As previously related, early forms of D&D had trouble clearly describing an initiative system. Original D&D used the Chainmail initiative system, and other versions or clarifications were proposed in Eldritch Wizardry, The Strategic Review and The Dragon. As the Eldritch Wizardry system seems to be missing some key information, Eric Holmes had something of a problem when he was designing the initiative system for the first version of Basic Dungeons & Dragons in 1977.
These were the days before Advanced Dungeons & Dragons; Gary Gygax was working on those works when Eric Holmes was working on Basic D&D, but it is important to remember that Holmes’ Basic D&D was designed to teach people how to play original Dungeons & Dragons, not the advanced game. Gygax added several references to AD&D into the published manuscript, but it is very much a work for the original game.
All of which makes the initiative system so interesting: it doesn’t really have a precursor in the rulebooks. The basis for Holmes’ initiative system is simple: Highest Dexterity score strikes first. In the case of monsters without Dexterity scores, the DM rolls them on the spot. The effect of this system is to create a cyclical initiative system, similar to that which is in 3E and later editions of the game, with the chief difference being that initiative is not rolled for the characters every combat, instead it being rolled for them as part of character creation!
This is not the entirety of the system, however. If Dexterity scores are within 2 of each other, instead the highest initiative roll (on d6) strikes first. Light weapons (e.g. daggers) strike twice per turn, and heavy weapons (e.g. two-handed swords) strike once per two turns. (As all weapons deal 1d6 damage by the basic rules, it would seem that daggers are much better weapons to use than two-handed swords!)
In addition, spell-casting is prohibited by spell-casters in melee. Spell-casters may always cast spells before melee is joined (resolving first), followed by missile fire. Missile fire is not permitted once melee has started “because of the danger of hitting friendly forces”, but magic-users not involved in the melee may cast more spells once 1 or more melee rounds have gone by.
Although the initiative system is a lot more defined than that in original D&D, it does have its ambiguities. What does “1 or more melee rounds” mean, anyway?
This initiative system was not retained for the 1981 revision of the Basic Rules by Tom Moldvay. Indeed, the 1981 set was a major redesign of the D&D rules, which took them down a distinctly different path than what was being followed by the Advanced line. Moldvay enshrined the system of rolling initiative each round on a pair of opposed d6s, but the method of resolving actions was much more formal: each round, the winner of initiative would, in order, follow these steps:
- Make Morale checks if needed
- Resolve Movement
- Resolve Missile Fire combat
- Resolve Magic Spells
- Resolve Melee combat
The loser would then (if he survived) perform those steps. This was a group initiative system, where all members of one side would share the same initiative, although in the case of “paired combat” when combat became one-on-one, there was the option of individual initiative.
In Moldvay Basic, spell-casting could not be interrupted, but a note in the companion volume of Expert D&D (by David Cook) added that rule: a spell-caster who lost initiative and took damage before casting the spell or failed a saving throw would have their casting spoilt and the spell would be lost.
These rules would be maintained by Frank Mentzer in his 1983 revision of the Basic Game (the famous Red Box set), although the note on spells being spoilt became a bit more obscure than how it was presented in Cook’s Expert rule, with only a mention of the caster being “disturbed” while casting the spell leading to it being lost.
The 1981 revision gave a particularly clear version of the initiative rules – the first such, in my opinion. However, Basic D&D was not the dominant system. That was AD&D, and when its revision came up, it was also time to revise its particularly Byzantine explanation of how initiative worked. That will be the subject of my next column on D&D Initiative!