture that 'flow of combat' feel Mongoose was looking for.

I will try combat as is. Personally if I decide to drop Combaty Actions I am going to go back to using RQ3 as my base system and graft in the bits of MRQ I like/need.

 

[atgxtg]

Personally if I decide to drop Combaty Actions I am going to go back to using RQ3 as my base system and graft in the bits of MRQ I like/need.

I'm curious. Just what bits from MRQ would you select to graft onto RQ3? Not a slam, just wondering what things you think MRQ did better.

 

[algauble]

What about the idea of using weapon SR as the cost in Strike Rank ticks to use a weapon? This is essentially one of the ideas I embedded in my suggestion above, isolated for consideration, clarification and modification.

Let's say we go with SR = ((DEX+INT)/2) + 1D10 as per the rules as written...

You roll and end up with SR 14...
You are SIZE SR 3 and decide to attack with a SR 1 (long) weapon, so your attack takes effect 4 SR later on SR 10.
So in effect your SoI is at SR 14 your resolution is at SR 10...
If your opponent had a SR roll result of 13 and a ready missile weapon, he could fire off an attack at SR 13, or aim for a SR or two and still fire before your attack hit home.

Does this general scheme have any merit? Would it be better without SIZ SR and only using weapon SR? Would it be better to use the RAW or just use RQ3?

-al (hoping the best suggestions we all keep throwing out here end up in the RQ Compendium of House Rules)

 

[atgxtg]

Actually is fairly similar to the idea I had with putting SIZ and Weapon SRMs into MRQ.

A few problems:
*With your method INT/DEX is still much more impotant than anything else. Someone with a 18 INT/DEX and a Dagger (-4) is going to beat an average 10 INT/DEX person armed with a pike (SR 0).

Before DEX, SIZ and weapon length were are of realtively equal importance.

*With you "aiming for a few SR" example. What would be the benefit? Would it be x% per SR, or would it take a certain number of SR to earn abonus (like 10% per 5 SR).

*How long in SR would it take to reload?

 

[algauble]

Actually is fairly similar to the idea I had with putting SIZ and Weapon SRMs into MRQ.

I'm not claiming any originality here. In fact as I said above, my main inspiration was a post on rpg.net (which I can't seem to find right now, or I'd throw in a link)

A few problems:
*With your method INT/DEX is still much more impotant than anything else. Someone with a 18 INT/DEX and a Dagger (-4) is going to beat an average 10 INT/DEX person armed with a pike (SR 0).

Before DEX, SIZ and weapon length were are of realtively equal importance.

I suppose to rectify this I'd prefer to scale weapon SRs up rather than scale INT/DEX down, but the intention was to allow multiple actions (replacing CAs)... 18 SR guy with dagger would get 1 attack at SR 14, then wait 3* SR, then at SR 11 declare another action, then at SR 10 pike guy goes, etc...

*With you "aiming for a few SR" example. What would be the benefit? Would it be x% per SR, or would it take a certain number of SR to earn abonus (like 10% per 5 SR).

I was thinking +10% per SR up to 2 x skill, but maybe that's way too much.

*How long in SR would it take to reload?

I was thinking 3 SR, with 3 SR to wait between actions as above at *.

IIRC 3 SR was the cost for similar in RQ3, right?

... Then I'd add back in Utgardloki's Initiative Skill, but as an Advanced skill... Crit - add 10 to SR roll, Success - add 5, Fail - add 0, Fumble - subtract 5...

 

[Utgardloki]

Evolving my Utgardloki system into a Five Phase System (failures go in phase 4; successes go in phase 3 and 4; critical successes go in phase 2, 3, and 4; super-critical successes go in phases 1, 2, 3, and 4; phase 0 is reserved for those with legendary abilities).

I suppose weapon speeds could be added as follows:

First of all, change how Strike Ranks are calculated. SR is calculated as STR + SIZ - DEX. (Low numbers are better.)

When a character's SR comes up, he may do an action. Depending on the action, this will add a number to his ESR to determine when the action takes place. Add 1/10 the attack roll plus the weapon's speed factor to the character's SR to determine his ESR for that phase. For a spell, add 1/10 the spellcasting roll to the spell magnitude.

Nice thing about this is it allows a character to draw a weapon at a SR penalty. Maybe a penalty of 10 sounds good.

 

[atgxtg]

Why should STR and SIZ be bad for SR?

SIZ used to reflect reach, just like weapon length, and greater STR would mtranlate into greater muscle and thus faster movement.