Topic: Initiative comparison

[Ginger McMurray]

When I played forever ago we used the companion's initiative system. You roll init, start at 200, and work your way down. We never used the standard one in C&CL so I have no way to compare the two. Which do you use and why?

[Hurin]

We used to use the original phased system from Arms Law. Now we use the action point system from RMU, because it is imho simpler and easier for players to understand.

[Ginger McMurray]

We used to use the original phased system from Arms Law. Now we use the action point system from RMU, because it is imho simpler and easier for players to understand.

Can it be merged into RM2?

[Hurin]

We used to use the original phased system from Arms Law. Now we use the action point system from RMU, because it is imho simpler and easier for players to understand.

Can it be merged into RM2?

Probably, but it would take a little work..

The RMU action point system is similar to the old % activity system, just with action points that basically each represent 25% activity. You get four of them per turn, to add up to 100%. You also get one free 'instantaneous action' per turn, to represent actions that took no activity, such as instantaneous spells. All of this allows you to do away with different phases for different types of actions, and you can just allow characters to take their actions in turn, whenever they have points to spend. It also allows you to do away entirely with declarations and the declaration phase.

You could just convert the percentage values, from the companions' initiative system, into action points, and you'd probably be good to go.

[Spectre771]

We use a simplified initiative system.  D100 (Open ended up and down) +QU bonus.  Highest value goes first.  A fumble indicates failure to act this round, basically caught flat-footed that round.

A player with a higher initiative and defer his action until later in the sequence and choose to act/react before a particular PC or NPC.

We roll new initiatives each round.

[Ginger McMurray]

We use a simplified initiative system.  D100 (Open ended up and down) +QU bonus.  Highest value goes first.  A fumble indicates failure to act this round, basically caught flat-footed that round.

A player with a higher initiative and defer his action until later in the sequence and choose to act/react before a particular PC or NPC.

We roll new initiatives each round.

Have you used the system in 2nd edition companion I? That sounds almost identical. I definitely like simple.

[Spectre771]

It was either from RMC-I or RMC-III.  Resolving rounds in RM are already somewhat long, we went as simplified as possible just to speed things along.

[Jengada]

I'm not sure if what I use is from a companion, a home-brew, or both. I went to just d10+(QU bonus/5). If multiple combatants have the same initiative, those acting where they stand (as opposed to moving across the room) go first, and among those, the one with the higher QU bonus goes first.
The part that's definitely home-brew is that I allow a combatant to act before their rolled initiative. For each segment they advance their action, they take a -10 on whatever that action is. That's in addition to melee penalties for having moved, etc. So far, in three years of using this system, only one person has used this rule, once.

[Majyk]

Spectre and I ran similar games, LOL.

Samesies.
We used the Arms Law phased system, declaring the next phase and having people use up their percentage activities as normal to know how much less activity someone had left to use for the round(mainly for moving or static actions that wasn’t combat/spells).

[yammahoper]

2d10+Qu mod.  Snap actions (-20 mod) at init+10. Normal actions (+0 Mod) at Init. Deliberate actions (+10 mod) at Init -10. I count down from 45.

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

For physical actions, 1d100 (not open-ended) + QU stat + QU bonus + weapon modifier (+25 if no weapons). For mind actions (such as spell-casting), 1d100 (not open-ended) + RE stat + RE bonus + 40.

[PiXeL01]

We always used d100 + ((Qu+Me)/2), Memory in this case being Eloquence. Everyone had one go. GM would call out modifiers if needed.

1- Declare Action and Parry
2- Roll Ini
3- working down from the top

[Ginger McMurray]

We always used d100 + ((Qu+Me)/2), Memory in this case being Eloquence. Everyone had one go. GM would call out modifiers if needed.

Eloquence?

[Jengada]

I thought I was using a system from a Companion, and maybe I am, but I don't see it in the thread.
We use d10 +(QU bonus/5). I have a(nother?) house rule that says you can advance your initiative but you take a penalty on your action (=use part of your action for the round) for doing so. Each segment you advance is a -10, so you can move up 4 segments before you are no longer able to make a melee attack, for example. And if a spell caster advances their action to cast a spell, they have an Extraordinary Spell Failure Roll at the end of casting.
It's worked well, so far, and very rarely does anyone advance their action.

[Majyk]

Eloquence was a way to add Spell User Speed/Speed of Thought to Init vs just Speed of Body(QU).

It was in a RoCo(II OR III, I think?).

[Ginger McMurray]

That explains why it's a mystery to me. I've never heard of that.

What's it like? Maybe I should integrate it into my game.

[farseer22]

I haven't played for a LONG time, but when I did we used CEATs with some minor modifications. It tracks combat second by second, rather than rounds. You roll your initiative (2d10 + Qu iirc), this gives you a modifier to how long an action takes. Each action would take x.x number of seconds. So you just add that to the current time. At each 10 second mark round based things would happen (bleeds, stuns wear off etc..) It took us 2-3 combats to get the system worked out but once we got it, it was worth it.

[Ginger McMurray]

I haven't played for a LONG time, but when I did we used CEATs with some minor modifications. It tracks combat second by second, rather than rounds. You roll your initiative (2d10 + Qu iirc), this gives you a modifier to how long an action takes. Each action would take x.x number of seconds. So you just add that to the current time. At each 10 second mark round based things would happen (bleeds, stuns wear off etc..) It took us 2-3 combats to get the system worked out but once we got it, it was worth it.

That sounds interesting. Link?

[OLF, i.e. Olf Le Fol]

Eloquence was a way to add Spell User Speed/Speed of Thought to Init vs just Speed of Body(QU).

It was in a RoCo(II OR III, I think?).

RoCo. III, p35, and it was actually a mere renaming and redefinition of MEmory, with no relationship to initiative (well, it wasn't even mentioned as an option to use it for initiative at least).

[Hurin]

That's actually a pretty cool idea.

It is clear that the idea of Eloquence was an initiative (sorry for the pun!) to help out the Memory stat, which had limited uses and was one of the least important stats.

I like the idea of offering it as an alternative initiative stat, though I think perhaps Reasoning might be more apt. I have heard that studies show that initial reaction time is quite strongly correlated with general intelligence (movement speed of course is more a function of dexterity/agility), so Reasoning would make sense, especially for spellcasters.