OOC Chat

Welcome back Jabes. Glad you're feeling better and hope you see a full recovery soon! Glad you're back because sSomehow I managed to make Jarveena miss a shot, which is pretty hard given that with precision strike, you have on average +13.5 to hit!

I've been thinking about initiative in PbP. I'm sure this comes to no surprise to you all: it's real sticking point in this medium. Rolling initiative is supposed to be an exciting moment in D&D, but here it can be the start of a big pause in the game as our asynchronous schedules line up.

What are some solutions you have seen in other games, or thought of yourself? I'm looking for a solution that doesn't negate or overpower class features. For example, I've heard of DMs letting all players go first, which is super convenient and results in much faster combat, but this negates the +5 initiative of the Alert feat and makes the Assassinate feature for that rogue subclass stronger than it was meant to be.

I am interested in any other suggestions for adapting 5e to make smoother to play in PbP without watering down the core system.

I roll for my players at the beginning of combat, using their initiative mod., that way it keeps things flowing, still leaves luck involved, and keeps the features that benefit initiative. After the rolls, I group them into separate groups that can act in any order within that group:

I've been in games where the DM rolls initiative for everyone, including the players, and takes the average result to determine which side goes first. This still means it's initiative by sides, but it allows for modifiers to apply.

Other DMs break up the players into groups based on when the NPCs or monsters go. So Group A would have all the players who rolled high on initiative, followed by a monster or group of monsters, followed by Group B of players, and so forth. Each group's members could act in any order.

I do side-based initiative. Take the average (or max) modifier for each side and make a single roll, then take turns

These are great suggestions! I'll paraphrase to make sure I understand:

1. RAW initiative. As per the PHB. The game is designed for this, but it can be a problem for PbP.

2. Side-based Initiative: DM rolls initiative for each side using the average or max modifier from that side. Prioritizes smooth play, almost surely guaranteeing players can post when their schedule works without holding anyone up. However, the averaging and simplicity seems like it will dilute the mechanics somewhat (I'm not sure how much - maybe it doesn't matter as much as I think?).

3. Before-and-After Initiative: DM rolls initiative for each PC, and the monsters as a single group. The PCs are divided into 2 groups, those that rolled higher than the monsters and those that rolled lower. Within the group, PCs can act in any order. Allows for mechanical bonuses to shine more and makes some accommodation for players posting when their schedule allows. There is still some potential for the game to hang up on scheduling conflict, but less than rolling initiative RAW.

Which option would people prefer? We can do a trial run of it and reflect on how it plays after a few combats.

Sounds about right. I have found that (in general) people haven't been opposed at all to side-based. Anything that speeds up the process is OK with me

Yeah I'm fine with whatever you're most comfortable with.
A little explanation to clear up number 3 more, it works the same as RAW initiative but makes it more pbp friendly. There can be multiple groups, depending on the amount of grouped monsters and the rolls.

I personally like side-based initiative, but honestly any method is fine by me.

What also helps is DM fiat that an absent player will be temporarily run by the DM, similar to what we did for Jarveena. You could establish a rule that if a player does not post for 2 days when it's their turn, the DM will perform their actions.

I guess I haven't publicly stated it, but in a 2-posts-per-day game, I feel it is fair to give a player 24 hours to conduct their turn before I perform it for them, counting from when the previous player posted their turn.

I'm willing to try out side-based initiative with averaged initiative modifiers for a few combats. The party would have an average modifier of (2+2+4+4+9)/5 = +4. It seems like a non-issue for most people either way, so let's go with the route that facilitates smoothest play.

Smoothness and pacing are top priorities for me. If anyone has any other suggestions for enhancing the game (in or out of combat), don't hesitate to suggest it.

I like side initiative a lot, too, for the record!

I personally really like method #2 for PbP, but do recognize that some mechanics will be rendered less potent. But as you said, it appears to be a non-issue at least with this particular group.

Different DM's handle this differently, so I'm asking: how do you handle recovery of spent arrows, Len? Thanks!

Like the PHB: spend a minute after combat to regain 1/2 of your spent ammo, rounded down. I believe it is under the Ammunition property i the weapons section, but I don't have my PHB handy at the moment. Sound good?

Yes sir! :-)

Just to clarify, we should wait for Moss to post first, then all of us can post our actions for Round Two?

Thanks for asking. No, we will just let deadpool_qc take 2 turns in a row to keep the game from backing up. Go ahead and take your turn.

Well, that nat 20 feels good after Jarveena's last miss! She's totally zeroing in on the trog that's got Leatha's rapier.

HypCo, did Ryte stay up at the surface with the funeral pyre?

Yes, I figured the distance plus the sound of the water he wouldn't hear a thing.