MCDM RPG: Everything you need to know and how different is it from D&D 5e?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 июл 2024
- MCDM Patreon link: / posts
Watch me play the MCDM RPG playtest: • I Ran the MCDM RPG Pla...
If you like what I do and would consider supporting this channel through Patreon:
/ treantmonkstemple
Timestamps:
0:00 Intro
1:41 Differences from D&D
19:44 Terminology translation guide
23:45 Example PCs
24:59 Conclusions 
Игры
Correction: I say the MCDM was on Kickstarter, it was actually funded through Backerkit
Hi Chris
I think the Backerkit backers also haven't gotten a playtest packet. That's only for the patrons.
Thanks for the video!
@@praoi Correct, the last update they gave to backers said that we can expect a playtest packet some time around July when the core mechanics are more finalized. As they put it the backers paid for the final product so MCDM doesn’t want to show them a bunch of half finished stuff. The patrons are paying to see the actual creation process so they are getting these packets that are extremely experimental.
@@fakjbf3129 If you paid for the Backerkit, you paid for the sausage. If you are on Patreon, you are paying for a tour of the sausage factory.
Why would I ever go anywhere else for rules and gameplay analysis? Subscribing to this channel saves me me untold hours. 😊
Colby speaking truth!
@TreantmonksTemple now you just need a RUclips membership for those of us who don't use Patreon! 😃
Critlander hath spoken.
creators supporting creators is a true critical hit.
I ran with the default initiative system where players choose who goes when, and it didn't bog things down much, if at all. It took a few seconds each time, sure, but it also kept players super super engaged. Even when it wasn't their turn they were paying attention, because it might be their turn in 15 seconds when the damage of a PC and then an enemy is rolled. There was never a big argument over who should get to go, usually it only took "I have an ability that lets me do this" and we were on our way to rolling damage.
I think it'll greatly depend on table. Some tables people won't care very much, and it will take very little time. But if you have 2 or more very opinionated players, I could see this being horrendous.
At my table, it slowed down combat because people had to decide when to go, BUT combat overall was greatly sped up because everybody was engaged and constantly thinking tactically about if/when they wanted to go which is definitely preferred to "Ok Jim it's your turn next..." but then Jim spends 3 minutes deciding what he's going to do because he wasn't paying attention.
Characters that focus on status effects that last until their next turn will hugely benefit the party by going first on the round they inflict it and then going last in the next round so everyone can double dip taking advantage of them.
One method our table used was simply going around the table. Which end went first was the only "argument".
@@trombonegamer14 Yeah, I can imagine this will bog down a bit if you're playing with pick up groups or groups that don't have that dynamic down yet. However, I can also see this being the nicest of breezes for a group like mine where we all know each other and we'll know what each other is capable of. I can also see my group doing stuff like "no, you go first and do X while we hold back to get the benefit of it".
I’ve played plenty of RPGs with flexible initiative: Wrath & Glory (just alternate players and enemies), Fantasy Flight Star Wars (roll PC and NPC slots, then pick who goes in each slot), etc.
I really don’t find that initiative bogs down once you have a couple sessions under your belt. The group usually develops a Standard Operating Procedure for that first turn - Jimmy opens with an alpha strike to take down a bunch of chaff enemies, then Sarah kicks out her buffing ability, and so on.
But then you’ll run into interesting, unique scenarios where one player goes, “Don’t worry guys, I’ve got a thing!” Where their unique ability applies in a really fun, interesting way.
The discussion is a feature, rather than a bug - it keeps players engaged, looking for an opportunity to jump in, and keeps everyone invested in the flow of battle.
I have played ICON and Lancer a lot which uses an initiative system similar to the MCDM RPG, and I want to say that it works absolutely wonderfully in games designed around it. There is discussion but it is interesting discussion, and it is discussion that makes other people's turns interesting as well. I don't know why exactly it wouldn't work in DnD but I must imagine it is something that happens because it hasn't been designed with that type of initiative system in mind.
encourages more teamwork too. you need to know the other PC's abilities to decide who goes first and you'll need to talk tactics to do it and you'll learn both in the process.
i tested it in D&D two days ago, it was vastly preferable!
As a Lancer I’ve always found the system a mixed bag, since you never get dogpiled by the enemies and as a GM the PCs never dog pile your boss monster it works pretty well. It does take some time to sort out at the start (and every round thereafter) but it’s nice to have the flexibility to give first turn to the pc who just took massive damage and needs to stabilize. And of course when you play with a group long enough you usually fall into a rut where a specific turn order is most optimal at specific time, but the players collectively decide that they want to optimize combat effectiveness so is it really a bug or intrinsically knowing your teammates strengths and weaknesses?
Yeah I've ran Lancer too, and players found it awesome and engaging to swap things around as needed, and as the DM it was interesting changing which monsters reacted to be more in line with the fiction than being locked in
IMO DnD have to many abilities that have durations based on turn order (everything ends at the beginning or end of your next turn). So it needs some tweaking (like making sure it lasts a whole round at least).
I for one want to try a new way. I have been tacticaly penalized for rolling a high initiative on several important combats and being locked into my spot. I have pushed for the 3.5 ability to fall back in initiative but my DM is a stickler for RaW. Sometimes it is tactically advantageous to go first as a character and sometimes it is not and that can change due to the flow of combat.
The stated goal for change is to increase player engagement rather than having players zone out on their phones until their turn comes up 30 min later.
If I play a rogue that wins initiative and can't use sneak attack because nobody is close to the creatures yet I am going to become a barbarian IRL! ITS SO STUPID!
@@indigo_tribe prepare action
@@indigo_tribesounds like a skill issue.
@@GrimHeaperThe initiative doesn't count as a skill check 😉🫠. I'll see myself out now
@@GrimHeaperThe initiative is not considered a skill check lol 😉🫠 I'll see myself out.
Gotta say, the initiative system is amazing in this game, you should really give it a go as it is written. I will say it may be redundant if you play with people that are more tactically inclined and are the types to pay attention and plan things out during a fight in 5e, but my group is very much the opposite of that. This system brought it out of them in a way i never could have predicted, and it actually promoted teamwork in my case. They were engaged like I’ve never seen before, no idling between turns, everyone is locked in waiting to see when to best use their Triggered Action and how to strategize going next. It was awesome. It might(?) have taken more time, but that’s not really an issue when it’s fun. Combats felt like they flew by compared to the slog that 5e can be at times. It also helps that you are always rewarded for a good plan, because your attacks never miss it always feels like you’re achieving the goal that you just spent however long planing out. A lot of times in 5e you can spend the time to come up with a really dope plan, miss a critical attack, and then feel like you wasted all that time planing.
I see your point, but I think Chris (and probably his viewers) definitely fall into that 'tactically inclined' category
Ok, so I found Chris thanks to his extensive playtest knowledge. It’s been great hearing about everything new from both a mechanical and psychological perspective. Most other channels come at it from a “This is BROKEN BECAUSE MATH” or “THIS IS NERFED BECAUSE MATH” perspective. Chris cares about the overall health of the game which I (a fellow Chris) believe is the most important thing when it comes to revision. My DM philosophy came from watching and learning from Matt Colvilles work, hell I learned how to be a good dm before picking up a rule book. Now this video comes along and it just made Chris even cooler
I'm noticing a pattern of Chris's here
Thanks for the shout out! That was a fun game!
While I haven’t played MCDM, the initiative system in it is the same as Fabula Ultima in which I love it. It does really well for strategy, where our healer goes last always unless he’s needed ASAP. My DPS can stay in the middle of initiative, getting buffs from the player going first until my first strike could mean ending combat one or two turns sooner. With a well communicating party, initiative is a breeze.
I like Shadow of the Demon Lord initiative system:
Fast turn - move or action.
Slow turn - move & action.
Order of Events:
Start of Round resolutions.
All players taking Fast turns.
All NPC's taking Fast.
All players taking Slow.
All NPC's taking Slow.
End of Round resolutions.
This is the RPG i'm most excited to try this year. Their Flee, Mortals! monsters were a massive hit. They're not just fun to face, but also fun to run... and they're designed well enough that less and less dice need to get fudged in order to still provide a thrilling challenge without causing a TPK (as a DM I want players to succeed, but if possible I like not having to pull my punches for that to happen) /// PS: The hack you mentioned for initiative, if MCDM team likes it they could include colored cards to put on the table for that. People would just flip the correct card each turn. Maybe each round a different player could direct the turn order for players?
Chris, you using your Tactician's final turn in the d20play playtest to command the Fury to beat the boss in the face was real Captain America telling Hulk to Smash!, and was everything I hope this game ends up being. Thanks for the breakdown!
I had a fun time with the Tactician.
Really glad to see the change of the term "Abilities" to actual things that you do
I've always hated the term "Ability" and "Ability check" because I feel like early on in my DND career, and definitely with newer players, is that they felt like USING abilities; i.e. "Can I use my athletics to move this boulder?" as opposed to asking "I attempt to move this boulder" and the DM responding "Please roll me an athletics check". I feel like that thinking stifles creativity as you're only looking for solutions that suit your skills, rather than looking for solutions and then applying your skills
Agreed 100%! It’s about embodying the character, not the character sheet, that’s fun and engaging.
Seen much of this slowly come out on the MCDM channel, thanks for summarizing it especially for anyone unaware of Colville's project. He has a number of good ideas and is the only other D&D channel besides this one I will watch pretty much any new video by default. From what I have seen the building blocks of the MCDM system are very similar to D&D as pointed out here but the main departure is in how the class abilities play out in an encounter which sort of need to be seen in action so I'm sure your playtest will display the differences better. The MCDM dev team are in a good position to use the best aspects of D&D's heroic fantasy with a fresh take on things that is in no way beholden to legacy rules from 50 years ago, in my opinion that is one of the biggest advantages they have for this new game.
To be clear on my stance, I'm a Colville fan and highly recommend his RUclips channel and the Running the Game series to any D&D player, but only an interested bystander in the MCDM process. I've never bought any of their products leading up to this and I'm happy to remain in the 'wait-and-see' camp for now. Clearly there is ample support for them to make the best possible version of their game concept that they can, as a group they seem to have a lot of talent and experience, and they're not stuck with stockholder decisions or major deadline issues that are known to plague the Hasbro/WOTC/D&D pipeline.
I didn't back it. I'm kind of in the same boat. I'm waiting to see what we get. I am, however, quite optimistic about the final product due to the history of MCDM products. They are passionate about making a genuinely fun product and are transparent on how they come up with their ideas and implementations. They aren't hooked on trying to milk as much money as they can. They understand that if you make and present a good product, people will buy it.
The initiative sounds kind of like the system in the Edge of the Empire Star Wars game. It really didn't take very much time at my table. There was usually someone who had an ability or something so they wanted to go first and then other people would care less about when they went. And those people would change every combat. It was actually really good for teamwork because we knew each other's abilities and would kind of decide as a group what the general order should be for each round. But my table is generally good-natured, so working together wasn't an issue. We would also occasionally change our plans and have someone else go earlier than planned because of something that happened in combat.
I really like the system and have thought about implementing it in D&D before.
The limited "Recover" maneuver combined with the gradual increase in power is very clever. Can't wait to see where this goes, thanks for the insight!
Thank you for doing this! There’s no one whose summary I would trust more.
Like some of the other comments, I also liked the Initiative system. I ran the system twice and the first time, while I really liked it I did have to get on them for taking waaay too much time - I should have used the 30s rule. I spoke to the 2nd group I ran for at the start about this and it went much smoother.
I had several moments where this turn by turn selection of who goes made for incredibly tactical decisions, they could plan out and combo, and I could then go and try to mess that up. One time the Conduit (Cleric) was going and was trying to decide which of two characters he would heal, since both were low. And I just old him to pick his favorite because I would pick the enemy closer to the unhealed one to go next. He then Crit and healed them both! This is the best example, but we had several really tense moments like this where the turn order being dynamic really made the combat feel intense. And when it didnt do that it gave the chance for them to be really tactical.
I can't argue that without keeping on it though, it can REALLY bog down combat, making it take forever if you dont use a hack like d20play had, the 30sec timer, or just a talk beforehand like I did.
Also, I really enjoyed it! I had 9 different players, all of them like it and one of them is running it for another group of friends!
I think you might have misunderstood the scope of Kits: they're not sets of equipment, they ARE equipment. You can no longer mix and match weapons, shields, armour etc, in fact it doesn't matter whether you're using a dagger or a greataxe, because its all just flavour within the properties of a kit. The kit is like a sorta subclass, determining your damage, defenses, speed and other properties, replacing all individual gear choices. Or at least, that's what I interpreted.
MCDM doesn't want to balance a whole simulationist system, evidently
That was by far, the most useful review of MCDM's game yet. Thank you.
I've had a lot of fun playtesting this, awesome to see you covering it! For us, the initiative system has never been a problem. It probably takes up a little more time overall, but it also add another level to the strategy. There's lots of other games that use something like this system, definitely more than use the D&D system.
I've been waiting for this for a month! Glad you took at look at the MCDM playtest and I am happy to hear you like most of the system so far.
I’ve played TTRPGs where the initiative worked with each player choosing the next person to go at the end of their turn, friend or foe. It was always interesting when players would leave the NPCs to the end of the round, because the last one to go in the round can choose anybody to start the next round, including themselves…
The initiative system is less desirable in 5e because 5e's class design is more focused on being self sufficient (or even selfish). Combos with other players are powerful, but not the norm.
The initiative system the MCDM RPG uses is also used in say, Lancer, and I like to call it Tactical Initiative, because it makes "who goes next" a very impactful and productive decision, and gets the party thinking as a coordinated team. In Lancer, there's a lot more ways to combo with allies and support your party, so it's not a rat race to see who gets the killing blow or can first cast the game-ending spell like in 5e (not to say that Tactical Initiative wouldn't work in 5e; I think it'd be fine, but it'd work better with a party that's really focused around team play). I'd imagine the MCDM RPG will be similar in that regard, considering how it emphasizes tactical combat.
Having ability to mean feature or trait just makes more sense than having it mean a statistic. Calling statistics abilities in D&D is actually one of my pet peeves, cause an ability in my mind is something that gives your characters something new to utlize while playing the game.
(just thinking about it a bit more, i realized that i might just be my video gamey brain''s way of thinking about it, because when a character 'level's up in a video game, they either get a new ability or to pick among several new abilities to use.)
I've been using that Initiative system in my own homebrew system for years now, I love it. In theory it slows things down by adding another step, but in practice it saves so much time. Others have pointed out the "It gets players to pay attention during someone else's turn" type benefits, so I'll point out an interesting pattern that emerged at my table not long after I started using this in my games:
I find my Players will discuss strategy at the start of an encounter; coordinate an order around making the turn 1 plan work, then they keep that turn order unless something comes up. So if the Paladin goes third on the first turn, he'll usually go third every turn after that unless someone asks him to help setup something or an emergency comes up like needing to LoH someone.
It was fun playing this with you and the others!
Thank you. This is exactly the kind of calm, side by side comparison and explanation of game mechanics I was looking for. 👍
Not sure that my group will be interested any time soon, but I might take a look once it's released. And I really appreciate you taking the time to share your analysis with us 👍
Surprised to see this level of coverage for this system, but absolutely thrilled. I hoped you would cover the MCDM RPG and really appreciate your analysis!
One comment I'll make on the Initiative system is that it is used in a game my group loves, Star Wars Imperial Assault. It was very cool for us to be able to spend what amounted to a few seconds each turn to decide, and even without a hard rule we ended up essentially playing like the hack you used. Most of the time there was only one player who really wanted to go first, and only infrequently did we have a scenario where one player would say "you go first then I'll follow up so we can do X" or similar variations. I never found that it bogged things down.
The guide I didn't know I needed. Great work on this video.
Thank you for sharing the thoughtful review! Your review makes me aware of at least a few very interesting concepts in this system. I probably will wait for a while to see the final product, though.
I’m glad to see you covering systems other than D&D, such as this one and the one on DC20. Your videos are always thorough and interesting. I would like to see one on Rob Schwalb’ s Shadow of the Weird Wizard.
OMG. Guys, the custom initiative order is nothing new in TRPGs. The question is, if other tactical mechanics around support it, making it meaningful (Lancer) or crucial (Fabula Ultima). And that is something I saw only a little in MCDM RPG, so to make our opinion we have to wait to see e.g. abilities and distance synergies between the Players. Only then, the custom initiative can shine.
I really like the names for the 6 abilities, especially the mental abilities. Players misunderstand what intelligence, wisdom, and especially charisma really mean in game. MCDM's names make it much clearer 👍
Every time I hear about the whole "circles are squares" in D&D thing, I just can't help but thing that hexagons are bestagons, and a hex grid is so much better.
Yup. I will never use a token system on a square grid, but on a hex grid circles render close enough without having to do trigonometry. Too bad there's no real way to do hexagonal tiles in a Google Sheets document, which is what I use in lieu of a VTT service. So for me it's gonna be the 3.5 movement system: the first diagonal is one step but the second diagonal is two steps, and it continues to alternate. Circles are circles, or more realistically squares with the corners carved off.
Very excited to see this coverage on my favorite TTRPG channel! I invested in MCDM's monster books & they were a game changer for my table. I backed their upcoming RPG, looking at a post-DnD gaming future.
I signed up for the backer and am very excited to receive my special edition books :)
I‘m super hyped about this one!
Can‘t wait for the final result.
Really nice video, ... sadly I'm not so exited about many changes so far :( The auto hit is nice, but I don't enjoy the take on initiative. Most of the new naming feels out of place, especially:
Director, ewwww, some game use Narrator, which I much prefer.
Charm, ... I prefer persuation it feels more general.
Boon/Bane, not sure if this is strictly for advantage but if it is, it's sounds very strange, ... Make a boon roll ? Roll with boon ? not sure about it.
Chance hit for opportunity attack ? Actually make 0 sense to me.
So, there's a tactical game that I've played called Lancer, which does initiative in a similar way; At the start of the combat, the players pick a player to go first, then the GM picks a bad guy to go, back and forth, until the combat objectives are met; if the sides are uneven, then the side with more characters gets multiple turns at the end of the round; then at the start of the round, the side that didn't go last gets to pick a character to go first.
In my experience, what ends up happening with something like this, is the least confident/aggressive player always ends up going last.
Crystal clear explanations as always
I can definitely see the concerns around the initiative system, and I could see how it might not be good to include it in the finished product, but my table has used a similar system for a while and never really struggled to figure out who was going when.
I think I share your interest in all the other changes; I’m excited to see what the full release looks like!
So just my two cents on the initiative system.
Having played the Battletech RPG, which has a very similar initiative system (at least how it was run for us) when the system is built around it, it works a lot more seamlessly, plus it not being a fight long decision makes it a lot quicker as well.
I also don't view it as bog in tactical games (when done right) as the discourse becomes part of playing the game.
We're actually using alternating initiative in our spelljamer campaign we just began. It has allowed us to blast through combat. Like what would have been 5 turns in 2 hours becomes 8-10 turns in 90 - 120 minutes
This only gets more impressive when you factor in that were jumping from map to map (one for the spelljamers in space, one each for every spelljamer ship layout). Its all online as well, using a VTT. I was a skeptical it would work and in fact thought it would slow gameplay long term, but so far it's made combat far more engaging a fluid
Monsters actually get a chance to do some damage and can't just be wiped by the party all going before they get a turn. Players can plan future moves much more precisely. Everyone is always paying attention because you can go next if you have a plan. Heck, even having more characters on one side over the other hasn't been an issue
Alternating initiative is only really an issue with the kinds of players that bog down combat anway. Indecisive groups or problematic players. And by problomatic I mean ones insisting on going first everytime or someone blatenly not paying attention or respecting the other players. You know, the kind of people who you don't want to play with in the first place
I will say a timer isn't the worst idea in the world, i would just insist on keeping it hidden from players and/or having a dodge equivalent maneuver that increases your survivability and passes your turn along if you're indecisive
I really appreciate the comparison here between MCDM RPG and DC20’s system because I’ve also noticed a lot of similar use between the two. The convergent evolution here is really interesting
Idk I’ve playtested it twice and I’ve had no issue with the initiative thing, it didn’t really drag on at all. Maybe if you have a group where people are going to argue about it it would suck, but that was not my experience at all
Another benefit of it is that it forces players to stay engaged in what is happening
One of the reasons I love Shadowrun is tht the more dice you have the more you are likely to end up with an average result. Which you can then affect. A master swordsman never rolls a 1 on a d20 and cuts off his toe. He rolls 16 d6 and gets an average 3-5 successes. It is an infinitely better and granular way of measuring actions.
It looks fun, cant wait to see more. ty for vid
I played the playtest! I have a response to the "High Elf Talent = weakest" comment.
The Talent is unique amongst all the classes in that it's about risk/reward management. Many many playtesters come from D&D where being risk-averse is very wise.
In the playtest, the Talent always gets to use their power, they risk they're taking is if they get a debuff from it (which can be removed with the recovery action). A Talent player that does not take any risks is essentially ignoring their most powerful class features and will absolutely feel weaker than other classes. A Talent player that does take risks can seriously affect the battle by dealing aoe damage and throwing multiple enemies around in one turn.
I didn't watch all of the d20play game so I don't know how their Talent player chose to use their class features.
Thank you for going over this! I have been so curious but I have enough trouble getting people to play D&D, much less something that is new and different.
The standard initiative is huge for tactical gameplay. I like your GMs hack, makes the PCs think ahead to speed it up. Which should be obvious, but it’s helpful for the GM to keep it moving
As someone who regularly asks for reflex and will saves I can survive with different terms.
I do wish they had figured out afresh what abilities to use rather than following the 50 year old ones.
I don't mind the initiative. I have used similar before and it it works fine FOR MY GROUP. That is at odds with the tactical part of the game but then having a big tactical pow wow every turn is at odds with the cinematic (or heroic - not sure exactly what they all mean)
Re Notice - my favourite Pathfinder 2 rule s how perception is a class feature as it's a skill I think I have rolled more than all the others together (though ATTACK would no doubt beat it if that was a skill as it is in some games).
This is a great video, and there are a lot of things in the system that really peak my interest.
Glad you enjoyed it!
I think my favorite initiative system is Savage Worlds' "action cards" deck based initiative. It allows a level of unpredictability from round to round, it doesn't tie initiative to any one attribute but still allows for its version of feats to play with initiative, and it avoids the discussion bottleneck of team slots.
Oh, and it provides an easy reference for anyone to glance at and see initiative without needing any top of round number callouts or record keeping that would slow down other initiative systems that change from round to round.
The best idea ive seen for initative in the mcdm rpg is this 'players always go first (then alternating), unless youre fighting a boss'.
I think thats really elegant, lets players feel strong and getting the jump on foes (have some caveats like players being surprised etc, just they go first in most cases) but also allows you as the director/gm to do the classic (cinematic) villain monologue and set up. Would make the boss fights feel more dramatic and important.
Really excited to see where this goes. I like how different it is vs. 5e and Pf2e while feeling familiar enough at the same time.
It's similar to DnD 4e in many ways.
I backed this when it was first announced and am definitely looking forward to the final project. I'm planning to move from D&D to the MCDM RPG after the WotC/Habro scandals of last year, but also because D&D has so much legacy content that bogs it down. I'm also looking forward to making some content for the MCDM RPG on my own channel to help promote it and give other players and directors of the game more to work with early on.
Been trying to keep an open mind about this system but cant say im very interested. I actually like the gambling feel of crit/failure of a d20 dice so nothing similar is kinda a bummer. Though i am a fan of getting an extra action for rolling well, plays well into tactics even if big dmg is monkey brain fun for me too.
Also appreciate these kinds of videos that do comparisons, fun to see the differences and what they accomplish.
Looks interesting!! I don’t think it’s for me, but with all the 6Es and 5.5s out there, I’d rather see games take a big swings and go in a different direction.
Great video!
Great video
Always hitting with a ranged weapon is pretty silly.
It's important with ability improvements to separate the score from the bonus if you roll for your scores (18 is very rare on 3d6).
Wrath and Glory had the same initiative system as MCDM, and we never had any issues. It was great if we wanted two players to go before the next enemy, we could spend a glory to seize the initiative. I hope MCDM has something similar.
It’s important to note that this system is going for “cinematic, heroic”, not “realistic, gritty”.
@@nelsonchandler7048 - that is still a big stretch for cinematic, heroic. People do miss in the movies, even heroes.
Thanks for covering this! I was gonna check out the kickstarter for this and DC 20 but then had a fincial roller coaster. So I do not have the even the extra $10 at the moment. I remember seeing that you always hit in another video. I think I like the DC approach a little better, because if you always hit you also always get hit. Idk how I feel about that. My players love when they come across an enemy that can hardly hit them because they have spent time and build decisions building AC. It also ads a big fear factor when they say my I cast sheild my AC is 27 or something and I say it still hits.
A friend of mine runs a game where the initiative system is similar to MDCM but rather than decide character order by committee before the round starts he chooses a character (PC or NPC) to go first. Then that player chooses who gets to go next (including bad guys). It keeps everyone engaged because you have to pay attention to who has already gone. And tactically you can decide who on your team might be most effective next. Some players might even volunteer/beg to go next. I was surprised by how well this round robin style of initiative works.
I've done a playtest of the MCDM RPG, and we had fun with the initiative system. However, I think we enjoyed it because we were all very tapped into the tactics of the fight. Trying to run it with my less tactics-focused players would, I think, have WAY more potential to be a drag. I really like the hack you discussed though, I'll absolutely yoink that.
Fun fact: using a die instead of a flat number for Proficiency Bonus is already an optional rule in D&D. Use a D4 instead of the +2, D6 instead of +3 ...
Thanks for your review on this. Sounds like it isn't for me, but I love your enthusiasm.
The benefit of an attribute-and-modifier system over modifier-only is that attributes can be eroded without such a dramatic impact on modifiers. The drawback of an attribute-and-modifier system over modifier-only is that attributes can be eroded without such a dramatic impact on modifiers.
I'm really loving seeing all the attempts to streamline DnD which are coming out of all these disparate development cycles between this, DC20, and One DnD. Great breakdown!
I've been running Fabula Ultima and it uses that style of initiative. It gets pretty quick as players adapt to it. Occasionally I'll prod someone to step up. It does enable some great cooporation and strategizing.
I do like the elegance of 'roll two dice and take the highest (or lowest) number'. Adding yet another modifier is fine, but it's more math than the other approach. MCDM could've added or removed a die to the 2d6 (and just take the highest or lowest number) for a similar approach, but that wouldn't be stackable.
Big fan of 2d6. Makes rolls less swingy and adds emphasis to bonuses acquired through specialization in what you're rolling for which is a huge net positive in my book.
That initiative idea 0, 1, or 2 was a great idea/hack.
Good mornin!
Keen to see what the system brings.
The initiative system I think is good to allow for more cooperation between players. You can have one character set up a powerful attack or spell from another character
re: Balance they also may be balanced over the life of the character - eg. the Tactician might be a strong early class while the Talent might have a steeper power curve over time.
Would like to hear your take on the tactical elements of the class design and how combat actually shakes out, and whether they succeed on their tactical claim
Obviously classes and moves you can use will change a lot, but should be able to get a feeling for the foundations of tactical play and the direction they are heading in. For example, they often mention many moves that will induce forced movement, but does the sum of everything involve tactics mattering?
i was lost when you discussed the concept of how initiative works normally in MCDM. my questions are a few:
what happens if there are more enemies than PCs, does the enemy just go unimpeded after all PCs have had a turn?
How do rounds work when there's more pcs than enemies/vice versa? or is it assumed that encounters will always start with equal sides?
What if npcs/enemies join the initiative? do they slot in the middle of the current round?
This reminds me a bit of video games like divinity original sin. and the system as a whole seems more appropriate for a board game with it's guaranteed damage, forced equilibrium initiative, 2d6 standard (monopoly style) universal dice with crits essentially being extra turns, and even how there's a more of emphasis on bigger boosts of temporary snowball powering up and smaller permanent increases (at least at first glance).
I'd definitely play a board game like this.
To answer your first two questions:
If there are more enemies/players, etc. on one side than the other, those enemies/players just go back to back at the end. So you may have multiple enemies going in a row or multiple players going in a row depending on which you have more of.
As for NPCs/enemies joining the initiative, they would just be eligible to go whenever the side they join next has the opportunity for someone to go. If they join after everyone has gone but before the end of the round, then they'd go immediately.
Hope that helps!
I on the other hand played with initiative system like this in rps and board games, both as dm and player- and I love it. It gives a fair amount of felxibility and prevents one side of battle to go all before the other. As for discussion it was never a problem- player asked themselves do i know exaclty what to do or do i have a big play with how the the table looks, if both are no, then somebody else goes. It never really slowed down gameplay more than any indecisive player while using dnd initiative order.
Thanks for the analysis. I appreciate hearing where this game is similar in design as much as hearing the differences, so i can evaluate if this is a game is for me... The amount of rebranding of the D&D terms surprised me. I guess I was expecting more game innovation. Still feels like a 5e game
Found this video just now, and it was just what I was looking for to get a feel of MCDM, so thank you for this ✌️
Unfortunately I don't think this game is for me. I really wanted to be into this system after Colville's "sales pitch", it seemed fun, but DC20 seems to just do everything I was hoping for from this game.
No hate to Colville, his team or this game, I'm sure there are lots who'll enjoy this. I'm just not one of them.
I'm definitely really excited for the MCDM RPG. Hope it ends up with a decent name!
I understand what MCDM is trying to accomplish with a more flexible initiative--allowing one charcter move before another because it provides a tactical damage, speeds up game play, unblocks characters behind other characters in a small fighting space, etc--but I do agree with Chris that if this causes hurt feelings or wasted time, it probably isn't worth it.
Please try the new initiative system in-person. Online discussions often are difficult, especially in large groups, but I think this system shines in person!
I don't mind the freeform initiative system in MCDM. I've played Shadow of the Demon Lord, and letting the players take turns in whatever order they want wasn't a problem for our group.
There actually are character creation rules. They're just not in the public playtest that went out for everyone because they're still being developed and because it makes things easier because everyone who plays with the playtest are using the same stuff. But all of the preset characters were made using those rules.
One thing that concerns me about that initiative system is that it favours the smaller group. So for example if your party of five is fighting a giant dragon the *best* turn order you can have is: Player 1, Dragon, Player 2, Player 3, Player 4, Player 5. I guess that evens out over multiple rounds, but if that dragon has a decisive first attack it could be an issue.
The Critical Hit mechanic is interesting enough that I might see about importing it into my D&D games.
In 5e where you have to roll to hit, it becomes a much less attractive system
@andrewshandle Funny, I was thinking that getting an Action - 2 attacks, or maybe a spell casting - might actually be _over_ powered in 5e.
About the initiative system, it is a good discussion.
MCDM caracteristics make the acronym A-PRIME which is great!
Hey. Regarding the Initiative Order. I agree the Alt one is the way to go. I used to GM Marvel's RPG (more than any other game, and I even had my own massive multiverse for it). I used Marvel's Initiative system, with a bit of my own homebrew...and it was so popular, we used it for EVERY game there after! Initiative was just that, what was happening. Assassin sneaks in and surprise attacks, that is the start...thug runs in the room and starts shooting, that is the start...I mean, it just makes sense right? Then...since Marvel is about SUPER HERO TEAMS...you acted as a team, and it was set by your agility score (so was the amount of actions you could take in one turn)...but, anyone in the team could swap around order as desired. Someone at a lower Initiative could chose to move 1st to throw their teammate into the fray, or while two people were talking over a collaboration, other people in the order could just go based on the order.
I've used a similar initiative system in Lancer before and I never had any issues with it. Probably depends on how cohesive and agreeable your group is.
Thanks Chris
The whole turn order argument can be an issue for sure. I have played a lot of the Star Wars/Genesys system and deciding turn order can be horrendous with particular play groups. But it also resolves issues for when people want to go later in a round. I've yet to find an initiative system that resolves all the issues but in the end the D&D system seems to be the best overall for game flow.
i play a lotta lancer, and that has a similar initiative system, and honestly i really like it and it doesnt cause much headache at all
I think the issue with the Alert feat that you mentioned is that it’s a one-off at the start of combat - big decision, big discussion.
MCDM’s initiative is many small decisions throughout the round with lower stakes. Faster decisions and engages players to make a group decision every turn.
Remember: any time your players are talking about the game, they are engaged and that’s a good thing!