Group Initiative Supplement

[seandon4]

I like how BFRPG is modular. I arranged a simple Group Initiative supplement more in line with original B/X rules and other retro-clones. Any comments?

[SmootRK]

I think this sort of supplement might be good to include a couple of different Initiative Options, with small discussion about each.

For instance, when it comes to a Group Initiative (Monster side vs. Player side (or other groups)) one can list some stuff like "after determining which group goes first, the order of the players is done by either a predetermined order based upon a 'session initiative roll done prior to play', Dexterity, or even as simple as the clockwork direction around the playing table".

Other Initiative options can include stuff like:
Alternate Dice (I often use d10 or even d20 based on how granular I want it (or whether I want to eliminate ties as much as possible).

Weapon Speed modifiers

How to resolve ties or discussion about how the results of Ties allow both actions to take place with full effect.

I am sure that others might have additional input on certain preferences when it comes to how one does initiative.

[seandon4]

I was originally thinking of including several options, but didn't want to get too far into ideas I haven't actually play tested yet, anyway...

Options I (traditional group initiative)

one can list some stuff like "after determining which group goes first, the order of the players is done by either a predetermined order based upon a 'session initiative roll done prior to play', Dexterity, or even as simple as the clockwork direction around the playing table

I like it. I should be able to work these in.

In fact, I tried a "bonus session" with some friends who were used to 3e/d20 initiative; we tried the "combat phases" and "first declare your actions" approach and several of the players complained that it seemed too convoluted or it was too hard to gauge who was up next. So I did some reading and found that a lot of groups prefer to drop the "first declare your actions" bit (in fact that's a AD&D thing I think, not even B/X D&D?). Further, I realized Swords & Wizardry uses the traditional group init but drops the combat phases, hence your options above.

Option II (traditional individual initiative)

The Rules Cyclopedia has this as follows: everyone rolls, every round, and ties are re-rolled (no ties.) Obviously this requires spell casting be declared before init.

Option III

BFRPG init or traditional init, but use d10 or d20 instead.

(Possible) Option IV

Declare spells. Roll d20 one time. If spell casters get hit before up, then disrupted. The trouble with this, if spell casters get a bad roll then they're screwed the whole encounter. And if a good roll, then it's too easy (no need to protect the wizard.)

(Possible) Option V

You had mentioned in other posts that you house rule: roll d20 one time, but stick to the BFRPG rules; player can choose to re-roll init or move up init DEX +2.

Other Crazy Ideas

I also have this idea of incorporating 3e/d20 init. Basically roll d20 one time. If a spell caster is engaged and casts, then must roll concentration check (INT ability roll), fail and the spell is lost. But I wouldn't want to go so far as to suggest that it provokes an attack, that opens a can of worms, mixing in AoO. I have not actually play tested this idea; my classic D&D and 3e groups have been separate thus far.

Other Points

There's also a lot of confusion about BFRPG pg 15, on spell disruption: does attacked mean "attacked" or "attacked and hit".) In the spirit of the original rules, I imagine it means "attacked and hit." But on a separate topic, I was wondering where BFRPG got the idea for "holding" actions (aka. held initiative)? Not complaining, just curious.

Anyway, thank you for the feedback. My main goal was to inject group init supplement for players coming from Labyrinth Lord or Original D&D.

PS. I don't know much about speed modifier rules.

[seandon4]

Here's a start for Initiative Options supplement (attached):

PS. I'm not sure where to find rules for weapon speed?
-- also, my apologies if the fonts are wrong in the file; I'm not sure if I have the right fonts installed on my computer.

[Dimirag]

AD&D has weapon speeds, use that or invert their values or use categories such as very fast, fast, medium, slow and very slow

Other ideas. Using the better or worst from dex ans wis mods (fast reaction and accurate senses)
Using the character movement or encumbrance category, this gives and extra edge for low armored warriors vs highly armored ones.
Free flow combat: each action takes a time to do and all actions are based on a second by second basis.

[SmootRK]

If I were doing weapon speeds for BFRPG, I would simply give a couple of categories: slow medium fast

Slow gives -1 Initiative (assuming d6, perhaps -2 for d10 or -4 for d20 type rolls if those variants are used).
Medium gives no bonus nor penalty
Fast gives +1 (d6, or +2 for d10, or +4 on d20 rolls).

Most weaponry needs to then be categorized as one of those. Generally, small one-handers might get fast, most medium one-handers get Medium speed, and two-handers getting slow.

I would make bows as medium speeds. Slings as Slow. Crossbows as Slow (unloaded) or Fast if preloaded.

Some special weapons might get some special consideration... for instance, a Katana might be Fast on the first strike of combat, medium speed thereafter.

[seandon4]

I'll read up on AD&D encumbrance and weapon speed bonus/penalties to initiative and work them in. Thank you.

[Dimirag]

ADD has set values for weapon speed. Dont recall if rc also has.
For encumbrance mods made your own. Add does not use them but gives attack and ac penalties so you can work with them

[Joe the Rat]

I'd considered weapon speeds, but more as a matter of breaking ties: if you end up on the same initiative count, the faster weapon goes first. Speeds in the following order: ranged, fast, medium (including natural attacks), slow, spells.

[seandon4]

I've been meaning to update the supplement with a weapon speed option. However, is weapon speed meant to weigh on who wins init every round? or just something to consider when both sides tie on init?