I've written a few games - my very not updated itch.io page has 3 games that I submitted for game jams there (when I was dedicated to posting every game jam I could). It only lasted a quarter, before I stopped - but only because I started writing a REALLY long game. I'm still working on it. At first, I thought I'd submit it for the Havok Engine jam a couple of months back, but I realized that the Havok engine wasn't the right system for it. I needed to write something totally different.

But why though?

My favorite RPG growing up was Final Fantasy 10.  I played final fantasy 8, then 7, then 9, but 10 is the one that made me feel like I had just watched one of the greatest stories ever told. IT was weird cause it was somewhat linear, combat while deep was not very exciting visually (look at modern Persona games, Expedition 33, and Metaphor - I just started a run on that last one!), and there were already action packed games like God of War and what not that were starting to gain traction.

But there was one thing that always stuck in my brain as I got into D&D...

This turn bar. It would shift depending on what you did, and that's one of the things that D&D (and a bunch of other games) don't really play around with a lot. Initiative is seen as an necessary evil for combat focused TTRPGs. 

But what if initiative was just a little bit more dynamic. Involved in your turn? That's something I wanna have, but let's look at what we already have first.

D&D/Pathfinder

The most familiar system. It's one of those things that just work for the games, so people have never really changed it much. Simply roll a d20, add a modifier (like everything else in the game) and bigger number = better. Do it once, it takes a minute, but generally people phase out for a bit and do bio-things like eat or pee, and jump back into the battle. In digital games, this has been made seamless by having initiative be an almost instantaneous click. 

I love it from a mechanical perspective - combat in these TTRPGs are generally like a sub-game within the game. It's okay to have this break to switch from role-play brain to combat brain (not that the two have to be completely distinct, but that's another conversation for another day). There are only a few mechanics that play around with this system, but otherwise, it's reliable, understandable, and doesn't take up brain space.

The problem is long wait times between turns, overly predictable sequencing, and the only fix on the dungeon master's side is to have more actions/legendary actions, variety in monsters. If I group all the monsters, if I have too many monsters, they're gonna bog down their turn. If a players plan is thrown off, they're gonna need a lot of time to plan and think of what they wanna do. How do we make it fast?  

Side-based

OSR games and the JTTRPGs (like Break!! and Fabula Ultima) simplify this into easy two sides play style - your team vs enemy team. Back and forth. 

I solves the "loading" issue - it's immediate, and seamless between role-play and combat. It's even simpler to understand, and doesn't require much work to get started. That's it really - it solves a time issue. There's no other real pros to me.

That being said, sides can become a slog. Everyone acts on one turn. It doesn't technically solve the action economy issue. It's basically players are on initiative 11 to 20, and enemies are on initiative 1 to 10. Spotlight time may also be reduced, since often sides are also taken over by the players who take more time/speak up more, as opposed to having individual dedicated slots to each player.

It doesn't make initiative mechanically fascinating, but it does make the game smoother. Very OSR logic. It does what it intends to do.

Zipper

Bouncing back between player and enemies. Instead of all the players taking their turns simultaneously, we do one player, one enemy, another player, another enemy, etc. 

This also solves the loading issue like side based, it maintains the player turn spotlight, allowing players to shine more evenly. Not gonna lie, I do like this sort of system, and it encourages players to dedicate their team to different slots. The first of the systems mentioned where I think it becomes narratively and mechanically imperative for players to discuss their turn order. It keeps everyone engaged, but it requires a lot of coordination. DC20 and Draw Steel I believe use this system. It is very dynamic, and is definitely a step in the direction that I'm thinking of.

But FF10 doesn't do zipper. It moves. If you act fast, you can move sooner. How do we replicate that???

Card Based 

Dragonsbane uses a card-based initiative system that re-shuffles every round. This is something that I'm digging that perhaps could inspire more ideas on initiative. Everybody already knows how cards work, and people love shuffling and dealing cards.

Cards are drawn from 1 to 10 (or however many creatures need initiative), and some monsters draw more cards and act more, and simply go from highest to lowest.

Pros: Cards are a very game mechanics adaptable tool. I love cards. Cards are what make Gloomhaven's randomness mechanics so fun - if you keep pulling bad cards, you've got a higher chance each time to get better cards, and vice versa. Imagine trading cards for initiative with players or forcing enemies to trade. Just cause you draw a bad card now, doesn't mean you're stuck on this turn - you just gotta wait till the end of the round, and you'll get a new one. 

Cons: Dishing out cards is time consuming. That's it, we've brought the loading problem back, and now it's on every round. 

Will do a PT2

I still have three more types of initiative - Popcorn, Countdown, and "Speed Sandwich", - and a cheat with no initiative systems, which is what a lot of narrative heavy games go for, and how they fair in a combat system, then I'll pitch my proposed system for the game I'm working on. Hopefully I get to test it once before I post the next blog post!

Don't forget, who's awesome? You're awesome.