Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

I tried searching but did not find this anywhere else, so adding one of my house rules here: another use for Initiative: when there is a tie in AdjDX, the side with Initiative goes first. If more than one player on the same side has the same AdjDX, then, if they can't agree, in order of Base DX, IQ, AdjMA, ST, Alphabetically by name. Saves a LOT of die rolling.

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

Something like that would be quite sensible. Any other comments?

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

I just roll a die (even or odd).

Using initiave makes sense too.

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

Hi everyone, Helborn.
I actually have been using this as a house rule in my campaign. It works well.

Warm regards, Rick.

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

Yeah, tied adjDX comes up often enough (and even ties on the tie-breaker die roll) that dropping it all together would definitely speed things up. And I like that it bumps up the significance of winning Initiative a bit.

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

Makes sense, since tied adjDX is frequently a problem and requires extra dice rolls quite often.

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

Yes, as with initiative, it might be best to word this rule such that in the case of a tie, the figure that whose side has won the initiative roll, and in a similar manner, has the *option* to go before the tied opponents. There are often situations in which he may want to delay acting.

Technically, if stated he is considered "faster", he could invoke the "delay your action" rule anyway, but it might make sense to avoid any confusion by not *making* the figure with the initiative go first.

The situation still exists, though, with tied individuals on the same side, so probably some die rolling is still to occur if there is competition amongst PCs for EP or items, etc.

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

Yes, quite often the site who won initiative wants to move second...

It's an interesting idea, and yes would add a new effect of winning initiative...

Personally, I like that it's a roll-off to see who goes first, as it makes it unpredictable, which I think is interesting and exciting.

Also, I don't think I like that if it were based on initiative, then an entire side would go first versus opponents of the same DX.

It would also be peculiar in that it would have a concrete effect on combat, but only to the degree there were opponents facing each other who happened to have the same DX. That seems a bit meta/odd to me.

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

Actually, this part I like because it makes tactics and strategy significant and, to an extent, it simulates a leader giving an edge to the group by coaching them.

Although, you could just allow tactics and strategy to modify DX for the purposes of this tie-breaking...

Re: Tied AdjDX and Initiative
 

I like the idea of the side with initiative having some advantage in cases of tied adjDX scores, and the idea that the side with initiative has the option to go first or to allow the other side to act first.

Here are the alternatives I've come up with:


ALTERNATIVE 1: Rules as written, tied adjDXs roll off, winner MUST go first.

ALTERNATIVE 2: Rules slightly modified, tied adjDXs roll off, winner has the OPTION to go first.

ALTERNATIVE 3: Rules modified, tied adjDXs roll off, winner has the OPTION to go first, 1D6 roll offs are modified as follows:
-- Figures on side with initiative: +1
-- Party leader's skill: Tactics = +1, Strategist = +2

Figures on both sides add their leader's skill, assuming their leader is conscious, able to speak, and within earshot. A figure may add its own skill modifier instead if for some reason the party leader's skill is lower.

Ties on the 1D6 roll off with the above modifiers are broken by awarding the win to the side with the initiative. Figures with tied adjDXs who are on the same side may choose which one goes first, but will require an unmodified 1D6 roll off to settle any disputes.

ALTERNATIVE 4: Rules modified, tied adjDXs do NOT roll off but are instead awarded to the side with the initiative, winner has the OPTION to go first.


For now, I favor Alternative 3, but I'm open to Alternative 4 and will consider any other alternatives that are proposed.

What I like the most is finding some way of making party leadership more important. This will really make Tactics and Strategist valuable talents, and bringing down one side's leader will have a noticeable effect on the battle.

After all, taking out the enemy's officer corps has been a military strategy throughout history.