Initiative & Spellcasting

[Nagora]

I've looked really carefully and I'm not seeing "add the result of the d6 to xxx" where "xxx" is anything at all. Nor is commencement linked to the score on the die anywhere. Nor is there any explanation of how to handle negative commencements due to high dexterity. Nor any reference to sub-round spells rolling over to the next round and how that interacts with subsequent initiative....etc.

Again, how is that Q&A conceptually possible under your interpretation?

I'm not sure what you mean but maybe it will become clear to either of us below.

I'm curious how it will be explained as being purposefully vague when it would have been so easy to answer it specifically, if wanting to clarify actions aren't assigned any specific segment.

I think the answer to this is that the system in the book only assigns segments when it needs to. In the case of melee Vs melee, there is no need to assign segments.

If all spell-like powers start at the beginning of the round, and all of them are 1 segment:

Spell-like powers have no casting time.

How is it determined that a blow happens in the same segment? Walk me through the mechanics of the DM knowing that the blow happened in the specific segment of the spell-like power.

This is a fairly meaningless question since spell-like powers have no casting time. Therefore the only question is one of order, not duration or delay. If Orcus rolls a 5 and you roll a 4, then Orcus' spell-like power will happen to you before you can respond.

I'll be curious if the interpretation gives low-"casting time" spell-like powers any advantage over normally-cast spells by mere mortals.

Spell-likes are superior both because they can't be interrupted (except by death), and because winning initiative is sufficient for them to go before opposing spells (or any other action) no matter how short the latter are.

Negora are you saying this (I will use an example to get the point across):

An MU has become separated from his group, so he's on his own (trying to get back to it).

MU exploring a tunnel runs into a ogre with a battle axe (10 feet away).

1. Surprise is rolled, Neither is surprised.
2. Declare: MU chooses to cast x, ogre will attack with axe.
3. MU roles a 5 the DM/monster a 4. In your interpretation high role goes first, so MU wins.
(you feel this role has nothing to do with the time within the round meaningful hits take place, just "high roll goes first".

High roll COMMENCES first, yes.

If x had been Magic Missile, it goes off on segment 1 and hits first.
If x had been fire ball it would have gone on segment 3 (and beat the ogre also).

If you're using weapon speeds, then p66/67 tells us that the battle axe in this case will strike on segment 3, so it would be a tie. If not using WS, then the fallback position is p65 and the ogre attacks on segment 5, after the fireball.

Clearly it's important that the magic user picks a spell before knowing the details of the initiative rolls.

If x had been a 5 segment spell it would have gone off on segment 5 (in this case the ogre would get a chance to hit (because he rolled a 4) the MU before he casts the spell (that started on segment 1 and completed on segment 5). If he missed the spell would go off, if he hit the spell would be lost, and no other action could be taken by the MU).

Except for a further discussion about whether weapons speeds are in use, yes.

Now lets suppose, the MU rolled a 3 and the monster rolled a 5. In this case the monster goes first (high roll goes first) and he hits the MU (since the spell starts on segment 1 he is interrupted even if its a 1 segment spell).

Yep. The system does not actually care what segment that ogre's attack comes on here - it's simply "early" and we don't have to waste time thinking about segments.

Is this how you feel initiative and spell casting works together?

Yes

To make it clear what SKA (and others) are saying is BtB "you go when the other guy roles" (so you go when the DM roles (the 1d6 indicates the segment within the 10 segments of the round) and the DM goes when you role). This is pieced together (not clearly spelled out in the rules anywhere).

You say "pieced together" I say "invented from scratch". Not unreasonably, I have to add. The rules as written are lacking clarity in the way that the Sahara is lacking in water. As Ska said, the d6-delay system is an attempt to put the parts together in a logical way.

However, lets say the ogre misses, and the MU wants to not cast the spell (he agreed to cast). What then? Personally, I would allow the PC to change his mind (after all the risk of being prone has passed). I would allow him to do another action (drink a potion of invisibility say, or use his dagger coated with death poison). But I wouldn't allow him to cast another spell (because now he's safe to cast longer and more deadly spells).

Indeed. This is the sort of thing I was thinking of when I called this system a house of cards - one has to keep piling new rules in to support the old rules, and none of it has any foundation in the books. It all start from Ska's "The fact there are casting times and initiatives [dice, I assume he means] leads one to logically use both" and when that goes wrong instead of searching for another logical explanation, the response is to keep patching up the deficiencies in that one.

I know many don't agree with this interpretation. But for what its worth, EGG confirmed it. He also stated the only time the MU looses his dex bonus is when he is casting the spell (so if he starts casting on segment 2 and his fireball goes off on segment 5, and the ogre can attack on segment 4, that 18 dex bonus is not in effect (but is in effect on segment 1 and segment 6 (just before casting the spell and after casting the spell).

EGG confirmed many things, including a statement I made about 1st segment casting, so unfortunately that gets us nowhere.

Nagora did you even bother to read the quotes I typed up from the DMG? No one is espousing adding a d6 amount of segments to anything. When you roll for initiative you are not adding that roll to anything.

I direct you to your earlier post up-thread:

So, if side A wins with a 4 and side B loses with 3 the magic-user member of side A must announce he is going to cast fireball prior to the initiative roll. In this case the magic-user starts casting on segment 3 but will not be able to complete the spell until segment 5. The magic-user could be disrupted on segment 4 when side B counter-attacks

So the 3-segment spell completes on segment 3+initiative(-1). A character with 12" movement will complete a 60' move down a corridor in 5+d6(-1) segments etc. If you prefer we can call this a "d6 delay" system instead but I don't see that as much different.

Commencement by initiative rolls is a core mechanic of the game and is clearly spelled out as I (and others) have repeatedly demonstrated by reference and quotes from the original core rule books.

"Clearly spelled out" and "DMG combat" are residents of two different parallel universes and the d6-delay system is like the Historical Jesus - lots of people assume it's there but never manage to point it out.

It would also be nice for you to explain how you get around the plain meaning of the cites from the DMG which spell out exactly how initiative is required for actions to commence.

"Plain meaning" Heh.

Just realized I did not answer your question about what if a magic user was struck on segment 2 when the magi-user can act on segment 4 and how is that bad for a magic-user.

My answer: If the magic-user is struck on segment 2 (prior to starting casting on segment 4) negative consequences would be the damage from the attack could kill or otherwise immobilize the caster preventing him from casting on segment 4. (Damage from attack, poison, etc.)

What if the caster is not killed? If the spell is still interrupted is is it still lost from memory? Looks like it's time to make up some more "missing" rules!

Let's look at another example. Side A consists of a single fighter advancing down a corridor. Side B is (initially) a magic user with web and an 18DEX fighter with a bow, stationed further from A than the magic user. We'll assume that A started movement last round so we don't have to worry about the complications you've introduced into the system around movement; his movement is continuous and furthermore at the start of this round he's decided to charge the magic user. At that rate it will take him 2 segments to reach the MU. Initiative rolls are 3 and 4 for A and B.

On what segment does the archer attack? On what segment does the (surviving) fighter attack the magic user? Is it 4? 3? 2? Something else? Which bit of text explains this?

In fact the BtB system is very clear: the archer won initiative with a modified score of 7 (which has no special meaning and therefore needs no explanation; it's simply higher than 2) and therefore COMMENCED actions 4 A-H before A COMMENCED steps 5 A-H (in this case, charging). Because he has no fixed time requirement, all the system needs to know or tell us is that A's timed action will CULMINATE in segment 2 but the arrows will strike before that. How much before? Who cares? We only care about the 2-segments because there's another spell in the offing. If it was archer Vs fighter the system literally doesn't bother telling us what segment anything happens on because that's bogging-down the game in detail which makes no difference to the end result.

Anyway. Let's replace the fighter with a second magic user armed with charm person. Same rolls.

Now, as I read it this is where the wheels really fall off your wagon and the relative simplicity of the book system shows. You want the charm to come on segment 3. Yet we know this: the fighter is doing something that takes LONGER than the spell and the spell caster has INITIATIVE, yet the spell caster still manages to be slower! The fighter will arrive on segment 2 (since his movement is continuous), the charm will go off on segment 3, and the web on 4 (or maybe 4 and 5, I'm not 100% sure how you deal with this situation).

As I read it the book system is that MU-B2's charm comes on segment 1, before the fighter reaches MU-B1 on segment 2, tying with the web spell (since "initiative is not checked at the end of charge movement" I don't use the dice to break this tie, but YMMV), so if the fighter makes their save against the charm then MU-B1 has to take one attack but he won't be interrupted in any case since initiative was tied.

Maybe a good way of understanding the book system is to look at ties. In that case we run down 4A-H and 5A-H in lock step. Fleeing comes before asking to parley, which is before turning undead, which is before commencement of movement, which is before striking blows, which is before grappling. But no one thinks this means that fleeing happens on segment 1 and grappling on segment 8. There's just a fracional difference.

When one side has initiative the same thing applies but now the difference is enough to make a noticeable advantage. But it's a slight advantage - it's not more than half a round difference which floods any effect from taking a 1 segment spell Vs a 3 segment spell. 4A-H certainly commence before 5A-H but only in the order of perhaps a second or two - which is life or death in combat - not 6-36 entire seconds. Even in the worse case everyone gets close enough to 60seconds of movement or spell casting, or shouting command words, that the system doesn't care about the difference and calls it 10-segments for everyone, not 5 to 10 segments.

Although I'm not 100% sure of my reading (some details still bother me), I am absolutely sure that there's no way to shoehorn the d6-delay system into the text in the DMG.

Edit: here's a link to a page on my blog which tries to clarify at least a little bit of the DMG's text in respect of why it's laid out the way it is: http://nagorascorner.blogspot.com/2015/ ... guide.html

[Ska]

Nagora---I will attempt to answer the questions you had that I could follow.

You asked what happened to the MU in my example where he was struck before his spell casting began on segment 4 if he was not killed or incapacitated. The answer is he did not lose his spell as he had not yet started casting it and he now on segment 4 begins casting it.

For whatever reason I am having a hard time understanding some of your questions.
I think your first scenario has Side A a fighter and Side B a MU with web and an archer fighter with 18 dex. A rolls 3 on initiative dice and B rolls 4. In your ex fighter A can charge and reach the Side B MU in 2 segments. (I think I have this right.)

The archer per the dex description in PHB has a +3 to his reaction adjustment/missile attack. We know from Page 64 DMG that the +3 will be applied to archer's attack roll and to his initiative. The archer acts 3 segments faster and will fire his arrows at the charging fighter on segment 1. Assuming Side A fighter survived the arrow attack Side B MU begins casting on segment 3 and will complete the spell on segment 4. Side A fighter begins his charge on Segment 4 (see page 61 DMG chart concerning actions during initiative which include charge) Side A fighter will reach Side B MU according to your set up on segment 5 as you said he is 2 segments away for his charge. The web spell goes off before Side A fighter can reach Side B MU.

I was too uncertain what your second set up was to answer.


Foster is correct in his above post that different people interpret the rules differently due to the confusing writing of Gygax. I do think though if one could have asked Gygax when the core rule books were published what the rules meant he could have told you.

I have another post recently where I ask if anyone actually played with Gygax during a convention or tournament who could tell us exactly how Gygax played back then.

Again, this is a btb discussion. I came up with house rules I use for when the rules were not clear or I disagreed with them. I am not answering using any of those house rules but trying to answer btb.

[EOTB]

Nagora, all you had to say was "I reject the cite as being as valid" if not interacting with its text. I didn't ask what you thought about those topics generally.

That said, I agree with Foster. One side just has to ifnore more text that doesn't fit to have their fun.

But the primary is that it's fun either way; the rest is friendly squabbles

[AxeMental]

I am always open to new interpretations of the rules that might be more correct. That’s the point of having such discussions. I will sometimes try them out to see how it works (who knows it might be superior fun wise).

[Matthew]

I can't believe you're all actually debating this yet again. The rules in the books are incoherent and contradictory, and when you add in secondary and tertiary sources it gets worse, not better. Decide what you want that works best for your games and use it and stop trying to convince everybody else that your preferred version is the "true" BTB version and that they've misunderstood or not studied it carefully enough or whatever.

Yes, indeed. Mind, I have to say that Nagora has presented the "best fit" for AD&D initiative in the sense that it makes sense of the most text. I disagree with some of his interpretations, but I cannot fault his overall logic.

[Ratbreath]

A couple of elements of text do have to be ignored to make it work, but having all spells start at the beginning of the round certainly has the appeal of keeping the round as a self-contained unit without a messy spillover of spells.

It also provides a template of what to do in the rare case of a spell started but not completed during surprise: treat it as a spell of however many segments are left.

[AxeMental]

A couple of elements of text do have to be ignored to make it work, but having all spells start at the beginning of the round certainly has the appeal of keeping the round as a self-contained unit without a messy spillover of spells.

It also provides a template of what to do in the rare case of a spell started but not completed during surprise: treat it as a spell of however many segments are left.

I wouldn't allow a spell to be started in surprise that wasn't within its time period (otherwise the spell caster would game the system and start casting long spells that would automatically go off on segment 1 or 2 of the following round. Which is exactly the problem with having spells start on segment 1 in the first place (the spell caster almost always goes first).

[EOTB]

A couple of elements of text do have to be ignored to make it work, but having all spells start at the beginning of the round certainly has the appeal of keeping the round as a self-contained unit without a messy spillover of spells.

If someone likes this aesthetically, or just doesn't want to track hanging chads, that's fine. But the trade-off is a significant mitigant on MU power.

I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone who ever whines about how MUs can take over a game, if they give them additional power to satisfy a sense of aesthetics.

(Note: not saying you've ever complained about MU power. But I do see people who don't make the connection between their choices and their effects.)

[Ratbreath]

I wouldn't allow a spell to be started in surprise that wasn't within its time period (otherwise the spell caster would game the system and start casting long spells that would automatically go off on segment 1 or 2 of the following round. Which is exactly the problem with having spells start on segment 1 in the first place (the spell caster almost always goes first).

It's definitely BtB to start a spell during surprise but not finish it.

Most spells cannot be cast in a single segment, although first level magic-user/illusionist spells are usually but 1 segment long, as are some other spells, and these spells are possible to use in a surprise segment. Other, longer casting time spells can only be begun in the first segment of surprise.

The problem is that doing so doesn't mesh well with the rest of the system unless spells normally start at the beginning of the round.

If someone likes this aesthetically, or just doesn't want to track hanging chads, that's fine. But the trade-off is a significant mitigant on MU power.

I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone who ever whines about how MUs can take over a game, if they give them additional power to satisfy a sense of aesthetics.

(Note: not saying you've ever complained about MU power. But I do see people who don't make the connection between their choices and their effects.)

I'm not sure how you're interpreting this working but I'd hardly characterize it as enabling MUs to take over a game.

Run with the assumption that the higher roll always wins initiative. Say the MU rolled a 3 and his opponent (be it with melee weapon, natural weapon, or missile) rolled a 4. The opponent won the initiative, and even if the MU is casting magic missile he still lost and gets interrupted. This means, necessarily, that the opponent got his attack versus the MU during segment 1 of the round. He must have or he wouldn't have been able to get his attack first.

If the MU had won the initiative with a 4 against the opponent's 3, then you do the equation with speed factors for melee weapons or you compare the casting time to the opponent's roll in the case of missiles or natural attacks.

So you definitely get interrupted if you lose initiative and you might not get interrupted if you win.

[EOTB]

Magic missile also can never spill over into another round absent some possible really odd corner case I'm not considering.

I'm talking about the effect on high-level play, with spells which are possible to go >10 segments if adding 1d6 segments to a high fixed casting time of 5+ segments. This does have an effect on combat casting choices. I've seen it happen.

The "magic users are too powerful" arguments aren't typically white rooming 5th level wizards getting off MM spells. The lower level the play, the less any initiative system will impact combat choices/results.

But you are right - most play doesn't get to this point anyway. Not that this stops the concern some have for mitigating the wizard in combat.

[Ratbreath]

I misunderstood your concern then. I thought you were referring to the notion of MUs having a general combat advantage of being able to get spells off before being attacked by starting all spells at the beginning of the round. Other people had expressed such a concern.

[Ska]

PHB section on initiative says, among other things, it determines the beginning of spell casting.
Nowhere, in any of the core rule books, does it say casting begins in segment one.

[Ratbreath]

PHB section on initiative says, among other things, it determines the beginning of spell casting.
Nowhere, in any of the core rule books, does it say casting begins in segment one.

I know. I'm not saying it's BtB. I did say that you have to ignore parts of the books to play it that way. My best estimation of how BtB initiative with spells works is in that example T. Foster proposed in that recent thread about arrow timing.

What I'm saying is that it has an appeal because it is neater and cleaner to do it that way and that most of the initiative system works very well with it.

[AxeMental]

I wouldn't allow a spell to be started in surprise that wasn't within its time period (otherwise the spell caster would game the system and start casting long spells that would automatically go off on segment 1 or 2 of the following round. Which is exactly the problem with having spells start on segment 1 in the first place (the spell caster almost always goes first).

It's definitely BtB to start a spell during surprise but not finish it.

Most spells cannot be cast in a single segment, although first level magic-user/illusionist spells are usually but 1 segment long, as are some other spells, and these spells are possible to use in a surprise segment. Other, longer casting time spells can only be begun in the first segment of surprise.

The problem is that doing so doesn't mesh well with the rest of the system unless spells normally start at the beginning of the round.

If someone likes this aesthetically, or just doesn't want to track hanging chads, that's fine. But the trade-off is a significant mitigant on MU power.

I have absolutely zero sympathy for anyone who ever whines about how MUs can take over a game, if they give them additional power to satisfy a sense of aesthetics.

(Note: not saying you've ever complained about MU power. But I do see people who don't make the connection between their choices and their effects.)

I'm not sure how you're interpreting this working but I'd hardly characterize it as enabling MUs to take over a game.

Run with the assumption that the higher roll always wins initiative. Say the MU rolled a 3 and his opponent (be it with melee weapon, natural weapon, or missile) rolled a 4. The opponent won the initiative, and even if the MU is casting magic missile he still lost and gets interrupted. This means, necessarily, that the opponent got his attack versus the MU during segment 1 of the round. He must have or he wouldn't have been able to get his attack first.

If the MU had won the initiative with a 4 against the opponent's 3, then you do the equation with speed factors for melee weapons or you compare the casting time to the opponent's roll in the case of missiles or natural attacks.

So you definitely get interrupted if you lose initiative and you might not get interrupted if you win.

OK reading your example makes it clear in your system that the high role always beats the low role (even the MU casting a 1 segment spell) so the person that hits the MU got in his hit on segment 1 just before the MU got his spell off. That seems odd though (because whenever there's an MU casting and he is beaten in initiative, that indicates he's been hit on segment 1 (which means that monster is always going to be lightning fast only when an MU is casting). Thats a weird thing to introduce due to movement around the room and other events unfolding within that minute time period that might effect the situation.

[Ratbreath]

OK reading your example makes it clear in your system that the high role always beats the low role (even the MU casting a 1 segment spell) so the person that hits the MU got in his hit on segment 1 just before the MU got his spell off. That seems odd though (because whenever there's an MU casting and he is beaten in initiative, that indicates he's been hit on segment 1 (which means that monster is always going to be lightning fast only when an MU is casting). Thats a weird thing to introduce due to movement around the room and other events unfolding within that minute time period that might effect the situation.

It's not my system. It's more like me trying to wrap my head around Nagora's system. I used a d10-based system for a long time and lately I'm doing my best to keep to BtB.

The MU got hit on segment 1 because it was a 1 segment spell. Spells with a longer casting time do not require that the action against the caster happened during segment and only relative time matters. So it's more like the attacker was lightning fast versus the caster if he won initiative versus a caster casting a quick spell. Which...he'd sort of have to be. Btb attacks against casters are always "faster" anyway, since they must happen during the 1st 6 segments.

In any event when there are multiple things going on besides spell casting they will interact strangely with each other. Consider the examples set forth lately involving 2 or more attack forms versus spell casting. Charging versus spell casting, like spell versus spell, only cares about fixed segments required for the action--both can ignore initiative rolls. If there's also missile fire against the caster and it wins the initiative then BtB the caster with a short casting time may be vulnerable to a charge which would have gotten to him after his spell went off if he were only facing the charger. Presumably because he's keeping an eye on the archer and dodging around for the best moment to cast.