My DM cheats (venting)

[Dalebert]

What I keep finding is he is strict with us but loose with his own creatures. In the first combat of the night, we get ambushed by a drow mage, four drow, and a bunch of bugbears. Somehow they group stealthed and got a surprise round on us. The next combat, if a single one of us failed stealth, the creature was alerted and no surprise round. Mobs of creatures are constantly ambushing us successfully. When I played a monk warlock with Devil's Sight, I got ambushed every single time I scouted ahead, despite the fact (and I pointed this out) that I could see unimpaired for 120 feet while most creatures just have darkvision which means they have disadvantage on perception in total darkness. The whole point of scouting is to prevent an ambush.

So that first fight, the drow mage casts Cloudkill in the surprise round. Then he had high initiative and immediately cast magic missile to take out my bat familiar and do some damage to the other scouts. It was pointed out to him that the cloud he made provided total cover and you have to see people to MM them. He implied he might have a bat familiar also. I said "then he was using his action to see through its eyes. How was he casting both Cloudkill and MM with his actions?" I've never tried to look through my bat to attack invisible creatures. I just tend to use the bat to deliver a touch spell which doesn't require me to do that or just so I know basically where they are for an AoE.

THEN, I cast a fireball at the wizard making sure to use subtle spell assuming he'll probably have counterspell. The fireball gets absorbed into a rod of absorption. A drow mage in OotA doesn't have this very rare item. I finally think to ask if I saw a bat. "No."

After it's all over, I asked him how the mage was able to MM my familiar with heavy obscurement in the way.

DM: "The mage had an imp behind the party and he had Dimension Door. He cast Cloudkill, DD behind, cast MM, then DD back."
Me: "That's four actions." I didn't even think to count and realize that meant he had cast 4 level 4 spells and 2 5th level spells and he doesn't have that many slots.

So then he casts Greater Invisibility and we have half a dozen creatures moving through this 15 ft wide tunnel to find him to engage and no one is able to. I reserve my action to cast Faierie Fire on his area right after he casts any spell. WE assumed he'd absorb it but then his reaction would be used and the cleric could cast Flamestrike. He casts Dimension Door and escapes. I mentioned that his invis would be gone in less than a minute and we could split up and probably find him but it was implied there was no use.

DM: "He's doing a sort of Word of Recall."

*facepalm* I shared my thoughts on this with him this morning by IM.

BTW, this is Adventurer's League.

[smcmike]

I understand how frustrating this is.

My advice, though: stop worrying about NPCs and what rules they follow. Just try to stay in character, and accept the world as presented.

Edit: or leave. Leaving is a good option. I just meant that staying and arguing won't get you anywhere

[fishyfishyfishy]

I usually like to give the benefit of doubt to people but this just seems like blatant cheating from someone who's approaching the game with a DM vs. Players mentality. I'd leave.

[Dalebert]

I feel like I'm in an arms race with the DM. If I do pick a feature or spell to deal with a particular threat, the DM will just metagame something to make it not work in that situation. He gave a HUGE lecture to some other players (not me) for metagaming to try to pinpoint the (greater) invisible wizard who he seemed intent on letting get away with anything. It seemed rather hypocritical to me. My exact words to him were "You're making the game not fun. You do whatever it takes to nullify my class features so I'm not effective." This guy is my friend. I really like him. It's just stuff got ridiculous last night.

I don't necessarily see it as him trying to "win" as much as he wants to make combats a challenge for us. I get that. Strings of unchallenging fights can be boring. But the way he does it seems to be nullifying our tactics and class features by having the enemy always be ready for us with just the right thing and also by imposing restrictions on us and not applying them to our enemies.

[R.Shackleford]

BTW, this is Adventurer's League.

Yeah know, I wasn't surprised. Sounds like the type of crap I've seen from AL.

[Oramac]

I had a DM like that once in AL as well. I told him I wanted to "hold my action until X happens", to which he replied "You can't do that. Next person." And skipped my turn completely.

Now I know "Holding an action" isn't in the rules, but "Readying an action" is, and they're basically the same thing. So the DM either 1) knew what I meant and ignored it, or 2) didn't know what I meant and doesn't know the rules.

Neither situation is ideal. My solution was to go to a new DM. I also talked to the AL coordinator and told him in no uncertain terms that I would not play with that DM again.

Sorry. I kinda vented there a bit as well.

TL;DR: the easiest option is to find a new DM. Though it may not be the best option if your DM is also your friend.

[Temperjoke]

AL DMs are supposed to be held up to a higher standard, is he new or is this something he's done to other groups? It really does sound like he's deliberately trying to ignore the ramifications of your party's abilities.

[R.Shackleford]

AL DMs are supposed to be held up to a higher standard, is he new or is this something he's done to other groups? It really does sound like he's deliberately trying to ignore the ramifications of your party's abilities.

Omg my coworkers want to know why I burst out laughing.

What they are supposed to be and what the reality of it is way different.

[Temperjoke]

Omg my coworkers want to know why I burst out laughing.

What they are supposed to be and what the reality of it is way different.

I will concede that this is often the case. :smallbiggrin:

[Fflewddur Fflam]

Omg my coworkers want to know why I burst out laughing.

What they are supposed to be and what the reality of it is way different.

I think it has to do with the idea that typically a "game" is about one side vs. another. I think DM's can easily fall into this line of thinking. But that's not the purpose of a DM, they are not "the other side", their job is to basically make the game go, to facilitate the game, not to actively oppose the players. Sure, a lot of the NPC's and the monsters that the DM controls are opposing the players, but the DM should not be. There are DM's who don't realize this.

[Dalebert]

Part of it is he's one of the people who's willing to DM frequently, aside from myself. I DM quite a lot in AL. He's alternating OotA and CoS on Sunday evenings and I'm nearing the end of both of those. Leaving now would just leave those characters in Limbo indefinitely. I'm hoping that the situation can be salvaged. As I said, I think his goal is to make combat challenging and therefore more engaging, but his tactics for doing so such all the fun out.

It's not always this bad, but it's noticeable. Last night it was just to the point of absurdity. *BAMF* The enemy has a very rare magic item that makes your class features useless. Now just stand around and be useless. Challenging enough? Do you feel engaged now?

[TheFlyingCleric]

Oh woe to all when the golden rule is not followed. If you don't want players to metagame, it helps if the monsters aren't doing it already!


Part of it is he's one of the people who's willing to DM frequently, aside from myself. I DM quite a lot in AL. He's alternating OotA and CoS on Sunday evenings and I'm nearing the end of both of those. Leaving now would just leave those characters in Limbo indefinitely. I'm hoping that the situation can be salvaged. As I said, I think his goal is to make combat challenging and therefore more engaging, but his tactics for doing so such all the fun out.

It's not always this bad, but it's noticeable. Last night it was just to the point of absurdity. *BAMF* The enemy has a very rare magic item that makes your class features useless. Now just stand around and be useless. Challenging enough? Do you feel engaged now?

Now that's just silly. If the combat is not challenging enough, just add a bunch more monsters so the players feel badass when they defeat them all. The DM style he takes is just absurd.

[Millstone85]

I think it has to do with the idea that typically a "game" is about one side vs. another. I think DM's can easily fall into this line of thinking. But that's not the purpose of a DM, they are not "the other side", their job is to basically make the game go, to facilitate the game, not to actively oppose the players. Sure, a lot of the NPC's and the monsters that the DM controls are opposing the players, but the DM should not be. There are DM's who don't realize this.It seems to me that if a DM truly believes they are not playing against the party, or playing at all, but just making the game go, then they would also believe that it is technically impossible for them to "cheat" an encounter. It would be all the more reason for them to ignore action economy and all those pesky rules while describing an NPC or a monster.

[Gastronomie]

Playing is for fun.

If you're not fun, leave.

It's as simple as that.

[Dalebert]

It's as simple as that.

It's really not, any more than relationships with your friends are simple. And gamers are friends getting together so they can all have fun after all. Relationships take effort and compromises. Sure, there is a point when you may have to decide that a relationship is beyond hope but I don't think such a decision should be acted upon rashly. Hopefully he will respond to reason. Maybe he just needs to be called out on it so that he will be more conscientious of his metagaming. I've not really confronted him about it before.

[JakOfAllTirades]

If there's another game available, you should definitely try to get into it and walk away from your current one.

This is often referred to as "Voting with your feet."

[R.Shackleford]

I think it has to do with the idea that typically a "game" is about one side vs. another. I think DM's can easily fall into this line of thinking. But that's not the purpose of a DM, they are not "the other side", their job is to basically make the game go, to facilitate the game, not to actively oppose the players. Sure, a lot of the NPC's and the monsters that the DM controls are opposing the players, but the DM should not be. There are DM's who don't realize this.


It has to do with DMs who get a power trip, threaten people, don't play by the rules, or play an entirely different system.

And WotC has yet to do anything about those issues.

Yeah, the DM that threatened a player is still DMing.

WotC needs to have better control over their little group or else it won't ever meet its potential. Which may be fine with them. Maybe they only want to put in minimal effort and gain a little bit of a return. *shrug*

[Dalebert]

I feel confident that I could report the events of last night's game to AL leadership and action would be taken. It's really painful but I've let him know that I won't be playing in any games with him as DM anymore. It sucks because I now have a bard stuck in CoS who's played most of the book but hasn't finished. I'll have to find a CoS game to finish with and get him out.

The problem is I can't trust him anymore. I can't trust him not to be cheating. When there's an invisible character running around, only he knows where it is, but if I find him, he'll just decide he was somewhere else. He'll just alter the scene as necessary to get the outcome that he wants. How can I enjoy that kind of environment? You have to be able to trust your DM to play fair. THey have unlimited power.

[hymer]

The problem is I can't trust him anymore. I can't trust him not to be cheating. When there's an invisible character running around, only he knows where it is, but if I find him, he'll just decide he was somewhere else. He'll just alter the scene as necessary to get the outcome that he wants. How can I enjoy that kind of environment? You have to be able to trust your DM to play fair. THey have unlimited power.

I was in a very similar situation at one point, and I agree with your reasoning. I didn't play with the guy for over a year, but then I met him on a train by chance, and we had a nice chat. We started playing again, and he mended his ways - mostly. Old habits die hard.
He was someone I met for gaming, but we became friends after we sorted things out. So there's a main difference there.
I'd suggest making it a point to do other stuff with your friend now, to make it clear that you're not objecting to him as a whole, but merely to his DMing. It can be taken personally very easily.

Edit: As a post script, the guy died after prolonged illness about five years later. I'm glad we got at least that much time.

[Oramac]

I'd suggest making it a point to do other stuff with your friend now, to make it clear that you're not objecting to him as a whole, but merely to his DMing. It can be taken personally very easily.

I'll second this for sure.

[Malifice]

What I keep finding is he is strict with us but loose with his own creatures. In the first combat of the night, we get ambushed by a drow mage, four drow, and a bunch of bugbears. Somehow they group stealthed and got a surprise round on us. The next combat, if a single one of us failed stealth, the creature was alerted and no surprise round. Mobs of creatures are constantly ambushing us successfully. When I played a monk warlock with Devil's Sight, I got ambushed every single time I scouted ahead, despite the fact (and I pointed this out) that I could see unimpaired for 120 feet while most creatures just have darkvision which means they have disadvantage on perception in total darkness. The whole point of scouting is to prevent an ambush.

So that first fight, the drow mage casts Cloudkill in the surprise round. Then he had high initiative and immediately cast magic missile to take out my bat familiar and do some damage to the other scouts. It was pointed out to him that the cloud he made provided total cover and you have to see people to MM them. He implied he might have a bat familiar also. I said "then he was using his action to see through its eyes. How was he casting both Cloudkill and MM with his actions?" I've never tried to look through my bat to attack invisible creatures. I just tend to use the bat to deliver a touch spell which doesn't require me to do that or just so I know basically where they are for an AoE.

THEN, I cast a fireball at the wizard making sure to use subtle spell assuming he'll probably have counterspell. The fireball gets absorbed into a rod of absorption. A drow mage in OotA doesn't have this very rare item. I finally think to ask if I saw a bat. "No."

After it's all over, I asked him how the mage was able to MM my familiar with heavy obscurement in the way.

DM: "The mage had an imp behind the party and he had Dimension Door. He cast Cloudkill, DD behind, cast MM, then DD back."
Me: "That's four actions." I didn't even think to count and realize that meant he had cast 4 level 4 spells and 2 5th level spells and he doesn't have that many slots.

So then he casts Greater Invisibility and we have half a dozen creatures moving through this 15 ft wide tunnel to find him to engage and no one is able to. I reserve my action to cast Faierie Fire on his area right after he casts any spell. WE assumed he'd absorb it but then his reaction would be used and the cleric could cast Flamestrike. He casts Dimension Door and escapes. I mentioned that his invis would be gone in less than a minute and we could split up and probably find him but it was implied there was no use.

DM: "He's doing a sort of Word of Recall."

*facepalm* I shared my thoughts on this with him this morning by IM.

BTW, this is Adventurer's League.

Tell this clown to read the rules. There is no such thing as 'a Surprise round' in 5E.

[AttilatheYeon]

Talk to the guy. It's AL, he's supposed to follow the rules as well as possible. Then talk to your coordinator, and let him/her know anout what's going on. The coordinator is supposed to keep rogue DMs in line. A DM who blatantly cheats is worde than no DM, for keeping casual players in the hobby. If these don't work, drop a cartoon piano on his head ;)

[mephnick]

I generally inform my players that my NPCs don't play by the same rules the PCs do. I use legendary actions and the paragon system and other things to get the challenge I want, but it's all done consistently with no surprise to my players. Of course this is not AL and it's with people who already trust me. I'd never consider changing the rules to that extent with strangers in an official game.

[R.Shackleford]

Tell this clown to read the rules. There is no such thing as 'a Surprise round' in 5E.

The DM in question is a clown but i wouldnt be throwing out insults when yes there is a "surprise round".


Surprise

A band of adventurers sneaks up on a bandit camp, springing from the trees to attack them. A gelatinous cube glides down a dungeon passage, unnoticed by the adventurers until the cube engulfs one of them. In these situations, one side of the battle gains surprise over the other.

The GM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the GM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side. Any character or monster that doesn’t notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter.

If you’re surprised, you can’t move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can’t take a reaction until that turn ends. A member of a group can be surprised even if the other members aren’t.

[Steampunkette]

My ex ran cheatyface encounters like this. My "Favorite" one involved a regular crocodile...

A regular crocodile that had eaten several powerful spellcasters and was "wearing" their various rings and amulets inside it's guts. When we finally managed to kill it, we got XP for killing a CR2 crocodile and zero loot because he finished digesting the magical items just as he died.

[Malifice]

The DM in question is a clown but i wouldnt be throwing out insults when yes there is a "surprise round".

Thats not a surprise round. Thats round one of the combat.

Some combatants might start the first round surprised (unaware of ememies when initiative was called for) and unable to take actions until thier initiative result comes up (when they can take reactions only). Those doing the surprising get no benefits.

Sounds like this bloke was granting everyone a free full round. You know - rolling attacks on PCs 'outside' of initiative.

I'd walk the instant he did it.

[CantigThimble]

Thats not a surprise round. Thats round one of the combat.

Some combatants might start the first round surprised (unaware of ememies when initiative was called for) and unable to take actions until thier initiative result comes up (when they can take reactions only). Those doing the surprising get no benefits.

Sounds like this bloke was granting everyone a free full round. You know - rolling attacks on PCs 'outside' of initiative.

I'd walk the instant he did it.

What? The guys doing the surprising get to take their actions as normal when their initiative comes up because they are not surprised. The guys being surprised do not get to move or take actions when their initiative comes up. It is functionally equivalent to the surprisees not even bothering to roll initiative until the surprisers have each taken a turn and then proceeding as normal.

[R.Shackleford]

Thats not a surprise round. Thats round one of the combat.

Some combatants might start the first round surprised (unaware of ememies when initiative was called for) and unable to take actions until thier initiative result comes up (when they can take reactions only). Those doing the surprising get no benefits.

Sounds like this bloke was granting everyone a free full round. You know - rolling attacks on PCs 'outside' of initiative.

I'd walk the instant he did it.

Try to justify it all you want but the first round of combat is a surprise round if anyone (even if not all) in a party (npcs or pcs) is surprised.

You were wrong to call this DM a clown for that reason. There were much better reasons to call that DM a clown and you chose the one that wasn't a reason (for using the idea/phrase "surprise round").


Edit

That isn't a surprise round, just a round in which people can be surprised (lose actions, movement, and reactions)!

Yeah... that logic is right on point.

[Dalebert]

Thats not a surprise round. Thats round one of the combat.

Some combatants might start the first round surprised (unaware of ememies when initiative was called for) and unable to take actions until thier initiative result comes up (when they can take reactions only). Those doing the surprising get no benefits.

Sounds like this bloke was granting everyone a free full round. You know - rolling attacks on PCs 'outside' of initiative.

You're technically correct. A lot of people do call that the surprise round for that reason though.

He did, however, grant them surprise against everyone. Again, we had two people and my bat familiar scouting a little ahead very steathy. Somehow they failed to notice the drow mage, four drow, and about six bugbears, all of which got a free round to attack our scouts. What's inconsistent and unfair is that in the very next combat, we heard something and attempted to move forward quietly as a group. We went to extra effort. I even summoned a Tensor's floating disk for one heavily armored guy. Because one person rolled low, we failed. Meanwhile I'm supposed to believe that every single one of their 11 creatures, including bugbears, surpassed every one of our passive perceptions? The rules are different for him but extra strict for us.

There's more metagaming here. These were a standard wandering monster from the OotA list. They were on patrol. Yet somehow they were in place to ambush us. They were in a tunnel below and perpendicular to ours. Our scouts dropped into a hole and somehow failed to see or hear all of those creatures.

[Malifice]

What? The guys doing the surprising get to take their actions as normal when their initiative comes up because they are not surprised. The guys being surprised do not get to move or take actions when their initiative comes up. It is functionally equivalent to the surprisees not even bothering to roll initiative until the surprisers have each taken a turn and then proceeding as normal.

PCs can not be surprised as well. Some might be some might not be.

On round one, any creature that is unaware of ALL other hostile creautures is surprised. Notice just the one, and youre not surprised. There is no surprise round. Just round one of the combat.

Ive had DMs roll attacks outside of initiative. It grinds my gears no end.

[CantigThimble]

But if no one of one side noticed anyone of the other it would effectively be a surprise round.

Alternatively they could have had an ambush set up with readied actions. In that case even if the PCs were aware that someone was around the corner they would still get hit with a round of attacks before their initiative would matter.

Regardless, the issue here seems to be that the dm is giving monsters the opportunity to detect stealthy pcs but not giving the pcs the opportunity to detect stealthy monsters. The rules for how combat should be resolved based on the stealth rules won't matter until the stealth rules are actually being used.

[Dalebert]

There's something else he does that might grind your gears. He makes invisibility super powerful. Basically if you do it in battle, he insists it's too noisy to hear you so you're basically automatically hidden. I may be getting my users mixed up but I thought you made a thread or two on this topic and how it make invisibility too good and I tend to agree. The way I treat, if you don't stealth which typically takes an action, then people know roughly where you are, at least well enough to attack with disadvantage. If you're using a ranged attack, you fire toward the noises or dusty footprints or whatever. If you're melee, you head toward where you think they are and can generally narrow it down as you get closer to the right square(s) and swing.

He's had so many guys be completely beyond attacking short of guessing what square they're in. And I don't even trust him to be honest about that for obvious reasons.

[R.Shackleford]

There's something else he does that might grind your gears. He makes invisibility super powerful. Basically if you do it in battle, he insists it's too noisy to hear you so you're basically automatically hidden. I may be getting my users mixed up but I thought you made a thread or two on this topic and how it make invisibility too good and I tend to agree. The way I treat, if you don't stealth which typically takes an action, then people know roughly where you are, at least well enough to attack with disadvantage. If you're using a ranged attack, you fire toward the noises or dusty footprints or whatever. If you're melee, you head toward where you think they are and can generally narrow it down as you get closer to the right square(s) and swing.

He's had so many guys be completely beyond attacking short of guessing what square they're in. And I don't even trust him to be honest about that for obvious reasons.

That DM is a classical "jerk DM", he is giving Invisibility user an additional action that bypasses the skill system.

I could understand giving someone the ability to Bonus Action Hide while invisible, if they are proficient with Stealth as it is a lot easier to hide while you don't need to worry about sight... But allowing a creature to take an additional Action (Hide Action) is ludicrous.

You may not think so but this is the type of crap that the "DM is all powerful" ideology brings you as people pit the DM versus the Players.

[Sigreid]

Sounds like the DM wants things to go the way he wants them to go and does whatever it takes make it work out his way. Personally, I would try to find another DM since he's unlikely to change.

You could also try reporting him to the AL organization. As I understand it part of the deal is supposed to be that they strive for a fairly standard form of D&D so you can move table to table without having to re-learn the game.

[R.Shackleford]

You could also try reporting him to the AL organization. As I understand it part of the deal is supposed to be that they strive for a fairly standard form of D&D so you can move table to table without having to re-learn the game.

Typically this is a waste of time. If they still don't care about a DM threatening a player with physical harm then I don't think they take this all that serious.

I and a couple others reported that DM and absolutely 0 was done about it.

Reported DMs for running entirely different Tabletop RPGs and nothing was done about it.

[Sigreid]

Typically this is a waste of time. If they still don't care about a DM threatening a player with physical harm then I don't think they take this all that serious.

I and a couple others reported that DM and absolutely 0 was done about it.

Reported DMs for running entirely different Tabletop RPGs and nothing was done about it.

Well then, it seems that a lot of the potential benefit of AL is gone.

[wunderkid]

Yeah I'm having a similar issue. I fairly recently had a character built. He was a bard with a little bit of wizard for portent.

Very non combat based, much more about skills and using his spells to CC or cast dancing lights, haste's, basically buffing/debuffing with a lot of utility. He was fun on paper.

However in practice the first session things went well. I was able to pull my weight by virtue of buffing the damage dealers and so on. And dancing lights gave the whole party a large buff against the bbeg. This is what I think the GM didn't like.

From that session onwards EVERY single spell that had a save I cast, even viscous mockery failed. The only time a spell ever landed was if I had a low portent and forced a fail. Which could be lucky rolls. But we aren't talking a few encounters here. More in the region of 10 encounters and that's likely on the low side. I think a knee jerk reaction made him just fudge saves and not realise the extent he was doing it.

Now he likely didn't notice all of mine were failing as there were many other saves being made by him, but when it's your character you notice the fails.

Other players have noticed the exact same thing. A monk for example who landed stunning strike a few times in the first session has had 99% of saves (even against insignificant mooks) passed.

It got to the point where I have rerolled into a warlock so I can just use spells and attacks where he can't roll behind a screen and get his 30th roll of a 17 or 18 in a session to mitigate. Once I know somethings AC he can't fudge anything.

It's a shame it's come to that as I feel a lot more 1 dimensional in combat now. But 1000% more like I'm actually having an impact.

Sorry to hijack the thread I needed to rant a little about how GMs treat their screen as an excuse to decide the outcome of a dice roll. He already creates and breaks rules for his npcs like it's going out of fashion, it doesn't feel like they need anymore of a buff.

[R.Shackleford]

Well then, it seems that a lot of the potential benefit of AL is gone.

Yup.

I mean, when I show up to a 5e D&D game and I brought the wrong character sheet, something is massively wrong.

However I think enough people have no choice to use AL, tolerate AL enough, or don't realize how much the game is being changed.

[Fflewddur Fflam]

Yeah I'm having a similar issue. I fairly recently had a character built. He was a bard with a little bit of wizard for portent.

Very non combat based, much more about skills and using his spells to CC or cast dancing lights, haste's, basically buffing/debuffing with a lot of utility. He was fun on paper.

However in practice the first session things went well. I was able to pull my weight by virtue of buffing the damage dealers and so on. And dancing lights gave the whole party a large buff against the bbeg. This is what I think the GM didn't like.

From that session onwards EVERY single spell that had a save I cast, even viscous mockery failed. The only time a spell ever landed was if I had a low portent and forced a fail. Which could be lucky rolls. But we aren't talking a few encounters here. More in the region of 10 encounters and that's likely on the low side. I think a knee jerk reaction made him just fudge saves and not realise the extent he was doing it.

Now he likely didn't notice all of mine were failing as there were many other saves being made by him, but when it's your character you notice the fails.

Other players have noticed the exact same thing. A monk for example who landed stunning strike a few times in the first session has had 99% of saves (even against insignificant mooks) passed.

It got to the point where I have rerolled into a warlock so I can just use spells and attacks where he can't roll behind a screen and get his 30th roll of a 17 or 18 in a session to mitigate. Once I know somethings AC he can't fudge anything.

It's a shame it's come to that as I feel a lot more 1 dimensional in combat now. But 1000% more like I'm actually having an impact.

Sorry to hijack the thread I needed to rant a little about how GMs treat their screen as an excuse to decide the outcome of a dice roll. He already creates and breaks rules for his npcs like it's going out of fashion, it doesn't feel like they need anymore of a buff.

DM screens are lame. That's right, I said it.

[Knaight]

However I think enough people have no choice to use AL, tolerate AL enough, or don't realize how much the game is being changed.

I suspect it's also a lot better in a lot of places, and that a lot of the people use it because it's where they can game at all - plenty of whom don't care about how much it is being changed.

[krugaan]

Everyone in the party should just YOLO all the time.

Seriously. But do it in a fun way, to have fun, since this is your friend.

Run straight into the thick of combat ignoring tactical decisions, spend entire turns taunting enemies by exposing your backside and farting in their general direction, create dramatic death soliloquys cursing your killers from beyond the grave, etc.

I doubt your DM will let you TPK, if indeed they are hoping for a certain outcome and manipulating events, because a TPK is fun for no one. If you do TPK, then awesome, next DM in the rotation and hope it goes better, and your friend hopefully won't be offended.

But if your DM isn't playing by the rules, then you can't really hope to win in the manner you're thinking of.

Example:

You: "My character has become ultra paranoid and thinks there are enemies around every corner, we've been ambushed too often. I ready a eldritch blast to fire at anything that moves that's not us!"

DM: "ok, out of the shadows you see movement..."

You: "ELDRITCH BLAST!"

DM: "the harmless critter is dead."

You: "ELDRITCH BLAST AGAIN UNTIL IM SURE!"


- or -

You: I cast invisibility and scout ahead.

DM: You're ambushed by a stone giant, he gets a surprise round. 20, critical hit, he deals 56 damage to you and you are knocked prone, and all your potion bottles break when you hit the ground.

You: I wail "MY POSHUNS!!!" and try to lick all the leftover liquid before it seeps into the ground. What ability check do I use?

DM: Uh, doesn't matter, you fail and take 1d4 points of damage as ground glass gets stuck in your tongue. The stone giant attacks and ... uh ... misses.

You: I attempt to lick the giants eyeball with my glass coated tongue!

[R.Shackleford]

I suspect it's also a lot better in a lot of places, and that a lot of the people use it because it's where they can game at all - plenty of whom don't care about how much it is being changed.

Yeah I'm sure a lot of people don't have a choice or don't care. I'm also sure a lot of people don't know in order to care. So many people I've met that were new to the game wasn't learning the rules.

I've done AL multiple times in New York (city area, like, not downtown but in the city... I don't know the area all that well), Jersey, DC, Pittsburgh (which was the best city by far for gaming btw SpawnofMorbo was one of my DMs and really helped me become a better DM myself... Found out recently that SpawnofMorbo was someone I knew lol), Saint Louis, Columbus, and a bunch of smaller (but not podunk) cities mostly across the east coast. Due to work I had a lot of time to try out different regions and more often than not I was finding that the games were either not 5e, were 5e modified extremely (typically to match more of a 3e game), or they just played an entirely different system.

Once or twice and I wouldn't be so passionate about how much AL sucks, but I've see way too many games and kept in touch with way too many people to think otherwise.

[smcmike]

Everyone in the party should just YOLO all the time.

Seriously. But do it in a fun way, to have fun, since this is your friend.

You: I cast invisibility and scout ahead.

DM: You're ambushed by a stone giant, he gets a surprise round. 20, critical hit, he deals 56 damage to you and you are knocked prone, and all your potion bottles break when you hit the ground.

You: I wail "MY POSHUNS!!!" and try to lick all the leftover liquid before it seeps into the ground. What ability check do I use?

DM: Uh, doesn't matter, you fail and take 1d4 points of damage as ground glass gets stuck in your tongue. The stone giant attacks and ... uh ... misses.

You: I attempt to lick the giants eyeball with my glass coated tongue!

....Win...

[Fflewddur Fflam]

Yeah I'm sure a lot of people don't have a choice or don't care. I'm also sure a lot of people don't know in order to care. So many people I've met that were new to the game wasn't learning the rules.

I've done AL multiple times in New York (city area, like, not downtown but in the city... I don't know the area all that well), Jersey, DC, Pittsburgh (which was the best city by far for gaming btw SpawnofMorbo was one of my DMs and really helped me become a better DM myself... Found out recently that SpawnofMorbo was someone I knew lol), Saint Louis, Columbus, and a bunch of smaller (but not podunk) cities mostly across the east coast. Due to work I had a lot of time to try out different regions and more often than not I was finding that the games were either not 5e, were 5e modified extremely (typically to match more of a 3e game), or they just played an entirely different system.

Once or twice and I wouldn't be so passionate about how much AL sucks, but I've see way too many games and kept in touch with way too many people to think otherwise.

This is interesting, I've been playing AL over in the Bay Area in a variety of different stores and there's an almost religious exactitude to making sure everything is done by the RAW and there is no deviation whatsoever. In fact, it is well known that if you want to play with any custom rules, it can't be done with any AL mod, no matter what season.

[Alerad]

Try talking to your DM if he is your friend and leaving isn't an option. Explain how you feel about all of your choices nullified. I hope it gets better. I was in a similar situation and could see the panic overcoming my DM. "****! He Charmed my big secret NPC. What do I do? There surely is something in the manual which can save him!"

It is true for both sides. Dice roll, just accept the consequences and carry on. Try to have fun.

One thing I don't like both as a player and DM is rules lawyers. It halts the game to a string of comebacks from both sides and only leads to frustration. Better settle for an argument after the game or leave, if it can't be helped.

Tailoring your game against the players is no fun. But sometimes different factors make it only seem so.
In DMs' defence, sometimes players don't know what's going on. Most of the time actually. If you roll nat20 on your hide and enter the wizard's tower, climb to his office find him sleeping in his armchair, ready a crossbow... And get surprised with a Fireball. We could spend 3 hours arguing, or you could discover later the silent Alarm you triggered and the Arcane eye which was following you. Unlike your DM I'm not going to suggest what just happened unless you discover it in-game.

[R.Shackleford]

This is interesting, I've been playing AL over in the Bay Area in a variety of different stores and there's an almost religious exactitude to making sure everything is done by the RAW and there is no deviation whatsoever. In fact, it is well known that if you want to play with any custom rules, it can't be done with any AL mod, no matter what season.

It can be done when people don't follow said rules.

WotC doesn't really seem to want to control AL very well in all honesty. They see to be a little too hands free when it comes to it.

Religious view of RAW is also a bad thing and can lead to baaaaad situation.

I just wish WotC acted like they had some sort of control over AL instead of putting up a false front.

[Malifice]

Alternatively they could have had an ambush set up with readied actions.

You cant ready actions outside of combat either.

Or to be more correct, basically everyone is walking around with a readied action. Thats what the Dexterity check at the start of combat (initiative) sorts out.

If a DM lets readied actions outside of combat, I also walk.

[CantigThimble]

You cant ready actions outside of combat either.

Or to be more correct, basically everyone is walking around with a readied action. Thats what the Dexterity check at the start of combat (initiative) sorts out.

If a DM lets readied actions outside of combat, I also walk.

Why can't you ready actions outside of combat exactly?

[Inchoroi]

My favorite saying in situations like this is still, unfortunately, perfectly true and appropriate: It is better to not D&D than to bad D&D.

[Malifice]

Why can't you ready actions outside of combat exactly?

Because the assumption is that you're walking around with one readied at all times (attack the hostile monster). Its what intiative determines. Who gets to shoot/ zap or charge first.

Characters arent just walking around as zombies. They have weapons out, are moving cautiously, keeping their ears open and so forth. They're ready for action.

If your party Rogue walks around a corner and stumbles into a dozen Hobgoblins in ambush with arrows nocked and bows pulled back, you roll initiative. There is no 'free attack'.

If the party Rogue didnt detect them before walking around the corner (i.e. their Stealth beat his passive perception) then he starts the combat surprised. The Goblins are going to shoot first - and maybe even twice depending on the initiative result. If the Rogue did detect them but stumbled around the corner anyway, then he is not surprised, however they still get to shoot first if they beat him on an opposed Dex check (called initiative). If he is not surprised and he rolls higher on his initiative check, he even has the chance to act faster than the Goblins and duck back around the corner before they shoot at him.

Otherwise in your campaign, I'll hand you a list of actions that my character has readied in response to several actions (when sighting a hostile monster, but before initiative is rolled, I cast lightning bolt, fire my crossbow or whatever). At high levels, I'll simply ready a time stop for whenever I detect a hostile threat.

Free contingency for everyone.

[R.Shackleford]

Why can't you ready actions outside of combat exactly?

When people try to lawyer the rules and make the game more fiddly. Or when they are trying to do a "gotcha, I know all the rules more than you" argument over the internet.

Saying that you can't ready an action means that when you walk into a room you can't say "I'm going to open that door on the far side once we are all in position" you would have to just go do it instantly instead of waiting.

Without the "Ready Action" outside of combat the ability check system and the exploration rules just don't work.

Barbarian: "I'm going to push open that door in three rounds"... *pushes open the door on the same turn*... Yeah, no one wants that.

[CantigThimble]

There are situations where I, if I were DMing, would not allow readied actions. As a general rule I might not allow them while moving outside of combat, you would need to be focusing on the trigger for your action or the zone in which it's targeted.

Otherwise the group of guards who are completely unaware of any danger are no better off when the pcs bust into the room than the guards who had 6 crossbows aimed at the door waiting for it to open.

[Segev]

My ex ran cheatyface encounters like this. My "Favorite" one involved a regular crocodile...

A regular crocodile that had eaten several powerful spellcasters and was "wearing" their various rings and amulets inside it's guts. When we finally managed to kill it, we got XP for killing a CR2 crocodile and zero loot because he finished digesting the magical items just as he died.

That's well beyond lame. I hope he was subjected to groans and mockery (and possibly thrown skittles).

[Malifice]

There are situations where I, if I were DMing, would not allow readied actions. As a general rule I might not allow them while moving outside of combat, you would need to be focusing on the trigger for your action or the zone in which it's targeted.

OK, my Wizard readies a lightning bolt, cast on the first hostile creature he has clear LOS to in the dungeon.


Otherwise the group of guards who are completely unaware of any danger are no better off when the pcs bust into the room than the guards who had 6 crossbows aimed at the door waiting for it to open.

The guards who are unaware of danger are surprised when the PCs burst into the room, meaning the PCs get a free rounds worth of actions to kill them.

The Guards who are ready for action with loaded crossbows pointed at the get to roll initiative as normal along with the PCs once that door gets kicked in. If the Guards roll higher, they shoot first. If the PCs were unaware of the Guards when they kicked in the door, the PCs are surprised on the first round of combat and the guards shoot first (maybe even twice if they roll high enough on initaitive).


When people try to lawyer the rules and make the game more fiddly. Or when they are trying to do a "gotcha, I know all the rules more than you" argument over the internet.

Saying that you can't ready an action means that when you walk into a room you can't say "I'm going to open that door on the far side once we are all in position" you would have to just go do it instantly instead of waiting.

It means nothing of the sort because you arent in the combat sequence, you're in narrative time. You dont have to 'ready actions', or 'roll initiative' to go check out a door, open or chest, talk to the bartender or anything else. You just tell the DM youre doing it and do it.

If there is a monster behind the door, and you open it, combat sequence kicks in, initiative is rolled, and when your turn rocks up, then you can take the ready action.

[Dalebert]

Try talking to your DM if he is your friend and leaving isn't an option.

Of course it's an option; just not a very appealing one. But as I posted earlier, that's the decision I made. When the DM has been caught lying and cheating on multiple occasions, there's no way I can continue to trust him. With trust lost, I can't enjoy the game. I will doubt everything, and that's even less appealing than quitting games that I've played most of the way through.


In DMs' defence, sometimes players don't know what's going on. Most of the time actually.

In this case we found out what was going on and it was that the DM was cheating. This was just a random encounter where inexplicable things were happening so it seemed harmless enough to find out after the fight.


Unlike your DM I'm not going to suggest what just happened unless you discover it in-game.

That works when you have the players' trust. This DM lost mine and now I will always assume he's metagaming.

[CantigThimble]

OK, my Wizard readies a lightning bolt, cast on the first hostile creature he has clear LOS to in the dungeon.

And he stands at the entrance to the dungeon focusing intently on the first hallway while his party wanders ahead of him?

[krugaan]

Of course it's an option; just not a very appealing one. But as I posted earlier, that's the decision I made. When the DM has been caught lying and cheating on multiple occasions, there's no way I can continue to trust him. With trust lost, I can't enjoy the game. I will doubt everything, and that's even less appealing than quitting games that I've played most of the way through.

In this case we found out what was going on and it was that the DM was cheating. This was just a random encounter where inexplicable things were happening so it seemed harmless enough to find out after the fight.

That works when you have the players' trust. This DM lost mine and now I will always assume he's metagaming.

Don't play to win, play to have fun and spend time with your friend, find another dm, or just do something else. This is a no-win situation otherwise from the picture you're painting.

YOLO!

[Sigreid]

DM screens are lame. That's right, I said it.

The screens are fine for letting the DM keep his map and notes hidden. If they're using it to fudge things, either for or against the party, then that is a problem in my book.

[Arial Black]

Why can't you ready actions outside of combat exactly?

Because Actions In Combat (to give 'actions' their full name) do not even exist outside of combat rounds, and the first round of any combat begins with the initiative roll.

It is simply not possible, RAW, to undertake 'combat' outside of...combat!

This doesn't mean that you cannot do your 'stuff' (casting spells, using class abilities, whatever normally uses Actions In Combat to resolve) outside of combat; it just means that you don't need Actions In Combat to do stuff outside of combat!

For example, casting the cantrip fire bolt in combat absolutely requires the Cast A Spell action, but if combat is not going on you can certainly cast fire bolt to light a bonfire, and you don't need an Action In Combat to do so. Indeed, it's not possible to use an Action In Combat unless you are acting in initiative order in combat rounds.

You could, in theory, shoot an arrow at a target (and even resolve it with an attack roll-although you can use another method of resolving the shot if you want because it's not actual combat) outside of combat, but the moment you declare that you are shooting a bow as a hostile act then this is combat, the DM decides if anyone is surprised (usually with a contested ability check like Bluff vs Insight or Stealth vs Perception), initiative is rolled! Your target may have seen you nock an arrow or divine your hostile intent through body language or whatever, and beat you to the draw!

That's how D&D combat works, and having attacks outside of initiative is literally saying that shooting an arrow at an enemy is not combat! This is indefensible!

[Malifice]

And he stands at the entrance to the dungeon focusing intently on the first hallway while his party wanders ahead of him?

You can move + ready every round. He takes the ready action, and then moves. When his next turn comes around, he repeats this.

He's cautiously advancing forwards, ready to cast lightning bolt at the first sign of trouble (readied action). The Rogue is advancing forwards cautiously, loaded crossbow out, ready to shoot the first baddie that moves.

Which is of course, the default state of affairs.

Its assumed that the PCs are doing this, and that monsters are more or less expecting hostilities (dungeons are dangerous places after all).

When some hostile Orc patrol come around the corner with crossbows of their own, everyones 'readied action' kicks in (including the Orcs). All combatants get a dexterity (initiative) check to see who goes first. Surprised (unaware of the other side) creatures can't act on turn one (but can take reactions, starting at after turn 1 ends - to deflect crossbow bolts or cast shield in response to any ambushers - assuming they roll high enough on their Dex check).

Basically the default 'readied action' for everyone is whatever they wind up doing on their turn 1. If they get surprised, that readied action is to stand there like a grinning idiot getting shot.

[Malifice]

The screens are fine for letting the DM keep his map and notes hidden. If they're using it to fudge things, either for or against the party, then that is a problem in my book.

I fudge, for and against. I side with Gygax here.

Sometimes (around 50 percent of the time give ro take) I also roll in the open and let the dice fall where they may.

All eyes are on that die. Intently.

Depends on the circumstances. I'm not keen on killing PCs for doing nothing more than good roleplaying and story engagement (although it does happen).

[Dalebert]

I roll out in the open 95% of the time or more. Private rolls are for when it's specifically called for like investigating for traps or death rolls for both PCs and NPCs (because people shouldn't know of success or failure until it's possibly too late).

[Arial Black]

There's something else he does that might grind your gears. He makes invisibility super powerful. Basically if you do it in battle, he insists it's too noisy to hear you so you're basically automatically hidden. I may be getting my users mixed up but I thought you made a thread or two on this topic and how it make invisibility too good and I tend to agree. The way I treat, if you don't stealth which typically takes an action, then people know roughly where you are, at least well enough to attack with disadvantage. If you're using a ranged attack, you fire toward the noises or dusty footprints or whatever. If you're melee, you head toward where you think they are and can generally narrow it down as you get closer to the right square(s) and swing.

He's had so many guys be completely beyond attacking short of guessing what square they're in. And I don't even trust him to be honest about that for obvious reasons.

I had a DM for the 2E boxed set Dragon Mountain. He had good points and bad points. One bad point was his adjudication of invisibility.

We were invisibly scouting a hobgoblin camp and set off a fireball (improved invisibility kept the caster invisible). The bugbears ran out of their barracks, saw us(?), and attacked!

'But...we're invisible!'

His 'logic' went like this: invisibility is of the illusion school, the bugbears couldn't see any attackers, there must be some attackers, therefore the attackers must be invisible(?). Since they had worked this out, then they automatically 'disbelieved' the illusion of invisibility and could therefore see us as plain as day.

Strange how we could never detect the bad guys in the same way...

Later, a sliding wall had cut off our retreat. We wanted to know what (if any) enemies waited for us if we broke the wall down, so we made the wall invisible.

"Oh, no, you can't see through invisible walls!"

WTF!!!

"No, the invisibility is just an illusion. You only think you can see through it; you can't actually see through it!"

[Malifice]

I had a DM for the 2E boxed set Dragon Mountain. He had good points and bad points. One bad point was his adjudication of invisibility.

We were invisibly scouting a hobgoblin camp and set off a fireball (improved invisibility kept the caster invisible). The bugbears ran out of their barracks, saw us(?), and attacked!

'But...we're invisible!'

His 'logic' went like this: invisibility is of the illusion school, the bugbears couldn't see any attackers, there must be some attackers, therefore the attackers must be invisible(?). Since they had worked this out, then they automatically 'disbelieved' the illusion of invisibility and could therefore see us as plain as day.

Strange how we could never detect the bad guys in the same way...

Later, a sliding wall had cut off our retreat. We wanted to know what (if any) enemies waited for us if we broke the wall down, so we made the wall invisible.

"Oh, no, you can't see through invisible walls!"

WTF!!!

"No, the invisibility is just an illusion. You only think you can see through it; you can't actually see through it!"

Ergh.

One of the advanatages of 5E's simplicity. If you're invisible then your opponents are assumed to be able to attack you normally (at disadvantage). You're immune to Opportunity attacks (need to be able to see you to do one) and most spells (which almost all require 'a target you can see').

Had my EK/ Wizard do this the other day. Cast invisiblity (he wears Plate mail) and thought that was the end of it. I told him that until he takes the Hide action 'all' it does for him is the above (disadvantage on attacks against, advantage on his attacks, immunity to AoO and most spells).

He was like, how do I cast it and Hide in the same round. I replied 'Take 2 levels in Rogue'. Expertise in stealth and Cunning action (Hide) are your friends.

[lost_my_NHL]

On the topic of rules brought up in the thread:
Invisibility
The stealth checks for invisibility seem a pretty good starting point. +20 to stealth while moving, -5 to move at greater than 1/2 but less than full speed, -20 to hide while attacking while running (reasonable interpolation: -10 to move at full speed on a single move action) -20 to snipe an arrow (reasonable interpretation: or a spell with a target of other). Perception has a DC of -10 to hear a battle or 0 to hear someone talking. It suffers +5 DC if you're distracted (reasonable interpolation: distracted by someone talking to you). So if a battle going on as a distraction is a + 15 to DC, then hearing another battle behind you despite the battle you're in is a DC of 5, same as hearing a character talking behind you despite another character talking to you. Granted, if you're attacked or suffer damage in battle, you the perception modifier is probably worse

To take a case in point, think of an invisible NPC taking a move action to go their full move speed (say, 30 ft) and then cast a nonverbal buff spell on himself. Next round, they shoot an arrow and then try to hide as a move action. A character is looking for them but surrounded by a battle. I as a DM would overall give the NPC +10 on their stealth check and +0 on the snipe, but apply a -15 penalty on the perception due to the distraction of battle. A roguish character would beat a particularly perceptive character most of the time, but a perceptive character would almost always find an unskilled NPC after a few rounds.

Initiative
How would you guys feel if both sides know combat is about to happen, you do away with being flat footed in the surprise round? Or, if archers are aiming their crossbows at a square, to consider that they threaten it? It wouldn't mean "readying" an action in the traditional sense. An alerted rogue who walks around the corner and wins initiative gets the first shot. However, an alerted barbarian that walks around the corner, wins initiative, and charges 20 ft has to eat AOOs before he gets his attacks - similar effect as if they had a surprise round, but barbarian's not flat footed.

[CantigThimble]

You can move + ready every round. He takes the ready action, and then moves. When his next turn comes around, he repeats this.

He's cautiously advancing forwards, ready to cast lightning bolt at the first sign of trouble (readied action). The Rogue is advancing forwards cautiously, loaded crossbow out, ready to shoot the first baddie that moves.

Which is of course, the default state of affairs.

Its assumed that the PCs are doing this, and that monsters are more or less expecting hostilities (dungeons are dangerous places after all).

When some hostile Orc patrol come around the corner with crossbows of their own, everyones 'readied action' kicks in (including the Orcs). All combatants get a dexterity (initiative) check to see who goes first. Surprised (unaware of the other side) creatures can't act on turn one (but can take reactions, starting at after turn 1 ends - to deflect crossbow bolts or cast shield in response to any ambushers - assuming they roll high enough on their Dex check).

Basically the default 'readied action' for everyone is whatever they wind up doing on their turn 1. If they get surprised, that readied action is to stand there like a grinning idiot getting shot.

Which is why I stated I would put a limit on readying out of combat that if you want to ready an action you must be immobile.

[Arial Black]

Which is why I stated I would put a limit on readying out of combat that if you want to ready an action you must be immobile.

As in my post above, it is not possible to take the 'Ready' Action In Combat, or any Action In Combat, when you are not 'In Combat'; i.e. acting on initiative.

[AvatarVecna]

On the topic of rules brought up in the thread:
Invisibility
The stealth checks for invisibility seem a pretty good starting point. +20 to stealth while moving, -5 to move at greater than 1/2 but less than full speed, -20 to hide while attacking while running (reasonable interpolation: -10 to move at full speed on a single move action) -20 to snipe an arrow (reasonable interpretation: or a spell with a target of other). Perception has a DC of -10 to hear a battle or 0 to hear someone talking. It suffers +5 DC if you're distracted (reasonable interpolation: distracted by someone talking to you). So if a battle going on as a distraction is a + 15 to DC, then hearing another battle behind you despite the battle you're in is a DC of 5, same as hearing a character talking behind you despite another character talking to you. Granted, if you're attacked or suffer damage in battle, you the perception modifier is probably worse

To take a case in point, think of an invisible NPC taking a move action to go their full move speed (say, 30 ft) and then cast a nonverbal buff spell on himself. Next round, they shoot an arrow and then try to hide as a move action. A character is looking for them but surrounded by a battle. I as a DM would overall give the NPC +10 on their stealth check and +0 on the snipe, but apply a -15 penalty on the perception due to the distraction of battle. A roguish character would beat a particularly perceptive character most of the time, but a perceptive character would almost always find an unskilled NPC after a few rounds.

Initiative
How would you guys feel if both sides know combat is about to happen, you do away with being flat footed in the surprise round? Or, if archers are aiming their crossbows at a square, to consider that they threaten it? It wouldn't mean "readying" an action in the traditional sense. An alerted rogue who walks around the corner and wins initiative gets the first shot. However, an alerted barbarian that walks around the corner, wins initiative, and charges 20 ft has to eat AOOs before he gets his attacks - similar effect as if they had a surprise round, but barbarian's not flat footed.

This rules discussion seems based on 3.5/PF rules, but this is a 5e thread. Intentional, or mistaken edition?

[CantigThimble]

As in my post above, it is not possible to take the 'Ready' Action In Combat, or any Action In Combat, when you are not 'In Combat'; i.e. acting on initiative.

Like 'Cast a Spell', 'Help', 'Search', 'Hide' or 'Attack'ing an inanimate object?

Edit: Actually, don't bother answering that. I'm done here. Nothing productive is coming out of this.

[AvatarVecna]

Like 'Cast a Spell', 'Help', 'Search', 'Hide' or 'Attack'ing an inanimate object?

Edit: Actually, don't bother answering that. I'm done here. Nothing productive is coming out of this.

Indeed, none of those things happen outside of combat. That's why if a Wizard wishes to cast Alarm over his party's campground, or make his staff glow in the dark with Light, he has to slap the Barbarian first.

EDIT: Of course, that would constitute taking the Attack action, which we all know can't be taken out of combat, so combat can never actually be initiated I suppose.

[bid]

At high levels, I'll simply ready a time stop for whenever I detect a hostile threat.
That wouldn't quite work, as you'll spend the slot even if you don't release it.

Wasting a slot every round of pre-combat will make for short days.

[Malifice]

Indeed, none of those things happen outside of combat. That's why if a Wizard wishes to cast Alarm over his party's campground, or make his staff glow in the dark with Light, he has to slap the Barbarian first.

EDIT: Of course, that would constitute taking the Attack action, which we all know can't be taken out of combat, so combat can never actually be initiated I suppose.

Youre permanently paralyzed unless you have hostiles nearby. Only when the DM calls for initiative can you start taking actions.

:smalleek:

I think some posters are conflating combat and narrative time. The assumption is that you're always ready for some threat to pop up and blast it.

For those times when you're not ready, enter the surprise rules.


On the topic of rules brought up in the thread:

Invisibility
The stealth checks for invisibility seem a pretty good starting point. +20 to stealth while moving, -5 to move at greater than 1/2 but less than full speed, -20 to hide while attacking while running (reasonable interpolation: -10 to move at full speed on a single move action) -20 to snipe an arrow (reasonable interpretation: or a spell with a target of other). Perception has a DC of -10 to hear a battle or 0 to hear someone talking. It suffers +5 DC if you're distracted (reasonable interpolation: distracted by someone talking to you). So if a battle going on as a distraction is a + 15 to DC, then hearing another battle behind you despite the battle you're in is a DC of 5, same as hearing a character talking behind you despite another character talking to you. Granted, if you're attacked or suffer damage in battle, you the perception modifier is probably worse

As long as you also grant +20 to Stealth checks when PCs are hiding behing other total obscurement (such as behind a wall, or in long grass, or a Halfling using Stealth anywhere) and such.

Invisibility only allows the Stealth check to be made (as an action normally). It doesnt give you a bonus to the check at all, any more than hiding in a cupboard or behind a wall or pillar does.

Example:

On his turn, a PC surrounded by three Orcs, casts invisibility as his action, and then moves away.

The Orcs cannot make opportunity attacks when he moves (he's invisible, and AoO requires the attacker to be able to see the target). However, on the Orcs turn they CAN simply walk over to the PC and swing axes at him (at disadvantage as they arent sure where he is). They dont have to guess his space, make Perception checks, and he isnt hidden from them.

They just walk over (they're actually following him as he whooshes past) and swing wildly where they think he is.

Now its the PCs turn again. He can (if he wants) take the Hide action, and attempt a Stealth check vs the Orcs passive perception. Elven Boots (which grant advantage to movement only stealth checks come in useful here). If he succeeds he is now invisible AND hidden, and the Orcs cant attack him without a lucky guess unless at least one first takes the Search action and locates him (sniffing the air, listening intently, and looking for tracks) and points him out to the others.

If he fails, he isnt hidden and the Orcs can attack him again (at disadvantage).

Now if the caster was also a Rogue of 2nd level, he could [cast invisiblity] as his action, and then immediately [Hide] as a bonus action via Cunning action. He could also do the same if he was a sorcerer with Quicken metamagic (cast as bonus, hide as action) or a high level Ranger (cast as action, use Vanish ability to hide as bonus action).

Otherwise it takes at least two rounds to hide using invisibility. One to become invisible, and another to use the Hide action.

You get no bonuses to your Stealth score for being invisible, and nor should you. The spell is already potent as is for a 2nd level spell.

If you want to be good at stealth, dip Rogue, take Expertise in stealth and go nuts. Or better yet, cast invisiblity on the Rogue, and let him use his expertise and cunning action and he can go nuts.

Incidentally, you dont want to know what havoc an 11th level Arcane trickster can do with the invisibility spell. He can become invisible, and then Hide as a bonus action (with expertise and treating any roll of less than 10 as a 10) on the same round.

With Greater invisibility, this makes him virtually immune to being attacked in return.

[Malifice]

That wouldn't quite work, as you'll spend the slot even if you don't release it.

Huh? Thats not how ready spells work. They use concentration, but the slot doesnt get expended unless you cast it.

[hymer]

Huh? Thats not how ready spells work. They use concentration, but the slot doesnt get expended unless you cast it.


When you ready a spell, you cast it as normal but hold its energy, which you release with your reaction when the trigger occurs.

I can see how this could be interpreted both ways. Has anyone seen any Mearles or Crawford word on this?

[Malifice]

I can see how this could be interpreted both ways. Has anyone seen any Mearles or Crawford word on this?

Its pretty clear man. No trigger, no action.

You can sit in the back of a room for 5 rounds of a combat covering a door with lightning bolt with a readied action.

Takes up your concentration but.

[hymer]

Its pretty clear man. No trigger, no action.

You can sit in the back of a room for 5 rounds of a combat covering a door with lightning bolt with a readied action.

Takes up your concentration but.

I can still see both sides. :smallsmile:

[Balmas]

I roll out in the open 95% of the time or more. Private rolls are for when it's specifically called for like investigating for traps or death rolls for both PCs and NPCs (because people shouldn't know of success or failure until it's possibly too late).

This is generally my approach to things. The only reason it should be hidden is if there's some reason the PCs should be unaware of the results.

Which, when the players know about how you handle things, can itself be judiciously used to build tension. "Oh hell he's rolling dice WHY IS HE ROLLING DICE"

[Malifice]

This is generally my approach to things. The only reason it should be hidden is if there's some reason the PCs should be unaware of the results.

Which, when the players know about how you handle things, can itself be judiciously used to build tension. "Oh hell he's rolling dice WHY IS HE ROLLING DICE"

Everyone has a different opinion on this.

For mine, I dont think the dice should get in the way of a good story and a fun time. Due to inherent randomness, eventually a session will happen where the players will roll crap, and the DM will roll well, and a TPK happens from no fault of the players.

Im not opposed to TPKs as a rule, but I'd rather they tended to happen mainly to parties biting off more than they can chew rather than by vagaries of the dice. Thats why I go with a 50/50 split - I can mitigate this problem a bit.

Some encounters, all dice are in the open though and TPKs are on the table for all. Same with some important rolls - there is a dramatic pause and then it gets rolled. Its a judgement call for mine.

[Dark Ass4ssin 1]

DM:Alright, its your turn.
Me: Cool, I attack it, then action surge for a couple more attacks.
DM:You can't action surge this guy.
Me: Why not? That is unheard of.
DM:This guy is just to quick for you to hit that many times?
Me: Are you sure you wanna rule that?
DM:Yup, he has a custom abili-
Me:*grabs dice and funyuns and leaves*

Was I just being butthurt and dramatic? Maybe.
Did this DM pull crap like that again? Not while I was around.
Are we cool now? Yes, because we are both mature(ish) gamers.
Did I get a full bag of funyuns? Yes

Long story short, sometimes leaving is the best option no matter what the situation looks like.

[Coffee_Dragon]

For mine, I dont think the dice should get in the way of a good story and a fun time.

So you would be OK with a player rolling, saying "That wouldn't make for a good story and fun time", scooping and rerolling? (Or just announcing the result that would make for a good story and fun time.)

[Malifice]

So you would be OK with a player rolling, saying "That wouldn't make for a good story and fun time", scooping and rerolling? (Or just announcing the result that would make for a good story and fun time.)

Strawman much.

I also dont allow players to create the encounters. But I do create them for their enjoyment.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Strawman much.

It's a very legitimate question, even though you may not like the implications. Either you don't actually think rolls should be fudged for story and fun, or you think you're the only one at the table who knows or decides what fun is.

[Malifice]

It's a very legitimate question, even though you may not like the implications. Either you don't actually think rolls should be fudged for story and fun, or you think you're the only one at the table who knows or decides what fun is.

Youre positing a binary question that I disagree needs to be binary. I know my players and what they enjoy.

Im the manager, and referee of the game, and director of the story when I DM. I take my cues from the players and insert story elements into the game that they suggest, and some of my own. Its a collaborative process (however the DM directs it).

I dont think the players getting massacred on account of the dice is particularly fun. Ive experienced it before as a player and a DM and it sucked. It brought the whole game to a standstill and all but killed the campaign. Of course, there needs to be an element of risk in the game or it becomes less challenging (and kinda boring).

I could use 'plot points' to increase the players ability to adjust reality, but I dont. The players create characters, and as players and DM we have a discussion about the campaign and what we want out of it.

Ultimately if my players arent having fun, I hope I would notice or in the alternative they would simply walk.

I would If I was playing in a game I wasnt enjoying.

[Coffee_Dragon]

Youre positing a binary question that I disagree needs to be binary.

You were not forbidden from giving a qualified answer, of course.


Im the manager, and referee of the game, and director of the story when I DM. I take my cues from the players and insert story elements into the game that they suggest, and some of my own. Its a collaborative process (however the DM directs it).

This sounds very much like a "DM as storyteller, players as audience" view of role-playing where the characters can drive a car of any colour to the dragon cave as long as it's a black pudding. To be honest I can't claim to really have made it past this stage myself, I've just developed a strong theoretical scepticism of it, and try to take baby steps (like rolling openly whenever there isn't a clear reason not to).


I dont think the players getting massacred on account of the dice is particularly fun.

I agree entirely with that, but think there are much better practices to deal with this sort of thing. It can be as simple as an open "no TPKs" clause that everyone agrees with. Routinely fudging dice rolls behind a screen to make the "right" things happen is bad practice. A pretence that the "right" things luckily just keep happening as a result of genuine dice rolls is not worth maintaining. Just put the machinations out in the open, and if everyone's OK with it, they will keep being OK with it. Alternatively - embrace the idea that if it's a good idea for you to fudge for story and fun, you can trust your players to do the same. :smallwink:

[smcmike]

Quote Originally Posted by PHB p. 193
When you ready a spell, you cast it as normal but hold its energy, which you release with your reaction when the trigger occurs.


This is not clear at all, actually. My interpretation is that you waste the spell slot when you ready the spell, since you "cast it as normal." That spell slot is GONE.

But I see the other side too.

[bid]

Its pretty clear man. No trigger, no action.

You can sit in the back of a room for 5 rounds of a combat covering a door with lightning bolt with a readied action.

Takes up your concentration but.
Right.


@JeremyECrawford How does Readying a spell work? Do you lose your spell slot if the trigger effect never occurs?

— John F Ezell (@EZotor_23) August 29, 2015

A readied spell's slot is lost if you don't release the spell with your reaction before the start of your next turn. https://t.co/0K59zeZLjX

[Inglorin]

You can sit in the back of a room for 5 rounds of a combat covering a door with lightning bolt with a readied action.

Nope. You can't. Apart from the Tweet, which you can ignore or accept, the rules clearly state under the "Ready" action, that you cast the spell normally. Part of casting a spell is expanding the corresponding spell slot. See "Spell Slots", pg. 201: "When a character casts a spell, he or she expands a slot of that spell's level or higher..."

[Malifice]

Nope. You can't. Apart from the Tweet, which you can ignore or accept, the rules clearly state under the "Ready" action, that you cast the spell normally. Part of casting a spell is expanding the corresponding spell slot. See "Spell Slots", pg. 201: "When a character casts a spell, he or she expands a slot of that spell's level or higher..."

I agree, it goes. My argument is that it can be held as per the RAW.

I wasnt aware of that tweet though.

[bid]

I wasnt aware of that tweet though.
I remembered it because it seems unfair to casters. No other class will waste something by readying.

[R.Shackleford]

I remembered it because it seems unfair to casters. No other class will waste something by readying.

It makes sense though.

Also it isn't like martials get martial specific, decent or good, options to waste in the first place.

[Giant2005]

I remembered it because it seems unfair to casters. No other class will waste something by readying.

It seems fair to me - a Caster can ready a full action while a martial character can only ready a single attack instead of a full action's worth of attacks. The fact that there is potential to waste the spell by readying is what balances it out.

[Pex]

I had a DM for the 2E boxed set Dragon Mountain. He had good points and bad points. One bad point was his adjudication of invisibility.

We were invisibly scouting a hobgoblin camp and set off a fireball (improved invisibility kept the caster invisible). The bugbears ran out of their barracks, saw us(?), and attacked!

'But...we're invisible!'

His 'logic' went like this: invisibility is of the illusion school, the bugbears couldn't see any attackers, there must be some attackers, therefore the attackers must be invisible(?). Since they had worked this out, then they automatically 'disbelieved' the illusion of invisibility and could therefore see us as plain as day.

Strange how we could never detect the bad guys in the same way...

Later, a sliding wall had cut off our retreat. We wanted to know what (if any) enemies waited for us if we broke the wall down, so we made the wall invisible.

"Oh, no, you can't see through invisible walls!"

WTF!!!

"No, the invisibility is just an illusion. You only think you can see through it; you can't actually see through it!"

Holy flashback!

By chance did you make a posting and discuss this on Ye Olde rec.games.frp.dnd newsgroup? I quite remember a heated debate on what it means for a wall to be invisible and whether you could see what's behind it.

[Arial Black]

Holy flashback!

By chance did you make a posting and discuss this on Ye Olde rec.games.frp.dnd newsgroup? I quite remember a heated debate on what it means for a wall to be invisible and whether you could see what's behind it.

I'm not aware of that forum, so no.

It may be that others have had similar experiences.

I suppose one of the other players might have told the story.

[Arial Black]

Like 'Cast a Spell', 'Help', 'Search', 'Hide' or 'Attack'ing an inanimate object?

Edit: Actually, don't bother answering that. I'm done here. Nothing productive is coming out of this.

Answering your post may help others who are curious...

Outside of combat, you certainly can cast spells, help others with an ability check, search for stuff, hide, and even use a weapon to damage inanimate objects.

My point is that you do not need Action In Combat to do these things; you just do them! 'Actions' are neither required nor permitted to do things outside of combat rounds.

For example, you don't need to take the 'Cast A Spell' action to cast a spell, you just cast it and no 'action' is needed....unless you are in combat rounds going in initiative order, in which case the Cast A Spell action is required to cast a spell.

Actions In Combat simply do not exist outside of initiative/combat rounds, nor are they required to do stuff outside of combat rounds; you just do your stuff.

[Balmas]

RE: TPKs

I like to think that I am not a killer DM. I try to present encounters that are challenging, but fair and beatable. (Gah. I already sound like a killer DM who doesn't know it.) If the party is really struggling because I overestimated their abilities and what they can handle, I might knock some points from the monsters' health pool, or make them do slightly less damage per attack.

If, however, the party is struggling because it's acting stupidly--the rogue cowboying off to fish for sneak attacks, the fighter refusing to flank a monster so the rogue can actually do that, the wizard doing nothing but blasting, cleric being a healbot, etc--then the dice fall where they may. And I try to make monsters act as intelligent as they ought to be; a feral beast may try to coup de gras a downed PC so it can drag off its meal, but intelligent monsters might realize that if someone's down, you can coup de gras them later, once the healer is also downed.

[MaxWilson]

I like to think that I am not a killer DM. I try to present encounters that are challenging, but fair and beatable. (Gah. I already sound like a killer DM who doesn't know it.) If the party is really struggling because I overestimated their abilities and what they can handle, I might knock some points from the monsters' health pool, or make them do slightly less damage per attack.

Hahaha. I'm the opposite. I like to think (and make my players think) that I'm a killer DM, but in practice I'm really a bit of a softie. If there's a player struggling with multiple deaths I have at various times ensured he stumbled upon a means of regenerating damage, provided him a Bag of Tricks for meat shields, and/or revised the game rules to make death less of a fun-killer for him. (Once even offered the player a chance to make a Wisdom saving throw after death and become a revenant. Didn't happen though.)

The reason I am this way is that I feel that the players really are the focus of the experience--there's no point in D&D if your players aren't enjoying themselves, and that includes the DM--and yet a good play experience must also function as an adversarial endeavor: not players-vs-DM, but player-characters-vs-the-world/enemy. There MUST be challenges, and if you really want the players to feel that in the bones, someone has to act as the advocate for the creatures which create those challenges. That means there has to be an evil part of me which loves to kill the PCs and take their treasure, even if the social part of me likes it better when my friends win.

Good DMs have to be a little bit schizoid. :)

[WereRabbitz]

I put this right up there with monsters that avoid casting on people who have immunities or resistance. Like casting disease on everyone but the paladin when you don't know he's a paladin yet.

No one ever tries to put my half-elf to sleep : P

[CantigThimble]

I put this right up there with monsters that avoid casting on people who have immunities or resistance. Like casting disease on everyone but the paladin when you don't know he's a paladin yet.

No one ever tries to put my half-elf to sleep : P

To be fair, if youre fighting remotely intellegent creatures, Paladins are rarely very subtle in appearance (heavy armor, holy symbol on shield, self-righteousness in bearing) and anything capable of using sleep magic would have figured out ages ago that pointy eared people were immune.

Huh, now I want to try playing a fighter who acts like a paladin so that people are less likely to use fear and disease effects on him. :smallbiggrin:

[ZZTRaider]

No one ever tries to put my half-elf to sleep : P

That might make sense, though, if the sleep-casting enemy has run into elves before... unless you're concealing your elven nature. But I can definitely buy that someone noticed you're a half-elf and therefore didn't bother trying to put you to sleep more easily than someone realized that the guy in shiny plate must be a paladin and is therefore immune to disease.

EDIT: The big difference is that it's a lot easier for a non-paladin to pick up shiny plate and a holy symbol than it is for a non-elf to pass themselves off as an elf.

[Segev]

Indeed. Your fighter pretending to be a paladin and being targeted when the real paladins are not would be the best indicator of whether or not it's the DM metagaming.

[CantigThimble]

Indeed. Your fighter pretending to be a paladin and being targeted when the real paladins are not would be the best indicator of whether or not it's the DM metagaming.

Unless the enemy had just seen you heal a dying companion with a mundane healing kit or something to that effect.

[Segev]

Unless the enemy had just seen you heal a dying companion with a mundane healing kit or something to that effect.

I've played clerics and paladins who've done that, just to save magic. Though yes, that would be at least an excuse. The question still arises whether or not the real paladin who did such a thing is similarly targeted.

[Kushina43]

I realize this whole thing is off topic and I apologize, but I feel I have to chime in: What in the world is this "you can't ready an action out of combat" thing, I assumed you could as part of both combat and narrative?

I would assume one could ready an attack/spell/etc. in preparation for something, even in non-combat, and do so when/if the proper trigger occurs as a reaction (not necessarily the combat one unless it would result in combat immediately afterwards) For purely fluff examples, I don't see why one couldn't ready a cast of Prestidigitation on someone's food or drink just as they're about to consume it, or Light on something one is holding if someone says something based on context purely for roleplay opportunities.

Or hell, how about the classic "I ready [ability/other interaction] until [potential target presumably seen but not in combat with] approaches [area within range]" With the ready rules you take that action with a reaction (which doesn't matter combat-wise right now since the trigger occurred before initiative roll and thus either can be used out of combat or as a surprise round, going off either way) once the trigger occurs before anything else. If you can't take ready actions out of combat then you literally can't do this simple task that is outlined right in the PHB.


READY
[...] Examples include "If the cultist steps on the trapdoor, I'll pull the lever that opens it."

Can this exact scenario occur outside of combat? Absolutely. Just go to a lever and get ready to pull it if/when someone comes in! I'm sure it has happened hundreds of times! So why are we questioning out-of-combat Ready when it's clearly possible? I must be missing something here

[Naicz]

You absolutely could!***

***In one of two ways:

1.) If you were hidden from the cultist (Your stealth beat his passive Perception) then *pull woosh scream splat*

2.) When the cultist walked over the trapdoor and saw you "reaching" for the lever, you both would roll initiative (see below)

2A.) You win initiative *pull woosh scream splat*

2B.) He wins initiative and he would either move (if he noticed the trapdoor, some DM meta may come in the play here), attack you, or whatever he chooses

The point is you aren't "readying" the action outside of combat, you are trying to do it and depending on the targets perception, you surprise him, or enter normal combat rounds.

Hope this helps

*edit*: And if #1 applies and you are stealthed, TECHNICALLY you are still entering combat rounds anyways, you just get to act because on his first turn he is surprised, the moment you take action that some other thing could/wants to react to (usually an enemy or an act of aggression, most townsfolk won't go into combat rounds when you light a torch) you enter initiative order and are "in-combat"

[mephnick]

Can this exact scenario occur outside of combat? Absolutely. Just go to a lever and get ready to pull it if/when someone comes in! I'm sure it has happened hundreds of times! So why are we questioning out-of-combat Ready when it's clearly possible? I must be missing something here

I believe they're using the trapdoor example in a currently running combat. You can't use the Ready action out of combat. If you are out of combat and the cultist hasn't seen you, you can say "I'll pull that lever when he's on the trap." As soon as you decide to pull the lever, initiative is rolled and surprise is determined. If the cultist is surprised (likely), you can use your action on your turn to pull the lever regardless of who wins initiative, but it's not a Ready action. It's no different than making an attack. Declaring you're making the first move just starts the initiative process, it doesn't mean you get to go first. If the cultist is not surprised, he gets a chance to react first (you know, that whole initiative mechanic) and may decide to move, in which case your plan has failed because you didn't react fast enough.

You can't Ready actions out of combat, you can just declare the intent to execute an action which starts initiative and combat. If you set it up so that the enemy is surprised it will work as if you had readied an action but this isn't actually what you've done, you've just removed the enemy from partaking in the first round of combat because of the surprised condition.

*Damn, ninja'd! Bad initiative roll

[Dalebert]

It's been explained well. Another way of putting it is, you can't be out of combat and declare "I'm declaring this action and also declaring that I get to automatically surprise and/or get higher initiative than my enemy." Thus readying an action only makes sense in the heat of combat when you are already getting to go before the event takes place and you just want to delay briefly. Note also that if you're turn comes around and the event hasn't been triggered, the readied action is just lost. So again, it only makes sense IN combat sequence.

[Malifice]

Just assume everyone has a 'readied' action at the start of every combat.

Otherwise get used to: My Rogue walks around with a loaded crossbow, and a readied action, to shoot before initiative is resolved at any hostile creature I see.

And the DM coming back with 'All the monsters in the dungeon take the ready action; to attack the party before initiative is rolled, as soon as they see them'

Everyone is ready for action at all times. For the times when your opponent or you are not ready, there are the Surprise rules.

[Segev]

Just assume everyone has a 'readied' action at the start of every combat.

Otherwise get used to: My Rogue walks around with a loaded crossbow, and a readied action, to shoot before initiative is resolved at any hostile creature I see.

And the DM coming back with 'All the monsters in the dungeon take the ready action; to attack the party before initiative is rolled, as soon as they see them'

Everyone is ready for action at all times. For the times when your opponent or you are not ready, there are the Surprise rules.

Invalid triggers, because readied actions require things that your character can detect. The closest translation of this would be "My rogue walks around with a loaded crossbow and a readied action to shoot anything that moves that isn't the party."

[Knaight]

It's been explained well. Another way of putting it is, you can't be out of combat and declare "I'm declaring this action and also declaring that I get to automatically surprise and/or get higher initiative than my enemy." Thus readying an action only makes sense in the heat of combat when you are already getting to go before the event takes place and you just want to delay briefly. Note also that if you're turn comes around and the event hasn't been triggered, the readied action is just lost. So again, it only makes sense IN combat sequence.

So something like watching a specific doorway with a crossbow already pointed at it because you have reason to suspect someone will be going through it in particular makes no sense then?

[fishyfishyfishy]

So something like watching a specific doorway with a crossbow already pointed at it because you have reason to suspect someone will be going through it in particular makes no sense then?

In that circumstance, if the thing approaching is aware you are on the other side even though they do not see you (just as you cannot see them) Initiative would be rolled when the door is opened. If they are not aware of you then surprise and then Initiative is rolled. No action was readied because there's nothing to react to.

[Dalebert]

So something like watching a specific doorway with a crossbow already pointed at it because you have reason to suspect someone will be going through it in particular makes no sense then?

It does make sense. It just doesn't fall under readying an action. Mechanically speaking, it falls under "I'm being sneaky and trying to gain surprise." The key word there is "trying". IF you succeed, presumably by having a stealth roll that exceeds it's PP, then you will gain surprise and it won't get to act during the first round. You don't get to automatically succeed at what you're attempting to do. In fact, if it sees ANY of your companions, it will not be surprised and gets to act in the first round (presumably because your group stealth roll failed, i.e. at least half your party didn't succeed). In that case, you'll just have to hope that you rolled higher on initiative than it.

[Easy_Lee]

It does make sense. It just doesn't fall under readying an action. Mechanically speaking, it falls under "I'm being sneaky and trying to gain surprise." The key word there is "trying". IF you succeed, presumably by having a stealth roll that exceeds it's PP, then you will gain surprise and it won't get to act during the first round. You don't get to automatically succeed at what you're attempting to do. In fact, if it sees ANY of your companions, it will not be surprised and gets to act in the first round (presumably because your group stealth roll failed, i.e. at least half your party didn't succeed). In that case, you'll just have to hope that you rolled higher on initiative than it.

To add to this, readied actions are lost if they aren't spent by the end of the round. This is especially relevant for spells, which can't be "held" longer, according to the text.

By RAW, you really can't ready an action outside of combat because there are no rounds. Though it's possible to be on edge, which may give you advantage on perception or a bonus to initiative or whatever, depending on the DM.

[Dalebert]

I should note that I've handled this incorrectly in the past, both as a player and possibly as a DM. I'm not sure. So this thread going completely off-topic *COUGH* has educated me. :)

[mephnick]

We played it wrong for almost a year until we had someone join as an Assassin and actually force me to read the surprise/initiative/ready rules more closely.

[Malifice]

Invalid triggers, because readied actions require things that your character can detect. The closest translation of this would be "My rogue walks around with a loaded crossbow and a readied action to shoot anything that moves that isn't the party."

Both triggers go off when you see something.

You dont have to see the trigger at the time you ready. You just have to see the trigger when (or if) it happens.

Otherwise you cant ready for when a criter ducks up out of cover, or drops invisibility etc which are common triggers.

[Leith]

If you'll let someone hide outside of combat, or cast a spell, why not ready an action and not have to deal with Initiative or Surprise? If readying an action is just trying to gain Surprise then shouldn't I have to hide to do it? Ya know, so the bad guys don't know I'm there?

My point being that you can't take one chapter of the PHb and run the entire game that way. If players want to try and get a leg up on a situation, good, they should. I sincerely don't care what my players choose to do, the reason being that they chose to do it. To bring it back to the original topic, a DM who cheats with the rules or cheats with dice isn't going to be any better than one who lawyers up on his players every time they try to make a good decision. In general you don't need to fudge things either way or hammer the rules, let the players make their beds and roll dice.

Of course, that doesn't mean you can or can't ready an action out of combat (RAI, RAW, or well-done) but I feel it takes something away from the players to not allow it.

[fishyfishyfishy]

You can't take away something that doesn't exist. Às already stated Actions, as the game defined term, do not take place outside combat. Make your own house rule if you want and move on. Let's stop derailing the thread as the OP hinted at.

OP: I would be interested to hear how things go from here in your game. I do hope you come to some sort of positive resolution.

[Arial Black]

If you'll let someone hide outside of combat, or cast a spell, why not ready an action and not have to deal with Initiative or Surprise? If readying an action is just trying to gain Surprise then shouldn't I have to hide to do it? Ya know, so the bad guys don't know I'm there?

My point being that you can't take one chapter of the PHb and run the entire game that way. If players want to try and get a leg up on a situation, good, they should. I sincerely don't care what my players choose to do, the reason being that they chose to do it. To bring it back to the original topic, a DM who cheats with the rules or cheats with dice isn't going to be any better than one who lawyers up on his players every time they try to make a good decision. In general you don't need to fudge things either way or hammer the rules, let the players make their beds and roll dice.

Of course, that doesn't mean you can or can't ready an action out of combat (RAI, RAW, or well-done) but I feel it takes something away from the players to not allow it.

The issue of allowing Readied actions outside of combat is that it lets the players cheat...whether they realise that it's cheating or not.

These OoC Readies are attempts by the players to totally bypass the rules for Surprise and Initiative. It's okay for the characters to try to get every advantage they can (by keeping a sharp lookout for baddies and carrying loaded crossbows ready to shoot, etc.), but these things are resolved using the rules for determining surprise, rolling initiative, and noting the effects of surprise on allowed actions.

They are not resolved by simply claiming that your PC, through his OoC actions, automatically sees the baddies first and automatically shoot before the baddies can react.

It works both ways too! You wouldn't like it if the DM just announced that you were dead, because his NPC shoots you with automatic surprise that you had no chance of countering (despite the Alert feat and a Weapon of Warning) and shoots you before the combat has started or initiative rolled.

What should happen if there is a guy who is in hiding and claims he has a readied action to shoot the first person to walk through that door? Should he automatically surprise you, just because he says so? Should he automatically shoot you before combat even starts? Think about that for a moment!

No. The guy hid (without taking the Hide action because he is not in combat and doesn't take Actions In Combat; he just rolled a Stealth check) and aimed his loaded crossbow at the door. When a guy walks through the door and the guy wants to shoot, combat starts and the steps are followed in order: the DM determines who is surprised (usually with opposed checks). If the guy walking through the door is sneaking or knows about the ambush then there may be opposed checks to see if the shooter is surprised, but if the victim is just innocently walking along then the DM may just rule he is surprised by the shooter, or there may be an opposed Stealth/Perception check. I would rule that the shooter is not surprised but that the victim has a chance to spot the ambush if his passive Perception is higher than the shooter's Stealth roll, and I would rule that the shooter is not surprised since the victim wasn't being quiet. Note that if the victim had the Alert feat or a Weapon of Warning then he would not be surprised.

Then, before any attack could possibly be resolved (according to RAW), initiative is rolled.

If the victim is surprised, then if the shooter rolls higher Init then he shoots and the victim cannot use any reactions versus that attack. On the victim's turn he can do nothing, but is now free to use reactions. Next, the shooter can reload and shoot again, but the victim can cast shield or use another reaction.

If the victim rolled a higher Init then he still cannot do anything on his turn, but when he is shot his reflexes were quick enough to cast that shield.

Note that the shooter still shoots first. It all makes sense and is still perfectly fair; no need to shoot before combat starts!

What if, for whatever reason, the victim spots the ambush and is not surprised?

If the shooter rolls higher Init then he still shoots first but that shield may still get cast. He was spotted after all!

If the victim goes first then this means that he has both detected the ambush and reacted faster than the shooter. So when the 'victim' gets his retaliation in first and fireballs the shooter then it's fair enough.

This is how the rules work, and it is fair. Compare and contrast with the claims of 'I shoot him before the combat round even starts because I took the Ready action!'

[CantigThimble]

However, if combat had already started and initiative had been rolled and then an archer readied an action to shoot the next guy to come around the corner then there's no question of whose reaction was faster, the archer shoots before the runner can take an action.

[Malifice]

If you'll let someone hide outside of combat, or cast a spell, why not ready an action and not have to deal with Initiative or Surprise?

Because you're always readying an action. 'I draw my sword and prowl down the passage, ready to strike at any enemy that I see.' Meanwhile, the monsters are 'Sitting around playing cards, ready to attack any foolish PCs that they see'. Thats the assumption of the game.

You can't be 'super extra ready'. Just assume that everyone is always readying an action (self defence when attacked). For the times they are not ready for action, you have the Surprise rules.


If readying an action is just trying to gain Surprise then shouldn't I have to hide to do it? Ya know, so the bad guys don't know I'm there?

You dont have to Hide to obtain surprise. The monsters just need to start combat unaware of a hostile presence nearby. This almost always means you have to be hidden, but it could also come about if you were disguised as one of them, or suddenly attacked a trusted friend.


My point being that you can't take one chapter of the PHb and run the entire game that way.


Thats exactly what youre arguing for. The Combat chapter deals with the combat sequence. Not narrative time. Once hostilities break out, things are resolved via turns and actions in an order determined via a Dexterity check.

You dont have to take the Hide action to use Stealth in narrative time. You just tell the DM youre doing it. You dont need to take the Search action to look for stuff either. You dont roll for initiative and move around in turn order.


Of course, that doesn't mean you can or can't ready an action out of combat (RAI, RAW, or well-done) but I feel it takes something away from the players to not allow it.

It takes nothing away from them. If the players are outside a door, and the plan is to kick it in, surprising the occupants, with everyone ready for action, then this is handled by the Surprise rules. Guess what? Every creature in the room unaware of the PCs when the door gets kicked open is Surprised, granting all the PCs a free turn before the monsters (possibly two actions before the monsters if the PCs roll well enough on Initiative).

If a DM atacked me without surprise via a 'ready action outside of combat', I'd (politely) explain why that shouldnt be the case. If that didnt work, I'd announce that unless I say otherwise, my PC readies an action to attack a hostile monster, before initiative is rolled, upon becoming aware of the hostile monster. If he said no to that, I walk.

The explanation is to see if he understands the rules. The readied action is to see if he's consistent with them, or just relying on 'gotcha' tactics that can only ever be employed by monsters. I can forgive misunderstanding of the rules. I cant forgive the second point.

[Kurt Kurageous]

Everyone in the party should just YOLO all the time.

Seriously. But do it in a fun way, to have fun, since this is your friend. You: I attempt to lick the giants eyeball with my glass coated tongue!

This seems like the most reasonable course of action to follow. The game seems to have taken a turn to the absurd, so play an absurd game. Don't forget that two can play this game, namely misreading the rules.

"I'm a 5th level sorcerer, therefore all my spells are cast at 5th level because I'm 5th LEVEL and what's a spell slot? Furthermore that chart thingy shows how many MORE spells I get every level, right?"

"My turn? I cast spell 1 as a reaction to their attack (even though its not a reaction spell), then cast spell 2 as my action, and then cast a random buff as a bonus action."

Why? Because my reading of the rules seems like your DMs. I can take three "actions" in my turn because the term "action" appears three times, and I will make no distinction between "bonus", "re", and just normal "action."

Wassamatta DM, your drow did it in the last fight?!?

[smcmike]

Because you're always readying an action. 'I draw my sword and prowl down the passage, ready to strike at any enemy that I see.' Meanwhile, the monsters are 'Sitting around playing cards, ready to attack any foolish PCs that they see'. Thats the assumption of the game

While I agree with your larger points, this seems a bit silly. There is a big difference between wandering around with your sword out and preparing a specific attack for a specific circumstance.

For example, take an archer with a shortbow. Wandering around hostile territory, he'll have an arrow on the string, and he'll be watching all possible angles of attack. That's the standard pre-initiative state for a prepared adventurer.

On the other hand, if he know someone is coming through THAT door in the immediate future, he might ready an attack: pull the bow back and aim at the opening. He should get some advantage for doing this.


Maybe it's better to accomplish this through surprise round mechanics, but there is clearly a difference between being ready for action in a general sense and readying an action.

[Inglorin]

On the other hand, if he know someone is coming through THAT door in the immediate future, he might ready an attack: pull the bow back and aim at the opening. He should get some advantage for doing this.

He DOES get a bonus for it. He WONT be suprised. Maybe (I don't know who is coming through this door in your example) he will even suprise the monster. Can't tell from here. But IF the monster knows about the evil adventurers on the other side of the door it will very well prepare for them to be ready to fight. The monster may roll through the door, sneak up to the door frame and take a look ... whatever. THAT is, what the initiative roll is for. It's a measure for the reaction speed. Is the ranger fast enough to get the monster sprinting through that door? Roll initiative.

[Segev]

Both triggers go off when you see something.

You dont have to see the trigger at the time you ready. You just have to see the trigger when (or if) it happens.

Otherwise you cant ready for when a criter ducks up out of cover, or drops invisibility etc which are common triggers.

The reason your examples were invalid triggers is because they key off of things your character cannot detect. He can't know for sure if XYZ is hostile until XYZ takes hostile action. Therefore, he can't ready an action to attack a hostile creature on sight. He can only ready an action to attack something that attacks him, or to attack anything that he sees. And even then, because "ready" doesn't work in 5e the way it does in 3e, he probably winds up just having to roll initiative when something initiates combat with hostile action.

[smcmike]

He DOES get a bonus for it. He WONT be suprised. Maybe (I don't know who is coming through this door in your example) he will even suprise the monster. Can't tell from here. But IF the monster knows about the evil adventurers on the other side of the door it will very well prepare for them to be ready to fight. The monster may roll through the door, sneak up to the door frame and take a look ... whatever. THAT is, what the initiative roll is for. It's a measure for the reaction speed. Is the ranger fast enough to get the monster sprinting through that door? Roll initiative.

Like I said, it's probably better to resolve this through surprise round mechanics. I'm just saying that the ready action is qualitatively different from the state of readiness one has while stumbling around through a dungeon.

[Leith]

The whole point is about player agency. If I lie about where an invisible enemy is or make up magic items to counter everything a player does it takes something away from them: the ability to make informed, intelligent decisions.
The same goes for fudging dice rolls; you're making the game fit the story in way that is not necessarily fair to the rest of the table.
As for readying actions, again, it takes away the ability to make informed, Intelligent decisions.

If a player chooses to shoot a fireball where they think an invisible creature is but it turns out I changed my mind so that there is no target, they wasted a choice. And a spell slot.
If I decide when an NPC attack hits rather than letting the die roll stand (whether the players saw it or not) then that makes the players decision to wear heavy armour or use a shield spell irrelevant.
If a player decides that they want to watch for a badguy coming through a door, that's not their default status, that's a thing they are choosing to do. If I then make them roll initiative before getting to do the thing they told me they were gonna do when they told me they was gonna do it, they've lost a choice.

To me all of these situations I'm describing are the same: they're about player agency and the freedom of the game system. They may not be equivalent to others but they are to me.
And it's not about the rules either. There is some ambiguity here (clearly, since we're all reading the same book and I think I'm right) and that's where a DM gets to make a choice, not a house rule, a choice, about how to interpret the rules.

[Dalebert]

OP: I would be interested to hear how things go from here in your game. I do hope you come to some sort of positive resolution.

As I said, I've decided to withdraw from his games. Even though he says he will do things differently, I don't feel I can trust him to judge things fairly. I don't know if he's even aware of just how much he's metagaming with the advantage of all he knows as DM.


It works both ways too! You wouldn't like it if the DM just announced that you were dead, because his NPC shoots you with automatic surprise that you had no chance of countering (despite the Alert feat and a Weapon of Warning) and shoots you before the combat has started or initiative rolled.

Yes, this! In our case, we are constantly ambushed. The DM acts as if every monster in the Underdark is constantly hiding in place and waiting for someone despite the fact that DAYS go by with no traffic. How can every monster maintain a state of high stealth and high alertness for that long? And this despite us taking extra effort to avoid alerting them like having a stealthy scout with Devil's Sight moving ahead of the noisy party.


Note that if the victim had the Alert feat or a Weapon of Warning then he would not be surprised.

This also. My Alert feat is junk if someone can just ready an action out of combat to attack. Can't be surprised? Doesn't matter!


Wassamatta DM, your drow did it in the last fight?!?

Right, I essentially tried to play that game but it doesn't matter. He flagrantly plays by different rules for his own NPCs and is blind to any inconsistency.


If a player decides that they want to watch for a badguy coming through a door, that's not their default status, that's a thing they are choosing to do. If I then make them roll initiative before getting to do the thing they told me they were gonna do when they told me they was gonna do it, they've lost a choice.

You shouldn't automatically succeed at anything when there's opposition. THat terrifies me because NPCs could do it to me automatically as well. Screw that. This is what surprise is for. You attempt to get it but you might not. You might gain it against some enemies but not others. Enemies may gain it against some of us but not all of us. THere are mechanics and rulings to resolve this. You don't get free surprise jsut because you declare it and I blew a feat to keep my monk from ever being surprised. If you just let someone do exactly the same thing but by a new made-up mechanic, i.e. readying an action out of combat, you've nullified my class feature and removed my agency once again.

This is at the core of what's so frustrating with a DM who is willing to metagame to Hell and back. He'll alter the rules, the terrain, the items creatures have, in whatever way is needed so that our choices of features and actions don't provide any benefit. He gets frustrated that we're smart about tactics so he just engineers just the right scenario where they don't work that favors the NPCs just right. He seems unable to limit the NPCs actions to just what they would reasonably do given the info that THEY have and not including everything he knows with his DM god-powers. And then he dares to lecture PCs when they act on a bit of extra knowledge that occasionally gets revealed to them. He expects us to work extra hard not to metagame when he does it FLAGRANTLY.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

If a player decides that they want to watch for a badguy coming through a door, that's not their default status, that's a thing they are choosing to do. If I then make them roll initiative before getting to do the thing they told me they were gonna do when they told me they was gonna do it, they've lost a choice.Except watching for enemies and being paranoid, trigger-happy PCs is the default status. The part that isn't default is the "standing still, weapon trained at that door" bit, but that by itself should not confer a free attack. There are essentially four states this situation can be in, where You are taking the faux-readied-action, and The Enemy is potentially walking through the door, assuming both of you are being DMG-default levels of paranoid:

(1) Both You and The Enemy are unaware of each other's presence.
In this case, you have an idea that The Enemy might walk through the door, but you don't know when. A reasonable GM might give You advantage on initiative once The Enemy opened the door, but that's it. The Enemy knows there's a chance of someone hostile being on the other side of the door, so clearly he isn't surprised by You, and he may even have faster reflexes despite your preparation.

(2) You are aware of the Enemy, but not vice versa.
In this case, The Enemy doesn't notice you (likely based on stealth, perhaps with advantage due to sitting still), but you notice The Enemy. In this case, you get a surprise round once combat begins, represented by shooting him once he opens the door. Of course, if The Enemy has the Alert feat or particular magic, he's just so awesome that it's like he was aware of you the whole time, defaulting to case (1).

(3) The Enemy is aware of you, but not vice versa.
This is, IMO, the trickiest case. If The Enemy knows You are there, crossbow trained, and decides to barge through anyway instead of finding an alternative attack route, I would say opening the door forfeits the Enemy's surprise, and we default to case (1).

(4) Both sides are aware of each other.
You and The Enemy are in combat before the door is even opened. You roll initiative, and can ready actions as normal.

This doesn't remove agency for trying to be prepared for certain contingencies, while remaining within the rules and not-complete-BS when a PC opens a door.

[90sMusic]

A lot of DM's are just terrible DMs. That is an unfortunate reality of D&D.

They will intentionally change the composition, abilities, items, and even rules of the game to completely counter your group. And i'm not talking about some BBEG who has been watching you progress and heard of what your group is made up of and is witnessing your abilities and tactics and planning accordingly, i'm talking about just random groups of bandits or gnolls you run across with specific classes, feats, magical items that counter your ability to do much to them.

It is just really poor DMing honestly. They don't create organic worlds where a story can unfold naturally, they just make it up as they go along intentionally to cripple you. Worst part is, all those fancy magical items they used against you often get "broken" somehow during the battle so you can't pick them up and use them yourself.

I've had terrible DMs like that before, absolute best thing to do is just leave and find a group with a better DM or start your own game. It is very important the DM lays everything out in advance as far as homebrew rules and things like that so the players know what they are getting into and also explains a little of how the sessions are going to play out. If he told you in advance he was going to fudge the numbers, cheat the rolls, change rules and class features mid-combat or immediately before a combat, change the number of enemies without an actual in-game reason that it would've happened, etc, then you knew what you were signing up for. If he didn't, just leave. It's difficult to turn a crap DM into a decent one if they have any sort of experience doing it. New DMs are usually open to constructive criticism and concerns but after you've been sitting in that chair for a while, even if every one of your groups falls apart because you piss off all your players, a lot of DMs start believing they really are god and can get away with anything. You're better off avoiding those people and letting them just play by themselves.

All of my best (and longest running) campaigns had events in the world unfold naturally and organically. Depending on our actions and preparations, we could make an encounter we were about to go into much easier or much more difficult on ourselves. He DM didn't just arbitrarily change everything to make it a difficult/deadly encounter no matter what we did, because that is stupid. It makes it pointless to do anything. Why bother preparing? Why bother researching weaknesses or finding out information on an enemy if the DM is going to metagame cheat you? You might as well just roll around guns blazing all the time and not even really "play" the game and just mindlessly attack everything with no thought.

I'd just keep looking and try to find a better DM. Always talk to your DM in advance to get a feel for how they're gonna run their game and stay away from bad ones with stupid, arbitrary rule changes and so on.

[djreynolds]

DMs are not computers, and for those DMs who have slaved over creating a new adventure, as long as they do not kill and loot you... let it be. Sometimes over powering villains and NPCs are needed to keep the story going in the direction the DM wants... this is the peril of a homebrewed story. But say that villain is important, just go with it. As long as he is not killing you off... I say see where the story goes.

[Dalebert]

DMs are not computers, and for those DMs who have slaved over creating a new adventure, as long as they do not kill and loot you... let it be. Sometimes over powering villains and NPCs are needed to keep the story going in the direction the DM wants... this is the peril of a homebrewed story. But say that villain is important, just go with it. As long as he is not killing you off... I say see where the story goes.

This was a random encounter from the charts of Out of the Abyss in an Adventurer's League game. I've also said several times in the thread that I left the game. Didn't actually read the OP or any of the thread?

[djreynolds]

I did read the thread and obviously the drow mage was doing more in a turn than he should be able to.

I think sometimes a DM almost tries to compete with his players, and perhaps this was the case. When I DM, I care about advancing the story and players in it fairly. Sometimes they do not do as I want and I have to drop huge clues.

There are players who want to DM but may not be ready for it because they are still in win mode as a PC is. In reality he try playing a game where he manages multiple characters like a general.

To DM you have to be Yoda and not in competition with PCs. Your function as DM is to allow the story to flow and stay on course... or allow it to deviate if its good.

But I did read you original post, sorry but I was just on my Soap Box doing my Braveheart Speech