When should initiative be rolled?

[Ataboiiwhynot]

I've been playing 5e for about a year now and I think I understand the game mostly well (I'd like to think). There is a situation involving Assassins that makes me unsure of when to roll for initiative. Should I roll it after a hidden person strikes another, or before and wait for the turn order to get to him?

If the later, a problem would arise in the Assassinate feature if the target rolled higher than the hidden attacker. He wouldn't have the surprised condition, despite having no way of knowing that the assassin would attack him? That doesn't make logical sense to me. That's why I'm asking about when I should call for rolling initiative.

[Atalas]

basically, wait for the DM to tell you to roll, is my experience. Which, in a case like you're example, would probably be after the assassin makes their attack. Everyone will have rolled, and then the assassin('s) will be placed in the proper initiative order.

[Unoriginal]

Initiative is rolled when combat start, before anyone does anything.

A character who doesn't expect the fight to start is surprised, regardless of the initiative order.

Jimiz the Quickling might have superhuman dexterity, but if Bog the Ogre manages to surprise him with an ambush, Jimiz will be surprised even if he rolled 22 to Initiative and Bog rolled 6.

[Tanarii]

About the only time it gets funky and hard to explain narrative results in-universe, is all of:

1) The DM rules that ambushing characters who have gained surprise are also hidden until they take their first action.
2) A character who is surprised wins initiative.
3) The surprised character that wins initiative has an ability that negates surprise and allows them to act.

For example, if a DM rules a bunch of sneaky goblins successfully ambushing a party with a Barbarian 7 remain hidden until they take their first turn, and the the barbarian wins the initiative and rages to take an action ... he doesn't know where any goblins attacking him are.

Of course, the DM has unnecessarily created this seeming conflict between mechanics and fiction with his ruling in #1.

[Lunali]

By RAW roll initiative when combat starts and for those that are surprised the status ends as their turn comes around. This means that an invisible assassin rogue can sneak up to someone, go to stab them, and lose initiative. If you are going with the RAW, make sure you don't let the players know that they've lost initiative until after the attack or things get weird.

[Xetheral]

About the only time it gets funky and hard to explain narrative results in-universe, is all of:

1) The DM rules that ambushing characters who have gained surprise are also hidden until they take their first action.
2) A character who is surprised wins initiative.
3) The surprised character that wins initiative has an ability that negates surprise and allows them to act.

For example, if a DM rules a bunch of sneaky goblins successfully ambushing a party with a Barbarian 7 remain hidden until they take their first turn, and the the barbarian wins the initiative and rages to take an action ... he doesn't know where any goblins attacking him are.

Of course, the DM has unnecessarily created this seeming conflict between mechanics and fiction with his ruling in #1.

Are you advocating that all hidden characters automatically are revealed the moment initiative is rolled?

[Tanarii]

Are you advocating that all hidden characters automatically are revealed the moment initiative is rolled?I'm advocating that declaring the intent to start doing something hostile, which initiates combat and thus an initiative roll, can be explained "in the fiction" as starting to do something, which reveals you. But someone winning initiative and having a special ability that negates surprise and let's them act is so good they can react faster than you can do the intended thing that reveals you.

Since the rules are abstract and not a simulation, we can easily explain this in terms of a narrative or in-universe description. There's no causality problems involved unless you insist on them.

Edit: explanation of narrative flow may be necessary:
"I attack from ambush"
"As you step out to begin your attacks, they react with blinding speed and counter-charge you"

In other words, in this interpretation merely declaring the intent to make an ambush attack triggers combat and reveals you immediately when initiative is rolled. But full declaration of your actual actions you will take is on your initiative count. You're already revealed, but you can decide on specific actions on your turn.

[Xetheral]

I'm advocating that declaring the intent to start doing something hostile, which initiates combat and thus an initiative roll, can be explained "in the fiction" as starting to do something, which reveals you. But someone winning initiative and having a special ability that negates surprise and let's them act is so good they can react faster than you can do the intended thing that reveals you.

Since the rules are abstract and not a simulation, we can easily explain this in terms of a narrative or in-universe description. There's no causality problems involved unless you insist on them.

So, how would this work in practice? Example: a party of three is successfully hidden from an ogre. Once the ogre is in position, one of the players declares that their character shoots their bow at the ogre. You roll initiative, the ogre is surprised until it's initiative count, the declaring character is revealed at the top of the order regardless of their initiative results, and the other two players are hidden until their initiative count (or longer if they don't take an action that breaks stealth)?

[Tanarii]

So, how would this work in practice? Example: a party of three is successfully hidden from an ogre. Once the ogre is in position, one of the players declares that their character shoots their bow at the ogre. You roll initiative, the ogre is surprised until it's initiative count, the declaring character is revealed at the top of the order regardless of their initiative results, and the other two players are hidden until their initiative count (or longer if they don't take an action that breaks stealth)?
No of course not. The players initiate the ambush as a group, so they are all revealed immediately.

Players aren't declaring individual actions until after you're in "combat time" and taking turns in initiative order. That's what it's for. Before that, you're overall doing things as a group generally, albeit possibly separate individual things within any specific abstract time period.

Edit: I thought I should make clear here, at this point my attitude is explaining how this can work. You don't have to do it this way. If you choose not to, you may need to modify the base rules to account for it.

In other words, I'm taking back my implication in first post that if you don't, you're doing it wrong. 😂 My bad.

[ad_hoc]

I've been playing 5e for about a year now and I think I understand the game mostly well (I'd like to think). There is a situation involving Assassins that makes me unsure of when to roll for initiative. Should I roll it after a hidden person strikes another, or before and wait for the turn order to get to him?

If the later, a problem would arise in the Assassinate feature if the target rolled higher than the hidden attacker. He wouldn't have the surprised condition, despite having no way of knowing that the assassin would attack him? That doesn't make logical sense to me. That's why I'm asking about when I should call for rolling initiative.

This is entirely intentional. Both parts of the ability only work when the Assassin wins Initiative.

As for narrative this kind of thing happens all the time in stories with assassins. The target moves at the last second as the assassin strikes.

[ad_hoc]

By RAW roll initiative when combat starts and for those that are surprised the status ends as their turn comes around. This means that an invisible assassin rogue can sneak up to someone, go to stab them, and lose initiative. If you are going with the RAW, make sure you don't let the players know that they've lost initiative until after the attack or things get weird.

That is like saying don't let the player know that they rolled low when declaring they are disarming the trap because then they will just take back that that is what they are doing.

[Lunali]

That is like saying don't let the player know that they rolled low when declaring they are disarming the trap because then they will just take back that that is what they are doing.

The alternative being not allowing them to choose what to do on their turn even if the situation has changed.

[Malifice]

I've been playing 5e for about a year now and I think I understand the game mostly well (I'd like to think). There is a situation involving Assassins that makes me unsure of when to roll for initiative. Should I roll it after a hidden person strikes another, or before and wait for the turn order to get to him?

If the later, a problem would arise in the Assassinate feature if the target rolled higher than the hidden attacker. He wouldn't have the surprised condition, despite having no way of knowing that the assassin would attack him? That doesn't make logical sense to me. That's why I'm asking about when I should call for rolling initiative.

Pick up your players book. Turn to the combat chapter. It lays it out for you in steps you take in order.

Initiative comes before attacks.

Heck it can come before all but one of the combatants are even aware of each other.

[Malifice]

That is like saying don't let the player know that they rolled low when declaring they are disarming the trap because then they will just take back that that is what they are doing.

Lol. You allow them to do that?

Sorry bud, arrows in the air. He heard you. The jig is up. Take your turn or dont it's up to you. You declared it.

[Naanomi]

Makes some interesting circumstances... like how people are responding to someone Subtle-casting a spell from long distances away... but for ease of gameplay it is generally best to just let it play out as written

[Lunali]

Personally, I prefer the houserule that anyone whose initiative come up before the first sign of combat is still surprised until they discover something is up. This can be a perception vs stealth, perception vs distance based dc for spellcasting, or just the first attack (and only the first attack if there are more attacks in that character's turn) if the ambushers are lucky. An alert character gets their whole turn pushed back to this point, but gets to take it in the middle of whatever turn gave away the ambush.

[Xetheral]

No of course not. The players initiate the ambush as a group, so they are all revealed immediately.

Players aren't declaring individual actions until after you're in "combat time" and taking turns in initiative order. That's what it's for. Before that, you're overall doing things as a group generally, albeit possibly separate individual things within any specific abstract time period.

Edit: I thought I should make clear here, at this point my attitude is explaining how this can work. You don't have to do it this way. If you choose not to, you may need to modify the base rules to account for it.

In other words, I'm taking back my implication in first post that if you don't, you're doing it wrong. �� My bad.

How does this work at your table when both sides have some members hidden and some members not? The side that group-declares they are attacking first auto-reveals all of their party, but the side that didn't trigger initiative by group-declaring an attack gets to keep some of their members hidden until they act individually? Or does one side's attack also reveal the locations of all of the defenders?

For example: there is a negotiation between foes scheduled for a certain time and place. Both sides sneak in backup in advance, and because (e.g.) everyone is a lot more skilled at stealth than perception, both groups get in position unseen by the other. At the appointed time, the negotiators meet in the open, between the two groups. The negotiations don't go well, and one negotiator (Bob) gets frustrated and declares an attack against the other (Dave). What happens now? It sounds like you're saying that initiative is rolled normally and no one is surprised, but Bob's allies are all revealed because they've (by definition) started attacking, while Dave's allies remain hidden because they didn't group-declare an attack yet? Or does Bob's attack also reveal the locations of all of Dave's allies? I'm curious to find out which it is, but I'll admit that neither option makes much sense to me.

I would also point out that your interpretation that (at least) the ambushing side is automatically revealed en masse before their turns renders worthless one of the benefits of the Skulker feat (not revealing oneself on a miss when attacking while hidden). I realize you don't play with feats, but I would think the fact that your interpretation conflicts with the Skulker feat suggests that your approach can't be RAI.

[ad_hoc]

Lol. You allow them to do that?

Sorry bud, arrows in the air. He heard you. The jig is up. Take your turn or dont it's up to you. You declared it.

Why are you quoting me?

[Tanarii]

Makes some interesting circumstances... like how people are responding to someone Subtle-casting a spell from long distances away... but for ease of gameplay it is generally best to just let it play out as writtenReally that's the reason I just go with it. Simplicity :)


How does this work at your table when both sides have some members hidden and some members not? The side that group-declares they are attacking first auto-reveals all of their party, but the side that didn't trigger initiative by group-declaring an attack gets to keep some of their members hidden until they act individually? Or does one side's attack also reveal the locations of all of the defenders?

For example: there is a negotiation between foes scheduled for a certain time and place. Both sides sneak in backup in advance, and because (e.g.) everyone is a lot more skilled at stealth than perception, both groups get in position unseen by the other. At the appointed time, the negotiators meet in the open, between the two groups. The negotiations don't go well, and one negotiator (Bob) gets frustrated and declares an attack against the other (Dave). What happens now? It sounds like you're saying that initiative is rolled normally and no one is surprised, but Bob's allies are all revealed because they've (by definition) started attacking, while Dave's allies remain hidden because they didn't group-declare an attack yet? Or does Bob's attack also reveal the locations of all of Dave's allies? I'm curious to find out which it is, but I'll admit that neither option makes much sense to me.
That sounds to me like the negotiators all roll initiative, and the other guys, who are soperate groups, don't even join in until the second round of combat.


I would also point out that your interpretation that (at least) the ambushing side is automatically revealed en masse before their turns renders worthless one of the benefits of the Skulker feat (not revealing oneself on a miss when attacking while hidden). I realize you don't play with feats, but I would think the fact that your interpretation conflicts with the Skulker feat suggests that your approach can't be RAI.Not sure what the Skulker feat has to do with Ambushing. That's not necessarily the same thing as being hidden. But as far as I can see, the combat swoosh makes no particular assumption that you're starting hidden if you were before it happened. And a surprise check represents attempting to ambush without needing to fiddle around with hide checks and movement into position etc.

Roll surprise, roll initiative, decide encounter distance based on if it was an attempted ambush / surprise or not, decide and describe where everyone's positions are, proceed with turn based combat.

Otoh I can easily see a counter argument that if you were hidden and combat broke out, nothing has changed in regards to your status. It just doesn't mesh to me with the abstract nature of the process of surprise and initiative and the switch to combat in general. Too simulation-y.

Edit: I realize this probably makes me sound like I'm all game-y about it ... I guess I kinda am. I just switch into combat turns on the fly, describing who is where are the action breaks out based on what everyone previously has said they were doing. And then they start doing stuff in initiative order. But all that flows from a surprise and initiative checks, and even then the former only if one side has told me they are attempting to set up an ambush, not a bunch of previous setup for hiding checks and a single person suddenly declaring an attack.

[Xetheral]

That sounds to me like the negotiators all roll initiative, and the other guys, who are soperate groups, don't even join in until the second round of combat.

That works. Do the other groups get to stay hidden when they join on the second round?


Not sure what the Skulker feat has to do with Ambushing. That's not necessarily the same thing as being hidden. But as far as I can see, the combat swoosh makes no particular assumption that you're starting hidden if you were before it happened. And a surprise check represents attempting to ambush without needing to fiddle around with hide checks and movement into position etc.

The ability to stay hidden helps a lot more when the enemy has no idea where you are, then it does when they can presume you are somewhere near the last place they saw you. Hence, the ability to remain hidden on a miss would seem to be most valuable when hidden at the start of combat, before anyone knows the vector to you. (Admittedly, in some circumstances I would let a target missed by an attack from a Skulker know the general direction the attack came from, but a 120 degree spread with no range info is a lot less helpful than knowing the hiding character is likely within a 30' radius of the last place you saw them.)


Otoh I can easily see a counter argument that if you were hidden and combat broke out, nothing has changed in regards to your status.

Yeah, unsurprisingly, that's my position. :)


It just doesn't mesh to me with the abstract nature of the process of surprise and initiative and the switch to combat in general. Too simulation-y.

Edit: I realize this probably makes me sound like I'm all game-y about it ... I guess I kinda am. I just switch into combat turns on the fly, describing who is where are the action breaks out based on what everyone previously has said they were doing. And then they start doing stuff in initiative order. But all that flows from a surprise and initiative checks, and even then the former only if one side has told me they are attempting to set up an ambush, not a bunch of previous setup for hiding checks and a single person suddenly declaring an attack.

I like the (e.g.) "previous setup for hiding checks" because it makes the characters' pre-combat choices have a direct impact on the fight. At my table, good pre-combat tactics/strategy (and use of off-sheet resources) can make a difficult fight easy, or an impossible fight merely difficult, and that's why I define my style as combat-as-war. I would normally consider abstracting all the pre-combat choices via checks to be a feature more associated with combat-as-sport, where the difficulty of a fight is determined by character stats and in-combat tactics rather than by pre-combat strategy... but I know you also run combat-as-war. Can you expand a little bit more about how you see abstracting combat setup as compatible with a combat-as-war approach? I'm curious if we each emphasize different elements of combat-as-war, or whether we actually mean different things when we both use that descriptor for our games.