Initiative in 4E

[Tegyrius]

I've been chewing on this and my inclination is to do away with the card system entirely and adapt the system from Five Parsecs From Home (which, admittedly, is one of my shiny new toys, and thus biases me more favorably toward it). Here's an untested alpha draft:

Each combat round has three initiative phases. In order, these are Quick, Enemy, and Slow.

At the beginning of every combat round, each PC and allied NPC makes a Coolness Under Fire check (adding unit morale if within LOS or voice/radio contact of an ally). This check receives a -1 penalty if facing enemies who predominantly have CUF A and a +1 bonus if facing enemies who predominantly have CUF D. The Combat Awareness specialty's effect becomes a +1 bonus to initiative.

1. Quick phase: every PC/ally who succeeded with the CUF check
   
2. Enemy phase: every opponent
   
3. Slow phase: every PC/ally who failed the CUF check

In each phase, characters may act in any order.

- C.

[Ursus Maior]

If you meddle with initiative slot allocation, you will end up with (N)PCs occupying the same slot. How do you deal with that? Do they act at the same time or do they act in a separate order and if so, how is that determined?

I agree with the sentiment, that turn order after the first turn is largely unimportant. And if you want to make sure or more likely, you go before your enemy (especially in the first turn), then 4E gives you three options for that: Invest in Combat Awareness and draw two cards, invest in Recon to ambush your enemy or find someone who draws a lower card than you and switch turn order with them.

I think that leaves a lot of choices for skill & competence as well as small unit tactics.

[leonpoi]

Perhaps for initiative, simply roll your CUF dice and act on the value. That way higher CUF can roll higher but doesn’t always guarantee going first.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by leonpoi

Perhaps for initiative, simply roll your CUF dice and act on the value. That way higher CUF can roll higher but doesn’t always guarantee going first.

That's how I'd do it.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by leonpoi

Perhaps for initiative, simply roll your CUF dice and act on the value. That way higher CUF can roll higher but doesn’t always guarantee going first.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but wouldn't players most likely be hoping for a lower initiative number (i.e. 1 goes before 10, so a higher roll is a later turn slot)?

-

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Raellus

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but wouldn't players most likely be hoping for a lower initiative number (i.e. 1 goes before 10, so a higher roll is a later turn slot)?

-

I'll have to be brief because I am waiting to offload but I would say No. Why?

Under my proposal, you start out high and count down to 1. This is due to the fact that those participants with a higher CUF would roll a bigger die size. This gives them more chances to roll a higher number than those participants rolling a smaller die size... but yet still allows the smaller die user to occasionally out roll the bigger die user and go first. It also allows the GM to impose existing game penalties which REDUCE the die size on the Initiative roll. So you wind up with a situation where the lower die CAN win but it is less likely than the guy with the larger CUF die (representing his greater experience or speed of engagement). So it makes more sense to roll high and count down.

[Tegyrius]

I really am enjoying the discussion here, but could a mod split the alternate initiative systems material into its own thread? It feels like the “all things 4e” topic may need to branch a bit.

- C.

[Rainbow Six]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

I really am enjoying the discussion here, but could a mod split the alternate initiative systems material into its own thread? It feels like the “all things 4e” topic may need to branch a bit.

- C.

Split as requested.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Ursus Maior

If you meddle with initiative slot allocation, you will end up with (N)PCs occupying the same slot. How do you deal with that? Do they act at the same time or do they act in a separate order and if so, how is that determined?

When I've run other initiative systems that have slotted sides/teams/squads rather than individuals, I've never had an issue with my players deciding who goes in which order. It usually helps them smoothly handle coordinated actions, especially when order of operations matters in tasks like like breach/bang/clear. On the ref's side of the screen, the same applies: NPCs act in whatever order is logical for their assumed degree of competence.

- C.

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

When I've run other initiative systems that have slotted sides/teams/squads rather than individuals, I've never had an issue with my players deciding who goes in which order. It usually helps them smoothly handle coordinated actions, especially when order of operations matters in tasks like like breach/bang/clear. On the ref's side of the screen, the same applies: NPCs act in whatever order is logical for their assumed degree of competence.

- C.

If more than one person goes on the same number (or on the same Initiative Step/Phase in V2.2), I have everyone perform their action and declare the actions are simultaneous. I have had two opponents take each other out of the fight with this rule.

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by swaghauler

If more than one person goes on the same number (or on the same Initiative Step/Phase in V2.2), I have everyone perform their action and declare the actions are simultaneous. I have had two opponents take each other out of the fight with this rule.

Cinematic as hell. I can dig it.

- C.

[unipus]

Sounds fun -- although I imagine you're going to be seeing a lot of "zero successes." Of course there's also mishaps... cancel successes 1:1 and any excess dumps you to the bottom?

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by unipus

Sounds fun -- although I imagine you're going to be seeing a lot of "zero successes." Of course there's also mishaps... cancel successes 1:1 and any excess dumps you to the bottom?

If I run CUF for Initiative, you just roll the die and that's your starting number. I like the fact that it takes into account the combatant's experience (by the die size) but still allows a less experienced combatant to get a higher result than the pros (based on rolls). I would still keep any penalties from wounds, surprise, etc...

[Tegyrius]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

I've been chewing on this and my inclination is to do away with the card system entirely and adapt the system from Five Parsecs From Home (which, admittedly, is one of my shiny new toys, and thus biases me more favorably toward it). Here's an untested alpha draft:

Each combat round has three initiative phases. In order, these are Quick, Enemy, and Slow.

At the beginning of every combat round, each PC and allied NPC makes a Coolness Under Fire check (adding unit morale if within LOS or voice/radio contact of an ally). This check receives a -1 penalty if facing enemies who predominantly have CUF A and a +1 bonus if facing enemies who predominantly have CUF D. The Combat Awareness specialty's effect becomes a +1 bonus to initiative.

1. Quick phase: every PC/ally who succeeded with the CUF check
   
2. Enemy phase: every opponent
   
3. Slow phase: every PC/ally who failed the CUF check

In each phase, characters may act in any order.

I've been running with this house rule since I started my current campaign (1e timeline, 4e rules) in January. We're currently 12 sessions and about 8 combats into it and it seems to be working fairly well. The final version is a bit more streamlined - I dropped the modifiers for enemy CUF:

At the beginning of each round, each player rolls Coolness Under Fire (adding Unit Morale if the PC is within voice or visual contact of a teammate). With success, they act in the fast phase, before all NPCs. With failure, they act in the slow phase, after all NPCs. Characters in each phase may act in any sequence and players may (briefly) discuss tactics and order of operations before declaring actions.

My observation in play is that this incentivizes keeping the team close (no lone-wolfing), rewards both individual proficiency (Coolness Under Fire) and team cohesion (Unit Morale), and allows the sort of coordinated action that we see in both documentary and cinematic examinations of small unit tactics.

- C.

[kcdusk]

Originally Posted by Tegyrius

I
My observation in play is that this incentivizes keeping the team close (no lone-wolfing), rewards both individual proficiency (Coolness Under Fire) and team cohesion (Unit Morale), and allows the sort of coordinated action that we see in both documentary and cinematic examinations of small unit tactics.

- C.

Agreed.

I have some observations on initiative coming up soon, from my own play experience.

[Tegyrius]

I should note that in our last combat scene, two PCs were detached for sniping and recon. They subsequently separated from one another before combat began. The PCs have no radios and I ruled that the two who'd gone solo were effectively out of voice communication with one another. The difference between using only CUF for initiative and using CUF + Unit Morale was starkly illuminated.

As an additional benefit, this system still works in Forge/Foundry (my group's virtual tabletop of choice) with no software tweaks.

No one has taken Combat Awareness, but the easiest way to integrate it with this system seems to be a flat +1 bonus to initiative checks, in keeping with the functionality of most other specialties.

- C.