D&D initiative system

>beigeposting

>lindythread
>saged, reported, hidden

This British man isn't nitpicking hard enough, I can't take him seriously.

doesn't lindybeige not believe in climate change? didn't he get fired as an instructor for comments about force feeding lard to vegetarians?

he also talks out of his butt a lot and never seems to cite sources on anything.

Initiative should be 1d6+bonuses, and people should roll for every action in order of priority. Say a Lv1 fighter against a Lv1 Goblin, Fighter decides "Move to Goblin, hit him, and then intimidate him" and Gobbo decides "Hit fighter then 5FS away", and the fighter rolls 5,3,1 and Gobbo rolls 5 and 4, it would go like this.

5; Fighter closes in on Gobbo and Gobbo attacks at the same time, Fighter takes damage from successful attack
4; Gobbo leaps back a bit
3; Fighter wiffs completely
1; Fighter says "I'm gonna butter your bread" while grabbing his balls

That's how initiative should work. Very narrow, very unpredictable, and even a tiny bit of an edge is a big deal.

>Literally the same thread as last week
Can you fucking stop?
Is this some sort of new ebin meme to post about beige and his rambling about initiative? Suddenly this video gets reposted on regular basis since early January.

How new are you to seriosly reply to thread about lindybeige's initiative video?

Report this spam, sage and hide

It doesn't ultimately matter if it makes sense or not.

It's the player's responsibility to know the rules of the game/DM and abide by them. By agreeing to play, you're also agreeing to follow the said established rules.

irrc he got assblasted out of this universe on the dual wield video some time ago.

Just fuck off already.

Because discussion is more interesting than some guy who looks like the baddie in an episode of Law & Order SVU.

So... fastest way I've ever seen a thread get deleted is to post lewd content and the following:

Quests belong on Veeky Forums, but we should have a rule that bans settings that are not implicitly Veeky Forums related. 40k, original settings, and Star Wars/Trek quests are just fine. Anime series are right out. Also the day we lost quests there was an absolute overload of quests that started off, all of them anime. I'm certain that a bunch of anti-questfags created and ran a bunch of pseudo-quests that they ran in order to facilitate the ban.

Also Generals are just fine.

Here's your (you)

So you are new enough to consider it worth discussing, even if this video and issue was already discussed ad nauseam for last... well, intense beigeposting started somewhere around mid-November.
Nice knowing. Is it some sort of winter break in your country right now?

Sage and ignore, because there is literally no point keeping this thread up - in the archive there are currently TWO threads about the very same video.

What about builder games? They happen usually only in summer (since they take considerably more time to be played) and aren't quest, but rather a mix between civ game, quest and pure math game. They are definitely tg-related, but aren't questy enough to be quests.

Bonus point for Strielok's Post-Apo Civ Quest AND Post-Apo Builder, where one is, well, quest, while the other is a game on its own.

Remember to sage

yes he is right OP is a massive FAGGOT

>play a game with rules
>get upset when GM follows rules
>make a video to complain about it

he is just a fucking child.

reminder that Lindybeige claims:

>no one used swords, axes
>no one used horses
>no one used throwing knives
>no one used double strap arm shields
>no one used scythes
>no one used mail coifs
>no one used torches
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
>no one spoke French during the French revolution
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
>battle of Zama didn't happen
>Romans carried one pilum
>Vikings weren't real
>berserkers weren't real
>climate change isn't real
>stagnant social mobility isn't real
>castles were defended by three soldiers
>butted mail is better than riveted mail
>operation market garden was a success
>Napoleon was literally Hitler
>The Churchill was the best tank in WWII
>The English won the Hundreds Years' War
>british naval guns on Malta could lanuch projectiles into space

I'm pretty sure that over half of these assertions are inaccurate , user.

Off the top of my head:
>no one used horses
That video was about how odd cavalry sounds on paper when moving from a society without domesticated livestock.

>no one used throwing knives
In a military context is what he said.

>no one used double strap arm shields
I think his only assertion was that single strap was better, not that double weren't used.

>no one used scythes
That's true. Scythes, as in the farming implement, were never used as actual weapons unless someone was really fucking desperate. So-called 'war scythes' aren't anything like they're more rural cousins except that they both have curved blades.

>no one used mail coifs
In the method they're portrayed with in pop culture. His assertion was that they had more padding than what's seen in modern reproductions

>no one used torches
That was another thing with pop culture representations (you don't hold them in front of your face, you hold them over your head), and that indoors people would have used candles.

>Vikings weren't real
His point was that Vikings as a homogeneous society weren't ever a thing, which is true

>berserkers weren't real
Again with pop-culture representation

>castles were defended by three soldiers
There are a few cases of this actually happening, but it's important to remember they're being defended by a handful of soldiers and the rest of the castle staff.
I don't think Lindy is all that, but you can at least be accurate in your criticisms.

I liked his video about forests.

Yeah, he's right. Initiative and turn-based combat, as it is in D&D, isn't realistic, and the example he uses shows this.

Consider this: a round is supposed to be six seconds. He runs up to them, casts a spell, throws them back. That should take up six seconds, and they shouldn't be able to stand up, charge back, and attack in that round, but the rules allow them because the rules are flawed.

He's right in how it should be done: people should take their turns all at once, and then the GM should determine how it all happens (with dice rolls, of course). In cases where two actions would contradict themselves (such as enemies charging a caster to attack and the caster charging and using a spell that throws them back), initiative could be used to determine who gets to go first. If I remember right, 5e does have variant rules for this, including rules for weapon speed.

And he's also right that Dexterity doesn't really tie into initiative, and it doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

>tries to abuse the initiative system
>complains about it when it bites him in the ass

That said, it can be a bit hard to get used to. The proper thing would have been to ready an action to cast that spell when the baddies got close during their turn.

He has interesting opinions. Ask for citation though.

As for that Napoleon one, he's not far off. He let his generals feed their armies by taking food and fodder off the locals... meaning that the locals starved. The British, in comparison, would hang their looters and paid for food taken from the local populace. Napoleon also championed the use of the column on the battlefield... which, whilst effective, caused extreme casualties in his own forces. Almost everyone else fielded their troops in line on the field, which increased the amount of guns they could bring to bear and reduced casualties in combat.

>Games are not real life
Woah

Dex modifies Reflexes, so taking that into account is should modify Ini too. Would make more sense if it were Wis (Perception)? maybe, but that becomes Clerics even more OP.

Str is important but not as important as Dex for melee attacks? sure, but that turns martials into MAD classes and even more shit compared to Casters.

You CAN'T fix D&D, is fucked up from the get to go, anything you do will fuck up something and most of the time it's martials who pay it more than anyone.

(Made me reply)
Pretty much everyone else but the British forgave looting. Large armies could not be supplied adequately over long lines of communication. Wellington's army was very small, and surrounded by angry Spaniards had made him think twice.
Other nations also used deep order and the French often formed line, fighting formation had nothing to do with casualties.

>"I'm not going to just watch them stagger to their feet and charge me I'm off I'm scarpering"
GM: "Well it's not your initiative it's not your go."
>"I'm not going to just stand there!"

Great, by that logic your enemies wouldn't have just stood there and let you blast them away with magic. If you say you can react to and avoid being attacked by your enemies they can do the same with your attacks. Enjoy never getting into melee because they keep backing away from you or darting past you before you can swing.

The combat rules are an abstraction. Everyone's actions are happening at once, but you see them one at a time in the same way that during a big fight scene the camera cuts from one character to another, each of them throwing punches or shooting their guns or whatever. What's actually happening is NOT that he blasts them away, then stands there like a statue as they run up. His next turn is already starting up - the part where he runs away - he just doesn't describe it just yet because the GM is asking the other players "Okay, and what are YOU doing?" If you had a constant back and forth of attacking and dodging and taking actions between you and your enemy, NOBODY ELSE at the table gets to do anything!

>"If it's not your turn you might as well read a book, you're not playing the game."
He has no idea what interrupt actions and reactions are. There are plenty of things you can do when it's not your turn, they're just smaller and limited because your turn represents the bulk of your attention and efforts.

>"I want it to be completely freeform... (gives long example)."
You mean a system where the loudest player who talks over everyone else gets to take the most actions? Awesome, I'm sure this won't irritate the hell out of the quieter players and completely ruin the concept of action economy. Enjoy a game where one Fighter gets ten attacks in a battle and the other gets two because he's not as obnoxious and isn't hogging the spotlight.

>You CAN'T fix D&D, is fucked up from the get to go, anything you do will fuck up something

This. It's like some of the systems I deal with at work, I started working there and all I saw were broken stupidly set up services, but when I tried changing something it broke something else, then fixing that broke something else and after a couple of years of this we had a new IT helpdesk guy start, his response was to point out how bad some of it was and I found myself saying 'don't you dare touch that faggot, it kinda sorta works fine until you touch it!'

lindybeige is the obnoxious that guy player, you see why he has no problem with hogging th spotlight right?

>no one used swords, axes
swords are expensive, axes were mainly tools but proved to be effective
>no one used horses
cavalry is a weird idea on paper
>no one used throwing knives
throwing knives is a hard thing to do
>no one used double strap arm shields
double straps are worse than single straps
>no one used scythes
as weapons
>no one used mail coifs
people wore a padded hat under
>no one used torches
when traveling distances over open ground
>Pikemen didn't fight each other
pikemen didn't clash in huge pushy pushy bouts, they had standoffish poke battles
see records from battle of pavia or any big battle involving many pikes
>no one spoke French during the French revolution
what
>no one spoke Latin during the Roman Republic
what?
>battle of Zama didn't happen
what?
>Romans carried one pilum
they drop their other pilum in battle after the skirmish ends
>Vikings weren't real
vikings were fairly isolated tribes with various motivations and differing cultures
>berserkers weren't real
berserkers weren't killing machines that took on entire armies
>castles were defended by three soldiers
easily defendable positions don't need more men than neccessary to defend them
>butted mail is better than riveted mail
i disagree with this vastly since butted just fucking breaks on you the moment you take any sort of oblique mipact
>operation market garden was a success
debatable but i disagree with this one too
>Napoleon was literally Hitler
napoleon wasn't the benevolent leader that everyone likes to see him as, he was a ruthlessly efficient god of war
>The Churchill was the best tank in WWII
blind arrogance from his side, churchill wasn't actual shit but it is not good stuff
>The English won the Hundreds Years' War
debatable but more or less a pyrrhic victory for the french desu
>british naval guns on Malta could lanuch projectiles into space
british naval guns on malta are large

Maybe on the losing end of a one punch knockout.

You forgot
>Katana didn't vary since it's inception
>Katana are shit
>Samurai used leather and wooden armor, metal armors don't exist in Japan
>Japanese bows are shit and anything that says otherwise is false because
>Longbow could go through a tank

Of course, just wanted to say something just in case a foolish GM was 'inspired' by his idea.

Dexterity in every edition of D&D is a representation of physical co-ordination, agility, speed, reflexes, and precision. It makes perfect sense for the physically faster character to strike the first blow in battle, just as it makes sense for the physically stronger character to win an arm-wrestling competition. Furthermore, in some editions level and/or experience and training DO contribute towards one's initiative bonus, completely invalidating his complaint.

He's kind of a moron when it comes to opinions about... well, anything, really. That's why you should never watch his non-armsandarmor videos.

That said, he is still a historian by trade and knows more about medieval arms and armor than whoever wrote the PHB, or indeed most of the grognards on Veeky Forums, so he's a decent source of information on that kind of stuff.

>doesn't lindybeige not believe in climate change?
What kind of not believing it?
The "climate isn't changing at all" kind?
The "humans had zero effect on the climate change and is all part of the cyclic climate change that has been happening on Earth forever"?
The "humans only had a minimal effect in the climate change and the rest is mostly part of the cyclic climate change"?
Which kind is he?

Source? Because AFAIK dual-wielding is really not as historically common/effective as pop culture likes to believe.

He may be autistic as all heck, but he does have a point. You can easily do away with initiative rolls if you have a party/DM who trust each other and aren't anal retentive.

Berserkers WEREN'T real, you idiot. They're Viking mythology.

>It makes perfect sense for the physically faster character to strike the first blow in battle
No, it doesn't. Armed combat is about out-maneuvering and outsmarting your opponent, not out-speeding them.

>In some editions
You mean 4th edition. In all other editions, it's a flat dexterity check, unless you take specific options that improve it.

Probably the first kind, he's an idiot. But he does know more about medieval combat than the typical RPG player.

His big argument is that he has never heard anyone explain the link between increased CO2 levels and an upward trend in global temperatures.

Litteraly worse than vargposting.

>Flash vs Stephen Hawkins
>Of course Stephen should land the first hit

You really couldn't argue with anything but the strawiest strawman in the history of strawmen?

The whole notion of "turns" in battle is an abstraction. If you deny that, you're a moron. Combat is composed of a careful series of probes, strikes, parries, blocks, and counterattacks.

Wrong.

If your opponent is faster, he will be able to act, react, and outmaneuver you before you can effectively do the same.

Only to an extent. Unless the disparity is enormous (in which case the slower guy should probably not be fighting in the first place), every action can be reacted to.

Even if you were right, there's no reason for the faster guy to WANT to attack first. Attacking first does not give you any sort of advantage unless you're using accurate, multiple-shot ranged weapons. Every non-stupid battle begins with feints.

>I'm bussy doing something in reality no one does
Casting a spell, yeah, I get your point

>Every non-stupid battle begins with feints.
neck yourself. Do you have any proof?

>Berserkers WEREN'T real, you idiot. They're Viking mythology.
They were real you moron. What most people think berserkes were is wrong. They were champions, retinues working for lords, fighting duels, etc.

Initiative is D20+Dex
Dex, to have any mayor importance needs to be much higher compared to your opponent, if Billy has Dex 14 and the Goblin has Dex 10 that doesn't matter, in the vast majority of rolls that +2 will not matter, for Dex to really matter has to be +5 or more and that's the difference between an average as fuck person and a gold medallist in a Dex field

Also Dex is not just fast (in fact isn't fast at all, no matter how much Dex you have you won't be moving faster, making more attacks per turn,etc) Dex is hand eye coordination, reflexes, accuracy, etc in D&D. Fuck, Dex modifies Hiding skill

>Brings the turns int the conversation when I didn't even mention them or complained about them
So to counter my strawman you used a goalpost move?

Attacking first means ending the combat in D&D

>no reason for the faster guy to WANT to attack first
The guy who can react faster can make the choice. The person who reacts slower does not get the choice. and no, every battle does not begin with deints. Every battle begins with someone chosing to make a move or not. Feints are used to see where your enemies weakness is, unless you are attackign by surprise, already know your enemy's weaknesses, or a half dozen other situational modifiers which come down to "am I faster and more capable, more capable, or just faster?" Speed is a factor in feinting too - the person who can react quicker will still win. Saying speed means nothing shows that you actually have no idea how combat really works in real life, much less in an RPG.

I don't want to cite personal experience in an anonymous setting because obviously you have no obligation to believe me. I'd say "please trust me" but this is Veeky Forums.

If you'll give me SOME benefit of the doubt, I have years of martial arts experience. You typically want to start one-on-one duels by testing your opponent's reaction, not merely striking to hit. It's easy to block most attacks, so planning for your opponent's defenses is key.

"Berserker" literally means "bear shirt," and Lindy isn't wrong on that count. It comes from legends about people wearing bear skins and taking on bear aspects in battle, ranging from gaining in ferocity to transforming into bears. Also appearing in primary sources are úlfheðnar, "wolf-hides."

In real life, it referred to a set of shamanistic practices based on totem animals. But "uncontrolled fury warrior" and "champion" are both probably inaccurate interpretation.

Note that we don't actually have as much information as we'd like on a lot of these topics, and most popular culture is based on Snorri Sturlson's work, which has been largely discredited.

>ITT: D&D combat isn't realistic.

What else is new?

It wasn't a goalpost move, I just didn't clarify sufficiently why it was relevant. You talk about the faster person "going first" as if there's an order of actions and you won it. Battle is a lot more fluid than that, and the faster person will often NOT go first, on purpose.

Physical speed is important, but so is mental speed. I never said "speed means nothing," that's another strawman. All I said was that the faster person doesn't necessarily strike first, or even attack first, which you seem to agree with.

>What else is new?
Veeky Forums is a bunch of autists who are willing to argue over anything and I'm no exception.

>I have years of LARP experience

fuck off lindybeige

>Projecting this hard

>I have years of martial arts experience

>As for that Napoleon one, he's not far off. He let his generals feed their armies by taking food and fodder off the locals... meaning that the locals starved. The British, in comparison, would hang their looters and paid for food taken from the local populace.
French troops were ordered to pay for the fodder they took if the local populace was willing.

Napoleon also championed the use of the column on the battlefield... which, whilst effective, caused extreme casualties in his own forces
This is not true, even in some battles were Napoleon loses he has less casualties than the Allies. Look at Leipzig.

See, that's what i get for asking people to believe me on an anonymous Mogolian crocheting board. Like I said, you're not obligated to believe me, and if you don't, feel free to just disregard everything I said.

I've never done LARP. Anyway it seems you're correct that you would not want to attack first and you would try to test your opponent.

So Lindybeige is basically a stand up routine where he criticises 3e D&D mechanics he learned from a series of campaigns all of them set in the forgotten realms setting?

I've never done LARP either.
And I appreciate you saying that second sentence. This entire thread should really be summed up as "D&D combat is an unrealistic abstraction, and that's okay."

Dex is also mental speed, that's why it's the modifier of Save Reflexes.

I think he's wrong because the actions in a turn of a Roleplaying game are all supposed to be taking place simultaneously.

>American daytime hour
>They took the bait
>They didn't sage

And I'm suppose to not consider burgers as idiots...

... which was one fuck-huge factoid combined with made-up shit

>hurr hurr lookit me I'm not American hahah dumb burgers
I smell inferiority complex.

I smell morons who bumped this thread and now argue for the sake of it.
Which coincidently corresponds with daytime in States. Hardly a coincidence, since this shit happens in EVERY beigeposting thread which didn't reach page 12 before ADT

So sorry if you feel ashamed of being stupid, but that's just reality.

>Proud of being American
Were you saying something about inferiority complex?

You mean the one where he claimed it's OK to cut down all threes around the world, because that's absolutely normal and nothing wrong comes with that? Or how he used England as some sort of global example, without pointing out it's English-specific type of behaviour and model of forestry economy?

No, user. This entire thread should be summed up in "Stop doing beigeposting, because it's bad and we had this thread 3 days ago anyway. Repost, sage and hide"

The world doesn't end with America. For all you know I could be anything but American. I could be posting from Brazil. I could be posting from Canada. I could be a Jap with insomnia. I could be fucking Kim Jong Un for Christ's sake.

And besides, correlation does not imply causation, faggot. Ice cream sales and crime rates seem to rise at almost exactly the same time every year, does that mean one is the cause of the other?

>Being this tier insecure when people call your nationality bunch of stupid faggots
Keep digging

Are you going to provide a coherent counterargument are are you going to keep projecting?

Standing up from prone (thunderwave doesn't even knock its targets prone in the first place) only costs half your movement speed in 5e. Speed is on average 30, so 15 to stand up and another 15 to close the distance the wizard pushed them in.

Do you even think before blathering all over the keyboard your shit opinion?

>Not providing any arguments himself
>HURR YOU GOT NOTHING
So do you, so what's the big problem, burger boy?

Adding to what everyone already corrected about your utter nonsense:
1. You gleefully glossed over what makes Hitler Hitler (the whole genocide master race thing, which Napoleon never forced. In fact, his attempts to assimilate the Jewish population got him labeled the Anti-Christ by the Russian Orthodox Church (you think I'm fucking joking?)).
2. Nobody, not even his enemies, saw him as a proto-Hitler (except maybe Alexander and the Russians, but Alexander was insane. His predecessor Paul was actually content to let Napoleon have Europe so he could focus on India). He was widely respected to the point where he was allowed to retain his (entirely formal) title as emperor even after his exile, and after rumors had reached Europe that he had to burn his own furniture at Longwood for warmth there was an outrage among the elites of Europe (not just France, Europe as a whole). Do you think anyone would've cared if Hitler somehow survived and starved to death? Europe flipped its shit over Napoleon being slightly uncomfortable. And let's not forget such events as Napoleon III riding his way to imperial status on his uncle's name (compare the family of Göring, not even Hitler himself, sterilizing themselves) and actually got Queen Victoria to visit his grave in a respectful manner (can you imagine a US president or a Soviet Chairman paying their respects to Hitler?).

He was a threat to the Ancien Régime, but unlike Hitler he was beloved by his people and even his worst enemies couldn't help but begrudgingly respect him. The whole "literally Hitler" shit is mostly British Francophobia (and even the hypernationalistic Churchill denied the Hitler-Napoleon connection).