Initiative in 4E

[unipus]

I like phased actions like that in concept. In practice? Not so much.

@Raellus -- you're not entirely wrong with your question about initiative, but your example doesn't seem to play. In this case, the PC has drawn the worst card. It doesn't matter whether the NPCs act all on the same initiative, or individually, they're all going to go before him anyway.

(personally, I recommend grouping NPCs in no more than fireteam size, and usually no more than pairs, and at the price/convenience that they all move and fight in the same hex unless numbers are whittled down so much that I decide to split them)

I think that you’ve identified a potential issue with initiative system. I haven’t had an experience yet where the enemy get the drop on the PCs but I have had an encounter where the PCs had a surprise round and it was a slaughter. That’s probably realistic but it could potentially be a TPK very easily if the enemy either achieve complete surprise or act first as a block at the start of the combat round.

I actually don't think it's all that realistic. I've been a part of exercises involving ambushes. Even a perfect ambush at close range has a lot of potential to work out sub-optimally. One snapping twig or one person opening fire a second before everyone else means that some targets will escape the kill zone or be able to react while others will not. And this is the norm, not the exception (unless you're part of Ghost Recon).

That's why I said I liked that aspect of your system, which could instead just grant advantage/disadvantage on initiative rolls. An ambusher has a much better chance of acting first, but it's not guaranteed. And a very experienced target of an ambush might have their spidey sense go off just that half second before it all goes to shit...

[unipus]

My question remains in this Press/Hold system (I'll buy a new copy of 2013! I cannot find it anywhere and I'd like to support the lads!) though...

What advantage is there ever to Holding? Essentially you've got a prisoner's dilemma except why would I ever not choose Push?

[swaghauler]

Originally Posted by unipus

My question remains in this Press/Hold system (I'll buy a new copy of 2013! I cannot find it anywhere and I'd like to support the lads!) though...

What advantage is there ever to Holding? Essentially you've got a prisoner's dilemma except why would I ever not choose Push?

In TW2K13's system, HOLD is often a forced option. A Suppression Attack is when the enemy shoots at you in TW2K13 with the full intention of suppressing you. They do a skill check and success will result in suppression. This will FORCE you to HOLD on the next round. Certain wounds or psychological injuries or Disadvantages will also force a HOLD under certain conditions (ie an animal that's afraid of fire encountering it). I also allowed INTIMIDATION ATTACKS to force a HOLD (psychological Warfare).

Sometimes it's a tactical choice. For instance, you are hiding from a group of attackers and you knife the only guy who detected you. The HOLD option might be a good choice to avoid detection by additional attackers.

[leonpoi]

I love the idea, I just don't know how you bring it in in a mechanical sense in a way that makes sense and flows well.

I feel that you almost want some time of counter or "timer" that is representing loss of group cohesion and short-term morale over time during a battle and as this starts going down then things start to become harder etc ("attrition"). It would happen on both sides and lead to a situation where the sides want to HOLD and regain and then the side that is losing when HOLDing is happening simply says - stuff this - we're out of here, and retreats or at least re-positions.

[edit] - specifically for holding I think I need to answer 1) why would a side want to hold? What's the benefit? 2) does a side need to hold or is it individuals that hold? 3) Why would a side not want to hold? What is the downside of holding?

With these I could start getting my head around what the intention is and then what the best way to implement might be.

An easy way could be to link it to CUF team morale - at some point unit cohesion and communication has suffered enough that everyone just needs to reground and work out wtf to do next?? Also situations where seriously wounded people need to be dealt with. I don't know, as an armchair soldier I'm not in the best place to judge here. I guess you do see the equivalent in team (ball) sports where you have many HOLDs between plays.

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by unipus

@Raellus -- your example doesn't seem to play. In this case, the PC has drawn the worst card. It doesn't matter whether the NPCs act all on the same initiative, or individually, they're all going to go before him anyway.

How is the 1 card the worst card? On p. 54 of the Player Manual:

Participants act in order from lowest to highest number, beginning with card #1, until everyone has taken their turn.

Originally Posted by Raellus

For example, imagine a 6 v 6 engagement. Let's say one of the six PCs draws the one card, and then the OPFOR draws the two. That means the bad guys get six turns before the PCs get a second one. That seems game breaking to me. Am I missing something?

So Player One, who drew the #1 card, goes first. The six OPFOR, who collectively drew the 2, go next. Then the remaining five PCs receive their turns.

Maybe my wording was unclear, or perhaps you were referring to one of the proffered house rules, where the high number goes first?

-

[unipus]

Originally Posted by Raellus

How is the 1 card the worst card? On p. 54 of the Player Manual:

Participants act in order from lowest to highest number, beginning with card #1, until everyone has taken their turn.



So Player One, who drew the #1 card, goes first. The six OPFOR, who collectively drew the 2, go next. Then the remaining five PCs receive their turns.

Maybe my wording was unclear, or perhaps you were referring to one of the proffered house rules, where the high number goes first?

-

I think I was simply confused, as I haven't used the book's initiative system in quite a long time. Sorry!

However, I do agree with everything Ursus posted... some of these optional rules probably do not work best unless you're using them with other optional rules, and I would never group more than 4 NPCs (even that is a lot... a +3 to an attack is very significant in the harm it can cause). But that question also comes down to how many NPCs there are to begin with. If there's only 6 in total then I'd probably run them as individuals, or pairs at the most. If there's 20... then yeah maybe some fireteams, and the PCs deserve what they get for trying to fight 20 guys at once. :P

[Raellus]

Here's another idea for a simple mod to 4e initiative rules. Start by drawing initiative, as described in the rules.

After the draw, when an enemy turn immediately precedes that of a PC (i.e. the enemy would act right before the PC in the turn order), the PC can choose to make a CUF roll v said enemy's CUF. If the PC wins the roll, he/she can exchange places with the enemy (i.e. swap turns, essentially). If not, there's no change to the drawn initiative turn order. This process only occurs once, immediately after drawing initiative. PCs may only attempt one swap, if the afore mentioned conditions apply. Any resulting changes to turn order last throughout the remainder of the combat encounter.

This rule only applies to PCs. Enemy NPCs do not get an opportunity to swap with PCs whose drawn initiative places them earlier in the turn queue.

Example:

Enemy A draws a 2; Ruiz draws a 5; Teller draws a 7; Enemy B draws the 10.

Ruiz can roll CUF v Enemy A. If Ruiz wins the roll, she can swap initiative/turn order with Enemy A. Ruiz chooses to roll CUF, and wins. She opts to swap with Enemy A and now acts before same.

Since Teller's turn did not initially follow Enemy A, he can not roll CUF for a chance to swap with same. He still acts after Enemy A. Enemy B does not get an opportunity to swap turn order with Teller.

---

This simple system will allow CUF to have some impact on turn order, but not too much. It could improve the tactical situation somewhat for the PCs, but not for the OPFOR. That doesn't seem game-breaking to me. It also doesn't add too many steps to the process, so it shouldn't significantly slow down combat.

Is that clear? What do y'all think?

-

[unipus]

It's very straightforward and clear (in this example, more on that below though).

It's not my cup of tea because (a) I don't really like the default initiative system anyway and (b) the CUF roll isn't actually a choice. There's no downside so there's no reason you wouldn't roll it every single time.

My big question about the simplicity is what do you do when you have 5 PCs, and 5 NPCs, and their initiative is scattered all over the place?

Say: NPC, PC, PC, NPC, PC, NPC, NPC, PC, NPC, PC

[Raellus]

Originally Posted by unipus

It's not my cup of tea because... the CUF roll isn't actually a choice. There's no downside so there's no reason you wouldn't roll it every single time.

I see your point and I think in most cases you're right, but there may be instances where players want a chance to suss out enemy intentions before acting. For example, maybe the engagement starts at long range, and the PCs want to let the enemy get closer before engaging. Or the PCs are hoping to pull off a flanking move but they want to figure out where the enemy MGs are first.

Originally Posted by unipus

My big question about the simplicity is what do you do when you have 5 PCs, and 5 NPCs, and their initiative is scattered all over the place?

Say: NPC 1, PC A, PC B, NPC 2, PC C, NPC 3, NPC 4, PC D, NPC 5, PC E

In this case, only four of the five PCs, and four of the five NPCs would roll against each other. A v 1, C v 2, D v 4, and E v 5. Yeah, it would add a minute or two to the turn to make the opposing CUF rolls, but I think most players would find the slight delay worth it for the chance to act before an enemy NPC.

I had a hard time phrasing this in the OP, but to clarify (I hope), one would only roll v an adjacent enemy in the queue. So, in this case, D only rolls against 4, not 4 and 3. And, again, enemy NPCs can't initiate a roll against a PC ahead of them in the queue. It's a PC only perk.

-