When to roll initiative

[FunSize]

This may be a dumb question, but when is the appropriate time to roll initiative when both parties are aware of each other? Before or after hostile intent is declared?

I ask because I've allowed players to declare an action, resolve it, and -then- roll initiative, even when enemies are aware of them (usually in a "end this conversation by casting Fireball" kind of way). Looking back, I don't think this is the right way to go about it for a couple reasons.

One being I rarely afford enemies the same opportunity, so it gives the Pcs an advantage that they don't really need. Getting two fireballs off before some of the enemies have a chance to act isn't always fun.

Secondly, in the scenario given above, casting a spell is an obviously hostile action, so it seems like it's fair to give everyone a chance to react. This, in turn, makes ambushes more valuable.

Don't have the book on hand to see if there's an official ruling on this, wondering if you guys have any input.

[Theodoxus]

Typically, most (like 99%) of combat I've DM'd or played in, started as a mutual roll - one group comes upon the other and people draw weapons and things die.

I've had all of one combat in which I ambushed my players, throwing a coordinated dual fireball attack from an enemy bard/sorc duo to initiate combat. My players were not appreciative of being on the receiving end of such a devastating attack... (they really didn't like it when the bard, mid combat, convinced them that it was all a misunderstanding, that they thought the party were bandits (and the PCs thought the others were bandits!) So, the PCs healed up the "others", only to be blindsided by their duplicity.)

Fun as a DM, but not as much for my players. I've pretty much backed off from doing things like that anymore. I've gone to using 3.5 style Surprise Rounds, as every party I run inevitably has an assassin - and if there's not a legit surprise opportunity, then they get cranky. I always thought it weird that 5e has the need for an actual surprise round (what with codified benefits, like the assassin), but the mechanics just don't play nicely as written...

[Sirithhyando]

I'd say when the situation may become an encounter. (not necessarily a combat encounter)



when both parties are aware of each other?
Definitly not, there's an initiative on the surprise round (though i'm sure it can be different depending on the DM)


Before or after hostile intent is declared?
I'd say both are possible.



I ask because I've allowed players to declare an action, resolve it, and -then- roll initiative, even when enemies are aware of them (usually in a "end this conversation by casting Fireball" kind of way). Looking back, I don't think this is the right way to go about it for a couple reasons.
Sure, the opposition could've forseen this happening, so they might have reacted before if the initiative were in their favor. Though i think that you should ask yourself this question : Did everybody at the table had fun? If so, dont fret about the rules on this. Ask your players if they mind the slight improvisation on the rules. I dont think rules should should come over fun on this.
And to be honest, it's an awesome way to end a conversation... even if it should've been done in another way, this is the best.


One being I rarely afford enemies the same opportunity, so it gives the Pcs an advantage that they don't really need. Getting two fireballs off before some of the enemies have a chance to act isn't always fun.

Secondly, in the scenario given above, casting a spell is an obviously hostile action, so it seems like it's fair to give everyone a chance to react. This, in turn, makes ambushes more valuable.
You can gain a surprise round by ambushing, but why wouldn't it be possible to gain that surprise round during a conversation? The "enemy" doesn't think you're going to cast that fireball while "enjoying" a conversation, it still comes as a surprise. Then if the PC gain initiative and gets a 2nd fireball in before the enemy react... that's part of the game. No?

[hymer]

@ OP: You're right in wondering about that. You probably shouldn't roll for initiative until either the PCs or the other side intend to do something hostile, but in any case that hostile act should be part of the initiative. It can get a little trickier with things like grabbing someone by the collar to threaten them or casting a spell that isn't directly hostile. Those could be the equivalent of opening a door, after which the DM calls for immediate initiative rolls. But if one side is jumpy enough, and the other side does something that could well be interpreted as starting a fight (like casting a spell or grappling someone), then they may act first if their initiative is fast enough.

[mephnick]

When something hostile happens, roll initiative. Be it someone reaches for a weapon, starts casting a spell, rushes forward menancingly etc. Whenever one side feels threatened enough to react, determine surprise (only if there are hidden creatures) and then roll initiative.

Do not give actions outside of initiative. Do not give free attacks. Do not give 3.5e surprise rounds.

Initiative is the order in which people react. Giving one side free actions over the other completely ruins the mechanic and combat balance.

People don't get free attacks/spells, or get to act first just because they were the first to declare an action.

[Joe the Rat]

As soon as hostile actions are declared, roll initiative. If a "pre-combat surprise action" is declared, anyone not in on it is Surprised. This also gives you the window for Alert-type abilities to play in.

If you have a face-to-face, everyone aware but nothing's happened yet, and surprise is possible, but not a given, Wis(Insight) for intent, or Wis(Perception) for spotting a hidden move would let someone avoid surprise for the first round.

[mephnick]

If you have a face-to-face, everyone aware but nothing's happened yet, and surprise is possible.

Just to be clear,\ since he's asking for rules advice; This is not RAW. By the rules, surprise only occurs if a creature does not perceive a hidden threat. Hidden in this case referring to someone actively using the Stealth skill to Hide.

[Sigreid]

When the bloodshed is imanent.

[Arial Black]

Just to be clear,\ since he's asking for rules advice; This is not RAW. By the rules, surprise only occurs if a creature does not perceive a hidden threat. Hidden in this case referring to someone actively using the Stealth skill to Hide.

Under 'Surprise' on p189 of the PHB it states: "Any character or monster that doesn’t notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter".

It is not enough to notice the 'presence' of a creature; you have to notice that the creature is a 'threat'.

Usually, when traipsing through dungeons and whatnot, we make a fair assumption that any creature we see is a threat unless we have a reason to believe otherwise. We are in hostile territory, after all.

But when you are in relatively safe territory you may be surrounded by 1000s of people without any of them intending you harm.

You may be in a conference trying to work out a peace treaty. The enemy are present, but are here to negotiate, not fight.

If someone who's presence has already been noticed but who was not trying to hurt you suddenly pulls a knife and starts attacking, then this sudden attack may take you by surprise, both literally and in game mechanics. You might or might not notice that this creature is now a 'threat' in time to do something about it.

Abilities might come into play re: immunity to surprise. This doesn't mean that you knew it was going to happen, it just means that you don't suffer the game effects of surprise. You react quickly enough to not suffer the loss of your actions/reactions in the first round.

The DM can just decide who is surprised, but usually will call for opposed checks. The example opposed check used in the combat chapter (Perception/Stealth) is very common for adventurers who, as previously stated, are in enemy territory and assume any creature they see is hostile.

For encounters where you already know the creatures are present but crucially do not know that they are a 'threat', then Perception/Stealth is inappropriate.

Use Insight/Deception instead. The baddy is trying to conceal the fact that he's about to make a sudden strike; that's his whole point! He's not trying to hide his presence from you (Stealth); you've been talking to him for ten minutes! He is trying to conceal his intention to attack you (Deception). If he isn't trying to conceal his intention to attack you ("You killed my tortoise!" *shling!* "Prepare to die!") then you are not surprised.

Meanwhile, your study of body language (Insight) may help you notice his intention to attack soon enough that you are not caught unawares (surprised) and you may even notice him going for his knife soon enough that your superior reflexes allow you to gut him before his knife clears the sheath. You are not trying to notice his mere presence (Perception) because you already know that he is here!

Your instinct to avoid 'out of combat' combat is spot on! Never do it. Never allow it. Combat is resolved in Combat Rounds/Initiative Order, after resolving any surprise.

[Beaureguard]

I ask because I've allowed players to declare an action, resolve it, and -then- roll initiative, even when enemies are aware of them (usually in a "end this conversation by casting Fireball" kind of way).


I think this way can work well sometimes, but not too often. I like to use it as a reward for good roleplaying or as a skill check. If my players are tossing out some really good dialogue and the upcoming royal ball, and going to the ball, and FIREBALL, I'll probably let it go because it's like a (bad) movie moment that makes me laugh. I like to think that it encourages them to roleplay and makes the game better. If the rogue, who's not a part of the pre-fight banter decides to launch an arrow at the head of the leader, I'll have him make a contested stealth vs perception check. If he passes, free attack, if not, initiative. Likewise, if the roleplay isn't great, I may have the players make a bluff check to see if the NPCs are buying the party's bull. I'll also toss it BACK at the party. When they try to negotiate with goblins for too long, someone will get bored and shoot them. When the bluff gets pushed a little too far in talking with the secret noble wizard cult someone may take offense and launch a fireball. Now the party is on the receiving end of the skill check.

I don't think they should be able to get away with it always, but working it into the game keeps every encounter from being "Oh we met someone else, I roll initiative and kill them." It gives the players some encouragement to work through some things before just fighting which gives you more chances to drop story hooks. I also think that most of us like winning rolls a little more than just getting a free attack. Maybe that's just me though.

[Arial Black]

I think this way can work well sometimes, but not too often. I like to use it as a reward for good roleplaying or as a skill check. If my players are tossing out some really good dialogue and the upcoming royal ball, and going to the ball, and FIREBALL, I'll probably let it go because it's like a (bad) movie moment that makes me laugh. I like to think that it encourages them to roleplay and makes the game better. If the rogue, who's not a part of the pre-fight banter decides to launch an arrow at the head of the leader, I'll have him make a contested stealth vs perception check. If he passes, free attack, if not, initiative. Likewise, if the roleplay isn't great, I may have the players make a bluff check to see if the NPCs are buying the party's bull. I'll also toss it BACK at the party. When they try to negotiate with goblins for too long, someone will get bored and shoot them. When the bluff gets pushed a little too far in talking with the secret noble wizard cult someone may take offense and launch a fireball. Now the party is on the receiving end of the skill check.

I don't think they should be able to get away with it always, but working it into the game keeps every encounter from being "Oh we met someone else, I roll initiative and kill them." It gives the players some encouragement to work through some things before just fighting which gives you more chances to drop story hooks. I also think that most of us like winning rolls a little more than just getting a free attack. Maybe that's just me though.

You don't have to go outside the rules to do this. You can use the rules as they are.

* If my players are tossing out some really good dialogue and the upcoming royal ball, and going to the ball, and FIREBALL, I'll probably let it go because it's like a (bad) movie moment that makes me laugh.

I'd have them make opposed skill checks to see if they surprise their opponents. The exact skills chosen depend on how they choose to do what they are doing. Deception (5E's Bluff) works here, and would be opposed by Insight to find out who isn't fooled.

* If the rogue, who's not a part of the pre-fight banter decides to launch an arrow at the head of the leader, I'll have him make a contested stealth vs perception check. If he passes, free attack, if not, initiative.

No! If he passes, he has surprised them and they cannot use reactions until after their first turn and cannot move or act on their first turn. Initiative has already been rolled as soon as the rogue announced his attack! This way, the target's immunity to surprise is not artificially bypassed by breaking the combat rules.

* Likewise, if the roleplay isn't great....

...then give them disadvantage to their Deception check! Or advantage if they have a great plan or great role-playing.

The rules, properly used, adequately model these different things. You don't need to break the rules, and breaking them has negative consequences. How would you like it if you had quested for a Weapon of Warning which makes you immune to surprise, which means you can use your reactions and get to act in the first round, and you are faster than the enemy, but the DM ignores all that by letting the bad guy attack/kill you before 'combat' even starts?

[Malifice]

This may be a dumb question, but when is the appropriate time to roll initiative when both parties are aware of each other? Before or after hostile intent is declared?

I ask because I've allowed players to declare an action, resolve it, and -then- roll initiative, even when enemies are aware of them (usually in a "end this conversation by casting Fireball" kind of way). Looking back, I don't think this is the right way to go about it for a couple reasons.

One being I rarely afford enemies the same opportunity, so it gives the Pcs an advantage that they don't really need. Getting two fireballs off before some of the enemies have a chance to act isn't always fun.

Secondly, in the scenario given above, casting a spell is an obviously hostile action, so it seems like it's fair to give everyone a chance to react. This, in turn, makes ambushes more valuable.

Don't have the book on hand to see if there's an official ruling on this, wondering if you guys have any input.

Actions are resolved in initiative order.

Declaring a hostile action triggers initiative. Then in initiative order you resolve actions.

If two sides were in negotiations and one of them declared they were casting fireball on the other, you first roll initiative. The enemy force has a chance to act before the spellcaster who is casting fireball and stop him.

[Gtdead]

Resolving any situation that requires combat stats requires initiative.

For example, if you set ambush and attack someone passing by with your bow, you determine surprise with the appropriate skill rolls and you roll initiative before any action is taken.

If you set a different kind of trap, for example you hold a lever that raises spikes from the ground, and want to activate them based on hearing, you just need to succeed on the perception roll and take the action without initiative. No combat stats required.