Quote Originally Posted by olskool View Post
When last I looked, this WAS the Homebrew forum.

Changing Initiative IS "heavily modding 5e." The game is built around the base initiative system and changing it will greatly affect a number of Classes, the least of which would be the Rogue and the Monk. It also greatly affects several FEATS by making it possible to do even more in your turn than Move, Attack, and Move away again (which is basically broken as is). I can see this initiative causing the bane of every tabletop RPG, the dreaded "DISCONNECT." This occurs when the DM takes so much time dealing with ONE Player's turn that the other players at the table "zone out," lose interest, and begin playing on their phones or talking about last night's game.
This is why I said i don't have a "dog in this fight." I have already abandoned the basic Initiative system for one where I cycle through a player's actions one at a time in about one minute per action resolution. This keeps everyone at my table involved in the action and combat is more dangerous (and therefore more interesting). Yes, it destroys "established tactical practice" for thieves and monks who can no longer "waltz in, hit someone, and waltz out." My players seem to enjoy it never-the-less.

To me, 5e is not "Scripture as writ" because I started gaming in the early '80s when EVERY game had to be "modded." The big issue I have with 5e is a lack of lethality and a loose interpretation of reality (due to FEATS and Class Abilities). My goal is to make the game feel "more dangerous" so the players treat encounters as something more than "kill the monster, collect its treasure."
Yes. But it helps to have a common base to talk from. Again-there's nothing wrong with making 5E more lethal and less generous on wealth, both mundane and magical, but it's NOT the standard that's being deviated from here.

To the OP:

I don't think I'd enjoy it. Part of why I like 5E is it's simple and intuitive-this isn't. Beyond some of the other mentioned issues, it's just kinda... I don't want to say "clunky", because it's reasonably well worded, but I'm struggling to find a better word. It'd add a lot of complexity for what I feel is little gain.

Apologies if this has already been addressed, but what are you looking to add to 5E with these changes?

Also, have you done any playtesting?