By Jason Campbell
I’d thought about running 5e without initiative order in combat and instead having every character’s turn happen simultaneously, round by round. I thought about it again when I watched The Informal Games’ YouTube video called “No Initiative! Parallel Actions”. Avoiding initiative not only simplifies the game but makes it go smoother and possibly faster. But can it work in a 5e based game?
The 5e Round Problem
In 5e based games the main problem with simultaneous actions is that each character’s action includes not only an action such as an attack, but movement as well. What happens if a monster uses their turn to attack a character and then move, but the character says they move away on their turn and after that attack at range. The player of that character may expect that their character moved before the monster attacked, avoiding the attack entirely.
Truly Simultaneous
One possibility in a 5e game is to agree that all movement and actions occur simultaneously in the chaos of battle. In the above scenario, a monster attacks and determines its success and then moves. Then the character moves and determines their attack’s success, ignoring whether the order of action might seem opposed. At the end of the turn, all combatants end up where their movement would leave them, then move on to the next round.
This method allows for chaotic simultaneous action with the understanding that combat in the game is an abstraction. Some players might still find the core logic makes the game less fun though.
Move Turn, Act Turn
Another method would be to separate movement from actions, so you’d have a movement round, resolve all movement, and then an action round. This won’t avoid all strange situations but might make more sense to some players. It is quite different from the rules as written, and that might be objectionable for some players.
Conclusion
I worked out the above options to allow for the possibility of simultaneous actions, which mirrors the chaos of battles. If your players have no objection to the rules as written method of alternating turns, there’s no reason to consider other methods. There’s no perfect method to reflect combat in real life, as all combat in games requires some level of abstraction.
On the other hand the core goal for most players is to have fun, so your group might try some of the above methods for a session and evaluate how they work afterwards, deciding how the rest of the game should be played.
What do you think? Are you interested in playing with simultaneous actions? Let us know!
About The Author
