Saturday, October 19, 2013

For discussion: do we even need initiative in Holmes Basic?

For discussion: do we even need initiative in Holmes Basic? Is it just a time suck? Would it make everything faster to just use something like "simultaneous initiative" where every one gets a turn to go, even if they die that round?

6 comments:

  1. Instead of simultaneous initiative, you could just use "deferred Holmes initiative": high Dex still goes first, but most of the time, you don't care about order of actions, so you don't check unless it matters (enemy put to sleep or killed before attack, frex.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Funny that you bring up that there is no specific rule for you that defines Holmesian. Been reading through Holmes a lot lately, and I have to agree. Maybe its just the nostalgia hit, but something about the text, art and presentation of Holmes just really brings out a sense of wonder for me.
    You could make a case for Init by Dex order, or the scroll making rules, or the Zenopus dungeon, but for me the whole is more than the sum of its parts.

    ReplyDelete
  3. That post is actually by someone else (Timrod), but I agree with him, and you about the whole being more than the sum. For me the essence of Holmes Basic is retaining the flavor of the original game but making it easier to approach. Gygax credited Holmes with the idea of a "Basic Set", so in a sense all later versions of Basic are variations on Holmes Basic.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'll eventually go back to Holmes for my games but when I do I won't be using Dex-based initiative. Initiative is useful, usually at the beginning of fights when figuring out who goes first. After that you may as well go simultaneously.

    There aren't any rules that will give you a Holmesian feel, although the further you get from the blue book the more you dilute it. It's more important to have the right attitude to the game and rules.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The trouble with acting simultaneously is that it can get confusing, and some actions may have no effect because someone else's action supersedes it. Taking turns to act makes book keeping easier, and if you're going to do it you may as well use Dexterity as the determining factor. The only simpler method is to go by the order of seating around the table, but then who goes first, the players or the referee?

    I use Holmes initiative, except I don't bother to roll 1d6 if there is a tie - instead, participants with the same Dexterity act simultaneously. Holmes initiative does have one important effect in play, in that it gives thieves an advantage because they are most likely to have a high Dexterity score. I admit that may be biased because thieves are my favourite class!

    ReplyDelete
  6. From a practical perspective, I don't think simultaneous is a good option. You can do it in a wargame where players write moves down and then the moves get revealed simultaneously, but that doesn't lend itself well to the RPG side of the house.
    In my experience, when you don't have some sort of initiative order it creates low-grade chaos at the table as players jockey to get their actions resolved. Whether you use a die roll or DEX order, it provides an orderly means to resolve player actions.
    Personally I prefer an init die, since it gives the players a chance to roll some more bones - always a crowd pleaser, especially when they roll high (the thrill of victory!) or low (the agony of defeat!).

    ReplyDelete