Should D&D go back to FIRST EDITION initiative order? 

A couple things I’ve started doing: 1. Group initiative for the same type of monsters/groups… This reduces the overhead to start combat AND gives me a little incentive to run more types of monsters or the same monsters in different groups that work together. 2: I let players who could reasonably communicate in range to use that free action to swap their turn order with eachother as they see fit (this works with RP in game). 3: They can also use their reaction to essentially take their turn at the same time as any other player in order to pull off whatever insane group combo attack they come up with in tandem (this works like readying your actions but pushes your whole turn up or down for the round).

Yes, Shadow of the Demon Lord(and weird wizard) fixed initiative by have players choose if they are going slow or fast. Fast turns are 1 action, slow are 2 actions. Initiative order which is revealed at once -Players Fast>Monster Fast>Player SlowF>Monster slow. Its amazing. Players can take the order in any they like to set up combos and such

I've been doing the following : 1d8 + initiative (so that the modifier has more influence than the die), monsters are fixed, like a DC, of 4+Dex. Only the players roll, and we do it at the beginning of the session, so that when combat starts, I punch in the monsters numbers in the VTT (unless I've done it in advance because it was a prepared encounter). And we jump straight in.

I am running an AD&D 2E game, we do group initiative. My players like it because if they lose one initiative but win the next, they effectively go twice in a row. The initiative at the top of the round has a lot of significance, the players feel really invested in it.

The 2nd Edition "Gold Box" computer games used a modified version of 2e. It used 1d10 as initiative, minus your dexterity bonus. Then everyone went individually in order of lowest to highest. Everyone I knew played that way in the 90s

I find a lot of people seem stuck in the idea that they need to brute force different system mechanics into 5e to make 5e "better" when they could just transition to a game system that actually supports the kind of game they're trying to turn 5e into. Powered by the Apocalypse games (PBtA) and Flames in the Dark (FitD) games are great for this.

Personally I use team based initiative with a d20, and re roll every round. I know it sounds harsh when the bad guys can go twice but it's equally likely the good guys can go twice too. It also makes rolling a 1 when it seems so easy to get anything above the bad guy's 2 feel that much more dire, the same way a clutch 20 makes that impossible seeming 19 feel so much more intense. It's very engaging. If only I could make a system that let players react to the actions of monsters and one another more often, then they'd basically lock in and seek every bonus they could get. That and short snappy combats that reward creative thinking and tactical skill would make every combat a hoot! But a part of me wants everyone to go at the same time every round, then check if anyone drops below 0 at the end before the next round begins. Just for the slim chance of two people striking one another and dropping at the same time, or for the suspense to hang heavy when two warriors meet in the air, landing, waiting to see which one falls.

Hey! Semi-new DM here (I DM on and off for a party of 5-6 but they say they really enjoy my campaigns whenever I have time to run them). Been DM'ing for around a year now and it is SOSOSO much fun and it comes somewhat naturally to me. I've always loved exercises that cause me to think on the fly so this was the next natural progression I suppose lol. I am thinking about implementing this system and was super excited to discuss this with my players, however whenever I went to comment I noticed how little views you have compared to the level of quality you put out. I have been watching you for a bit now and your content is SO underrated. I will be recommending you to others in my DND group because they also love hearing about stuff like this. Keep doing you man, I can't wait to see how far you will come

We’ve been doing around the table initiative for maybe 6 months and I love it - whenever an encounter starts the pertinent player rolls initiative against a static DC then turns go around the table from there - so if a player tries to attack a goblin or a goblin tries to attack a player, that player rolls against 10 + the goblin’s initiative modifier - if they win, they go before the goblin - if they lose they go after the goblin - then turns proceed clockwise around the table with the DM placing monsters between players as they see fit, often grouping similar monsters (e.g., archers, melee, casters, boss) - it speeds things up, lets you say “roll for initiative” and gives players the choice of they order they go by just changing where they sit - usually the person leading the march goes first, which is often scouts or rogues, so they get their early initiative if they want it - players can switch where they sit round to round if they so wish - it’s been great 👩🏿‍🍳💋

I like the way my DM handles initiative. The players roll normal initiative checks, and that gets compared to an overall initiative check for monsters. Players that rolled higher than the monster roll go first, but in whatever order they want. Then monsters go. Then the players that rolled below will also go in the order they see fit.

Absolutely love your stuff and this new style you're going for is gorgeous! How long have you been making content out of curiosity? I just started last Autumn and am wondering what this Youtubing life has in store :3

I pretty much got rid of initiative all together at our games & everything is better for it. Usually it’s totally obvious which side is going to go first, if it’s a situation where both sides are honestly surprised then we roll to see which sides goes first but I dumped individual initiative order. It just slows everything down too much. Now i just start rolling & pointing at players “you take an arrow to the shoulder 2 points of damage, an orc swings his battle axe at your head & you mange to duck, no damage’. Meanwhile, they do the same to me. It’s very chaotic (just as combat should be) & it adds to the suspense & tension of the game, it also goes very quickly, there’s no waiting to take your turn & if the wizard is still trying to decide what spell to use at the end of the round then they get skipped, which really cits down on the indecision factor.

I used two different initiative types in my last campaign, depending on encounter type. Usually the standard d20 method for 5e, but there was some side initiative ship-to-ship battles (at least until we closed in enough that individual spells/attacks started to outweigh the ship weapons' potential).

I came up with my own initiative system (though, someone certainly had a similar if not the exact idea before). It goes like this: 0. Every creature has an Initiative score which is equal either to Dex or to Int. The Initiative is never rolled. 1. When the combat initiates, creature chooses the Initiative that is equal or less to its Initiative (max by default). After choosing, the Initiative for the battle cannot be changed. 2. If any of the Initiatives between allies and foes are equal, randomly determine who goes first. For example, you could roll some d20-s like in dnd initiative, but without any modificators. Repeat for all Initiative values if needed, until all is sorted. If the Initiative is shared only between allies, do not resolve a tie, because... 3. All allies, whose turns are not separated by an adversary, take actions at the same time, thus allowing for teamwork. This applies even through different Initiative scores. The "grouping" can change mid-battle: for example, cleric and rogue turns were separated by a goblin and a goblin was slayed, so cleric and rogue can work together now. This applies to NPCs too.

I just go with Balsera / popcorn initiative from Fate. One entity (player character / villain / minion group) goes first and from then the entity that most recently acted passes initiative to anyone who hasn't acted this turn, until all entities have acted. The entity that acted last gets to decide who goes first for the following round (including themselves), so it's usually a bad idea to frontload all the PCs. (As for who goes first initially, it's usually based on the narrative, e.g. who decides to engage or who gets the drop on someone else, though it could also be a roll)

I stole an idea from a table top wargame called Bolt Action. I put white poker chips with PC's names and numbered red chips for mobs in a bag and randomly pull one out. No dex, or any type of mods. To us it is more like real combat, the best laid plans go out the window as soon as combat starts. Players love it when the go last, then are picked first in the new round and can complete their thought process. We found it keeps people at the table and paying attention, rather than knowing they are last in the order so they take a smoke break and we end up sitting, waiting for them to come back to the table. No time is lost having PCs roll and me rolling for mobs, writing it down in order and then someone goes, "oh wait, I forgot to add my dex" and rearranging order. To us you have to have an order, letting people choose when to go willy nilly is like driving on the freeway at rush hour and people doing what they want when they want.

Great video! It's funny how different early DnD was compared to later editions. I've been experimenting with some different initiative mechanics, and will definitely try the alternating group initiative. I also like the QB idea. 🤠

I have people declare what they are doing, then roll 2d6 for their initiative. The system we are using generally has mods of +0, so I say that all monsters, unless I deem them extra important, are on initiative 7. So unless you have a mod there’s roughly an even chance you’ll go before or after all the enemies. The group discussion beforehand, I like to think, encourages more teamwork.

My players roll individual initiatives, my boss monster rolls initiative, and a single initiative roll for all minions. If the players are next to each other in the initiative order, I allow those players to synergize there turn how they like. For example, if the rogue and wizard are next to each other in initiative order (even though the rogue had a higher initiative roll) the wizard may cast a spell first such as faerie fire on some creatures so the rogue can gain advantage on attacks against said creatures and thus gain sneak attack damage.

The older edition initiative also added weapon speed to initiate roll . I don’t actually use initiative for my monster ( but my players don’t know that ) I roll a d20 to see if the monster goes 1st than just stagger my monsters in with the players turns .

I like how Swords & Wizardry hacks Moldvay’s initiative. The Moldvay steps are there, and initiative is a group roll, but sides alternate through the steps.

I've been trying new initiative systems as well. My players seem to like going in any order they want but they also miss "roll initiative!" So I'm considering a group initiative roll where the players roll their d20 initiative as usual but add it up, and rather than roll it for the enemies I would just determine if the players total is greater than their possible average then they go first. So I have 3 players each rolling initiative, if their total is higher than 30 they go first. Sounds easy enough I think.

1e initiative order also involves the type of action being taken. If 'A' wins initiative... the A-side Missile attacks are resolved, then B-side Missiles are resolved. Similarly for Movement and then Melee, with Magic being a bit of a wild card. Ties are also possible in 1e. I've played and DM'd 1e, 3.5 and 5e, Once the DM understands it, 1e is by far the the best blend of speed and robustness.

That sides method is how Adventure Quest, a system based off D&D 1st Edition, does it, except all players lock in an answer without discussions and all actions for their side resolve simultaneously, with no difference made to distance. On a new round, both sides roll again and the losing side gets a +1 added each round until they win initiative. This means players can't spend minutes discussing what happens over the course of a few seconds, and have to either shout the plan to other players in 4 second bursts during their actions, plan before an encounter, or have faith that the other players are smart enough to not get in the way.

That was an impressive teleport to Livraria Lello, Porto! Or you have an impressive study that looks remarkably similar. It's a neat place to visit if you are in Porto. Now I'll contine watching the video.

I bet you and your group would really like DC20. It changes the way movement works, making it more freeing and strategic at the same time, and initiative is like 5e but with the freeing dynamics of choosing where monsters go initiative. It's the perfect system for me and it's only in alpha right now.

Both sides roll a D6 at the beginning of each round. Highest wins. When it’s the players turn, they just go in whatever order they want. It seems too simple, but it’s added tension at the beginning of every round as it can be quite painful for the players if the enemy finishes their turn and then gets to go again right after.

I’m using Luke Gearing’s side initiative in my 4e game. Everyone rolls d20+Dex against the medium DC for the level. Players who beat the DC are fast and go before the monsters. Players that don’t are slow and go after. It’s got good dynamics and simultaneous player turns are fun!

I’ve been trialling a variation of initiative closer to BG3: rolled as normal, but if there is more than one character clustered in the order, they effectively have a group turn where they can move, do actions etc in any order they like :P this seems to eliminate the waiting side of initiative as players with similar initiative rolls can act tactically, plus the players seem to like it!

I have a couple of thoughts about team-based initiative: firstly, I think it COULD be night-and-day if they game was built ground-up for it (as these new TTRPGs might be) because it opens up combo attacks by both players and monsters, and it would also affect statistics because how does individual dexterity work in a group setting? That last part might be a good or bad thing depending on how it is implemented and depending on how you feel about the current power of dexterity in 5e. The other thing, slightly more of a problem, is DMs already worry their monsters don't last many turns or use many of their abilities thanks to action economy; this problem could be exacerbated by the players (including slow powerful characters being carried by faster teammates) all going at once and wiping out/focusing on the monsters too quickly.

I have everybody roll initiative normally, but put PCs and enemies on separate lists. I have the highest total go first and then alternate between teams while moving down each list. It's a little more work but more balanced overall.

Actually you are missing one system in AD&D. In the 1978 player's handbook, iniatitive was determined, by a warrior the type of weapon used, each had it's own Speed Factor, or a Magic User by spell, each spell had a casting time determined in segments or turns. [a segment was approx 6 secs, 10 segments equalled a turn.] Depending on what you casted or used as a weapon, you could go higher than 20 in todays initiative, and some weapons, like a dagger could go multiple times in the same round of combat. I liked this system far more than rolling a die because you could select a weapon to determine how fast you could go verses it being so random. It's been a while but I think you could use a appropriate modifer as well such as INT for wizards, STR for fighters and DEX for rogues and rangers. Anyways, I just wanted to throw this out there. Cheers.

Bunkers & Badasses (The official Borderlands TTRPG) uses something neat. Players are the only ones that roll Initiative, 1d20+SPD Mod (a)+BR (b). This is checked against the highest BR (c) of the enemies. If a player rolls higher, they move in the "Before Enemies" step. Roll lower, and they move in the "After Enemies" step, with all enemies taking their turns in descending BR order during the Enemies step, while Players can take their turns in any order within their respective bracket. (a) - The four ability scores for B&B are Accuracy (ACC), Damage (DMG), Speed (SPD), and Mastery (MST). (b) - BR [Player]: A player's Badass Rank is a score that is *Usually* 1/2 their level, rounded up, but can be increased as the GM sees fit after a particularly impressive/Badass feat. (c) - BR [Enemy]: An Enemy's Badass Rank is used to determine their Initiative, and how much XP they grant, and how much loot they drop on death, but that's roughly it. You *could* compare it to Challenge Rating, but it's far from a direct comparison. A surprisingly difficult enemy to fight could be low BR, meaning it's worth less XP and moves later in combat, while a very weak enemy could be high BR, allowing it to move first (probably to run away) and grant a *LOT* of XP and Loot when defeated (Probably why it's running).

In other systems, I don't see it as a problem. Although in D&D 5e, there are class abilities and feats that can improve a characters initiative bonus. It is possible to make this a key part of how your character works and I currently have a player in my game that purposely built their character with this in mind. Removing initiative would be fine if the entire group was on board and possibly replacing the bonuses to initiative with something else, but I don't see a need to change the system

I like the simultaneous action system that AD&D has for ties. Except I like it to the point I think it ought to be simultaneous every time. Let players decide if they want to attack or block the enemy in front of them. It's like rock, paper, scissors but with a dozen different options.

We used to use the Shadow of the Demonlord initiative system, but we've switched to the Daggerheart initiative token Whatchamacallits in my homebrew game for a few sessions now and we really like it. Combat doesn't drag out, there's no confusion about actions, bonus actions, or forgetting to use this or that during my turn, and we can get right into combat without any slowdown at all. The only challenge has been on me to make sure the enemies take enough actions to keep the players supplied with actions of their own, but even that is just down to practice.

I'm all for eliminating the confusion of initiative. One method I've used for one shots is rolling initiative at character creation, so that they just HAVE an initiative order. I know that probably raises some hackles but it didn't cause any problems, and having a reliable space in the turn order led to some cool strategic play

I thought it was just another episode of Users Not Understanding 5e Design but at least this one looks into the game's history. One thing you should've mentioned is, though, 2014 Dungeon Master's Guide offered several alternatives to initiative, including side-based one. I think you should introducd these variants in your next video and share your thoughts, pros and cons on them.

Honestly the main issue I have had with initiative is the act of rolling it in the fist place, I noticed this hard in my current CoS campaign. Basically you build all of this tension and suspense, the looming threat of something dangerous in the dark, and the second something jumps out to attack, everyone has to stop and do math at each other. I had players literally get up from the table to go to the bathroom it was so bad. So I house ruled that we roll initiative at the start of the game, and whoever acted first to start combat is the turn we start on. I think turn based combat is fine but its the act of rolling it at the start that I think is the main drag. There is things like readying and reactions that let you do things out of turn order so I really think its not that bad of a system. All the theory crafting I have seen online about systems where people act at the same time in my experience cause more problems than fun emergent gameplay.

I love your videos! Thank you so much. I appreciate you.

The issue I see is that the players have to resolve which player goes first. So, on the players' turn, they just go in order of who has the highest initiative modifier. That way, anything that boosts initiative will still have value and the combat flow doesn't get held up with debating who goes first. On the DM's turn, they just choose their own order.

I have a system that is a combination of several others: Only one roll of the dice. Whoever has the lower score - starts. Rogue and Monk: roll d4; Fighter, Barbarian: d8; Monsters: d10; Spellcasters: d12. Monsters cannot start later than 3rd place (even if the dice got high number). Second half of monsters starts after everybody. If eveyone have the same number then lowest die starts (ex. Monk and Barbarian have 1 on die - then Monk starts as he is using d4). This speeds up a lot :) P.S. If monster is a quick soab - then I replace the die from d10 to d6 or d4.

Ohhhh.... You could use the QB's charisma bonus (aka leadership) as a small bonus to attack? Just a quick thought.

We're having to rewrite our initiative tracker in Bag of Mapping (a new vtt focused on ease of use) because of MCDM and daggerheart. Listening to this makes me realise there's just a lot of initiative options

I like rolling for initiative once for the entire combat. Everyone stays in order for each round until combat is over, and no weapon speed adjustments. Keeps things moving nicely

The best way to run initiative, in my experience, varies based on how many players are at the table. If I'm running for three players, side-based initiative is probably the way to go; if I'm running for 5-7 players, individual initiative helps break up the chaos and make turns feel a bit more dynamic. Even when I run vanilla 5e initiative, I do tend to integrate a handful of house rules: I let players switch places in the initiative order so long as no monsters are acting in-between them (similar to Baldur's Gate 3); I allow a 5-foot step in combination with most Ready Actions (the extra bit of flexibility cuts down on indecision due to uncertainty about what will happen throughout the turn); I use passive initiative (10+dex mod) for most monsters; and I occasionally use the Pathfinder 2e method of using the most relevant ability score, skill...or even save instead of just using DEX every time. To be perfectly honest--even though I like alternative initiative (or the absence of initiative) on its own merits--I haven't actually found rolling for and tracking initiative to be all that onerous at the table once you've done it a handful of times. A lot of lip-service gets paid to how much the procedure breaks the momentum of a session but, in reality, there is very rarely going to be a combat where the GM doesn't need a minute or two to get something ready. In person, I'll be fumbling with some minis or terrain pieces. On a VTT I'll need to import some tokens or a map. And even if stopping to roll initiative *did* cause problems, you can always do it in advance when someone is going to the bathroom.

In general Initiative sucks. There are many better alternatives. Despite what anyone says, I feel the reason why we are stuck with the current 5e Initiative System is because players refuse to let it go even if they complain about it. Out of all the various initiative methods in D&D and Pathfinder, the AD&D system was my favorite. It was not just a system of who went first but also forced some tactics. My suggestion for an Initiative System; Roll up number pools. Each side rolls a d20 for the number of combatants they have. Then you assign an individual to each number. You can change it from round to round if you like. The numbers remain the same but the PC assigned to it may change if the party chooses. i.e.; Party has 4 PCs. They roll d20 x4 times and assign those numbers to the players. The DM does the same for their NPCs. There is your initiative order. Once the PCs develop their tactics they may choose to have a default line up changing it only in rare circumstances which would speed up play somewhat.

my favourite is clockwise player initiative based on seating with monsters acting in groups whenever i the dm decide they should go based on what the players do. saves time and is fun.

Honestly, I might. This is by far not the first time I've heard talk about changing initiative, and when my group tried 2nd edition Advanced a little while ago it seemed to work well. I'm with a new group and while I don't think any of them mind normal initiative maybe I'll ask anyway.

I think a an system would be enhanced by something like blades in the dark group rolls. Basically you designate someone to lead the roll, everyone else rolls, and the leader takes the consequence. Makes it so no one person wants to do it all the time

AD&D2nd Edition's "everyone goes at the same time" (unless one size is surprised) makes the most sense for real combat. Real combat isn't chess, it is chaos.

Depending on the type of game I'm playing/running and the group I'm playing with, I love systems that make initiative and turn-taking more organic and give more control to the players and GM. But, D&D is a mass market game made for beginners, with a lot of organized play at conventions and stores. So, for D&D, I think a concrete initiative system works best-everyone has a turn and takes it. That's much easier for the group dynamics of a group of up to 7 players (the limit in Adventurer's League), who may be total strangers, and of all ages and levels of experience, discussing and deciding who will take what actions in what order every round. If I were to make any changes to the 5e initiative system, I would introduce the optional rule that a player may voluntarily delay their initiative to take their action after any other character acts. Some form of that rule existed in several previous editions, and was a lot of fun with highly strategic play groups.

our game Swords 'n' Stones, uses the D6 initiative, each PC rolls 1D6, 1-3 = attack, 4-6 = defend. This is rolled each round so the risk of being on the defensive is high and you may take damage each round., or you may be on the attack each round and survive. This makes the PCs think more if combat is the right choice. The second option is a group roll, same results either attack or defend.

I really enjoy the Lancer system. That game the players and the opponents take turns, and the players decide who goes in what order. It is similar to what you pitched up no dice rolling. It's been a lot of fun in Lancer

I like the idea of 1-1-1 player, monster, player… but surely this wouldn’t work when against much larger monsters like dragons! What’s our thoughts here?

My six players, who are now level 11, roll initiative like normal. I then pair them up so top two initiative rolls are grouped and I repeat for middle and last two. This gives some players a higher initiative roll since I pair them up. The enemies are already grouped into small parties of 2-5 creatures and labeled A, B, C and etc… one group of enemies goes after a set of the players. Example, group A goes after the two players with the top initiative. I only roll initiative for any groups beyond C and boss type enemies.

After I bought the DMG I learned that in the D&D 5e there are several different options for initiative, but usually the GM and players are lazy and we go with the first option presented, i.e. the classic rolled initiative. Those less used others are: Initiatives core, i.e. instead of rolling the dice, the character's passive initiative is used, SideInitiative, i.e. group initiative which is the highest result rolled together, and Speed Factor, i.e. initiative modifier that the DMG recommends only for experienced players because the initiative changes dynamically during the combat.

I created what i call "Counterattack Side Initiative". Basically players go first but if anyone's last action against a creature fails that creature goes next. Then back to the players One downside is remembering which creature went already during the players turn but using something like excel with checkboxes fixes this nicely You can all gang up on the big bad guy but if one of you misses... Its his turn

Every system my group plays is now using the adapted variation on the system we’ve been using for years - each player rolls separate “initiative” check like in 3-5ed D&D, depending on a system this uses different stats but essentially boils down to a normal roll that employs dex/perception/some other stat governing initiative in the system originally. That check is made vs an arbitrary difficulty set by GM representing just how fast the enemies are. In 5e for example this is usually a “passive” initiative 10+DEX averaged between enemies into a single number, but we use arbitrary numbers GM sees as fitting too. Essentially, GM never rolls initiative, he’s got better things to do. If there’s a Boss involved, or few distinctly different combat groups (wolves and crossbowmen handlers), two or more different difficulties are set up essentially dividing initiative into multiple “brackets”, but we usually keep it simple. That results with players being having either passed or failed the check and setting them either before or after enemies of certain DC. They can then freely choose the order between themselves in relevant pass/fail brackets. This allows for initiative roll to take three seconds, and due to that be done every turn - dynamically changing initiative order, which results in less static turns and also allows for pairs/threes of players to tactically combo off each other knowing the enemy can’t interrupt between their actions. Ones that rolled initiative badly turn one get to potentially have a “double turn” if they reroll initiative into a high one on turn two. We love it.

Theme wise, I think those with ranged attack would go first. Especially if they have enhanced eyesight, smell, or hearing. Then melee if the creatures are in the room.

To be honest, 5e initiative as is works great. It's fun to throw in some Homebrew for sure, though! I like letting everyone draw a card from the Draw20 deck (including enemies) and that's your initiative (give Dex a break, it already does everything). I also enjoy letting players who all act before a certain threshold getting to decide the order they would like to go in (Like any PCs who get over a 10 get to have a quick moment to decide what order they want to go) Then that becomes fixed.

I do 1d6 every round. Then I count from 6 to 1, and each player go on when I call their number. No book keeping, it's fast, INI bonuses are very powerful, the combat gains an exiting and dynamic flow.

This is how I run initiative in my own homemade ttrpg 😊 it is also how warhammer does it - 1d6 the winner goes first

MCDM sounds pretty logical and really easy to understand... really it might be worse to try it in our d&d campaign

I saw those player names! You cheeky guy you

Daggerheart just seems like it was made for his group, no initiative at all would be trash

The study aka Livraria Lello (in Porto, Portugal) aka the library which inspired the Hogwarts library

Thank you good sir, good stuff 🫡😎🙌

I haven't had fixed initiative in years. Basically, we just follow the logical order of whichever side was surprised, using passive perception and stealth scores. It works just fine.

The kerning in the thumbnail made me double take 😂

I like initiative as a DM and as a player. I appreciate the organization of it.

Whats your opinion of passive initiative? where your initiative is just 10 plus your dex mod(and other relevant modifiers) and then reminding the players that they can push back their own turn if they wish to.

This is a great idea.

I was just reading the thread you linked a few days ago! I think it's a cool alternative, but obviously it should be discussed in a session zero and given a trail run. With builds and feats that work based on the initiative bonus, what sounds like a good idea at first might disappoint those players with high dexterity who chose Alert. I also think 5e's initiative does a great job of making combat spontaneous and emergent. Turn based systems or those using a "QB" trade this for a more strategic approach to battles like a turn based RPG, and it could quash players' creativity and role play in battle when someone else is calling the shots or they are always expected to take an optimal team action. Good video!

I’ve asked my players if they wanted to use group initiative but they all want to roll individually. I can’t wait until someone gets caught in AOE friendly fire.

D&D 3e-5e are not more familiar to me. I stopped playing when WotC acquired TSR.

All this thinking about initiative is hurting my brain, I think I'll just go play Valkyria Chronicles 4 😅

So you either spend time figuring out how to play tactically with the rolled initiative order, or you spend time planning how to optimize the order. Net neutral in terms of time spent, IMO. With rolling at the beginning of combat, you at least get a fresh puzzle each time rather than relying on (and potentially abusing) a pattern - though RAW prior to 5e allowed players to adjust their initiative order in the very first round, and then they're set up. And players will tend to hate any "advantage" that is given to both allies and enemies. Having both sides subject to the same randomness at least mitigates that some.

But you didn't even touch on Daggerheart's system 😶😶😶

The issue with DnD's initiative is the same issue that DnD has overall. There is no balance between luck and skill. You throw a dice and you throw what you throw. And only if the luck from the dice allows you do to so, your character skill comes into play. Using one single dice (default) for decision making is the whole issue to begin with because it is, completely random. That is why a lot of systems use two dice. As soon you have two dice, the numbers in the middle are the most common. If you have two D6, you will throw, 6, 7 or 8 roughly half the time. This causes that how you skill you character plays a much bigger role and allows for much better balancing while still maintaining a random factor. But when you throw an D20, its basically pure luck with a very very small influence of modifiers. If you fight 10 battles in DnD, it is completely random who goes first and who goes last, no matter the initiative. Do the same in systems that use 2D6 and you'll see, that in 8-9/10 cases, the fastest person goes first and the slowest goes last. DnD gives the illusion that you can still your character but in the end, it is a pure luck game with the GM deciding your winning ratio. Just think about it, instead of throwing a D20, you could, as good, just play a round of roulette to decide who goes first and the result would not be much different.

D&D was an offshoot comes out of miniatures wargaming, so not a surprise about initiative.

No! D&D 3E got initiative right . Is just like many variant rules under 1E and 2E that people played with and made standard in 3E. If anything 5E should adopt the options to delay, ready, or refocus. Use caution adapting rules into a system. Everything is a balance between pros and cons. For example D6 group turn initiative hurts players invested in the alert feat or high Dex. It could help a fighter that wants to charge and attack, but he is competing against the aoe blaster and assassin also wanting to go first, to do their thing. That could lead to arguments. It could also lead to team building, if they learn to work together. Some groups will not like this rule because it is very meta game in feel and encourages ooc chatter across the table.

No, leave it alone. Thanks! That's all!

We need to get rid of youtubers who are always trying to change the game for everyone else. Seems like that is the only way they think they can get views.

Leave it as it is and just let each table of players decide what works best for them

INITIATIVE IS A TERRIBLE MECHANIC AND NEEDS TO GO.

We're going to keep complaining about Initiative, AC, countless terms really, until we cast away these chains and find fun in the freedom of newer pastures.

Only noobs & fakes think initiative order is bad and needs to be replaced. Any good GM can do it with in a minute. It only takes me as long as my players telling me thier initiative to be ready.