Ready Action and "combat"

[Kuu Lightwing]

I know, this is somewhat a controversial topic, but still want to ask how you would rule this.

Question #1 Would you allow to Ready an action outside of combat? This might lead to some cheese with characters going "I always ready an attack action when I see someone", but on the other hand, that's a common trope of action movies and stuff, where people enter a hostile territory with weapons ready, and checking every corner and such.

Question #2, let's assume that Ready isn't allowed outside combat, would you allow to enter initiative earlier, without seeing an enemy yet? The most obvious situation where this could be needed is when a party prepares and ambush, say Himiko wants to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door that (as they think) has enemies behind it?

[mephnick]

This is all handled by the surprise rules. In hostile territory your characters are assumed to be "ready with weapons out" and initiative just determines how fast they act.

The second example, the monsters on the other side of the door are surprised and get no actions assuming you've somehow gotten to the door without them noticing. So you'll still get the first attacks, but nothing happens outside of initiative.

[Tanarii]

No way. Ready is a combat action. That's what initiative and starting positions are for.

If the party prepares an ambush of any kind, roll for surprise as normal. Initiative begins when combat begins, although there's some leeway for common sense in that regard already built in. If they want to do some shooting through door after opening shenanigans, they start outside. If the enemy is waiting with missile fire to get them as they come trough a door or opening, they start outside. Otherwise they can start on the other side of the door in battle order. That's where the leeway is. But PCs Should act in initiative order as usual, once starting positions have been established.

I've had exactly this scenario, with a wizard wanting to peek around a corner when enemies have heard them coming (and killing their allies), and lob a fireball into the cavern around it. The way it worked: everyone rolls initiative, I roll for enemies. All the players who go before the wizard just do nothing on their turns, the wizard take his turn and peeks around the corner ... and gets shot at by 10 Gnoll archers who had won initiative and had used it to Ready actions in response to hearing the party talk around the corner. Because of course the players had discussed this tactic among themselves at the table with the Gnolls right there, despite repeated example of my table talk = in-game talk coming up earlier in that same session. :smallamused: Even with cover, the Wizard still manage to get hit and knocked down to single digit hit points. Of course, the fireball killed all the gnolls. And set fire to their bedding. In a closed environment ...

Another common scenario is they players wanting to go through a door in specific order, when the enemy on the other side may or may not have heard them coming. This is more easily handled. Roll initiate, start combat with the PCs on the inside of the room, in battle order they intended. Nothing says initiative must be the moment a door opens or they look around a corner. Only if the players (or enemies) are trying to do things before the players go into the space.

[PhoenixPhyre]

This is all handled by the surprise rules. In hostile territory your characters are assumed to be "ready with weapons out" and initiative just determines how fast they act.

The second example, the monsters on the other side of the door are surprised and get no actions assuming you've somehow gotten to the door without them noticing. So you'll still get the first attacks, but nothing happens outside of initiative.

The bold part is a key that many DMs (especially new ones) miss. You can never go wrong by switching into initiative order for any timing-sensitive thing. Yes, even out of formal combat. If reaction speed is important, go to initiative.

And if anyone's trying to hurt/take hostile action against anyone else, initiative is essential, and happens before the triggering action is resolved. To do otherwise is to court madness and hurt feelings as people get screwed. And to court munchkinry. There are no "free" attacks (using the term more generally than things that require an attack roll).

[Unoriginal]

No to both, but if a players told me "I get ready to stab the NPC if he tries to touch the Cleric", and the NPC doesn't expect it, the NPC could count as surprised. Same way that a player could say "my archer fires the moment he sees an Ice Giant" or "I blow my horn so we get help as soon as we find where the dragon is".

You can have an action "readied" outside of combat, but not a Readied action.

[SiCK_Boy]

Answer to question # 1:

I don't think you should allow it (having ready action outside combat). The purpose of initiative if to determine which character has the fastest reflex and can react the quickest.

A player keeping is crossbow loaded and his finger on the trigger would still need to win initiative in order to shoot first.

Otherwise, you are automatically giving free actions to your players, which will totally wreck game balance.

If players want to gain "free" attacks, they should work at gaining surprise. That means traveling in "sneak" mode, and beating opponents' perception check. Otherwise, no free attack.

Answer to question # 2:

Again, you should just use regular surprise rules and initiative. Even if the players are "ready", maybe the monsters are ready too (and have better reflexes). And the default "ready action" rule allows the player to change his mind (as the trigger happens, the player can decide to not take the readied action), so I would not want to force the player to stick to an action declared outside initiative, especially when the situation changes.

I had a similar situation where my players were more concerned about pre-arranging initiative amongst themselves in a context of surprise (they were about to rush into a cavern where they knew there were monsters; the monsters had not noticed the players; the players were determined to attack the monsters). The players were worried that if the warriors went last in the initiative, the casters would have to refrain from moving in because they would then block the path for the fighters (and you can only ready an action, not a move + action). At the time, I allowed them to each roll a d20 and to allocate these rolls to the players in the group as they saw fit for initiative purpose. Once they entered, the monsters still got their initiative roll and were placed accordingly, but the players had at least been able to arrange their own relative initiative as they wanted.

After that, I wasn't sure if I wanted to allow this system to work on a regular basis. Since then, I've come up with the following rule: when the players roll for initiative, I allow them to "delay" and move further down in the initiative order. For example, if the Fighter gets 15 and the Wizard gets 12, but the fighter really wants to play after the wizard, the fighter can elect to change his 15 for a 12 (in case of ties, players decide amongst themselves who goes first). They do this before seeing any of the monster's initiative results, and a player can only reduce his score with this method. This gives the players a certain amount of control on their relative initiative order, but at the risk of having the monsters act first, and they can only do it at the very beginning of the fight. After that, they can only use the "ready action", as per the usual rule. Once the players are set (I normally align their initiative cards along my DM screen as we do that), I then add the monsters to the initiative order, placing them at the proper spot on the screen.

[Xetheral]

I know, this is somewhat a controversial topic, but still want to ask how you would rule this.

Question #1 Would you allow to Ready an action outside of combat? This might lead to some cheese with characters going "I always ready an attack action when I see someone", but on the other hand, that's a common trope of action movies and stuff, where people enter a hostile territory with weapons ready, and checking every corner and such.

Question #2, let's assume that Ready isn't allowed outside combat, would you allow to enter initiative earlier, without seeing an enemy yet? The most obvious situation where this could be needed is when a party prepares and ambush, say Himiko wants to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door that (as they think) has enemies behind it?

I use a houserule that permits a single character to automatically go first in the initiative order so long as no other character wants to take a hostile action yet. Under the circumstances, I would count opening a door as a hostile action in #2, so the opening character automatically goes first, and then the initiative results of the other combatants would determine subsequent order, with some combatants being surprised, if appropriate.

[Tanarii]

I use a houserule that permits a single character to automatically go first in the initiative order so long as no other character wants to take a hostile action yet. Under the circumstances, I would count opening a door as a hostile action in #2, so the opening character automatically goes first, and then the initiative results of the other combatants would determine subsequent order, with some combatants being surprised, if appropriate.
That's an interesting clarification on your house rule, that opening the door would count as thefirsthostile action.

Conversely, and building on our previous discussion on the matter, I generally wouldn't even include opening the door in the initiative order. It'd be what triggered initiative. So it'd go down identically in our games if someone wanted to attack through the doorway.

Conversely, as I said above, I would start with PCs inside the room if they wanted to charge through in battle order, and the enemies weren't waiting to fire as they came through.

So it sounds like what you call a "house rule", I call "RAW, with the DM starting the battle at the appropriate moment for the situation". :smallamused:

[Arial Black]

Question #1 Would you allow to Ready an action outside of combat? This might lead to some cheese with characters going "I always ready an attack action when I see someone", but on the other hand, that's a common trope of action movies and stuff, where people enter a hostile territory with weapons ready, and checking every corner and such.

Never! Never, never never!

Most actions cover things that can be done outside combat. For example, 'casting a spell' outside of combat neither uses nor requires Actions In Combat; you just....cast it!

But the Ready Action is only about changing the place in the initiative order of when the thing you want to do happens. It has no other function. Out of combat, you don't need the Ready Action, and Actions In Combat only exist...you guessed it!...in combat. And, as we all know (because the rules say so!) combat takes place in Combat Rounds in initiative order.

Anyone trying to Ready outside combat is trying to get around the initiative/surprise rules. Never allow it. Never do it yourself. Just use the rules for initiative and surprise.


Question #2, let's assume that Ready isn't allowed outside combat, would you allow to enter initiative earlier, without seeing an enemy yet? The most obvious situation where this could be needed is when a party prepares and ambush, say Himiko wants to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door that (as they think) has enemies behind it?

No. The 'condition' of 'being surprised' only applies to the first round of combat. Starting initiative earlier than the foe can respond takes away their ability to surprise you and yours to surprise them. It takes away their ability to be 'not surprised', having a higher initiative than you, and attacking you first!

It's essentially cheating. Never allow it.

If you, as DM, decide to use initiative order outside of combat for some reason (because the order people act is somehow crucial to this non-combat activity), then as soon as actual combat is about to begin, then end your non-combat initiative, re-roll initiative and establish surprise. This allows the game to be run fairly, allows those creatures who are immune to surprise or who have abilities which only function in the first round of combat to work as intended.

[Xetheral]

That's an interesting clarification on your house rule, that opening the door would count as thefirsthostile action.

Conversely, and building on our previous discussion on the matter, I generally wouldn't even include opening the door in the initiative order. It'd be what triggered initiative. So it'd go down identically in our games if someone wanted to attack through the doorway.

I classify it that way because it's an action intended to start hostilities, in reaction to which other combatants might elect to (or in the example given, already plan to) take hostile actions of their own. I put opening the door in the initiative order to avoid the problem where the door-opener rolls higher initiative than the fireballer but lower initiative than the enemies. To illustrate:

(Door is opened outside initiative.)
Enemies take turn and are no longer surprised.
Door-opener skips turns.
Ally casts Fireball.
Enemies attack.
Door-opener takes turn.

vs

Door-opener automatically goes first and opens door.
Enemies take turn and are no longer surprised
Ally casts Fireball
Door-opener takes turn.
Enemies attack.

The latter is a much more advantageous worst-case scenario than the former. (If the enemies roll lowest on initiative, then yes, our approaches are functionally identical.)


Conversely, as I said above, I would start with PCs inside the room if they wanted to charge through in battle order, and the enemies weren't waiting to fire as they came through.

In that circumstance I'd roll initiative the moment someone wants to take a hostile action, which will likely be immediately after the first hostile-looking character clears the doorway. My houserule wouldn't trigger since presumably multiple people want to take actions at that point.


So it sounds like what you call a "house rule", I call "RAW, with the DM starting the battle at the appropriate moment for the situation". :smallamused:

I often wonder if our games might look quite similar in practice even though we often use different language to describe what we're doing, and differ on certain points of minutae. :)

Edit: Well, other than the parts where you don't play with feats or multiclassing and design encounters very differently.... :p

[SiCK_Boy]

But the Ready Action is only about changing the place in the initiative order of when the thing you want to do happens. It has no other function. Out of combat, you don't need the Ready Action, and Actions In Combat only exist...you guessed it!...in combat. And, as we all know (because the rules say so!) combat takes place in Combat Rounds in initiative order.

It also exist to allow "conditional" reactions to the evolving situation of the combat.

[Mellack]

#1. No


#2. No

Determining what happens when is the entire purpose of initiative. Use it for what it is meant to do.

[JoeJ]

If you, as DM, decide to use initiative order outside of combat for some reason (because the order people act is somehow crucial to this non-combat activity), then as soon as actual combat is about to begin, then end your non-combat initiative, re-roll initiative and establish surprise. This allows the game to be run fairly, allows those creatures who are immune to surprise or who have abilities which only function in the first round of combat to work as intended.

This one part I don't agree with. If the non-combat situation that caused initiative to be rolled is still ongoing - for example, a complex trap that hasn't been neutralized yet - then having enemies show up should be no different than having new creatures show up in an ongoing fight. You just roll initiative for the newcomers and add them in to the existing initiative order.

[DrowPiratRobrts]

I'll play devil's advocate for what looks like everyone who's responded so far.

In response to Q1: Yes! Absolutely! Although I force players to make it specific just like the Ready Action in combat. The thing is, in combat you run the risk of missing a turn (the one where you took the Ready action) with a readied action because the conditions may never be met. It's the same in a role-playing situation. It allows players to think 1 or 2 steps ahead of their NPCs (and vise-versa) and potentially gain an upper hand either in combat or in a role-playing situation.

So if the party were talking to a few NPCs that they thought might be tied to the band of marauders troubling the village, a couple of them might want to ready actions in case things go south or a specific opportunity arises. For instance, Bob the Druid says he wants to ready an action that if the leader steps out of the room for any reason, he wants to Wildshape into a bear and attack the henchmen. So if the trigger comes, he has the option to take that readied action as he (as a character) anticipated the leader might leave and that it would provide the best opportunity for an all out attack. Then you roll initiative for everyone and account for surprise because bears.

Alternatively, I was recently playing a wizard and was invisible next to a demon who was claiming that someone's child now belonged to him. The party was just talking to the demon, but I readied an action to grab the baby who was next to the demon and slink away if there was a time when the demon looked away or seemed less focused on the child. It ended up working out great for the most part and we got out without any real combat happening.

I don't see any gamebreaking features in either scenario since NPCs can do this as well. It rewards your players for thinking ahead, even in order to avoid combat or a big fight.

[sophontteks]

#1 as described is how the characters are acting without readying. If they weren't they would spend the first round (which is only 7 seconds long) 'surprised'. Surprised meaning they were not expecting combat.

#2 Also handled by the surprise round. A successful ambush would give the party a free round.

[Telok]

Something that happened in a game:

Fighter: 'I ready an action to catch the wizard when he fails his climb check.'
DM: 'You can't ready actions outside of combat. Roll, wizard.'
Wizard: <roll> <fail>
DM: 'You fall and take <roll> 45 points of damage.'
Wizard: 'Zero and dying.'
Cleric (to fighter): 'Next time we'll just start a fight with the bard so you can catch him.'

[DrowPiratRobrts]

Something that happened in a game:

Fighter: 'I ready an action to catch the wizard when he fails his climb check.'
DM: 'You can't ready actions outside of combat. Roll, wizard.'
Wizard: <roll> <fail>
DM: 'You fall and take <roll> 45 points of damage.'
Wizard: 'Zero and dying.'
Cleric (to fighter): 'Next time we'll just start a fight with the bard so you can catch him.'

Exactly my point. Readying an action is just anticipating a circumstance and preparing for it. It doesn't even have to be combat based. When I watch someone ski behind a boat, I "ready" an action to tell the drive that they've fallen. They might not fall, but if they do I'm ready because we're responsible adults.

Or when a toddler gets close to the edge of the boat, I get ready to jump in if they lose their balance (they're wearing a life vest btw. I'm not a terrible uncle).

[JoeJ]

Exactly my point. Readying an action is just anticipating a circumstance and preparing for it. It doesn't even have to be combat based. When I watch someone ski behind a boat, I "ready" an action to tell the drive that they've fallen. They might not fall, but if they do I'm ready because we're responsible adults.

Or when a toddler gets close to the edge of the boat, I get ready to jump in if they lose their balance (they're wearing a life vest btw. I'm not a terrible uncle).

If there's no initiative order, what's the difference between readying an action and just taking one after you see something happen?

[PhoenixPhyre]

You can prepare to act at any time. In cases where relative reaction speed and contested timing are involved, you should be acting in initiative order. The rules are more formal there, which minimizes the friction. This includes, but is not limited to, combat.

[Derpaligtr]

If there's no initiative order, what's the difference between readying an action and just taking one after you see something happen?

There isn't one.

You are readying an action, even if you aren't in combat.

People want to rules lawyer 5e, 5e was built around simplicity and using common sense.

Saying "I ready an action too..." and "Once X happens, I'm going to Y" is the same thing.

[PhoenixPhyre]

There isn't one.

You are readying an action, even if you aren't in combat.

People want to rules lawyer 5e, 5e was built around simplicity and using common sense.

Saying "I ready an action too..." and "Once X happens, I'm going to Y" is the same thing.

As long as there's no need to worry about who goes first, that's true.

[Tanarii]

Saying "I ready an action too..." and "Once X happens, I'm going to Y" is the same thing.
And generally speaking, the correct response is "you can tell me when X happens".

What's typically happening is a player is trying to make sure their declaration of intended action gets a chance to be inserted without having to rewind stuff or jump in suddenly.

Technically the same with Ready Actions, except in that case they're giving up their current opportunity to act in order to do so.

[Kuu Lightwing]

I see. Thank you for answers.

Well, my main problem with "just use the surprise rules" is that they don't simulate the situation I try to imagine. Allow me to explain.

Situation: Himiko, Angie, Maki and Gonta are alone in a room. They suspect that there are orks behind the nexy door, and they come up with the plan - Himiko prepares to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door, after which Gonta instantly shuts it down. Maki prepares to attack them as well.

If we go by surprise rules, everyone gets a full turn, which is not what I imagine - Gonta opens the door, Maki rolls high, runs up to an ork, stabs it with a knife, runs back out, only then Himiko casts fireball, and then Gonta can also run in, stab someone and then even run out and close the door. What Ready would allow to do in this situation, is to make all the actions "smaller" - Gonta opens the door, Himiko releases the fireball and Maki shoots an ork with a crossbow. If orks heard our party, they also could opt for Ready, and shoot back instantly as soon as door opens, some may opt for readying a move to jam the door.

The next issue, is that let's imagine the characters are already in combat and Angie is fighting Zombies while the rest of the team are trying to find a route for escape. Now, since they are in combat already, the whole "Ready a fireball" trick suddenly becomes 100% RAW legal, despite characters being in a more stressful situation. So, why the presence of another threat would make characters react to events better? That also opens up the old "Bag'o'Rats" trick shenanigans, which isn't very desirable.

[JoeJ]

I see. Thank you for answers.

Well, my main problem with "just use the surprise rules" is that they don't simulate the situation I try to imagine. Allow me to explain.

Situation: Himiko, Angie, Maki and Gonta are alone in a room. They suspect that there are orks behind the nexy door, and they come up with the plan - Himiko prepares to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door, after which Gonta instantly shuts it down. Maki prepares to attack them as well.

If we go by surprise rules, everyone gets a full turn, which is not what I imagine - Gonta opens the door, Maki rolls high, runs up to an ork, stabs it with a knife, runs back out, only then Himiko casts fireball, and then Gonta can also run in, stab someone and then even run out and close the door. What Ready would allow to do in this situation, is to make all the actions "smaller" - Gonta opens the door, Himiko releases the fireball and Maki shoots an ork with a crossbow. If orks heard our party, they also could opt for Ready, and shoot back instantly as soon as door opens, some may opt for readying a move to jam the door.

The next issue, is that let's imagine the characters are already in combat and Angie is fighting Zombies while the rest of the team are trying to find a route for escape. Now, since they are in combat already, the whole "Ready a fireball" trick suddenly becomes 100% RAW legal, despite characters being in a more stressful situation. So, why the presence of another threat would make characters react to events better? That also opens up the old "Bag'o'Rats" trick shenanigans, which isn't very desirable.

And sometime later, when the PCs are taking a break or even relaxing in town after leaving the dungeon, a small party of enemies opens the door to their chamber, shoots a fireball in, and slams the door before any of the PCs can react. That's okay too, right?

[sophontteks]

In the examples you provided the answer is "Use suprise rules." But there are situations out of combat where readying an action is appropriate. Its a thin line.

In one campaign I was luring out an invisible creature with food. Ranged party members readied an action. They would shoot the creature as soon as it takes the bait. I felt that was most appropriate for the situation. It knew where we were, but it wouldn't initiate combat unless we approached, so we initiated with readied actions after tricking it into coming out.

[Arial Black]

This one part I don't agree with. If the non-combat situation that caused initiative to be rolled is still ongoing - for example, a complex trap that hasn't been neutralized yet - then having enemies show up should be no different than having new creatures show up in an ongoing fight. You just roll initiative for the newcomers and add them in to the existing initiative order.

Why should either the party or the newcomers suddenly be immune to surprise, just because the party are messing with a trap?

That would be the effect of your ruling, because if you say that initiative has been going for several rounds then no-one can be surprised because the effects of surprise only occur in round 1.

[JoeJ]

Remember that, although you as DM might know that the monsters are unaware of the party, the PCs don't know that until they open the door. By using Ready you're basically allowing them to create a situation that treats the orcs as if they were surprised even if they aren't. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't fly if you have monsters do that to the PCs, so why is the reverse situation okay?

[Arial Black]

Something that happened in a game:

Fighter: 'I ready an action to catch the wizard when he fails his climb check.'
DM: 'You can't ready actions outside of combat. Roll, wizard.'
Wizard: <roll> <fail>
DM: 'You fall and take <roll> 45 points of damage.'
Wizard: 'Zero and dying.'
Cleric (to fighter): 'Next time we'll just start a fight with the bard so you can catch him.'

As already mentioned, outside of combat you neither have nor need Actions In Combat to do stuff.

In your example, the fighter can certainly be ready to catch the wizard if he falls, no Action In Combat needed (or allowed); he just...does it.

[JoeJ]

Why should either the party or the newcomers suddenly be immune to surprise, just because the party are messing with a trap?

That would be the effect of your ruling, because if you say that initiative has been going for several rounds then no-one can be surprised because the effects of surprise only occur in round 1.

For the same reason that they're immune to surprise if they're already fighting somebody. The characters who are already engaged can't be surprised, which is only fair because surprise would keep them from acting for one round against the threat they already know about and have been dealing with. The newcomers still can be, and any who are will lose their first turn.

The effects of surprise, RAW, don't have to occur on the 1st round of combat; they occur on your first turn.

[Kuu Lightwing]

And sometime later, when the PCs are taking a break or even relaxing in town after leaving the dungeon, a small party of enemies opens the door to their chamber, shoots a fireball in, and slams the door before any of the PCs can react. That's okay too, right?

I mean, why not actually? Obviously if it's done as a proper encounter rather than "oh you killed my monsters, then frak you too!!!" Could actually be interesting adventure hook possibly.


Remember that, although you as DM might know that the monsters are unaware of the party, the PCs don't know that until they open the door. By using Ready you're basically allowing them to create a situation that treats the orcs as if they were surprised even if they aren't. I'm pretty sure that wouldn't fly if you have monsters do that to the PCs, so why is the reverse situation okay?

If monsters are aware, they could also ready actions. Or just slam the door open before players set up their tiny little trick, depending on circumstances or how long they were discussing this.

[Lombra]

Actions exist outside of combat so yes. You can ready actions out of combat.

[Malifice]

Answers are no and no.

The game presumes you're ready for action. For the times you're not, you're surprised.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Answers are no and no.

The game presumes you're ready for action. For the times you're not, you're surprised.

"Ready for action" and "I'm prepared to do A as soon I see B happening" are two vastly different things though. With spells it's even done by pre-casting a spell. I don't like the arbitrary "the combat music should be playing" rule to be able to do the second kind of thing.

[Unoriginal]

"Ready for action" and "I'm prepared to do A as soon I see B happening" are two vastly different things though. With spells it's even done by pre-casting a spell. I don't like the arbitrary "the combat music should be playing" rule to be able to do the second kind of thing.

You can pre-cast a spell and hold it out of combat, but then don't complain if nothing happen in the next 6 seconds and you waste the slot.

[JackPhoenix]

I see. Thank you for answers.

Well, my main problem with "just use the surprise rules" is that they don't simulate the situation I try to imagine. Allow me to explain.

Situation: Himiko, Angie, Maki and Gonta are alone in a room. They suspect that there are orks behind the nexy door, and they come up with the plan - Himiko prepares to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door, after which Gonta instantly shuts it down. Maki prepares to attack them as well.

If we go by surprise rules, everyone gets a full turn, which is not what I imagine - Gonta opens the door, Maki rolls high, runs up to an ork, stabs it with a knife, runs back out, only then Himiko casts fireball, and then Gonta can also run in, stab someone and then even run out and close the door. What Ready would allow to do in this situation, is to make all the actions "smaller" - Gonta opens the door, Himiko releases the fireball and Maki shoots an ork with a crossbow. If orks heard our party, they also could opt for Ready, and shoot back instantly as soon as door opens, some may opt for readying a move to jam the door.

The next issue, is that let's imagine the characters are already in combat and Angie is fighting Zombies while the rest of the team are trying to find a route for escape. Now, since they are in combat already, the whole "Ready a fireball" trick suddenly becomes 100% RAW legal, despite characters being in a more stressful situation. So, why the presence of another threat would make characters react to events better? That also opens up the old "Bag'o'Rats" trick shenanigans, which isn't very desirable.

That's the problem with players not sticking to the plan, not with the rules. You want to start combat, you roll initiative. If Gonta acts first, she opens the door with her free object interaction, then readies an action tu close it again after the others act. Himiko and Maki shoot or lob a Fireball inside, after which Gonta closes the door. If both... or either... act before Gonta, they use Ready for their respective actions, with the trigger "after Gonta opens the door", then on Gonta's turn, she uses her object interaction to open the door, Himiko and Maki use their reactions to perform their readied actions, then Gonta closes the door with her Action. If the orcs inside the room know the enemy is outside, they may act on their own initiative: Ready an action to do whatever if they act before Gonta, or just act in the moment of time before Gonta opens the door and closes it again, if she has to wait for Himiko or Maki to make their move if they are just a bit slower (i.e. after both Gonta and orcs in the initiative order). If Maki wants to run inside the room instead of shooting, she must a) act after Gonta, but before Himiko b) hope the orcs aren't ready for her c) risk either disrupting Gonta's readied action, or being stuck inside, depending on how Gonta words the trigger for her readied closing of the door.. If Gonta wants to run in and attack, she can't close the door behind her, as she used her free object interaction to open it, and her action to attack. Again, orcs may disrupt that plan.

[Trickshaw]

Surprise Round

[Kuu Lightwing]

You can pre-cast a spell and hold it out of combat, but then don't complain if nothing happen in the next 6 seconds and you waste the slot.

Okay, so obviously it is a time-sensitive thing, so makes sense to enter combat rounds and roll initiative? Or you will insist that it is possible only if another team member is fighting a rat?


That's the problem with players not sticking to the plan, not with the rules. You want to start combat, you roll initiative. If Gonta acts first, she opens the door with her free object interaction, then readies an action tu close it again after the others act. Himiko and Maki shoot or lob a Fireball inside, after which Gonta closes the door. If both... or either... act before Gonta, they use Ready for their respective actions, with the trigger "after Gonta opens the door", then on Gonta's turn, she uses her object interaction to open the door, Himiko and Maki use their reactions to perform their readied actions, then Gonta closes the door with her Action. If the orcs inside the room know the enemy is outside, they may act on their own initiative: Ready an action to do whatever if they act before Gonta, or just act in the moment of time before Gonta opens the door and closes it again, if she has to wait for Himiko or Maki to make their move if they are just a bit slower (i.e. after both Gonta and orcs in the initiative order). If Maki wants to run inside the room instead of shooting, she must a) act after Gonta, but before Himiko b) hope the orcs aren't ready for her c) risk either disrupting Gonta's readied action, or being stuck inside, depending on how Gonta words the trigger for her readied closing of the door.. If Gonta wants to run in and attack, she can't close the door behind her, as she used her free object interaction to open it, and her action to attack. Again, orcs may disrupt that plan.

This way - I don't actually have any objection, and that's how I'd probably rule this situation if I was a DM. But this means that you actually enter the combat rounds and roll initiative before seeing the enemy - which is what many people don't seem to agree with. What it seems to me is that general suggestion is to roll initiative only after Gonta opens the door, and not before, and determine these actions that we describe as "prepared" here via a surprise round. Which is why I introduced Maki (rogue) to show that it's not exactly the same situation, as when you Ready, you only Ready a move or an action, and it simulates some instant response to a trigger. Surprise round is obviously a much bigger time frame.

[Lombra]

You can pre-cast a spell and hold it out of combat, but then don't complain if nothing happen in the next 6 seconds and you waste the slot.

Is there a time limit on how long you can concentrate on a readied spell?

[PhoenixPhyre]

Is there a time limit on how long you can concentrate on a readied spell?

In combat, until your next turn. If the trigger didn't happen, you wasted a slot.

[Tanarii]

Just don't roll initiative until after the player open a door. At the earliest. It's simplest all around and shuts down silly door opening shenanigans.

[Arial Black]

Actions exist outside of combat so yes. You can ready actions out of combat.

Actions (full name = Actions In Combat!) only exist in Combat Rounds in initiative order.

Outside of Combat Rounds, Actions In Combat are neither allowed nor required to do stuff.

[Arial Black]

For the same reason that they're immune to surprise if they're already fighting somebody. The characters who are already engaged can't be surprised, which is only fair because surprise would keep them from acting for one round against the threat they already know about and have been dealing with. The newcomers still can be, and any who are will lose their first turn.

But when the DM is choosing to use the initiative mechanic for non-combat activity, like messing about with a trap, then it is not appropriate or realistic to act as alert as if you were in actual combat.

The reason that you can only be surprised during the first round is that when you know you are in combat then you are treated as hyper alert for danger, and all the surprise rules do is delay that alertness for a few seconds.

If the DM is (against RAW BTW!) using initiative outside of combat then this erroneously makes everyone as hyper aware as if they were in actual combat. The rules aren't working, precisely because the DM is not using the rules properly by using Combat Rounds for non-combat activity.

If the DM wants to use initiative that way, he must re-roll initiative and establish surprise as soon as actual combat starts!


The effects of surprise, RAW, don't have to occur on the 1st round of combat; they occur on your first turn.

You must have a different PHB than I have!

Right at the beginning of the Combat chapter, p189, under Surprise, it states, "Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the START of the ENCOUNTER."

In the boxed section, 'Combat Step By Step', it says:-

1. Determine surprise
2. Establish positions
3. Roll initiative
4. Take turns
5. Begin the next round. When everyone involved in the combat has had a turn, the round ends. Repeat step 4 until the fighting stops.

There is no place for a second step 1. Surprise is determined before initiative is rolled, and is never checked again until the fighting stops, RAW.

[Lombra]

In combat, until your next turn. If the trigger didn't happen, you wasted a slot.

Nope. You decide wether to cast it or not until the trigger occurs. If the trigger doesn't occur, you can stop concentrating anytime.


Actions (full name = Actions In Combat!) only exist in Combat Rounds in initiative order.

Outside of Combat Rounds, Actions In Combat are neither allowed nor required to do stuff.

Action's full name is Actions. I can hack my axe at a tree while walking down the forest. I attacked that tree. No combat involved. I can dash whenever I please, no need to roll initiative. I can search my backpack for a drink and gulp it down without rolling initiative.

Come on now. Roll initiative only when it makes sense. Why would something work on tight situations but not in a calm envirorment? It's ridiculous.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Nope. You decide wether to cast it or not until the trigger occurs. If the trigger doesn't occur, you can stop concentrating anytime.


No. You cast it when you take the Ready action and hold it until the trigger occurs, at which time you can release it or do something else. If the trigger does not occur, the spell is wasted. This is both by RAW and by SA.

[Lombra]

No. You cast it when you take the Ready action and hold it until the trigger occurs, at which time you can release it or do something else. If the trigger does not occur, the spell is wasted. This is both by RAW and by SA.

You are right, RAW the reaction must happen later in the round you ready the action. Which is inherently flawed, since this way you can't ready actions if you go last in initiative, so I'll stick to common sense instead.

[PhoenixPhyre]

You are right, RAW the reaction must happen later in the round you ready the action. Which is inherently flawed, since this way you can't ready actions if you go last in initiative, so I'll stick to common sense instead.

Round is not a defined term. It must happen before your next turn starts. That's how any such effect works unless it says otherwise.

[JoeJ]

But when the DM is choosing to use the initiative mechanic for non-combat activity, like messing about with a trap, then it is not appropriate or realistic to act as alert as if you were in actual combat.

The reason that you can only be surprised during the first round is that when you know you are in combat then you are treated as hyper alert for danger, and all the surprise rules do is delay that alertness for a few seconds.

But for some reason characters dealing with a complex trap are not hyper-alert? Why wouldn't they be?


If the DM is (against RAW BTW!) using initiative outside of combat then this erroneously makes everyone as hyper aware as if they were in actual combat. The rules aren't working, precisely because the DM is not using the rules properly by using Combat Rounds for non-combat activity.

You're incorrect about RAW. Complex traps do have initiative. "When it is activated, the trap's active elements act according to its initiative. On each of its initiative counts, after all creatures with that same initiative have acted, the trap's features activate."


If the DM wants to use initiative that way, he must re-roll initiative and establish surprise as soon as actual combat starts!

So if a PC is surprised they don't get to respond for one round to the active complex trap they already knew about and were trying to deal with. That's pretty harsh.


Right at the beginning of the Combat chapter, p189, under Surprise, it states, "Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the START of the ENCOUNTER."

In the boxed section, 'Combat Step By Step', it says:-

1. Determine surprise
2. Establish positions
3. Roll initiative
4. Take turns
5. Begin the next round. When everyone involved in the combat has had a turn, the round ends. Repeat step 4 until the fighting stops.

There is no place for a second step 1. Surprise is determined before initiative is rolled, and is never checked again until the fighting stops, RAW.

There's no place for a second step 2 or 3 either, so what do you do when new creatures arrive at an ongoing fight? If RAW doesn't allow a determination of whether the new arrivals are surprised, then it also doesn't allow them to roll initiative, or even for the DM to determine where they are positioned when they arrive.

[Tanarii]

I thought either the PHB or the DMG had a little blurb specifically about how to handle creatures joining an ongoing combat?

Time for some rules delving.
Edit: guess not. At least, I couldn't find it.

[Unoriginal]

You are right, RAW the reaction must happen later in the round you ready the action. Which is inherently flawed, since this way you can't ready actions if you go last in initiative, so I'll stick to common sense instead.

You can Ready an Action up to your next turn, since it uses Reaction.

[Tanarii]

You are right, RAW the reaction must happen later in the round you ready the action. Which is inherently flawed, since this way you can't ready actions if you go last in initiative, so I'll stick to common sense instead.
As far as I know, There's no reason to ever think of rounds as anything other than "until the same creatures next turn" or "until the same point in the cyclic initiate order".

[sophontteks]

Readied actions don't last until the start of the next round, they last until the start of your next turn. Your order in initiative has no effect on how long a readied action lasts. It uses your reaction.

[Mellack]

I see. Thank you for answers.

Well, my main problem with "just use the surprise rules" is that they don't simulate the situation I try to imagine. Allow me to explain.

Situation: Himiko, Angie, Maki and Gonta are alone in a room. They suspect that there are orks behind the nexy door, and they come up with the plan - Himiko prepares to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door, after which Gonta instantly shuts it down. Maki prepares to attack them as well.

If we go by surprise rules, everyone gets a full turn, which is not what I imagine - Gonta opens the door, Maki rolls high, runs up to an ork, stabs it with a knife, runs back out, only then Himiko casts fireball, and then Gonta can also run in, stab someone and then even run out and close the door. What Ready would allow to do in this situation, is to make all the actions "smaller" - Gonta opens the door, Himiko releases the fireball and Maki shoots an ork with a crossbow. If orks heard our party, they also could opt for Ready, and shoot back instantly as soon as door opens, some may opt for readying a move to jam the door.

The next issue, is that let's imagine the characters are already in combat and Angie is fighting Zombies while the rest of the team are trying to find a route for escape. Now, since they are in combat already, the whole "Ready a fireball" trick suddenly becomes 100% RAW legal, despite characters being in a more stressful situation. So, why the presence of another threat would make characters react to events better? That also opens up the old "Bag'o'Rats" trick shenanigans, which isn't very desirable.

Lets go with your situation where the orcs heard your party and they have also all readied an action to shoot someone when they see the door open. Gonta opens the door. Who goes next? Do they get to shoot Himiko before he releases the spell? That would be why you need initiative. Its purpose is to decide the order when there is conflict.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Lets go with your situation where the orcs heard your party and they have also all readied an action to shoot someone when they see the door open. Gonta opens the door. Who goes next? Do they get to shoot Himiko before he releases the spell? That would be why you need initiative. Its purpose is to decide the order when there is conflict.

Which is when my second question comes up. Is it possible to enter initiative beforehand?

Some people suggest that it's atrocious, but I don't really agree. Being unable to setup an "ambush" like that unless you already fight something (even if only a rat) feels way too artificial.


But when the DM is choosing to use the initiative mechanic for non-combat activity, like messing about with a trap, then it is not appropriate or realistic to act as alert as if you were in actual combat.


How is it more realistic or appropriate to be more aware of something, if you, or one of your friends have to deal with another threat nearby? So, if the only thing you have to concentrate on is the door, you can't be "alert enough" to pull the trick off, but if your teammate is busy fighting something behind you - you can?

[Mellack]

If you enter initiative beforehand you are creating your own problem. Have Gonta open the door. That triggers initiative. If they are surprised, great, your plan works as you hoped. If they heard you, initiative is the tool to determine if you get to blast them first or they get to hit you first. It is the function of the initiative order to determine that timing.

[Lombra]

As far as I know, There's no reason to ever think of rounds as anything other than "until the same creatures next turn" or "until the same point in the cyclic initiate order".

Well, the book states "later that round".

It is clear why it shouldn't matter. If you want to prepare for something, you just keep preparing for it through your normal actions: the dude you are waiting for didn't appear? Use your action on your next turn to keep readying an attack/whatever.

With spells tho, it is unclear. And I see no reason why I couldn't concentrate throughout the whole wait for the trigger to happen.

[Kuu Lightwing]

If you enter initiative beforehand you are creating your own problem. Have Gonta open the door. That triggers initiative. If they are surprised, great, your plan works as you hoped. If they heard you, initiative is the tool to determine if you get to blast them first or they get to hit you first. It is the function of the initiative order to determine that timing.

Reread my examples please, where I explain why Surprise does not simulate the situation I want to present.

[Malifice]

Reread my examples please, where I explain why Surprise does not simulate the situation I want to present.

What situation?

Orcs in a room unaware of PCs on the other side of the door? PCs on other side of door, aware of Orcs in room and ready to murder them all?

PC's open door. DM Calls for initiative. PCs and Orcs roll, and take turns in order.

Orcs cannot act on thier first turns, and cant take reactions till their first turn ends, granting the PCs at least one and possibly 2 whole turns worth of activity before the Orcs can have a turn.

There are no ready actions outside of combat. All creatures are ready for combat, aside from when they're surprised.

[Kuu Lightwing]

What situation?

Orcs in a room unaware of PCs on the other side of the door? PCs on other side of door, aware of Orcs in room and ready to murder them all?

PC's open door. DM Calls for initiative. PCs and Orcs roll, and take turns in order.

Orcs cannot act on thier first turns, and cant take reactions till their first turn ends, granting the PCs at least one and possibly 2 whole turns worth of activity before the Orcs can have a turn.

There are no ready actions outside of combat. All creatures are ready for combat, aside from when they're surprised.

So, you insist that preparing to lob a fireball in the room as soon as door opens should only be possible when your teammate is fighting someone? Because what you describe is entirely different situation.

[Arial Black]

Action's full name is Actions. I can hack my axe at a tree while walking down the forest. I attacked that tree. No combat involved. I can dash whenever I please, no need to roll initiative. I can search my backpack for a drink and gulp it down without rolling initiative.

You seem to be getting the wrong end of the stick.

I said, "Outside of Combat Rounds, Actions In Combat are neither allowed nor required to do stuff."

So, yes, outside of combat of course you can hack at a tree or move as far as you want or search your own backpack. Being outside combat doesn't prevent you from doing these things. What being outside combat does is make it so that you don't need Actions In Combat to do those things! You just....do it!

The only time you need actions to do stuff is in Combat Rounds in initiative order. In fact, Actions In Combat only exist in Combat Rounds in initiative order.

Saying that you can search your pack outside of combat is true, but does not indicate that you need to use an Action In Combat to do that outside of combat!

[Malifice]

So, you insist that preparing to lob a fireball in the room as soon as door opens should only be possible when your teammate is fighting someone? Because what you describe is entirely different situation.

Prepare away. You can prepare to jog up and down on the spot while juggling 5 daggers and humming the national anthem if you want.

Door opens, roll initiative. Fireball away on your turn one.

[Arial Black]

But for some reason characters dealing with a complex trap are not hyper-alert? Why wouldn't they be?

Perhaps we are talking past each other. I was responding to what I thought was a situation where there was no combat going on at all, but where the party had plenty of time to mess with a trap. In that circumstance Combat Rounds are not required.

If the party are messing with a trap during combat, then Combat Rounds are happening anyway.

If the party are peacefully messing about with a trap, and half-way through they get attacked, then initiative is rolled when they get attacked, not when they started messing with the trap in what was then a non-combat situation.


You're incorrect about RAW. Complex traps do have initiative. "When it is activated, the trap's active elements act according to its initiative. On each of its initiative counts, after all creatures with that same initiative have acted, the trap's features activate."

So that is when you are in combat anyway.


So if a PC is surprised they don't get to respond for one round to the active complex trap they already knew about and were trying to deal with. That's pretty harsh.

They weren't in Combat Rounds/initiative order before they get attacked by the creatures that arrive sometime during the trap-messing.


There's no place for a second step 2 or 3 either, so what do you do when new creatures arrive at an ongoing fight? If RAW doesn't allow a determination of whether the new arrivals are surprised, then it also doesn't allow them to roll initiative, or even for the DM to determine where they are positioned when they arrive.

That's because the DM established their positions and rolled their initiative originally, just like with every combatant. The fact that their position is established as 'several rounds away' doesn't prevent them from being included in the initiative order.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Prepare away. You can prepare to jog up and down on the spot while juggling 5 daggers and humming the national anthem if you want.

Door opens, roll initiative. Fireball away on your turn one.

That's funny, but that's not what "prepare" means. There's a difference between "prepared to fight something" and "I'm going to focus on this one objective to do this one action as soon as X happens". Tell me, why the second option should only be possible when characters already fight something?

[Malifice]

That's funny, but that's not what "prepare" means. There's a difference between "prepared to fight something" and "I'm going to focus on this one objective to do this one action as soon as X happens".

No there isnt.

You can prepare your fireball before opening the door. You can be as specific about the conditions as to when it goes off as you want.

Then when we open the door we roll initiaitive and your fireball (and all other actions from aware combatants) resolves in initiatve order. If you're really fast you get to resolve your fireball before everyone else who has also readied a fireball, and if you're very sneaky (or your enemy is caught off guard) you always get to resolve it first.

You might even be fast enough to move 30' and fireball, and then move another 30'and fireball again before your opponent can move an inch.


Tell me, why the second option should only be possible when characters already fight something?

Because the rules say so. And for good reason. What you're trying to model is already factored into the rules as written.

And because if we're already fighting something, we have already determined initiative order (reflex time, reaction speed, action resolution and surprise). You're putting the cart before the horse.

In any event, you're wrong so it doesnt really matter.

[MaxWilson]

I know, this is somewhat a controversial topic, but still want to ask how you would rule this.

Question #1 Would you allow to Ready an action outside of combat? This might lead to some cheese with characters going "I always ready an attack action when I see someone", but on the other hand, that's a common trope of action movies and stuff, where people enter a hostile territory with weapons ready, and checking every corner and such.

Would I allow Ready actions outside of combat? Yes. But if you try to spend an extended period of time in such a state you'll exhaust yourself. (I wouldn't necessarily impose a mechanical penalty, but I'd eye the player askance, same as I would for a player who claimed he was recasting Guidance continuously every minute for days on end. "Really?" In my experience that's enough to put a kibosh on unreasonable action declarations.) And if you ready an attack on someone the instant you see them, you're pretty much guaranteeing that your interaction with them will be hostile.

It's possible, but people don't really do that kind of thing without a good reason any more than police go around pointing their guns at everything.

I also use a custom initiative system (based on AD&D initiative and loosely related to 5E DMG Speed Factor initiative) which avoids the need to make artificial distinctions between "in combat" and "out of combat." They flow naturally into each other, and sometimes players even pause during combat to return to non-combat activities like negotiating, because the system doesn't punish you for not aggressively attacking every chance you get. Anyway, in that initiative system there would be only limited benefit to Readying an attack out of combat. It might make you more likely to shoot first, but it won't give you extra attacks.

[Malifice]

Would I allow Ready actions outside of combat? Yes.

Dude, characters are always ready outside of combat sequencing.

Player: ''My Fighter enters the dungeon with Bow in hand and arrow nocked, scannining in an arc to his front, ready to shoot the first hostile monster he sees.''

That's not 'taking the ready action'. That's just what the characters are doing.

I wish you people would read the rules some times.

[Kuu Lightwing]

No there isnt.
Oh, but there is. Just as there is a difference between a reaction and a turn. Pretending that there's no difference is simply lying.



Because the rules say so. And for good reason. What you're trying to model is already factored into the rules as written.

And because if we're already fighting something, we have already determined initiative order (reflex time, reaction speed, action resolution and surprise). You're putting the cart before the horse.

In any event, you're wrong so it doesnt really matter.

You never presented me any "good reason", you just insist that there is one. Also, could you find me any actual reference in the rules that say that initiative must only be rolled when the characters actually see the enemy?


In any event, you're wrong so it doesnt really matter.

Best argument in this thread. "I'm right, you're wrong".

[Lombra]

Dude, characters are always ready outside of combat sequencing.

Player: ''My Fighter enters the dungeon with Bow in hand and arrow nocked, scannining in an arc to his front, ready to shoot the first hostile monster he sees.''

That's not 'taking the ready action'. That's just what the characters are doing.

I wish you people would read the rules some times.

So characters always use their reaction on the first round of combat in the first turn to shoot attack move or whatever because they're Ready™

[Unoriginal]

Where are the Cassalanters when we need them?

[JoeJ]

Perhaps we are talking past each other. I was responding to what I thought was a situation where there was no combat going on at all, but where the party had plenty of time to mess with a trap. In that circumstance Combat Rounds are not required.

If the party are messing with a trap during combat, then Combat Rounds are happening anyway.

If the party are peacefully messing about with a trap, and half-way through they get attacked, then initiative is rolled when they get attacked, not when they started messing with the trap in what was then a non-combat situation.

Why would there be initiative rolled if characters are just messing around? I'm talking about a complex trap that's been triggered. The trap by RAW goes on initiative count 10, or 20, or both 10 and 20 depending on the description. The PCs roll initiative to determine when they go.



That's because the DM established their positions and rolled their initiative originally, just like with every combatant. The fact that their position is established as 'several rounds away' doesn't prevent them from being included in the initiative order.

And how do they do that when the DM doesn't know when they'll arrive, or even if they'll join this fight at all? The newcomers might be PCs who have been off doing something else, after all. Or it could be something gated in. Or it could be something from a table of wandering monsters.

[sophontteks]

So characters always use their reaction on the first round of combat in the first turn to shoot attack move or whatever because they're Ready™

No, because readying an action means delaying your turn. They intend to act immediately, on their turn. Thats where the sillyness comes in. We are trying to use something designed to delay an action in order to do something before an action. Just take the action.

[Tanarii]

That's funny, but that's not what "prepare" means. There's a difference between "prepared to fight something" and "I'm going to focus on this one objective to do this one action as soon as X happens". Tell me, why the second option should only be possible when characters already fight something?
You seem to have missed the point of the Ready action.

It isn't "I'll do X when Y happens".

It's "I'll give up my turn now to do X when Y happens later."

It's a way to delay part of your turn, with the added condition that you must say what you're going to do in advance and limit yourself to specific triggers.

So no, there's absolutely no point in the Ready action to "prepare" for combat. You're not giving anything up now to do something later.

[Xetheral]

I wish you people would read the rules some times.

MaxWilson said he was using a custom initiative variant, rather than the initiative rules in the book. The rules don't matter here, because MaxWilson isn't using them.


It's a way to delay part of your turn, with the added condition that you must say what you're going to do in advance and limit yourself to specific triggers.

So no, there's absolutely no point in the Ready action to "prepare" for combat. You're not giving anything up now to do something later.

While yes, the practical impact of Ready is to delay an action, the purpose of Ready is to choose the sequence of actions.

I think the OP has a valid question. From a simulation standpoint, why should it only possible for PCs to choose the sequence of their actions after they've all taken their first turn in combat?

From a game-mechanics standpoint, the answer is obvious: sequencing your actions via Ready requires taking a turn, so you can't sequence your first-turn actions (because you haven't had an action yet). But from a simulation perspective that's extremely problematic, because there isn't an in-game reason that this should be true, particularly in situations where the PCs are the aggressorss and have plenty of time to prepare before alerting the enemy. If anything, sequencing actions should logically be easier in such a circumstance because you aren't trying to set it up in the middle of a fight.

[Malifice]

You never presented me any "good reason", you just insist that there is one.

Ive presented plenty of good reasons.


Also, could you find me any actual reference in the rules that say that initiative must only be rolled when the characters actually see the enemy?

Your DM could call for initiative for the encounter with the Orcs in a nearby dungeon 3 weeks before you even depart town to fight them if he wants.

Its a bit weird calling for an opposed Dexterity ability check between your PCs and a bunch of Orcs several miles away who have never met your PCs (and vice versa), dont know they even exist yet, and so forth.

An opposed Dexterity ability check to determine reaction speeds of the parties when (if?) they get into combat... in three weeks time?

A DM calls for initiative (an opposed Dexterity ability check) when there is something for each party to react to, and abstract 'turn' sequencing is important (i.e. when combat starts). Until combat abstraction starts, you're in narrative time and 'turns' dont exist. They dont exist 'in the game' - only outside of it to assist the players (and DM) in sequencing largely simultaneous activity in portioned off six second combat rounds.

Does your DM call for Opposed Ability checks like Dexterity Stealth or Wisdom Perception checks weeks in advance? What about Persuasion and Insight checks? What about opposed Strength checks to grapple, weeks before the grapple starts?

Finally remember, by RAW you can only take the ready action on your turn, and turns do not exist until the DM has called for initiative (an opposed Dexterity Ability Check) from all combatants (and after he has also determined awareness and surprise, and position of all parties) in the following steps (also RAW, from the PHB):


Determine surprise: The GM determines whether anyone involved in the combat encounter is surprised.
Establish positions: The GM decides where all the characters and monsters are located. Given the adventurers’ marching order or their stated positions in the room or other location, the GM figures out where the adversaries are, how far away and in what direction.
Roll initiative: Everyone involved in the combat encounter rolls initiative, determining the order of combatants’ turns.
Take turns: Each participant in the battle takes a turn in initiative order.
Begin the next round: When everyone involved in the combat has had a turn, the round ends. Repeat step 4 until the fighting stops.


See how it works? You dont get a turn until the DM has already determined surprise, established positions of all combatants, and rolled initiative for everyone involved in the combat. You cant (RAW) ready an action until the DM has done all the above (placed miniatures on the board or otherwise determined their position, determined if you or the other party are surprised, called for an opposed Dexterity Ability Check between you and the other party and started to count down rounds)


Best argument in this thread. "I'm right, you're wrong".

Im just showing you the rules (which show you're wrong) and indicating to you that (outside of those rules) there is zero support for everyone 'readying actions outside of combat'. Im also showing you the rules already take into account how to resolve a group of combatants sneaking up to another group with 'readied actions'. If they are not discovered before they take those 'readied actions' then they get off a full rounds worth of attacks before the enemy can react; maybe even two.

[Xetheral]

Ive presented plenty of good reasons.

You've presented reasons that support your interpretation of what the rules say (an interpretation I agree with). But what you haven't presented is reasons why the rules should be that way.

Kuu has presented a scenario where (to some posters, including me) the abstraction of initiative has the heavy believability cost of irrationally preventing characters from sequencing their actions on the first round of combat (because they can't have taken the Ready action yet) even though they can freely sequence their subsequent actions.

I believe what Kuu is looking for from you (and everyone else) is a discussion of why the rules are that way, a discussion of what breaks if those rules are modified, and how those rules might best be modified to avoid a situation he considers absurd.

I think he (and everyone else) is well aware of your (probably correct, imo) interpretation of what the rules say.

[Mellack]

The reason you need initiative is because the characters have a plan, but you need a contest for when that plan confronts the enemy. The wizard has readied a fireball to go off when the door opens. Now he has to react when the door opens to asses the situation. He is not just blindly casting. What if the door opens into a closet or a barricade? Do you force him to cast and fireball themselves? Does the archer have to pick a spot or do they get to target an orc anywhere in the room. All of those decisions take time. The orcs inside the room might be surprised, then they don't get to react and your team will go first no problem. If the orcs are not surprised, they might be able to react faster than the PCs. So we use initiative to determine who is able to react in what order.

[opaopajr]

Of course I would. All the other functions mentioned in that Combat chapter can be used outside combat -- yes, including Attack -- so why would I exclude Ready? Read Making an Attack again, it states basically to target a Noun (a person, place, or thing):

Making an Attack
Whether you’re striking with a melee weapon, firing a weapon at range, or making an attack roll as part of a spell, an attack has a simple structure.
1. Choose a target. Pick a target within your attack’s range: a creature, an object, or a location. [...]
(D&D 5e Basic. August, 2014. p. 73.)

Same with Use an Object, Search, Help, Dash, Spell, Dodge, etc., they are not excluded strictly into Combat usage. It's all there for interesting Exploration situations. Want to coordinate something, like chopping down a tree and then others getting Ready to Dodge or Dash away? Attack out of combat the tree, and Ready out of combat your Dodge or Dash.

It's also there to set up Ambushes, too. All of this is bundled up in the Surprise section. Will people try to abuse it by legalese? Naturally, but that's why the GM is there to adjudicate.

Also it might be why so much of the Surprise section is left up to GM judgment, since people are still coming away from 3.PF & 4e Rules as Written Statute. This way there is less confining structure to lock down the imaginative flow of the game. This is an Old Skool feature, not a bug. :smallsmile:

If you cannot handle such applications, well OK, that's your table. But as written, there's no specific beating general restriction. So feel free to stay as confined or as liberated as you want. :smallcool:

[Cybren]

Dude, characters are always ready outside of combat sequencing.

Player: ''My Fighter enters the dungeon with Bow in hand and arrow nocked, scannining in an arc to his front, ready to shoot the first hostile monster he sees.''

That's not 'taking the ready action'. That's just what the characters are doing.

I wish you people would read the rules some times.

In combat, you can choose to always act before some specific event you're waiting for. Are you arguing that is literally impossible outside of combat? That's fairly absurd.

[opaopajr]

No, because readying an action means delaying your turn. They intend to act immediately, on their turn. Thats where the sillyness comes in. We are trying to use something designed to delay an action in order to do something before an action. Just take the action.

Technically incorrect. It is merely "programming" your Action into your Reaction with an optional trigger. And since Reactions may go off anywhere from the start of your turn in a round until the start of your next turn, you technically can have your optional trigger triggered within your turn this round. It's not common, but if someone else's Reaction went off in your turn -- or something occured simultaneously within your turn (such as environmental circumstance) -- it is possible. :smallcool:

This is important to understand the potential of Ready. :smallsmile: It can be used for loads of fun!

[opaopajr]

FWIW, Surprise is explicit in taking away your Move, Action & Reaction:

Surprise
[...]
"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.
(D&D 5e Basic. August 2014. p. 69.)

Specific Beats General. That means the Surprise is taking these things away. That does not mean they were granted by Combat starting. Important distinction. :smallcool: (And why would we argue that move is granted only by Combat? C'mon... :smalltongue: )

[strangebloke]

In combat, you can choose to always act before some specific event you're waiting for. Are you arguing that is literally impossible outside of combat? That's fairly absurd.

Okay, let's just think this through a bit.

Scenario #1: Party is on one side of a door, goblins on the other. Both know that there's something unpleasant on the other side.

Logically, every party member should ready an reaction for "When the door opens" right? And since goblins can prepare actions too, they'll all ready an action off the same trigger. So the door flies open. Who gets to go first? Well, maybe you have some kind of contested DEX check...

Oh wait, that's literally initiative.

Scenario #2: Party is on one side of a door, goblins on the other. The party knows about the goblins, but not vice versa.

Okay, so they succeeded on a stealth check or scouted with a familiar or something. So yeah, we'll let them get one round of actions off for free. Maybe we have a special "readied action" round where the PCs get to do stuff and the goblins can't...

Oh wait that's literally surprise.

In conclusion, I really don't see there being any real reason to allow for this kind of nonsense. It doesn't add any capability to the game that didn't exist before. And this works identically for a social surprise. He wouldn't have expected you to knife him? Well, roll deception against his passive insight, see if you can hide your killing intent. You succeeded? Roll initiative, he's surprised! His buddy isn't, though, so he's acting normally.

[Cybren]

Okay, let's just think this through a bit.

Scenario #1: Party is on one side of a door, goblins on the other. Both know that there's something unpleasant on the other side.

Logically, every party member should ready an reaction for "When the door opens" right? And since goblins can prepare actions too, they'll all ready an action off the same trigger. So the door flies open. Who gets to go first? Well, maybe you have some kind of contested DEX check...

Oh wait, that's literally initiative.

Scenario #2: Party is on one side of a door, goblins on the other. The party knows about the goblins, but not vice versa.

Okay, so they succeeded on a stealth check or scouted with a familiar or something. So yeah, we'll let them get one round of actions off for free. Maybe we have a special "readied action" round where the PCs get to do stuff and the goblins can't...

Oh wait that's literally surprise.

In conclusion, I really don't see there being any real reason to allow for this kind of nonsense. It doesn't add any capability to the game that didn't exist before. And this works identically for a social surprise. He wouldn't have expected you to knife him? Well, roll deception against his passive insight, see if you can hide your killing intent. You succeeded? Roll initiative, he's surprised! His buddy isn't, though, so he's acting normally.

Okay but those are all combat scenarios.
I'm talking about situations completely devoid of combat. Like haggling with a shopkeeper or schmoozing at a banquet. In a fight you can say "I ready an action to slam the door shut the second i see someone approach". At a regal gala you can't do that. That's weird. r

[MaxWilson]

Okay, let's just think this through a bit.

Scenario #1: Party is on one side of a door, goblins on the other. Both know that there's something unpleasant on the other side.

Logically, every party member should ready an reaction for "When the door opens" right? And since goblins can prepare actions too, they'll all ready an action off the same trigger. So the door flies open. Who gets to go first? Well, maybe you have some kind of contested DEX check...

Oh wait, that's literally initiative.

Except, what if some of them want to do something else? For example, a spellcaster may not want to ready a spell because he's using concentration for something else; another spellcaster may want the freedom to choose which spell to use after he sees what's on the other side of the door.

Furthermore, triggering a readied action eats your initiative, and by strict RAW cannot include movement, so Readying and a full, normal round are not equivalent situations anyway, even in the simple scenario where everyone just wants to attack the first thing they see on the other side of the door.

The isomorphism you're proposing just doesn't hold.

[Pelle]

In combat, you can choose to always act before some specific event you're waiting for. Are you arguing that is literally impossible outside of combat? That's fairly absurd.

Outside of combat, you don't take the Ready Action, you just prepare for something and do it when applicable since you don't need to define stuff as an Action to fit them into their Initiative slot. If you decide not to wait, you just do something else. And you can run, cast spells and chop wood, but you don't think about that as Actions because you don't need to fit them into the 6 sec sequence.

The default assumption is that the fighter is prepared to attack monsters, but at the same time, monsters are also prepared to attack fighters. So when they meet each other, how do you resolve that situation? You roll Initiative. You could have both parties first make a reaction in order, and then their turn in order, but that's just pointless. You can just as well start with the regular turns where the fighter will attack the monster and the monster attack the fighter, just like they had prepared to do out of combat. That adequately represents the fiction, and is what the streamlined rules ended up as.

Edit:

Okay but those are all combat scenarios.
I'm talking about situations completely devoid of combat. Like haggling with a shopkeeper or schmoozing at a banquet. In a fight you can say "I ready an action to slam the door shut the second i see someone approach". At a regal gala you can't do that. That's weird. r

Why do you care about initiative order when you are haggling or schmoozing at regal galla? Just say what you want the character to do, and then use the rules that fit best to adjudicate it.

[Pelle]

Except, what if some of them want to do something else? For example, a spellcaster may not want to ready a spell because he's using concentration for something else; another spellcaster may want the freedom to choose which spell to use after he sees what's on the other side of the door.


Sounds like you want a 1 sec mini-turn with pre-programmed binding actions for everyone. You could add it to your game, but it doesn't add enough benefit to make up for the added complexity IMO. You can represent the situation adequately enough as is anyways. If following a specific sequence of actions is important narratively, just ask people what they intend to do after the door is opened, and hold them to their word in the first turn. For the wizard that wanted to see what is on the other side before choosing, make him take the Dodge Action first turn, to not upstage the ones who prepared.

[strangebloke]

Okay but those are all combat scenarios.
I'm talking about situations completely devoid of combat. Like haggling with a shopkeeper or schmoozing at a banquet. In a fight you can say "I ready an action to slam the door shut the second i see someone approach". At a regal gala you can't do that. That's weird. r

So, just to be clear, you're saying something like: "I ready an action to call him a liar when he boasts about his role in the battle." Am I right?

If so, I'd argue that you're getting a bit far afield with social encounters. DND straight up doesn't have rules for something like this. Talking is just 'something you can do' on your turn, not on your turn, or whenever.

If you have hacked together a mini-system for social/exploration encounters, I think that an alternative initiative is by far the best way to handle it. It's initiative but you roll with CHA or WIS instead of DEX.

Who says you only use initiative in combat?


Except, what if some of them want to do something else? For example, a spellcaster may not want to ready a spell because he's using concentration for something else; another spellcaster may want the freedom to choose which spell to use after he sees what's on the other side of the door.

Furthermore, triggering a readied action eats your initiative, and by strict RAW cannot include movement, so Readying and a full, normal round are not equivalent situations anyway, even in the simple scenario where everyone just wants to attack the first thing they see on the other side of the door.

The isomorphism you're proposing just doesn't hold.

Okay, but I think you're missing my point.

I'm responding to arguments that, narratively, the ready action needs to exist because a character should be able to prepare.

Mechanically, everyone starting with a 'readied reaction' round is different. You're beginning combat with a round of pre-fixed actions, and no movement or bonus actions. But it isn't different in a way that improves the narrative flow, and it's mechanically wonky. It heavily advantages archers, since everyone who doesn't have a good ranged attack is either accepting a lot of risk (caster) or is just sitting there like a bum.

I don't see why we should add another non-intuitive corner case in a game that's already full of them. (I consider this 5e's greatest weakness)

[Lombra]

No, because readying an action means delaying your turn. They intend to act immediately, on their turn. Thats where the sillyness comes in. We are trying to use something designed to delay an action in order to do something before an action. Just take the action.

Readying an Action means Readying an Action.

Let's not get too silly here. If I'm walking down the street and decide that I want to shoot whatever opens that door, I'm shooting the instant the door is opened (or not, player's choice). You may want to roll initiative but the character readied an action, he just choose to do so before rolling initiative. It's no different than doing it in-combat.

You can roll initiative before opening the door, the character readied an action and ehichever part goes first, the character uses his reaction on the first turn of combat to choose wether to act or not.

Readying an action is supposed to give you aj advantage for thinking ahead of stuff. Often you need to think ahead of stuff before it happens, so it's unreasonable to require readying only when something is already happening.

[strangebloke]

Readying an action is supposed to give you aj advantage for thinking ahead of stuff. Often you need to think ahead of stuff before it happens, so it's unreasonable to require readying only when something is already happening.

OK, but what if multiple people ready actions with the same trigger? Who goes first "When the door opens"?

Readying an action isn't about being rewarded for thinking ahead. Readying an action is about being able to act when it isn't your turn. Most readying I see at my table is "I'm going to stab him once gary moves into flanking position."

[Mellack]

Readying an Action means Readying an Action.

Let's not get too silly here. If I'm walking down the street and decide that I want to shoot whatever opens that door, I'm shooting the instant the door is opened (or not, player's choice). You may want to roll initiative but the character readied an action, he just choose to do so before rolling initiative. It's no different than doing it in-combat.

You can roll initiative before opening the door, the character readied an action and ehichever part goes first, the character uses his reaction on the first turn of combat to choose wether to act or not.

Readying an action is supposed to give you aj advantage for thinking ahead of stuff. Often you need to think ahead of stuff before it happens, so it's unreasonable to require readying only when something is already happening.

What is the cost of just always having a readied action? Why would not every character say "I will ready an attack to shoot if I see a hostile creature."

[Unoriginal]

I think people just have an issue with their characters wanting to do something with a plan in mind yet being beaten on the initiative.

No one so far managed to give an example of an out-of-combat action you'd want to Ready, IMO.



Let's not get too silly here. If I'm walking down the street and decide that I want to shoot whatever opens that door, I'm shooting the instant the door is opened (or not, player's choice). You may want to roll initiative but the character readied an action, he just choose to do so before rolling initiative. It's no different than doing it in-combat.

One, this is not Readying an action, it's deciding what you do in advance. Not the same.

Two, you might decide what you do before the initiative, but it doesn't mean you'll be able to.

You might want to shoot the next person who opens the door, it doesn't mean they're not going to be prepared for that.



You can roll initiative before opening the door, the character readied an action and ehichever part goes first, the character uses his reaction on the first turn of combat to choose wether to act or not.

That's just trying to get one free Reaction on top of the surprise round.

The cost of Ready is one action so you can act outside your turn. You can't just decide you're not paying it.




Readying an action is supposed to give you aj advantage for thinking ahead of stuff. Often you need to think ahead of stuff before it happens, so it's unreasonable to require readying only when something is already happening.

No, Readying an action is supposed to let you act in reaction to things that happen during the round but after your turn.

[Amdy_vill]

I know, this is somewhat a controversial topic, but still want to ask how you would rule this.

Question #1 Would you allow to Ready an action outside of combat? This might lead to some cheese with characters going "I always ready an attack action when I see someone", but on the other hand, that's a common trope of action movies and stuff, where people enter a hostile territory with weapons ready, and checking every corner and such.

Question #2, let's assume that Ready isn't allowed outside combat, would you allow to enter initiative earlier, without seeing an enemy yet? The most obvious situation where this could be needed is when a party prepares and ambush, say Himiko wants to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door that (as they think) has enemies behind it?

1. yes i feel the rules allow this

2. yes and no really depends on the situation.

[Lombra]

OK, but what if multiple people ready actions with the same trigger? Who goes first "When the door opens"?

Readying an action isn't about being rewarded for thinking ahead. Readying an action is about being able to act when it isn't your turn. Most readying I see at my table is "I'm going to stab him once gary moves into flanking position."

So it's not about being rewarded for gaining, in your example, advantage to an attack roll after thinkng about the positioning and the coordination of the team? Because that's exactly what I get from your example.

[Unoriginal]

So it's not about being rewarded for gaining, in your example, advantage to an attack roll after thinkng about the positioning and the coordination of the team? Because that's exactly what I get from your example.

It's not rewarding you for thinking ahead, it's rewarding your for *acting later*.

[Lombra]

What is the cost of just always having a readied action? Why would not every character say "I will ready an attack to shoot if I see a hostile creature."

Everyone is considered alert generally, but nothing prevents one from focusing on a specific thing. If the trigger is as broad as your example, I would have an hard time seeing it as an effective trigger.

If you focus on that hole in the cave while exploring, among the branches of that tree, or under that table at the inn, then it would make sense, but "I stay alert for anything" isn't really helping you.

[Lombra]

It's not rewarding you for thinking ahead, it's rewarding your for *acting later*.

Acting later is the cost, but you have nothing before your acting if you choose to act after a trigger that happens before anything else.

[strangebloke]

So it's not about being rewarded for gaining, in your example, advantage to an attack roll after thinkng about the positioning and the coordination of the team? Because that's exactly what I get from your example.

They're rewarded for their tactics, yes, and they used the ready action tactically. But you can use anything tactically. "I move next to Bob so that if he tries to attack Sam I'll get an Opportunity Attack." Movement is as much "about" rewarding a player for thinking ahead as the ready action is.

The Ready action is specifically about taking actions not on your turn.

Also, could you answer my question I posed? Three people take the ready action with the trigger "When the door opens." Which reaction triggers first "When the door opens"?

[Lombra]

They're rewarded for their tactics, yes, and they used the ready action tactically. But you can use anything tactically. "I move next to Bob so that if he tries to attack Sam I'll get an Opportunity Attack." Movement is as much "about" rewarding a player for thinking ahead as the ready action is.

The Ready action is specifically about taking actions not on your turn.

Also, could you answer my question I posed? Three people take the ready action with the trigger "When the door opens." Which reaction triggers first "When the door opens"?

So it rewards you for using it tactically, like movement, yes, does this make it any less tactical of a choice just because other different tactical choices exist?

Answer to the question: since this can happen even in combat scenarios, how would you do it? It is no more controversial to my argument than it is to any other here. I would either roll initiative if it weren't already rolled and make players decide in initiative order (I actually would make everyone roll initiative anyways in modt cases. My point is that if someone readies something before rolling initiative, he should get what he planned, which is a reaction upon the trigger, which happens at the first turn of combat/fast-paced scenario that just started, if nothing important starts upon the trigger, the players decide what to do with their readied actions and no initiative needs to be rolled), or make them act in order of readied actions, I don't know if the book addresses this issue tho.

[Malifice]

Everyone is considered alert generally, but nothing prevents one from focusing on a specific thing.

But thats exactly what everyone is doing though isnt it?

You archer in the party will always have a readied arrow. Your barbarian a readied charge. And so forth. I dont know about you but I presume my PCs arent just wandering down the dungeon twiddling their thumbs. They're advancing with weapons drawn, covering doorways, leapfrogging from door to door, ready with a a sword, spell or bow to kill the horrible monster that lurks around the next corner.

And my monsters? They all also take the ready action 'to attack the PCs as soon as they notice them, using their most dangerous attack, spell or special ability as the case may be from monster to monster'.

Every single monster in the world.

Hey look, my monsters all start every combat with readied actions. Sadly the players all also have readied actions though... hmmmm now what to do? Pity there isnt some kind of rule in relation to sequencing attacks when everyone is aware of each other and ready for combat, and wishing hostile acts on each other... such as by making an opposed Dexterity ability check to see who gets to do that hostile act first...

Everyone is either ready for combat (and it boils down to reaction speed and luck as to which attack gets resolved first) or they are not ready for combat and they get surprised (unless very Alert due to special training, and amazing reflexes).

Its just silly ignoring the rules for combat in the PHB (awareness, positioning, initiative, then you take turns) and ignoring the rules for the Ready action in particular (you can only take the Ready action on your turn, and you dont have turns until the DM has determined initiative for all combatants, determined surprise and positioning).

Attacks 'outside of initiative order' and 'ready actions outside of combat' are something that would lead me to bail on a game. Its as annoying as DMs who dont understand the rest/ encounter meta of 5E.

[Kuu Lightwing]

You've presented reasons that support your interpretation of what the rules say (an interpretation I agree with). But what you haven't presented is reasons why the rules should be that way.

Kuu has presented a scenario where (to some posters, including me) the abstraction of initiative has the heavy believability cost of irrationally preventing characters from sequencing their actions on the first round of combat (because they can't have taken the Ready action yet) even though they can freely sequence their subsequent actions.

I believe what Kuu is looking for from you (and everyone else) is a discussion of why the rules are that way, a discussion of what breaks if those rules are modified, and how those rules might best be modified to avoid a situation he considers absurd.

I think he (and everyone else) is well aware of your (probably correct, imo) interpretation of what the rules say.

Thank you. Pretty much this, yes.

However, some clarification on the actual rules wouldn't hurt either, and I find that some of the interpretations I read here lead to unfortunate consequences.



A DM calls for initiative (an opposed Dexterity ability check) when there is something for each party to react to, and abstract 'turn' sequencing is important (i.e. when combat starts). Until combat abstraction starts, you're in narrative time and 'turns' dont exist. They dont exist 'in the game' - only outside of it to assist the players (and DM) in sequencing largely simultaneous activity in portioned off six second combat rounds.

Abstract turn sequencing becomes important when player characters decided to execute the plan I've described.


Finally remember, by RAW you can only take the ready action on your turn, and turns do not exist until the DM has called for initiative (an opposed Dexterity Ability Check) from all combatants (and after he has also determined awareness and surprise, and position of all parties) in the following steps (also RAW, from the PHB):

If turns do not exist outside combat - that's a whole new can of worms. The way I see, PHB only describes Actions in the context of a Turn. So, if that's your reading of RAW, then you shouldn't allow players to do anything that requires an Action, since you can only take Actions on your turn. Same goes for Bonus Actions and Reactions, actually, as they also only defined in the context of turns and rounds. Therefore, if there's no turns, there's no Bonus Actions and Reactions either.


Im just showing you the rules (which show you're wrong) and indicating to you that (outside of those rules) there is zero support for everyone 'readying actions outside of combat'. Im also showing you the rules already take into account how to resolve a group of combatants sneaking up to another group with 'readied actions'. If they are not discovered before they take those 'readied actions' then they get off a full rounds worth of attacks before the enemy can react; maybe even two
And I'm pointing you that your interpretation of the rules has some noticeable holes. And in the end, even if that's what rules actually mean, I did not start this thread by asking "what the rules say", I asked how would people interpret these situations and whether they find it acceptable to do one or the other.

[strangebloke]

Answer to the question: since this can happen even in combat scenarios, how would you do it? It is no more controversial to my argument than it is to any other here. I would either roll initiative if it weren't already rolled and make players decide in initiative order (I actually would make everyone roll initiative anyways in modt cases. My point is that if someone readies something before rolling initiative, he should get what he planned, which is a reaction upon the trigger, which happens at the first turn of combat/fast-paced scenario that just started, if nothing important starts upon the trigger, the players decide what to do with their readied actions and no initiative needs to be rolled), or make them act in order of readied actions, I don't know if the book addresses this issue tho.

I would use initiative. Same as you. It is 5e's mechanic for determining order of actions, after all.

But here's the thing: Everyone will take the ready action before combat every time, unless there's stealth/surprise involved. Why wouldn't you? What possible downside is there to "I use the ready action to shoot an arrow when the door is opened."? Everyone will ready that action.

So, quite literally, all this ruling does is add a 1-second mini-round to the start of combat where no one can take reactions or bonus actions or move.

There's nothing wrong with that, but it's an added complication to the rules that serves no purpose. Complication of the rules should serve a purpose.

[Malifice]

If turns do not exist outside combat - that's a whole new can of worms.


No it does no such thing.

Turns exist only when I (the DM) switch to combat sequencing and round based/ turn based structure. They exist when I say they exist, and only then to structure simultaneous action between two (or more) opposing forces.

When the players actions (or the actions of the monsters) indicate to me that a hostile act is about to be inflicted on another creature and there is a chance people can react to that, I call for an opposed Dexterity ability check to determine reaction speeds of those involved.

At the same time, I determine surprise, awareness and so forth.

Then, in turn based order counting down from the fastest (on account of his Dexterity check) to the slowest all aware combatants (non surprised ones) get a chance to act and react to that stimuli.


The way I see, PHB only describes Actions in the context of a Turn. So, if that's your reading of RAW, then you shouldn't allow players to do anything that requires an Action, since you can only take Actions on your turn. Same goes for Bonus Actions and Reactions, actually, as they also only defined in the context of turns and rounds. Therefore, if there's no turns, there's no Bonus Actions and Reactions either.

A turn is an abstraction that has no meaning in game. The characters in the game dont take turns in isolation. Turns only matter in the context of sequencing contested action where reaction speed has been determined in contest with a secondary hostile party.

If you havent rolled initiative yet you dont have turns. Your turn is set based on how well you made an ability check in oppopsition to someone else. I mean, a player cant sit there and announce to the DM that his PC is going to 'roll initiative' while alone in his room. He can make an attack, or cast a spell, or use a skill or whatever he wants (and if doing so against someone else, who is aware of him and not surprised, this simply triggers initiative) but he cant ready an action, because everyone aware of a hostile creature is always readying actions (dodge his punch, run away stab him in the face, etc).

Look its RAW, and confirmed by the devs as RAI. I see no reason to break from either that isnt already covered by the rules, and as I pointed out earlier, would bail from a game where the DM had monsters shooting me 'outside of initiative because they have readied actions'.

Play it how you want though if it makes you happy.

[Hecuba]

I think it's probably helpful here to distinguish what we mean when we're talking about readying an action.

If you just mean "prepare for something to happen:" yes, you should absolutely be able to do such a thing out of combat. An in general, there are mechanisms to do so.
If you mean "try to influence the flow of an initiative-controlled action for an initiative order not yet rolled:" you can do that too - what you are doing is attempting to arrange a surprise round.
if you mean "try to entirely preempt the flow of an initiative order not yet rolled separate from the surprise mechanic:" no, I would not allow that. That is what surprise is for: introducing a separate mechanism opens a huge can of worms.

The closest I can think of would be something like a complex trap you have previously observed and prepared for but cannot avoid. Surprise doesn't really apply there - the timing of the trap won't change. I'd be inclined to give you advantage on initiative to start, and advantage on checks or saves in the first round based on your prior preparation. Thereafter, you would be in initiative order and could ready actions in initiative normally.

In general:
If you are preparing to get the jump on someone & starting combat (or another initiate controlled activity), that's what surprise is for.
If both sides are trying to get the jump on each other, then neither side is surprised and your relative quickness to execute whatever you have prepared is determined by the initial initiative roll is for.
If you are operating in a skill situation, that is abstracted as either helping them or a team check.
Moreover, if you are in initiative order, this is probably the help action and not the ready action
If you are somehow preparing for a save, that falls under the DM's explicit job of handing out situational bonuses/penalties or advantage/disadvantage on the save.
Moreover, if you are in initiative order, this is probably the help action and not the ready action


Something that happened in a game:

Fighter: 'I ready an action to catch the wizard when he fails his climb check.'
DM: 'You can't ready actions outside of combat. Roll, wizard.'
Wizard: <roll> <fail>
DM: 'You fall and take <roll> 45 points of damage.'
Wizard: 'Zero and dying.'
Cleric (to fighter): 'Next time we'll just start a fight with the bard so you can catch him.'

If the Fighter is good enough that they can provide some reliable assistance to the wizard, then the Fighter was helping the Wizard - who should have been making their check with advantage.
ex: Scouting and marking foot and handholds, planting anchors

If the Fighter has prepared to deal specifically with the Wizard failing the check separate from assistance in making the check, the situation is a tad murkier - but it sounds to me like an Athletics or Acrobatics check to replicate the function of a climbing kit, limiting the distance of the fall.

There is no reason these should not be available outside combat, absent some special situation. You're trying to resolve a DM ignoring an element of the skill rules by moving to the initiative rules - where the exact same skill rules (help is an option in combat) would still apply.

The DM made a bad call: I've made a few myself. If you think it was unfamiliarity with the rules, either talk to them or try to introduce the helping on a skill check action in another context. If you think it was intentional, either talk with them or find another DM.


EDIT: To be clear about consequences, trying to introduce preparation out-of-initiative in a way that actively trumps the initiative order is a bad idea: the first step to rocket-tag is establishing reliable pathways to first move. From there you only need some option that benefits from a first move advantage. Allowing the ready action (with its specific implications for initiative order) to occur outside of initiative timekeeping effectively provides a path to that by bridging non-initiative and initiative timekeeping.

To wit, you'll find that 5e provides several notable options for avoiding being surprised, but does not provide trivial paths to getting surprise as players. Flat bonuses to initiative are fairly rare, and somewhat expensive.
The ability "always goes first" is very powerful: you shouldn't implicitly give it out lightly by having the ready action bridge the initiative timekeeping and non-initiative timekeeping models.

Instead, consider whether there is already a mechanism that deals with the problem you're grappling with in the non-initiative space.
There probably is.

[Unoriginal]

Acting later is the cost, but you have nothing before your acting if you choose to act after a trigger that happens before anything else.

Acting later is the *purpose*. The cost is your turn's Action.

If you chose to not act despite the trigger being there, or if there was no trigger, you payed for nothing, but the cost is for potentially acting later.

[MaxWilson]

What is the cost of just always having a readied action? Why would not every character say "I will ready an attack to shoot if I see a hostile creature."

Why don't police walk around with their guns out all the time? When they stop a driver for a traffic violation, why don't they point the gun at the driver's head BEFORE initiating conversation? It would reduce the number of police who get shot by criminals after asking for identification. Why don't they do this? It's obviously the optimal policy for maximizing police survival rates.

[Mellack]

I know you are being sarcastic, but a dungeon delve is much more like a SWAT raid. They do point their guns at everyone.

[strangebloke]

Why don't police walk around with their guns out all the time? When they stop a driver for a traffic violation, why don't they point the gun at the driver's head BEFORE initiating conversation? It would reduce the number of police who get shot by criminals after asking for identification. Why don't they do this? It's obviously the optimal policy for maximizing police survival rates.


I mean, you can ready an action to draw and fire a gun as well. Nothing about the ready action implies you actually have to have the weapon out.

[MaxWilson]

I know you are being sarcastic, but a dungeon delve is much more like a SWAT raid. They do point their guns at everyone.

In the context of a SWAT-like raid on a dungeon that's over in minutes, then fine, they can behave like a SWAT team. (Note that there are still potential social costs, for both adventurers and real-life SWAT teams, for treating everyone and everything like a potential hostile.) I thought I was responding to the question of why they don't do it all the time. Maybe I misunderstood how you meant the word "always."


I mean, you can ready an action to draw and fire a gun as well. Nothing about the ready action implies you actually have to have the weapon out.

Strictly speaking, you get to ready an action--not an object interaction plus an action. But as DM I'd ignore that, same as I ignore the way you're not intended to be able to ready a movement and an action like "I will charge the first hobgoblin that shows its face and hit it with my axe." I see no valid reason why you shouldn't be able to ready that action.

But if you're talking about strict RAW, no, that's not allowed, and it's also beside the point: you're adopting a hostile posture toward everything you meet, and other creatures you interact with won't be completely ignorant of that fact.

[Lombra]

But thats exactly what everyone is doing though isnt it?

You archer in the party will always have a readied arrow. Your barbarian a readied charge. And so forth. I dont know about you but I presume my PCs arent just wandering down the dungeon twiddling their thumbs. They're advancing with weapons drawn, covering doorways, leapfrogging from door to door, ready with a a sword, spell or bow to kill the horrible monster that lurks around the next corner.

And my monsters? They all also take the ready action 'to attack the PCs as soon as they notice them, using their most dangerous attack, spell or special ability as the case may be from monster to monster'.

Every single monster in the world.

Hey look, my monsters all start every combat with readied actions. Sadly the players all also have readied actions though... hmmmm now what to do? Pity there isnt some kind of rule in relation to sequencing attacks when everyone is aware of each other and ready for combat, and wishing hostile acts on each other... such as by making an opposed Dexterity ability check to see who gets to do that hostile act first...

Everyone is either ready for combat (and it boils down to reaction speed and luck as to which attack gets resolved first) or they are not ready for combat and they get surprised (unless very Alert due to special training, and amazing reflexes).

Its just silly ignoring the rules for combat in the PHB (awareness, positioning, initiative, then you take turns) and ignoring the rules for the Ready action in particular (you can only take the Ready action on your turn, and you dont have turns until the DM has determined initiative for all combatants, determined surprise and positioning).

Attacks 'outside of initiative order' and 'ready actions outside of combat' are something that would lead me to bail on a game. Its as annoying as DMs who dont understand the rest/ encounter meta of 5E.

I don't disagree with you in your examples, but no, my character isn't a paranoid soldier affected by ptsd always looking for danger in any given situation, not in a tavern while hanging out with ither PCs or NPCs, not while shopping, and not while interacting in social encounters. And not all monsters are waiting for someone to approach.

What you say makes perfect sense in your contexts, it's just that some contexts are not combat related. I mean by your reading I couldn't cast spells before rolling initiative either, because I have to cast them on my turn, which doesn't exist prior to combat starting.

[strangebloke]

But if you're talking about strict RAW, no, that's not allowed, and it's also beside the point: you're adopting a hostile posture toward everything you meet, and other creatures you interact with won't be completely ignorant of that fact.

Are you adopting a hostile posture? That's completely just your ruling man. This is the weirdest part of this whole business to object to. It's DND! the 'social costs' of waving weapons around is negligible compared with a free surprise round or a double surprise round. Any situation where there's potential hostiles on the other side of the door, I'll take that trade. Most environments that my characters navigate, they're justified to have weapons out and at the ready.

The thing that I don't get here, though, is why. Like, I'm firmly in the camp that RAW is unclear here. Neither 'Initiative' nor 'Ready' references out of combat situations. But narratively, the 'readied round' serves the same purpose served by initiative and surprise. Adding the 'readied round' only has the impact of making surprise and ranged builds even more powerful.

You are right about not being able to draw as part of a readied action. (free item interaction is only on your turn)

[Xetheral]

The thing that I don't get here, though, is why. Like, I'm firmly in the camp that RAW is unclear here. Neither 'Initiative' nor 'Ready' references out of combat situations. But narratively, the 'readied round' serves the same purpose served by initiative and surprise. Adding the 'readied round' only has the impact of making surprise and ranged builds even more powerful.

Regarding the "why": permitting Readying outside of combat helps when the party wants to take their first-round actions in a specific sequence. If the caster who is going to cast Fireball can ready an action to do so before the door is opened, that ensures that the caster goes first, and that the characters waiting to rush in and attack don't have to skip their first turns waiting for the caster's initiative to come up.

The downside, as you point out, is that guaranteeing the ability of characters to go first by readying is extremely powerful. But avoiding the incongruity of not being able to sequence actions on the first turn (incongruous both because in real life deliberate sequencing of actions is commonplace, and because D&D lets characters sequence after the first round) might be worth it at some tables.

[strangebloke]

Regarding the "why": permitting Readying outside of combat helps when the party wants to take their first-round actions in a specific sequence. If the caster who is going to cast Fireball can ready an action to do so before the door is opened, that ensures that the caster goes first, and that the characters waiting to rush in and attack don't have to skip their first turns waiting for the caster's initiative to come up.

The downside, as you point out, is that guaranteeing the ability of characters to go first by readying is extremely powerful. But avoiding the incongruity of not being able to sequence actions on the first turn (incongruous both because in real life deliberate sequencing of actions is commonplace, and because D&D lets characters sequence after the first round) might be worth it at some tables.

I agree with you that acting in a coordinated sequence could be desirable, however....

If you want this, you're much better off simply implementing side initiative or one of any number of initiative variants.

[sophontteks]

Regarding the "why": permitting Readying outside of combat helps when the party wants to take their first-round actions in a specific sequence. If the caster who is going to cast Fireball can ready an action to do so before the door is opened, that ensures that the caster goes first, and that the characters waiting to rush in and attack don't have to skip their first turns waiting for the caster's initiative to come up.

The downside, as you point out, is that guaranteeing the ability of characters to go first by readying is extremely powerful. But avoiding the incongruity of not being able to sequence actions on the first turn (incongruous both because in real life deliberate sequencing of actions is commonplace, and because D&D lets characters sequence after the first round) might be worth it at some tables.

I'm confused by this. There is no waiting for your turn outside of combat. Everything is happening in real time and simultaneously. The interesting thing about real time is that the fireball in itself is not instant either. In real time it is a massive explosion of fire and smoke and dust. I don't see where it is giving one side any advantage besides an unexpected angle of attack and potentially catching the enemy wholly unprepared.

If the enemy is ready for a fight they will have ample time to react to this explosion, just as much as the people trying to ready an action.

Turn-based combat is far from perfect, but its simple and easy to follow. Trying to game mechanics designed for turn-based combat in the real-time sequences is very 'gamey'. That fireball doesn't instantly make the wall dissappear so everyone can instantly fire their arrows at enemies before they can react. Everyone in the scenario would have a totally fair chance to move based on initiative after the fireball barring some other variable.

[Xetheral]

I'm confused by this. There is no waiting for your turn outside of combat. Everything is happening in real time and simultaneously. The interesting thing about real time is that the fireball in itself is not instant either. In real time it is a massive explosion of fire and smoke and dust. I don't see where it is giving one side any advantage besides an unexpected angle of attack and potentially catching the enemy wholly unprepared.

If the enemy is ready for a fight they will have ample time to react to this explosion, just as much as the people trying to ready an action.

Turn-based combat is far from perfect, but its simple and easy to follow. Trying to game mechanics designed for turn-based combat in the real-time sequences is very 'gamey'. That fireball doesn't instantly make the wall dissappear so everyone can instantly fire their arrows at enemies before they can react. Everyone in the scenario would have a totally fair chance to move based on initiative after the fireball barring some other variable.

I was referring to readying actions with the expectation that combat is about to begin, and that those Readied actions will take place in the first round of combat.

[Tanarii]

Readying an action is supposed to give you aj advantage for thinking ahead of stuff. Often you need to think ahead of stuff before it happens, so it's unreasonable to require readying only when something is already happening.


Acting later is the cost, but you have nothing before your acting if you choose to act after a trigger that happens before anything else.You've got that kind of back to front. The purpose of a Ready action is delay part of your action until later when it would be better used than right now. There are two costs: you do not act immediately, and you must specify a trigger.

Using a Ready action outside of combat twists that purpose. Instead you're trying to act before your turn in combat, which is an even bigger advantage, and justifying it with a lesser cost: just the trigger.

That said, if we were instead to go with your "acting later is the cost" then there's even less justification for allowing Ready to take action before their action. Now you're comparing benefit for a cost to bigger benefit with no cost. Your argument defeats itself.

Edit: I guess the point is, regardless of how you view the purpose of the Ready action, trying to act before your first turn should be pretty clearly cheese. It is an attempt to gain something for nothing.

[Kuu Lightwing]

No it does no such thing.

Turns exist only when I (the DM) switch to combat sequencing and round based/ turn based structure. They exist when I say they exist, and only then to structure simultaneous action between two (or more) opposing forces.

When the players actions (or the actions of the monsters) indicate to me that a hostile act is about to be inflicted on another creature and there is a chance people can react to that, I call for an opposed Dexterity ability check to determine reaction speeds of those involved.

At the same time, I determine surprise, awareness and so forth.

Then, in turn based order counting down from the fastest (on account of his Dexterity check) to the slowest all aware combatants (non surprised ones) get a chance to act and react to that stimuli.

You wrote two whole paragraphs and failed to even touch any of the issues I presented to you. No turns - no actions, bonus actions and reactions. If your basis for not allowing to Ready is that it requires turns, then you also should forbid all the other Actions described in Actions in Combat section.



A turn is an abstraction that has no meaning in game. The characters in the game dont take turns in isolation. Turns only matter in the context of sequencing contested action where reaction speed has been determined in contest with a secondary hostile party.

If you havent rolled initiative yet you dont have turns. Your turn is set based on how well you made an ability check in oppopsition to someone else. I mean, a player cant sit there and announce to the DM that his PC is going to 'roll initiative' while alone in his room. He can make an attack, or cast a spell, or use a skill or whatever he wants (and if doing so against someone else, who is aware of him and not surprised, this simply triggers initiative) but he cant ready an action, because everyone aware of a hostile creature is always readying actions (dodge his punch, run away stab him in the face, etc).

Look its RAW, and confirmed by the devs as RAI. I see no reason to break from either that isnt already covered by the rules, and as I pointed out earlier, would bail from a game where the DM had monsters shooting me 'outside of initiative because they have readied actions'.

Play it how you want though if it makes you happy.
So, you are going to ignore the situations where sequencing is important when there aren't two hostile parties involved? And, once again you dodge the question, is when exactly sequencing starts to be important. What if characters know that there are orcs behind the door? What if they know their exact position? When exactly do you determine that it's time to roll initiative?

And no, I don't say that players just going to roll initiative. How I see this, they describe this plan, and then DM calls for initiative, because he sees that it would be required for this to pull off, rather than saying "oh, no, you aren't in combat, so you can't do that, maybe if Angie punches Maki first then I'd consider that!"

Additional thoughts: situation I described has players in a tactical advantage, because they have the control exactly when they are going to be able to affect the enemy, because in this example orcs don't interact with the door for whatever reason. Why are you going to deny the players this tactical advantage?


because everyone aware of a hostile creature is always readying actions (dodge his punch, run away stab him in the face, etc).
That's not how either Ready or Dodge actions work.

[JoeJ]

Why are you going to deny the players this tactical advantage?

Because they will scream "unfair" the first time a PC dies because a monster used that same tactical advantage against them. And they'll be right.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Because they will scream "unfair" the first time a PC dies because a monster used that same tactical advantage against them. And they'll be right.

Depends on the kind of game I suppose. If the idea is to reward just slamming the doors down without a second thought, then I suppose that works.

[Lombra]

You've got that kind of back to front. The purpose of a Ready action is delay part of your action until later when it would be better used than right now. There are two costs: you do not act immediately, and you must specify a trigger.

Using a Ready action outside of combat twists that purpose. Instead you're trying to act before your turn in combat, which is an even bigger advantage, and justifying it with a lesser cost: just the trigger.

That said, if we were instead to go with your "acting later is the cost" then there's even less justification for allowing Ready to take action before their action. Now you're comparing benefit for a cost to bigger benefit with no cost. Your argument defeats itself.

Edit: I guess the point is, regardless of how you view the purpose of the Ready action, trying to act before your first turn should be pretty clearly cheese. It is an attempt to gain something for nothing.

Something for nothing? You guess/deduce something and if you are right you are rewarded, nothing cheesy here.

[Cybren]

Outside of combat, you don't take the Ready Action, you just prepare for something and do it when applicable since you don't need to define stuff as an Action to fit them into their Initiative slot. If you decide not to wait, you just do something else. And you can run, cast spells and chop wood, but you don't think about that as Actions because you don't need to fit them into the 6 sec sequence.
You seem to have missed the entire point. Good work.


Why do you care about initiative order when you are haggling or schmoozing at regal galla? Just say what you want the character to do, and then use the rules that fit best to adjudicate it.

I don't care about initiative order when you are haggling. That's my whole point. There IS no initiative order, but there MAY be situations where someone is waiting for something to happen. I'm saying it's ridiculous that within combat you can always choose to act before some event if it hasn't happened yet, whereas out of combat, if you take the stance that "ready actions are only for combat", you can't. "The rules that best fit to adjudicate" change substantially whether or not someone is trying to kill you. That's bad.

[Hecuba]

Something for nothing? You guess/deduce something and if you are right you are rewarded, nothing cheesy here.

I'm not sure I agree with your assessment of how cheesy that wold be (I've had a couple characters players players who are real characters and seem to expect to be able to use something like this to get a super-duper second surprise), but if you are going to reward a character in that situation the reward should be structured around the surprise mechanic. That's what its for.

What you are discussing seems to me to be, approximately, giving a character something like the alert feat because the player can meta-game well.


I don't care about initiative order when you are haggling. That's my whole point. There IS no initiative order, but there MAY be situations where someone is waiting for something to happen. I'm saying it's ridiculous that within combat you can always choose to act before some event if it hasn't happened yet, whereas out of combat, if you take the stance that "ready actions are only for combat", you can't. "The rules that best fit to adjudicate" change substantially whether or not someone is trying to kill you. That's bad.

Initiative is not combat-only: that's why "other fast-paced situations" are noted. If the exact order of events and interactions are important, that's what initiative is for.
If you're in the more abstracted narrative time-frame instead, then its deliberately abstract and narrative. That's is a feature, not a bug: trying to bypass it blurs a the specifically designed pathway for moving between narrative and tactical time (initiative).

That shouldn't mean you can't prepare for things mechanically - it just means you adjudicate the preparation in a way that is less dependent on the exact order of turns. If you're waiting for the exact right time to interject when your teammate is haggling, or waiting to time an attempt to be sneaky for the exact time your party member provides a distraction, or what have you then the mechanic result should be advantage from the help mechanic. If you've noticed the thugs eyeing you and spoiling for a fight, the mechanical benefit of preparation for the fight should be a change in how surprise is adjudicated.

As best I can tell, the complaints in the thread amount to:
My DM never enters initiative except for combat
Well, that sucks. It's called out for use in other fast paced situations where order of events matters. Consider talking to them about the subject.
My DM won't let me prepare for events outside of initiative in any way with mechanical consequence because the ready action is tied to initiative.
Well, that sucks. If the situation is at all cooperative, consider reminding them of the mechanics for helping on checks and group checks. Otherwise, consider talking to them about their willingness to hand out advantage/disadvantage.
My DM won't let me prepare for combat that is clearly about to start.
Well, that sucks. Consider discussing with them what their threshold for adjudicating surprise is.
My DM won't let me use the ready action to influence the exact order of events outside initiative.
Well, yeah. The adjudicating the exact order of events is what initiative is for: if you're not in initiative, that's a signal that you're working in a narrative frame where such matters are abstracted.
If you're chafing under this consider whether you're currently taking advantage of other ways to benefit from preparation outside of initiative and/or talk to your DM about more liberal use of initiative outside combat.

[Pelle]

I don't care about initiative order when you are haggling. That's my whole point. There IS no initiative order, but there MAY be situations where someone is waiting for something to happen. I'm saying it's ridiculous that within combat you can always choose to act before some event if it hasn't happened yet, whereas out of combat, if you take the stance that "ready actions are only for combat", you can't. "The rules that best fit to adjudicate" change substantially whether or not someone is trying to kill you. That's bad.

You don't need Ready Action outside of combat, the character just say what they want to do, and it is resolved as it happens. The stance isn't that you can't prepare things out of combat, it is that you don't take a Ready Action because you don't bother dividing actions into 6 sec discrete Actions outside of Initiative. So you can still prepare to do things, and do them fine.

Not sure what situations you are thinking about. Let's say you are haggling, and you prepare to offer a specific bid when the seller present a certain good. Ok, then you just get to do that when it comes up. You don't need to take a Ready Action, just say what your character wants to do and it happens. If there is some opposition, where the relative reaction speed matters, you roll a Dex(Init) (or maybe Cha(Init) ) check to decide who gets to do the prepared action first, and resolve it from there...

[Doug Lampert]

Regarding the "why": permitting Readying outside of combat helps when the party wants to take their first-round actions in a specific sequence. If the caster who is going to cast Fireball can ready an action to do so before the door is opened, that ensures that the caster goes first, and that the characters waiting to rush in and attack don't have to skip their first turns waiting for the caster's initiative to come up.

The downside, as you point out, is that guaranteeing the ability of characters to go first by readying is extremely powerful. But avoiding the incongruity of not being able to sequence actions on the first turn (incongruous both because in real life deliberate sequencing of actions is commonplace, and because D&D lets characters sequence after the first round) might be worth it at some tables.

You can sequence the first round fine. If your initiative is too early, you READY and wait for the guy you were acting after to act first.

Strangely, this is EXACTLY what you'd do in real life. Sequencing actions costs a slight amount of delay by the people waiting for others to act first, why is this hard?

In extreme cases your groups timing may be disrupted by unexpected enemy actions, this is not unreasonable or unrealistic. If you absolutely must go last, then tell your GM that you were distracted by a butterfly and think you should roll initiative with disadvantage or something.

What you are complaining about is not that you can't sequence, it's that sequencing slows things down. Too bad, that's how reality works too.

Go to side initiative or reintroduce the Delay action if you find this intolerable. But Ready outside of combat is the wrong tool for the wrong job here.

You don't need Ready Action outside of combat, the character just say what they want to do, and it is resolved as it happens. The stance isn't that you can't prepare things out of combat, it is that you don't take a Ready Action because you don't bother dividing actions into 6 sec discrete Actions outside of Initiative. So you can still prepare to do things, and do them fine.

Not sure what situations you are thinking about. Let's say you are haggling, and you prepare to offer a specific bid when the seller present a certain good. Ok, then you just get to do that when it comes up. You don't need to take a Ready Action, just say what your character wants to do and it happens. If there is some opposition, where the relative reaction speed matters, you roll a Dex(Init) (or maybe Cha(Init) ) check to decide who gets to do the prepared action first, and resolve it from there...

Yep, ready interacts with initiative, outside of initiative I just say that I do X when he does Y. If order and timing are critical, then the moment two people both want to do something RIGHT NOW is the time when we've entered a fast paced situation where timing matters, and the involved characters roll then initiative and the guy waiting for this situation with the faster reflexes acts first. Again, not a problem, a feature.

[opaopajr]

I don't know about y'all youngins, but I definitely do call upon rounds and turns outside of combat when they are applicable to a time pressure. Exploration and Social pillars very much have examples of time pressures, and heists (to use an example of a seemingly forthcoming WotC book) especially exemplify this. In such coordinating challenges you face timing issues of split team movement, distractions, object interaction, social deflection, coercion, etc. And combat and chase scenes are all a looming potential threat from failure amid a stressful Exploration & Social scene.

The reason we don't use rounds and turns all the time is because not all social and exploration scenes involve a Time Pressure. Almost all combat does, however. The former has the option to simplicity (glossing over) because Time Pressure is not a regular stressor. Yet just because one facet uses it constantly does not preclude the other facets from using them. Situations do arise where time does matter.

As for where to use Ready?:
I already gave one (Explore) about chopping down a tree.

Another (Explore) would be Ready action to catch someone (cat? girlfriend?) as they were jumping from a tree. Need more time pressure? How about jumping from a tree during a dangerous natural disaster in progress?

Another (Social) could be sharing info to a target without others noticing or eavesdropping.

This is an extremely common Time Pressure -- and anyone who regularly attends social functions would immediately grok that knowing rounds & turns could mean the difference between success v. disaster. This is everything from trying to get a date with someone from an overprotective family, to passing info to a victim of domestic abuse.

The examples can be endless. But the critical element is there is an element of risk, and that is often time pressure.

That you cannot imagine it does not preclude its existence. Similarly, just because you are used to things being spelled out, doesn't mean that you were prevented by it not being explicitly allowed. Old Skool runs more from "If no one said no, then why not?" not this New Skool "If no one said yes, then why do?"

[Unoriginal]

Something for nothing? You guess/deduce something and if you are right you are rewarded, nothing cheesy here.

How are you guessing/deducing anything?

"I heard the enemies in the next room. I'm going to Ready an action to cast my spell if I see an enemy when the door is open before initiative happens".

You're just trying to make Ready do things it doesn't.

Ready isn't "we have a plan, so we get to act before", it's "I don't want to act now, so I try to have a chance to act later".

Initiative exists for a reason, and that reason isn't giving free combat turns.

[Isaire]

Regarding the "why": permitting Readying outside of combat helps when the party wants to take their first-round actions in a specific sequence. If the caster who is going to cast Fireball can ready an action to do so before the door is opened, that ensures that the caster goes first, and that the characters waiting to rush in and attack don't have to skip their first turns waiting for the caster's initiative to come up.

So, I'm not sure that I see the difference between this and a surprise round. Either both sides are aware and roll initiative when the door opens to reflect reaction times to the door opening (i.e. can that orc release that arrow before the wizard reacts to the open door), or one side is surprised and doing nothing while the other side readies actions in the surprise round to achieve the desired sequencing effect. Where's the difference?

(I suppose if both sides are aware and preparing to ambush, you could adjudicate it as: both sides are busy moving around / readying actions until the door is opened and the associated readied actions unfurl in a hectic simultaneous manner, but this seems unnecessary and doesn't improve narrative flow at all - it doesn't allow for any additional types of engagement. Far more likely to use initiative approach above to reflect needing to pick targets etc. etc., and is certainly the approach I would recommend.)

And yeah, you don't need to ready actions outside of combat. If the fighter says he wishes to watch the wizard carefully and prepare to catch him if he falls, you can give him an athletics check, maybe with dex to reflect reflexes, to reduce the fall damage the wizard takes, for example. It isn't a readied action in initiative order, it's just people doing stuff as and when. If the DM doesn't let people act like people outside of combat, that is a problem, but it isn't a problem with readied actions. If it gets too hectic, feel free to go to initiative order.

[Tanarii]

I don't care about initiative order when you are haggling. That's my whole point. There IS no initiative order, but there MAY be situations where someone is waiting for something to happen. I'm saying it's ridiculous that within combat you can always choose to act before some event if it hasn't happened yet, whereas out of combat, if you take the stance that "ready actions are only for combat", you can't. "The rules that best fit to adjudicate" change substantially whether or not someone is trying to kill you. That's bad.Ready action doesn't allow you to act before some event. It allows you to not do something now (skip taking an action), and then do something immediately after an event, instead of waiting until your next turn to do something.

Out of "combat", you are always free to do something after someone else has done something. Exact order is determined abstractly. There's no need for a Ready action. If exact order is important, you should be using opposed Dex checks between involved parties to determine resolution order. In other words, initiative.


Something for nothing? You guess/deduce something and if you are right you are rewarded, nothing cheesy here.Yes, something for nothing. There is a process in place for resolving guessing/deducing something and getting the jump on someone. It's surprise checks. Ready actions just prior to combat are an attempt to bypass surprise checks and initiative order.

You may not find it cheesy to try and do that, but that's still what it is it is still an attempt to bypass the rules to gain an advantage. (edit: rewrote because it read like I was claiming it was cheesy. Regardless of if it's cheese, it's still an attempt to gain an advantage by bypassing the rules.)

[opaopajr]

How are you guessing/deducing anything?

"I heard the enemies in the next room. I'm going to Ready an action to cast my spell if I see an enemy when the door is open before initiative happens".

You're just trying to make Ready do things it doesn't.

Ready isn't "we have a plan, so we get to act before", it's "I don't want to act now, so I try to have a chance to act later".

Initiative exists for a reason, and that reason isn't giving free combat turns.

If they are in a chase scene, then yes they are fully within rounds & turns, and thus Ready is inarguably allowed. If not, then it becomes a matter how the GM determines Surprise. There are notably no mechanics for Surprise, let alone setting up an Ambush, so it is up to each table to resolve this. Surprise does specific over general by denying one's first turn's move, action, and reactions during their first turn.

You would want stronger mechanical structure to define when you can Ambush. I, on the other hand, can easily adjudicate player intent here (Holding their ground and Readying themselves against the enemy that comes through that door = Ambush). Mercifully 5e leaves us room to define our tables as we please.

There is no problem here. :smallsmile:

You want more permissions. I already see a structure that turns off a permission during a GM decided event (Surprise turning off move, action, and reaction during your first turn), thus alluding to the general where it is always being on otherwise. We would work best at separate tables, that's all. :smallsmile:

edit: Also, and this should be self-evident, having a Reaction set up does not preclude one from being Surprised. :smalltongue: Thus your "always ready!" SWAT member means little unless the GM OKs Two Factors: 1) That your PCs are Not Surprised, and 2) That your PC's Ready 'programmed reaction trigger' has been activated. So, RAW y'all are both wrong AND there's nothing to worry about. Your welcome! :smallcool:

[strangebloke]

You would want stronger mechanical structure to define when you can Ambush. I, on the other hand, can easily adjudicate player intent here (Holding their ground and Readying themselves against the enemy that comes through that door = Ambush). Mercifully 5e leaves us room to define our tables as we please.

What about what they're doing constitutes an ambush?

An ambush is "a surprise attack by people lying in wait in a concealed position."

They aren't concealed. Their opponent isn't surprised. They're just standing in an open 20x20 ready to attack, and their opponent is entering through the door to the north, also ready to attack. This isn't an ambush, it's just a fight.

Moreover, according to your ruling, there's also nothing preventing the opponent from readying his own action to shoot someone as soon as he enters the room.

Maybe you could argue that the group on defense gets a bonus to initiative. I've seen that in other systems. Maybe you could use side initiative or something similar. But a free ambush rounds is really silly.



edit: Also, and this should be self-evident, having a Reaction set up does not preclude one from being Surprised. :smalltongue: Thus your "always ready!" SWAT member means little unless the GM OKs Two Factors: 1) That your PCs are Not Surprised, and 2) That your PC's Ready 'programmed reaction trigger' has been activated. So, RAW y'all are both wrong AND there's nothing to worry about. Your welcome! :smallcool:

1) This isn't something the GM makes a ruling on. If the bad guys win stealth, then yeah, he's surprised like anyone else. The issue is, if a pair of "always ready" characters are fighting, that surprise is roughly twice as strong as it was (which is insanely broken) and that archers have a huge advantage. Since everyone's always opening combat with a readied action and no movement, archers effectively get a free round.

2) "I ready an action to shoot an arrow if I see someone I want to shoot an arrow at."

[Pelle]

I don't know about y'all youngins, but I definitely do call upon rounds and turns outside of combat when they are applicable to a time pressure. Exploration and Social pillars very much have examples of time pressures, and heists (to use an example of a seemingly forthcoming WotC book) especially exemplify this. In such coordinating challenges you face timing issues of split team movement, distractions, object interaction, social deflection, coercion, etc. And combat and chase scenes are all a looming potential threat from failure amid a stressful Exploration & Social scene.

The reason we don't use rounds and turns all the time is because not all social and exploration scenes involve a Time Pressure. Almost all combat does, however. The former has the option to simplicity (glossing over) because Time Pressure is not a regular stressor. Yet just because one facet uses it constantly does not preclude the other facets from using them. Situations do arise where time does matter.


Agree so far.



As for where to use Ready?:
I already gave one (Explore) about chopping down a tree.

Another (Explore) would be Ready action to catch someone (cat? girlfriend?) as they were jumping from a tree. Need more time pressure? How about jumping from a tree during a dangerous natural disaster in progress?

Another (Social) could be sharing info to a target without others noticing or eavesdropping.


Why do you need Initiative and Ready Action to catch the jumping cat? Just say you prepare to catch it, and you either automatically do or might have to do an ability check to catch it. Is it because you want to game the mechanic and get two chances to catch it? If you did not prepare to catch it, but still wanted to try after it did jump, I would ask for Dex or Wis(Perception) check first, or a harder ability check to catch it. So it would still be worthwhile to prepare.



This is an extremely common Time Pressure -- and anyone who regularly attends social functions would immediately grok that knowing rounds & turns could mean the difference between success v. disaster. This is everything from trying to get a date with someone from an overprotective family, to passing info to a victim of domestic abuse.

The examples can be endless. But the critical element is there is an element of risk, and that is often time pressure.

That you cannot imagine it does not preclude its existence. Similarly, just because you are used to things being spelled out, doesn't mean that you were prevented by it not being explicitly allowed. Old Skool runs more from "If no one said no, then why not?" not this New Skool "If no one said yes, then why do?"

The arguments for not allowing Ready Action out of combat are for situations where time is not critical. Combat here is just shorthand for in Initiative. Of course, if you are under time pressure in a social or exploration scenes, you might choose to run that turn by turn in Initiative order. If so it will not be a problem to apply Ready Actions, but it still belongs within the resolving simultanous actions by turns in Initiative order system.

The point is that you roll Inititiative at the moment when time becomes important, whether it is in combat, social or exploration. Ready Action is to delay your action until after a trigger during that 6 seconds of simultanous actions when time is critical. What you do before time is critical is automatic and informs the situation, but whether you react fast enough to do what you prepared to do is exactly what rolling Initiative (and surprise) is for.

[Unoriginal]

If they are in a chase scene, then yes they are fully within rounds & turns, and thus Ready is inarguably allowed.

A chase uses the combat structure, so sure.



Surprise does specific over general by denying one's first turn's move, action, and reactions during their first turn.

Yes. And?



You would want stronger mechanical structure to define when you can Ambush. I, on the other hand, can easily adjudicate player intent here (Holding their ground and Readying themselves against the enemy that comes through that door = Ambush). Mercifully 5e leaves us room to define our tables as we please.

There is no problem here. :smallsmile:

You want more permissions. I already see a structure that turns off a permission during a GM decided event (Surprise turning off move, action, and reaction during your first turn), thus alluding to the general where it is always being on otherwise. We would work best at separate tables, that's all. :smallsmile:

No, I want none of those things, and I have no idea what you're talking about.

I don't want rules that tell me what is or is not an ambush when 5e is based on common sense rulings, and I certainly don't want more "permissions"



I'm saying it's ridiculous that within combat you can always choose to act before some event if it hasn't happened yet, whereas out of combat, if you take the stance that "ready actions are only for combat", you can't. "The rules that best fit to adjudicate" change substantially whether or not someone is trying to kill you. That's bad.

Ready does NOT let you act "before some event". It let you act AFTER.

There is no reason to use Ready when not in combat, because you can just say "I react that way to this event".

[Arial Black]

You wrote two whole paragraphs and failed to even touch any of the issues I presented.

And you either haven't read or haven't noticed the fact that this has already been addressed in this thread.


No turns - no actions, bonus actions and reactions. If your basis for not allowing to Ready is that it requires turns, then you also should forbid all the other Actions described in Actions in Combat section.

Nope. As already discussed, outside of combat there are no Actions In Combat....but neither are Actions In Combat required to do stuff.

If something is described as taking an Action (or bonus action), as opposed to taking an actual unit of time such as minutes or hours, then if you are acting in initiative order in Combat Rounds then you must take an Action that lets you do that thing, whether that 'thing' is casting a spell or closing a door or anything else. But outside of Combat Rounds and initiative order, you just....cast a spell or close a door or whatever. Actions are not required. Which is just as well, because Actions don't exist outside of combat rounds.

In fact, the only thing you cannot do outside combat (apart from, y'know, combat itself!) that you would require an Action In Combat to do if you were in Combat Rounds...is the Ready Action. Why? Because literally the only thing it does is manipulate the timing of events in the initiative order. You know that thing which doesn't exist outside of the initiative order!!!

It's like complaining that you can't switch the light on in the dark because it's not dark anymore with the light on!

[Arial Black]

Readying an Action means Readying an Action.

Let's not get too silly here. If I'm walking down the street and decide that I want to shoot whatever opens that door, I'm shooting the instant the door is opened (or not, player's choice). You may want to roll initiative but the character readied an action, he just choose to do so before rolling initiative. It's no different than doing it in-combat.

You can roll initiative before opening the door, the character readied an action and ehichever part goes first, the character uses his reaction on the first turn of combat to choose wether to act or not.

Readying an action is supposed to give you aj advantage for thinking ahead of stuff. Often you need to think ahead of stuff before it happens, so it's unreasonable to require readying only when something is already happening.

So you 'ready' an action, outside of initiative, to shoot whoever opens that door.

And, because you said so, when the door is opened you get to shoot the guy before initiative is even rolled. Because that's 'fair'?

No, what's 'fair' is that the door opens, the DM establishes who is surprised (probably using opposed checks of some kind). Let's assume that you win the check, so the enemy is surprised. This means that he cannot take reactions before his first turn, and cannot move or act on his first turn. So even if he has faster reactions than you (rolled higher initiative) then on his turn he does nothing, but on your turn you hit but he uses his reaction to cast shield or Deflect Missile or whatever. But if you are faster he doesn't even get to do that, because he can't use reactions yet. Good for you! You're planning made the difference.

But what if the guy coming through the door has the Alert feat? He cannot be surprised (the game mechanic), and will probably be faster than you. He opens the door, and his preternatural instincts/spider sense means he acts before you. He could close the door or move to you and stab you, because he's just that good! Even if you are faster, he can still use his reaction to cast or catch, if he has one.

The game is working as intended. You can want to act first, but so do the bad guys. Wanting to act first doesn't mean that you will act first!

If the DM is foolish enough to allow Actions In Combat outside of combat(!) then you get to shoot when he opens the door, before initiative is rolled. The fact that he is faster than you is artificially bypassed, as is his immunity to surprise, his reactions, everything.

And when you are confidently striding around as your PC with your fancy Weapon of Warning and your devastating hellish rebuke, the DM calmly informs you that you are dead because he allows the BBEG sniper to shoot and kill you outside of combat with a 'readied action' to shoot 'whoever opens the door', neatly rendering your immunity to surprise, shield spell, Deflect Missile, all moot. And you think, "Yeah, that's fair".

[Kuu Lightwing]

Nope. As already discussed, outside of combat there are no Actions In Combat....but neither are Actions In Combat required to do stuff.

If something is described as taking an Action (or bonus action), as opposed to taking an actual unit of time such as minutes or hours, then if you are acting in initiative order in Combat Rounds then you must take an Action that lets you do that thing, whether that 'thing' is casting a spell or closing a door or anything else. But outside of Combat Rounds and initiative order, you just....cast a spell or close a door or whatever. Actions are not required. Which is just as well, because Actions don't exist outside of combat rounds.

In fact, the only thing you cannot do outside combat (apart from, y'know, combat itself!) that you would require an Action In Combat to do if you were in Combat Rounds...is the Ready Action. Why? Because literally the only thing it does is manipulate the timing of events in the initiative order. You know that thing which doesn't exist outside of the initiative order!!

It's like complaining that you can't switch the light on in the dark because it's not dark anymore with the light on!

Yeah, no. If you are arguing RAW here, then you made up pretty much all of this. If you read how to cast a spell, under "casting time" section it literally tells you that most of the spells require an Action to cast, but some require Bonus Action, or a Reaction. If you don't have any of those, then you can't cast those spells unless you are in combat. Moreso, if you read how to cast spells with longer casting time, you'll find out that you require to spend your Action on each of your turns casting said spell. Therefore, if you don't have turns, or actions available, you can't cast said spell.

Here we go, folks. You can't cast spells out of combat, because there's no turns.


Because literally the only thing it does is manipulate the timing of events in the initiative order. You know that thing which doesn't exist outside of the initiative order!!!

The only thing it does is allow to do an Action as a Reaction in response to some trigger. Such as "door opens".

[Hecuba]

The only thing it does is allow to do an Action as a Reaction in response to some trigger. Such as "door opens".

More specifically, it's action for reaction in response to trigger if the trigger occurs before your next turn. Which implies you're operating in the turn-based timekeeping and should already have rolled initiative: the "other fast-paced situations" clause has been triggered, even if only by your character imposing a 6-second-long time-frame on the situation.

Yes, you could take the ready action every turn until an actual combat starts. Which should reasonably be mirrored by the enemies taking the ready action every turn if they are aware of you - so everyone acts in the first round. Alternately, if they are unaware of you, then you should act in the first round and they wouldn't.

Gee, that sounds kinda like the surprise mechanic...


Or, you could spend your action helping party member with a check they'd normally have problems with. Gee, that sounds like helping with a skill check.

[strangebloke]

Yeah, no. If you are arguing RAW here, then you made up pretty much all of this. If you read how to cast a spell, under "casting time" section it literally tells you that most of the spells require an Action to cast, but some require Bonus Action, or a Reaction. If you don't have any of those, then you can't cast those spells unless you are in combat. Moreso, if you read how to cast spells with longer casting time, you'll find out that you require to spend your Action on each of your turns casting said spell. Therefore, if you don't have turns, or actions available, you can't cast said spell.

Here we go, folks. You can't cast spells out of combat, because there's no turns.

Okay, let's assume that RAW allows you to do Ready an action outside of combat. I'm actually sympathetic to that argument.

What mechanical or narrative power does out-of-combat readied actions add to the game?

Lying in wait on a stakeout? We can already do that. Stealth and surprise.

Assassinating someone at a party? Deception and surprise.

Acting first when both parties are aware? Initiative.

Out-of-combat interactions? (Interrupting a politicians speech at a key point) No mechanical solution needed, you can handle this through narration.


So it doesn't add anything except complexity.

It also imbalances the game, making ranged and stealth/observant characters a whole lot stronger. It probably makes spellcasters a bit weaker, since they have to pick their spell ahead of time. It also makes alert and other reactive defenses a lot worse. Stealth is already a borderline-overpowered tactic in many cases. This makes it way better.

Like seriously, you step out of your tent and the enemy goblins who beat your passive perception get a prepped round of attacks, get a surprise round, and then beat you on initiative, getting two volleys off before you can even take a reaction, and three rounds off before you can take an action.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Gee, that sounds kinda like the surprise mechanic...

Because there's totally no difference between getting a whole turn off, or a single action. Did you read the situation I described? Do you see the difference between "I nuke the room as soon as you open the door, and you then close it" and "you open the door and I hope I'll be able to nuke the room before they rush in. Oh, and don't bother closing it because it'd be too late at that point."


Okay, let's assume that RAW allows you to do Ready an action outside of combat. I'm actually sympathetic to that argument.
The main purpose of that argument is to show that "there are no turns outside of combat" is an absurd reading.

I don't exactly advocate for readying without initiative at all, although that was a question I asked. The main thing I do advocate for is allowing to enter initiative earlier than actually encountering, or rather seeing the enemy, if the situation calls for it. The situation I describe doesn't work well with surprise rules. It just doesn't, especially if enemy is also aware of the party. Another absurd situation comes from being able to do the exact thing I'm describing if the group is fighting something else or even each other.

[Unoriginal]

Because there's totally no difference between getting a whole turn off, or a single action. Did you read the situation I described? Do you see the difference between "I nuke the room as soon as you open the door, and you then close it" and "you open the door and I hope I'll be able to nuke the room before they rush in. Oh, and don't bother closing it because it'd be too late at that point."

The difference is that with the first you're trying to cheese the game by implying the DM should deny NPCs the chance to act because ... you have a plan I guess, while the second is a defeatist statement implying that the enemies will never be surprised.

If your buddy opens the door and the enemies are surprised, you can nuke them before they can react. Your buddy can then close the door as part of their action (since opening the door is not part of the combat).

If your buddy opens the door and the enemies are not surprised, and you beat them to initiative, you can nuke them before they can react. Your buddy can then close the door as part of their action (since opening the door is not part of the combat).

If your buddy opens the door and the enemies are not surprised, and they beat them to initiative, they're going to rush in, because that's how being in a fight is: sometime the other guys are faster.

Ready's only purpose is to let you use a Reaction to act after your turn in response to a particular event.



The main purpose of that argument is to show that "there are no turns outside of combat" is an absurd reading.

It's not. It's the logical reading.


The main thing I do advocate for is allowing to enter initiative earlier than actually encountering, or rather seeing the enemy, if the situation calls for it.

The only situation initiative is called for is *when one group is interacting with another group or an event/mechanism in an actively opposed manner*.



The situation I describe doesn't work well with surprise rules. It just doesn't

Yes it does.



especially if enemy is also aware of the party.

The situation you're describing does not work at all if the other group is aware of the party. Or are you expecting them to wait and die for you?



Another absurd situation comes from being able to do the exact thing I'm describing if the group is fighting something else or even each other.

New combatants are added to the initiative order. Nothing incredible about that.

[Kuu Lightwing]

The difference is that with the first you're trying to cheese the game by implying the DM should deny NPCs the chance to act because ... you have a plan I guess, while the second is a defeatist statement implying that the enemies will never be surprised.

If your buddy opens the door and the enemies are surprised, you can nuke them before they can react. Your buddy can then close the door as part of their action (since opening the door is not part of the combat).

If your buddy opens the door and the enemies are not surprised, and you beat them to initiative, you can nuke them before they can react. Your buddy can then close the door as part of their action (since opening the door is not part of the combat).

If your buddy opens the door and the enemies are not surprised, and they beat them to initiative, they're going to rush in, because that's how being in a fight is: sometime the other guys are faster.

Ready's only purpose is to let you use a Reaction to act after your turn in response to a particular event.

Enemies have a chance to ready as well as the players do, so both have a chance to act, if they are aware of the enemy. And yes, I do want to gain some advantage from thinking ahead and planning, what a big surprise.

Your justifications such as "sometimes the other guys are faster" fall completely flat in the light of my scheme working exactly as I describe it if the party is already fighting something. I guess the other guys could not be faster if party is distracted.


It's not. It's the logical reading.

Only if you follow your own logic by not allowing to cast spells outside of combat.

[sophontteks]

The second the enemy does this everyone will curse the player who suggested this. Every room the party enters they will be hit with a barrage of arrows before they roll initiative. Wouldn't it be disadvantage too? Ouch.

Every single room, as long as the enemy has a reason to feel threatened, they are all "readying their weapons."

[Unoriginal]

Enemies have a chance to ready as well as the players do, so both have a chance to act, if they are aware of the enemy.

Then you're describing a normal combat situation with no surprise.




And yes, I do want to gain some advantage from thinking ahead and planning, what a big surprise.

The advantage you get is that you have a plan ready. Big tactical advantage, especially against disorganized enemies, but it's not going to give you the capacity to move faster than normal.




Your justifications such as "sometimes the other guys are faster" fall completely flat in the light of my scheme working exactly as I describe it if the party is already fighting something. I guess the other guys could not be faster if party is distracted.

No, it would not. I have no idea why you think your scheme would automatically work if the party is already fighting something.


[QUOTE=Kuu Lightwing;23145652]
Only if you follow your own logic by not allowing to cast spells outside of combat.

You can cast spells outside combats. You can't HOLD the casting of those spells more than six seconds, however, which is what the Ready action represent.


The second the enemy does this everyone will curse the player who suggested this. Every room the party enters they will be hit with a barrage of arrows before they roll initiative. Wouldn't it be disadvantage too? Ouch.

Every single room, as long as the enemy has a reason to feel threatened, they are all "readying their weapons."

Not to mention how ridiculously dangerous it makes stealth.

"I try to sneak past the guard. 15"
"You weren't discreet enough, you get shot"

"I try to attack the Bugbear as he hasn't seen me yet."
"As you hit him, he reacts and attack you with his giant axe."

[Kuu Lightwing]

Then you're describing a normal combat situation with no surprise.


No, I'm not. Did you actually read anything you argue with? Do I have to repeat everything to you specifically?



No, it would not. I have no idea why you think your scheme would automatically work if the party is already fighting something.

Because it does? Wizard can ready an fireball then Fighter can open the door as a free object interaction, and then close it as an Action when Fireball comes off. Boom! Plan works. But, not if party doesn't fight anything.



You can cast spells outside combats. You can't HOLD the casting of those spells more than six seconds, however, which is what the Ready action represent.

If you argue that there's no turns, then you can't. If you actually bothered to read my posts, you would know the argument for that.

[Rogan]

First thing first: I have no idea about D&D 5. So no rules here.

But I have some thoughts about the described situation and would like to share them.

Imagine three kinds of reflex tests.


On the count of three, press the button. 1... 2... 3!
On my Signal, press the button. ...... Now!
When you read this, the next thing you have to do is pressing the 'A' button as fast as you can, this will determinine your reaction speed.


In the first case, you know what will happen, when, and what you are supposed to do.
In the second case, you know what will happen and what you are supposed to do.
In the last case, you have to find out what will happen and what you are supposed to do during the time of the test.

If you were to do those tests, you would likely find out that Nr.1 will get the fastest reaction time, while Nr.3 will take the longest.


If you map those results to the example of the door, the heros will do Nr. 1, Monsters that know about the players will do Nr. 2 and anybody who did not specify what he would like to do beforerhand would do Nr. 3


Is the difference in reaction time great enough to justify a rule for it? I don't know. But you can argue about it, like we do here.

But there will be another problem: Whats going to happen if the situation won't play out if you thought it would?

Maybe the heros would like to attack as soon as the fighter opens the door, but the monsters storm out before they can do so? Or maybe there are no monsters in the room?

In my oppinion, Players that state the plan beforehand should gain an advantage of some sort if eveything plays out as planed, but suffer a drawback if it doesn't.

So, if the enemy attacks before they can execute the plan, they might loose their turn since the trigger did not happen (fighter opens door).
Or, if the room is empty, they might waste the spell on nothing.

[ThePolarBear]

Question #1 Would you allow to Ready an action outside of combat?

Not outside of initiative, if you mean by using the actual Action and correlated rules


Question #2, let's assume that Ready isn't allowed outside combat, would you allow to enter initiative earlier, without seeing an enemy yet?

Does the DM need a tool to help them adjudicate the situation, since for how things are developing there is a need for a strict sequence of events to be established? Yes. More on the point: You actually roll initiative even when one of the two parties is surprised, which might very well mean that they are about to get hit by something that they can't see nor hear or even know its existance. And you roll initiative for invisible creatures too. But again: is sequencing important and time of essence and the DM needs a way to help adjudicating things? Roll initiative or use another method of resolution, whatever floats your boat.


The most obvious situation where this could be needed is when a party prepares and ambush, say Himiko wants to cast a fireball as soon as Gonta opens the door that (as they think) has enemies behind it?

Yes. Surprise rules apply, surprised players if the initiative call is used as a narrative tool too and the sounds coming from the before unexplored door where all just an illusion set up to make adventurers waste resources. Surprise!

[JoeJ]

Does the DM need a tool to help them adjudicate the situation, since for how things are developing there is a need for a strict sequence of events to be established?

I ask myself two questions. First, does the order in which things occur actually matter? If not, there's no need to roll initiative. If the order of events does matter, does everybody (including the DM) agree on the order in which things should occur? If yes, again there's no need for initiative; everybody just does what they were going to do at the proper time. Only if the order of events occurs and there is some disagreement about what that order should be do I roll initiative. Combat is one of the primary situations were initiative is needed (since nobody is likely ever to agree to just wait politely and let their enemy strike first), but it's not the only situation.

[Isaire]

Because there's totally no difference between getting a whole turn off, or a single action. Did you read the situation I described? Do you see the difference between "I nuke the room as soon as you open the door, and you then close it" and "you open the door and I hope I'll be able to nuke the room before they rush in. Oh, and don't bother closing it because it'd be too late at that point."

I don't exactly advocate for readying without initiative at all, although that was a question I asked. The main thing I do advocate for is allowing to enter initiative earlier than actually encountering, or rather seeing the enemy, if the situation calls for it. The situation I describe doesn't work well with surprise rules. It just doesn't, especially if enemy is also aware of the party. Another absurd situation comes from being able to do the exact thing I'm describing if the group is fighting something else or even each other.

Kuu, I'm not being funny but I literally don't see what part of your example does not fit into the standard initiative scheme. Like, if one party is surprising the other, then you can use the ready action within the surprise round to achieve the desired effect. If both parties are aware of eachother, you can basically use either of the following schemes, as fits your style:

Call for initiative as soon as parties are aware of each other, as at this stage time management is important and the enemies aren't going to be sitting still while the heroes plan and get into position! This might lead to the release of a lot of reactions at the same time - this is probably fine, however you choose to run your game really. You could of course adjudicate by initiative - in which case the wizard might get hit and lose concentration before he casts his spell. If you like this, more power to you.
Call for initiative as the door is opened, because the wizard does not have instantaneous reflexes so is not guaranteed to cast his spell before people within the room react to the door opening.

In both cases, you are hoping that you react before the people on the other side of the door - of course, they might have not readied attack actions, maybe they didn't react quickly enough to awareness of the party or carried out a different action, but they have to be given the chance to act within the initiative structure.

Basically, hostile intent is probably going to be the trigger for initiative. It's up to the DM to judge this, and that's cool.

[Unoriginal]

Basically, the question is "can I initiate a combat action like casting a damaging spell on enemies through a door at a certain time without it being combat and without being subjected to the initiative order ?"

The answer is "no". Combat starts when some one decide to do a combat action.

[JackPhoenix]

Because it does? Wizard can ready an fireball then Fighter can open the door as a free object interaction, and then close it as an Action when Fireball comes off. Boom! Plan works. But, not if party doesn't fight anything.

What? If there's no opposition, the GM won't bother with initiative, the plan goes as expected, the fighter opens the door, the wizard wastes a 3rd or higher level slot against an empty room, the fighter closes the door again.

If there *is* an opposition, initiative gets rolled first and the combat proceeds normally.

[Lombra]

Yes, something for nothing. There is a process in place for resolving guessing/deducing something and getting the jump on someone. It's surprise checks. Ready actions just prior to combat are an attempt to bypass surprise checks and initiative order.

You may not find it cheesy to try and do that, but that's still what it is it is still an attempt to bypass the rules to gain an advantage. (edit: rewrote because it read like I was claiming it was cheesy. Regardless of if it's cheese, it's still an attempt to gain an advantage by bypassing the rules.)

First things first, if we want to be pedantic, "surprise checks" don't exist, and surprise is adjudicated entirely on DM fiat.

Let's say, that neither the party or the opponents are aware of each other, and habe no reason to be. While exploring a not-necessarly-dangerous place, a party member decides to draw an arrow toward a door, preparing himself to shoot the instant something opens it.

The enemies are at the same task of the adventurers, they're exploring the seemingly innocuous place, amd casually open that door.

From your reading, you probably would assign the surprised condition to everyone except for the archer, effectively giving him an extra round of combat.

How different would it be if, instead, the DM decides to roll initiative as the archer decides to ready the action because he feels more comfortable managing this with turns clearly layed-out (which is totally fine)?

The DM decides that now everyone is taking turns, the archer on his turn readies the action to attack as the door opens, so when the enemies open it, they get "surprised" but not in a mechanic sense by an arrow fired at them.

The situation is the same, but the outcome is different because what, The DM decided to roll initiative? It doesn't make sense to me, the plan is the same, so it should work the same way regardless of when you decide to start to use a time-measuring tool (initiative).

I just don't get the fear towards using a tool for purposes different than its original design, I can use a screwdriver to remove a screw but I can also use it to open a bottle of beer.

[Malifice]

First things first, if we want to be pedantic, "surprise checks" don't exist, and surprise is adjudicated entirely on DM fiat.

It's detrmined via circumstances and quite often Stealth vs Passive Perception actually.


Let's say, that neither the party or the opponents are aware of each other, and habe no reason to be. While exploring a not-necessarly-dangerous place, a party member decides to draw an arrow toward a door, preparing himself to shoot the instant something opens it.

The enemies are at the same task of the adventurers, they're exploring the seemingly innocuous place, amd casually open that door.

Both parties become aware of each other at that instant, and an initiative check is asked for by the DM to determine reaction speed of the combatants in the ensuing combat.


How different would it be if, instead, the DM decides to roll initiative as the archer decides to ready the action because he feels more comfortable managing this with turns clearly layed-out (which is totally fine)?

He cant 'roll initiaitve'. Initiaitve is an opposed Dexterity ability check (opposed against one or more hostile creatures trying to react faster than you).

Until there is something to react faster than in an opposed check (a monster for example), he cant make the check.

Its like asking a PC to make an opposed Strength ability check to throw something further than... no-one else, because no-one else is around to be throwing anything.

When the door opens and a hostile monster appears, he can make his Dexterity check because then (and only then) is he attempting to react faster than the monster that just openened the door.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Basically, the question is "can I initiate a combat action like casting a damaging spell on enemies through a door at a certain time without it being combat and without being subjected to the initiative order ?"

The answer is "no". Combat starts when some one decide to do a combat action.

No, this is not the question.


Kuu, I'm not being funny but I literally don't see what part of your example does not fit into the standard initiative scheme. Like, if one party is surprising the other, then you can use the ready action within the surprise round to achieve the desired effect. If both parties are aware of eachother, you can basically use either of the following schemes, as fits your style:

Call for initiative as soon as parties are aware of each other, as at this stage time management is important and the enemies aren't going to be sitting still while the heroes plan and get into position! This might lead to the release of a lot of reactions at the same time - this is probably fine, however you choose to run your game really. You could of course adjudicate by initiative - in which case the wizard might get hit and lose concentration before he casts his spell. If you like this, more power to you.
Call for initiative as the door is opened, because the wizard does not have instantaneous reflexes so is not guaranteed to cast his spell before people within the room react to the door opening.

In both cases, you are hoping that you react before the people on the other side of the door - of course, they might have not readied attack actions, maybe they didn't react quickly enough to awareness of the party or carried out a different action, but they have to be given the chance to act within the initiative structure.

Basically, hostile intent is probably going to be the trigger for initiative. It's up to the DM to judge this, and that's cool.

Yes, Wizard isn't going to have instantaneous reflexes. However, Wizard who prepared to cast a fireball as soon as the door opens, isn't going to act slow enough to allow enemy to make a full turn before they able to release the spell, no matter what the initiative is. Surely if other party readied to throw some javelins in, they'll be able to do so, some may even ready a move to rush into the door, and jam it, if they expected this turn of events, but not run into the room and multiattack someone. Why am I so sure about that? Well, because if the party is already in combat, everything I describe is possible exactly the way I presented it. Which is why I think that initiative should be rolled before the door is opened in this particular situation.

To the argument "players would hate if you do it to them" - I'd say players would hate it even more if you play it with Surprise - "doors open, and you see a horde of orcs rushing in. You are surprised, roll initiative. Now orcs do this, this and this and these orcs rush to you, Himiko and multiattack you. You take five hits. Oh, you rolled poorly? You take four more hits, and now dying."


Initiaitve is an opposed Dexterity ability check (opposed against one or more hostile creatures trying to react faster than you).

Another little houserule? Initiative is not defined as an opposed contested check. The section about contested checks also doesn't mention anything about contested checks between more than two participants.

[Malifice]

Yes, Wizard isn't going to have instantaneous reflexes. However, Wizard who prepared to cast a fireball as soon as the door opens, isn't going to act slow enough to allow enemy to make a full turn before they able to release the spell, no matter what the initiative is.

Yes they very well could. Remember despite the 'stop start' nature of combat rounds (with people moving 30' and then attacking) actions are simulatanous.

On initiative count 20, an Orc takes the disengage action from a fighter and moves 30' on its turn to a door and then opens it. On the Fighters turn later on the same round on initiative count 1, he moves 30' to the Orc and attacks it.

To our (out of game) perspective the Orc spent the 'time' from initiaitve count 20 to initiaitive count 1 alone near the door, with the fighter 30' away from him. What actually happened in the game from the persective of the fighter and the Orc was that the Orc ran away to a door, with the Fighter with him every step of the way, hot on his heels, swinging at him with his sword.


Surely if other party readied to throw some javelins in, they'll be able to do so, some may even ready a move to rush into the door, and jam it, if they expected this turn of events, but not run into the room and multiattack someone. Why am I so sure about that? Well, because if the party is already in combat, everything I describe is possible exactly the way I presented it. Which is why I think that initiative should be rolled before the door is opened in this particular situation.

They cant take the Ready action to throw javelins unless they have been asked (by the DM) to make an opposed Dexterity check against a hostile creature, established turn order based on the outcome of this check, and then on thier turn, elected to take the Ready action.


To the argument "players would hate if you do it to them" - I'd say players would hate it even more if you play it with Surprise - "doors open, and you see a horde of orcs rushing in. You are surprised, roll initiative. Now orcs do this, this and this and these orcs rush to you, Himiko and multiattack you. You take five hits. Oh, you rolled poorly? You take four more hits, and now dying."

Why on earth are a bunch of PCs who are alert to danger, suddenly 'surprised' by Orcs here? They're literally standing there with weapons drawn and spells ready, expecting trouble on the other side of the door.

Door opens, Orcs spotted, initiative is then called for (to compare reaction times between the Orcs and the PCs). Presuming both sides were aware of each other, neither side is surprised, and turns happen in initiative order (fastest in the combat to slowest).

If one side was not aware of the other, then it's surprised and cant act on round one.

How are you struggling with this simple concept?

[Malifice]

Another little houserule? Initiative is not defined as an opposed contested check.

Yes it bloody well is. From the PHB:


INITIATIVE
Initiative determines the order of turns during combat. When combat starts, every participant makes a Dexterity check to determine their place in the initiative order. The DM makes one roll for an entire group of identical creatures, so each member of the group acts at the same time.

That's an opposed Dexterity check (a Dexterity contest), that is made after combat begins (after susrprise has been determined, and after positions have been determined) at step 3:


COMBAT STEP BY STEP

Determine surprise. The DM determines whether anyone involved in the combat encounter is surprised.
Establish positions. The DM decides where all the characters and monsters are located. Given the adventurers’ marching order or their stated positions in the room or other location, the DM figures out where the adversaries are—how far away and in what direction.
Roll initiative. Everyone involved in the combat encounter rolls initiative, determining the order of combatants’ turns.
Take turns. Each participant in the battle takes a turn in initiative order.
Begin the next round. When everyone involved in the combat has had a turn, the round ends. Repeat step 4 until the fighting stops.


PC with ready fireball (not in initiaitive) spots an Orc 30' away. DM declares the Orc fumbles for its sword and charges (narration by DM indicating the start of combat sequencing). COMBAT BEGINS.

1) Neither party is surprised
2) Position: Orc is 30' away from PC.
3) Calls for initiative. Orc rolls 15. PC Wizard rolls 10. Orc wins.
4) Round one begins:
-Orcs turn 1: DM narrates: 'As you stare in shock at the Orc the final words of power stutter from your lips as your eyes meet its feral yellow slits. It springs forward with shocking speed, rapidly closing the gap and its sword clears its scabbard swinging at your neck, trying to silence you as the final words of your spell are chanted [rolls attack, misses].
-PCs turn 1: Player fireballs Orc (positioning it so he isnt caught). Orc dies.

To a neutral observer, our Wizard was caught slightly off guard and failed to react swiftly enough against a vicious and suicidal charging Orc, with the Orc very nearly reaching him... as a blast of flame incinerated said Orc at the last second. (remember - the above actions in round one happened largely simulataneously).

[Kuu Lightwing]

Yes it bloody well is. From the PHB:



That's an opposed Dexterity check (a Dexterity contest), that is made after combat begins (after susrprise has been determined, and after positions have been determined) at step 3:



PC with ready fireball (not in initiaitive) spots an Orc 30' away. DM declares the Orc fumbles for its sword and charges (narration by DM indicating the start of combat sequencing). COMBAT BEGINS.

1) Neither party is surprised
2) Position: Orc is 30' away from PC.
3) Calls for initiative. Orc rolls 15. PC Wizard rolls 10. Orc wins.
4) Round one begins:
-Orcs turn 1: DM narrates: 'As you stare in shock at the Orc the final words of power stutter from your lips as your eyes meet its feral yellow slits. It springs forward with shocking speed, rapidly closing the gap and its sword clears its scabbard swinging at your neck, trying to silence you as the final words of your spell are chanted [rolls attack, misses].
-PCs turn 1: Player fireballs Orc (positioning it so he isnt caught). Orc dies.

To a neutral observer, our Wizard was caught slightly off guard and failed to react swiftly enough against a vicious and suicidal charging Orc, with the Orc very nearly reaching him... as a blast of flame incinerated said Orc at the last second. (remember - the above actions in round one happened largely simulataneously).

I know that you've read this paragraph. No try reading what is a contested check, before you assert that Initiative is one.

[Malifice]

I know that you've read this paragraph. No try reading what is a contested check, before you assert that Initiative is one.

It's the definition of a contested ability check. Im trying to stab you before you stab me and vice versa. Hence you and I both roll a Dexterity ablity check (your check contested against mine and vice versa) to see who gets to stab whom first.

Seriously bro. If your DM said to you 'Roll initiative' and said nothing else, you wouldnt ask why? As in: What am I rolling to check my reaction time against exactly? What has happened that my character is required to make a check using his Dexterity score?

Initiaitve is a Dexterity ability check, the result of which is expressly compared to the results of the same check made by all other participants in a combat to determine who goes first.

Im not sure why Im arguing this with you. If you want to run it your way, go nuts. It wouldnt fly in my games, and the RAW is clear that it wont work in many other games either (although you may gain some traction, seeing as a handful of people in this thread seem to allow 'ready actions outside of combat').

This is despite the rules clearly stating one can only take the Ready action [on your turn], and turns dont occur until you're actually in combat (and initiative has already been determined).

I suppose your DM can call for initiaitive several minutes before you trigger a combat encounter and the sides become aware of each other, but to be fair the creatures in the combat encounter should also get the same advantage. They might as well take the Ready action (preparing themsleves accordingly) while your PCs do.

[Lombra]

It's detrmined via circumstances and quite often Stealth vs Passive Perception actually.

Often, but not necessarly. Initiative can be called whenever for whatever reason. Anyways, that's beside the point.


Both parties become aware of each other at that instant, and an initiative check is asked for by the DM to determine reaction speed of the combatants in the ensuing combat.

So the guy who expected and prepared for an encounter has the same advantage of someone just wandering around, ok.



He cant 'roll initiaitve'. Initiaitve is an opposed Dexterity ability check (opposed against one or more hostile creatures trying to react faster than you).

You get what I mean by "rolls initiative", I can't be bothered to always write "dexterity(initiative) check".



Until there is something to react faster than in an opposed check (a monster for example), he cant make the check.

Its like asking a PC to make an opposed Strength ability check to throw something further than... no-one else, because no-one else is around to be throwing anything.

I don't get this.


When the door opens and a hostile monster appears, he can make his Dexterity check because then (and only then) is he attempting to react faster than the monster that just openened the door.

That's exactly not what the example I presented is about, the character does have to react, but he expects that thing to happen, he has an edge. He is ready for it.

[Malifice]

So the guy who expected and prepared for an encounter has the same advantage of someone just wandering around, ok.

5E has two states [determined by the DM at step ''one'' as soon as combat starts]. They are

A) Ready for combat, or
B) Not ready for combat [and Surprised].

For example: A bunch of Orcs sitting at a table playing cards in a guard room are almost certainly [surprised] when the door is opened by a bunch of PCs who burst in with weapons out who are ready for combat. If the same PCs instead simply blindly stumbled into the room having a casual chat to each other while the Orcs were in their card game, neither side is [surprised].

Should the Orcs fail to notice the PCs before that door gets opened, they're surprised.

You're trying to insert a 'third state' between [surprised] and [not surprised]. Sort of a [not surprised, but not really expecting combat, but not 'not expecting' it either].


I don't get this.

You dont ask for an initiaitive [Dexterity] check to test how fast a PC reacts to a stimuli, when there is nothing for that PC to react to [such as a hostile creature trying to murder him first].

[Lombra]

5E has two states [determined by the DM at step ''one'' as soon as combat starts]. They are

A) Ready for combat, or
B) Not ready for combat [and Surprised].

For example: A bunch of Orcs sitting at a table playing cards in a guard room are almost certainly [surprised] when the door is opened by a bunch of PCs who burst in with weapons out who are ready for combat. If the same PCs instead simply blindly stumbled into the room having a casual chat to each other while the Orcs were in their card game, neither side is [surprised].

Should the Orcs fail to notice the PCs before that door gets opened, they're surprised.

You're trying to insert a 'third state' between [surprised] and [not surprised]. Sort of a [not surprised, but not really expecting combat, but not 'not expecting' it either].

So, in my example from before you would rule it as I first described it? I'm totally fine with that reading.



You dont ask for an initiaitive [Dexterity] check to test how fast a PC reacts to a stimuli, when there is nothing for that PC to react to [such as a hostile creature trying to murder him first].

Ok I understand and agree.

[Malifice]

So, in my example from before you would rule it as I first described it? I'm totally fine with that reading.

When I DM I ask myself [at the start of hostilities]: Is anyone surprised [not expecting/ unaware/ caught with thier pants down] at the commencement of this combat encounter?

If the answer is 'yes', then that creature(s) is surprised, can not act on turn one, and cant take reactions untill that turn ends (barring it being particularly alert via the Feat or some other corner case ability, like a weapon of warning or whatnot).

You're either expecting combat, or you're not and youre caught with your pants down and surprised. Im not seeing any need for a third íntermediary state of 'not surprised or unaware but not super ready for combat either'.

The switch from narrative time [where 'turns' not only dont matter, they also dont exist] to combat time is the point at which I [determine surprise, set up encounter, roll initiative, commence taking turns in initiative order]. Turns dont exist till we have made the switch from narrative time to combat sequencing.

[Fuzzy Logic]

Can I ask this question of those saying you should be able to ready outside of combat:

Taking the wizard casts a fireball through a door the fighter opens scenario, what if the orcs have bows out and readied actions to shoot at anyone they see when the door opens? Who goes first?

[Arial Black]

The old adage that "no plan survives contact with the enemy" applies to your wizard's plan to fireball as soon as the door opens, because the orcs are making their own plans about what to do as soon as the door opens.

So, who's plan goes first? If only we had some kind of test for reaction speed in this situation...!

Basically, just because the wizard plans to go first, this doesn't mean that he will go first.

But the idea to have pre-combat combat(!), just so the wizard's plan works and he goes first just because he said so....no! That's cheating. That's an attempt by the player or DM to cheat by bypassing the initiative check and, possibly the surprise rules.

ANY attempt by player or DM to have a free whack before initiative is rolled is simply trying to cheat. Never allow it.

The PHB states that combat takes place in Combat Rounds. The things that are done in Combat Rounds are done in initiative order. Therefore, if you are doing something like combat (like whacking them upside the head with your axe) then this is, by definition, 'combat' and therefore must take place in Combat Rounds in initiative order.

TL;DR: 'combat' counts as 'combat' and takes place in Combat Rounds.

You know what else must take place in Combat Rounds? Actions In Combat.

Actions In Combat are only allowed and only required in Combat Rounds. Since most things can take place in combat, each of those things is given an action cost (like Action, bonus action, reaction, etc) to adjudicate its use in a Combat Round. But just because things have a listed action type, ready for those occasions when they are used in Combat Rounds, does not limit their use to within combat! Nor does it imply that those Action In Combat exist outside of combat.

There is no point in printing next to the action cost of every single ability, attack or spell in the game the fact that you only need to use this action if you are in combat. The casting time of every single spell is not printed as, "Casting time: 1 action, but you don't need to spend an action if you cast it outside combat because Actions are not needed nor do they exist outside combat", because what a waste of space that would be! But it might as well say that, because it's true.

[Kuu Lightwing]

It's the definition of a contested ability check. Im trying to stab you before you stab me and vice versa. Hence you and I both roll a Dexterity ablity check (your check contested against mine and vice versa) to see who gets to stab whom first.

If initiative was a contested ability check between "I'm trying to stab you" and "You're trying to stab me", then it would have one of the following outcomes:

- (I win) I stab you.
- (You win) You stab me.
- (Tie) Nobody stabs anyone.

As per the rule that describes opposed ability checks. However, Initiative isn't one, as rolling initiative does not necessarily result in anyone stabbing anyone. Initiative only determines the turn order among several entities, and many of those entities aren't even necessarily hostile to each other. If you want to use rules as a base of your argument, then use the rules themselves, not some vague idea of what they are.



Seriously bro. If your DM said to you 'Roll initiative' and said nothing else, you wouldnt ask why? As in: What am I rolling to check my reaction time against exactly? What has happened that my character is required to make a check using his Dexterity score?

Initiaitve is a Dexterity ability check, the result of which is expressly compared to the results of the same check made by all other participants in a combat to determine who goes first.

Im not sure why Im arguing this with you. If you want to run it your way, go nuts. It wouldnt fly in my games, and the RAW is clear that it wont work in many other games either (although you may gain some traction, seeing as a handful of people in this thread seem to allow 'ready actions outside of combat').

This is despite the rules clearly stating one can only take the Ready action [on your turn], and turns dont occur until you're actually in combat (and initiative has already been determined).

I suppose your DM can call for initiaitive several minutes before you trigger a combat encounter and the sides become aware of each other, but to be fair the creatures in the combat encounter should also get the same advantage. They might as well take the Ready action (preparing themsleves accordingly) while your PCs do.

You continue to repeat the same mantra that "turns do not exist outside of combat" and decided to completely ignore everything that demonstrate how absurd this ruling actually is. Other guy is at least trying to present (albeit incorrect) argument that apparently you can ignore Casting Time requirements in some situations. So, yea, I don't know why are you arguing with me.


The old adage that "no plan survives contact with the enemy" applies to your wizard's plan to fireball as soon as the door opens, because the orcs are making their own plans about what to do as soon as the door opens.

So, who's plan goes first? If only we had some kind of test for reaction speed in this situation...!

Basically, just because the wizard plans to go first, this doesn't mean that he will go first.

But the idea to have pre-combat combat(!), just so the wizard's plan works and he goes first just because he said so....no! That's cheating. That's an attempt by the player or DM to cheat by bypassing the initiative check and, possibly the surprise rules.

ANY attempt by player or DM to have a free whack before initiative is rolled is simply trying to cheat. Never allow it.

You continue to misunderstand the argument. Are you doing this on purpose? At this point, I agree that Initiative would be required to establish turn order. However, I do not agree that Initiative must be rolled only when door is already open. And yes, orcs on the other side of the door can also ready their actions if they aware of the party and if they are smart enough.

You repeat the same argument that "Wizard might not be fast enough", but you fail to address the part that Wizard always will be "fast enough" if Wizard is already in combat with a rat, other party member or Ancient Red Dragon.



The PHB states that combat takes place in Combat Rounds. The things that are done in Combat Rounds are done in initiative order. Therefore, if you are doing something like combat (like whacking them upside the head with your axe) then this is, by definition, 'combat' and therefore must take place in Combat Rounds in initiative order.

TL;DR: 'combat' counts as 'combat' and takes place in Combat Rounds.

You know what else must take place in Combat Rounds? Actions In Combat.

Actions In Combat are only allowed and only required in Combat Rounds. Since most things can take place in combat, each of those things is given an action cost (like Action, bonus action, reaction, etc) to adjudicate its use in a Combat Round. But just because things have a listed action type, ready for those occasions when they are used in Combat Rounds, does not limit their use to within combat! Nor does it imply that those Action In Combat exist outside of combat.

There is no point in printing next to the action cost of every single ability, attack or spell in the game the fact that you only need to use this action if you are in combat. The casting time of every single spell is not printed as, "Casting time: 1 action, but you don't need to spend an action if you cast it outside combat because Actions are not needed nor do they exist outside combat", because what a waste of space that would be! But it might as well say that, because it's true.
The PHB also states that to cast a spell with casting time 1 Action you are required to spend 1 Action to do so. To cast a spell with longer casting time, you need to spend 1 Action on each of your Turns and maintain concentration. Nowhere in the rules it is said that you can ignore the casting time of the spells, or that you need actions to cast spells.

Also, if you decide that you can ignore Actions, Reactions and everything else for other actions, then the exact same argument could be made that you could do the same for Ready, since it is just a type of action.

[strangebloke]

If initiative was a contested ability check between "I'm trying to stab you" and "You're trying to stab me", then it would have one of the following outcomes:

- (I win) I stab you.
- (You win) You stab me.
- (Tie) Nobody stabs anyone.

As per the rule that describes opposed ability checks. However, Initiative isn't one, as rolling initiative does not necessarily result in anyone stabbing anyone. Initiative only determines the turn order among several entities, and many of those entities aren't even necessarily hostile to each other. If you want to use rules as a base of your argument, then use the rules themselves, not some vague idea of what they are.


Sorry, but you're very simply wrong here. 'Rolling Initiative' is an ability check. It's a special one that has rules for multiple participants, ties, etc.

Read:

"Initiative determines the order of turns during combat. When combat starts, every participant makes a Dexterity check to determine their place in the initiative order. The GM makes one roll for an entire group of identical creatures, so each member of the group acts at the same time.

The GM ranks the combatants in order from the one with the highest Dexterity check total to the one with the lowest. This is the order (called the initiative order) in which they act during each round. The initiative order remains the same from round to round.

If a tie occurs, the GM decides the order among tied GM-controlled creatures, and the players decide the order among their tied characters. The GM can decide the order if the tie is between a monster and a player character. Optionally, the GM can have the tied characters and monsters each roll a d20 to determine the order, highest roll going first."


You roll initiative when combat starts, not before. and the roll is an opposed ability checks. Jack-of-all-trades, remarkable athlete, guidance, and bardic inspiration all can apply to it. I'd argue that combat can't be said to have started until people are taking hostile action. So the roll should happen when the door is knocked down, and not before.

Obviously, in a real game there are a variety of things which the DMG suggests using initiative for. But the driving point here is that the DM decides when to roll initiative, and for purposes of simplicity, it makes sense to do this when a combat or chase or social battle begins.



The PHB also states that to cast a spell with casting time 1 Action you are required to spend 1 Action to do so. To cast a spell with longer casting time, you need to spend 1 Action on each of your Turns and maintain concentration. Nowhere in the rules it is said that you can ignore the casting time of the spells, or that you need actions to cast spells.

Also, if you decide that you can ignore Actions, Reactions and everything else for other actions, then the exact same argument could be made that you could do the same for Ready, since it is just a type of action.

You're misunderstanding things. So are a lot of people in this thread.

actions do exist outside of combat. You can move, cast spells, shove things, interact, etc.

Turns do not. Turns are part of the construct called 'combat.' They are defined in the combat section, and when combat stops, you explicitly stop taking turns.

Read:

The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.
...
Begin the next round: When everyone involved in the combat has had a turn, the round ends. [continue taking turns] until the fighting stops.



You can explicitly only ready actions on your turn in combat. Stated differently, the 'ready' action is different from the 'cast a spell' action in that in can only be taken on your turn. Since turns on take place during combat, you can only take the ready action during combat. QED

Read:

"To do so, you can take the Ready action on your turn"

[Malifice]

You continue to repeat the same mantra that "turns do not exist outside of combat" and decided to completely ignore everything that demonstrate how absurd this ruling actually is.

That's not a ruling, its the rules.

Turns only exist when combat sequencing is called for by the DM (he asks for initiative). Turns have no meaning outside of initiative having been rolled and turn order determined. Players arent taking turns unless there is a determined initiative order and combat sequencing.

You can sook and whinge about that if you want, but its the rules. No initiative (which determines turn order) = no turns. We're simply in narrative time and actions are resolved via narrative. You dont pick up your miniature and move it 30' and ready an action, followed by another player doing the same, and then another player and then another player and so on all the way to the dungeon, or indeed once inside of it until and unless the DM calls for initiative (he switches to combat sequencing).

If this seems odd to you, stay away from electrons and the uncertainty principle.

Oh and stay away from this tweet: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/10/06/can-players-use-the-ready-action-before-initiative-is-rolled/

[ThePolarBear]

Sorry, but you're very simply wrong here. 'Rolling Initiative' is an ability check.

There's no question in the answer you replied to that initiative is a check. The discussion was about it being a contested check.

[Malifice]

There's no question in the answer you replied to that initiative is a check. The discussion was about it being a contested check.

If you and I are rolling initiative in a duel, we are literally making a contested Dexterity ability check to see who acts first are we not?

If we are both reading a Math question and trying to solve it, it would be a contested Intelligence Ability check with the highest result solving it correctly the fastest would it not?

[strangebloke]

There's no question in the answer you replied to that initiative is a check. The discussion was about it being a contested check.
Man, sorry, but that was a long chain of quotes to go back through.


If you and I are rolling initiative in a duel, we are literally making a contested Dexterity ability check to see who acts first are we not?

If we are both reading a Math question and trying to solve it, it would be a contested Intelligence Ability check with the highest result solving it correctly the fastest would it not?

Well there is a difference. Trying to shove someone is different from an initiative roll.

But it's not a distinction that matters. You roll initiative at combat start. Them's the rules.

Also: I don't think I adequately dove into the whole 'spellcasting' thing. I hadn't seen the bits in the 'casting time' section that were being referred to.

Turns explicitly only exist so long as fighting is going on. The DM can call for initiative at other times (during a chase) but once again, the intent is clear. Turns are a construct of an hostile encounter. This is all established.

The 'casting time' section of the spells block argues that Spells requiring a bonus action or time greater than an action must be cast on your turn. Spells that require an action do not, but some of their results do. (The action granted by telekinesis, for example.)

However, the game spells out almost nothing that can be done outside of combat. Can I talk? Read? Eat food? The Ready action is distinct from spellcasting because it is a gamist action that interacts with the initiative order.

Official RAI confirms that the intent was to limit the Ready Action to combat, so this assumption seems valid.

[Malifice]

The 'casting time' section of the spells block argues that Spells requiring a bonus action or time greater than an action must be cast on your turn. Spells that require an action do not, but some of their results do. (The action granted by telekinesis, for example.)

The argument is that you cant cast a bonus action spell and a spell as an action on your turn.

Seeing as there are no turns outside of initiative, this doesnt matter outside of combat sequencing. Cast what you want, subject to the DM's call (its narrative time after all).

[MaxWilson]

Can I ask this question of those saying you should be able to ready outside of combat:

Taking the wizard casts a fireball through a door the fighter opens scenario, what if the orcs have bows out and readied actions to shoot at anyone they see when the door opens? Who goes first?

Since you're asking:

As I recall, the wizard has readied a Fireball as soon as the door opens, right? And the orcs have readied to shoot whatever opens the door? Result at my table: initiative contest between the wizard and the orcs to see if the wizard can save the fighter from getting shot a bunch of times.

Initiative contests are sometimes among the most memorable moments of play, because I only call for initiative rolls when the order in which actions happen matters. If all the orcs had too many HP to die to a Fireball I wouldn't call for initiative at all, I would just roll a bunch of orc attacks and saving throws and apply them all.

[ThePolarBear]

If you and I are rolling initiative in a duel, we are literally making a contested Dexterity ability check to see who acts first are we not?

We are rolling to determine what is the order. You have to roll indipendently of where you want to place in the initiative order and have no choice but roll even if the two characters are not in sync in "wanting to start first", which is the base of thinking it to be a contested check. In a contested check, the only way to not have a satisfying result for any of the parties involved is a tie (and even that, there are cases where one party is better off by a tie).
Initiative is still rolled when there is a group wanting to go last, one first, and both might end up disappointed when the result "favors" one of the two by making the "want to go last" group go first. Which kind of defeats the idea of initiative being a contested check imho.


If we are both reading a Math question and trying to solve it, it would be a contested Intelligence Ability check with the highest result solving it correctly the fastest would it not?

Initiative is not determining who goes first, but what the order is.
There will be someone that goes first, someone that goes last, but it doesn't matter because the purpose of initiative is simply establishing order, irrespective of the wishes of the partecipants. There is no contested Intelligence check if there's only one person to try to be the fastest, while there still is an initiative one anyway in combat.

Just a question: do you feel that there should be a "delay" option?

Another one: Why does this distinction even matter? I'm not aware of any difference that this distinction would make in play - but i might be wrong.

[ThePolarBear]

Man, sorry, but that was a long chain of quotes to go back through.

No need to be sorry, really. I was just clarifying a misconception. Sorry if it came out as abrasive, it wasn't meant to.

[Malifice]

Just a question: do you feel that there should be a "delay" option?

As a Dexerity check, I guess the PC is under no obligation to keep the highest roll, and should be able to substitute a lower number for the check result if he wants (like any ability check, I dont see anything wrong with intentionally performing below your ability).

Once the order is set though, its set.

[Tanarii]

There's no question in the answer you replied to that initiative is a check. The discussion was about it being a contested check.
Of course it is. It's an contested ability check among all participants, with turn order determined in result of highest to lowest.

It's certainly not an ability check vs a fixed DC, a passive check, or a group check. A Contests Check is the only kind of abilty check which fits.

[Hecuba]

Because there's totally no difference between getting a whole turn off, or a single action. Did you read the situation I described? Do you see the difference between "I nuke the room as soon as you open the door, and you then close it" and "you open the door and I hope I'll be able to nuke the room before they rush in. Oh, and don't bother closing it because it'd be too late at that point."

Yes. The former presumes that your attempt does not hit any roadblocks. The later assumes it hits all of them. Both assume you're not in initiative order already: that's somewhat odd for the situation if both sides are aware of each other, but not inconceivable.

If the opponents are all surprised and the Door-opener goes first, then:
The Door-opener opens the door (interaction on movement), and uses the ready action to close the door once the nuke is thrown (action for second interaction)
The Nuke-thrower throws the nuke
The Door-opener's readied action to interact with the door again resolves.

If the opponents are all surprised and the Nuke-thrower goes first, then:
The Nuke-thrower uses the Ready action to throw the nuke once the door is opened
The Door-opener opens the door (interact - movement)
The Nuke-thrower's readied action to throw the nuke resolves
The Door-opener closes the door (action for second interaction)

You only don't get to carry out your plan as prepared if the enemy is prepared for the shenanigans in question or otherwise alert enough to prevent them from being surprised. Or, I suppose, of one of your allies aware of the planning and thus avoiding surprised takes an action that undermines the plan.

This is, admittedly, well outside the direct application of surprise - sneaky ambush based on stealth/perception - but 5e does not try to cover every edge case.
Situations other than direct stealth can lead to one side getting the drop on the other - for example, if you are expecting trouble from some dastardly evil courtiers at a royal wedding reception, you probably can't walk around the whole time with weapons drawn and a guard on each baddie. If that were an option, you could probably just arrest them. Rather than stealth/perception, it might become deception or persuasion against perception or insight to arrange the dance floor in a way that gets the right people at the right place/time to get secure the first-move in the assassination attempt.

The key is that surprise and initiative are the tools provided for moving from narrative timekeeping to initiative timekeeping. When you get a novel situation where the straightforward examples (roll initiative when first arrow flies, stealth/perception for surprise), adapting how you adjudicate who is surprised in the situation is a far less disruptive change than either adding a second-layer of quasi-surprise mechanisms or adding an new path between the two time-frames altogether. The more disruptive changes are disruptive both because they alter the value of the character aspects that are built around those elements and because they add complexity to the rule structure.

When you need to find a way to adjudicate a situation for which the DMG does not provide a clear straight-forward path, it is usually best to choose one that works with the existing game structure of the game than one that struggles against it.
Here that means working the decision into the surprise\initiative framework.
Other places, it might mean preserving bounded accuracy by using advantage\disadvantage on checks you don't have clear guidance on rather than going to flat bonuses.
If you need to show a spell caster expending magical energy on something other than a spell because the magical MacGuffin needs mystical energy, you probably should consider spending spell slots to represent that.


However, I do not agree that Initiative must be rolled only when door is already open. And yes, orcs on the other side of the door can also ready their actions if they aware of the party and if they are smart enough.

I'm not the poster who you're replying to here, but I would agree on that.

I have no objection to some situation which might call for initiative timekeeping before the door is opened, especially if both sides are aware someone is on the other side: as I've pointed out in the thread already, you should be in initiative when there is a time crunch and importance to turn sequence.

The rules give bright-line direction that initiative should be rolled once someone declares an action to start combat: but it also suggests that it should be used for "other fast-paced situations." Your example seems like a good case to me. Your door example doesn't even seem to need to go that far to me - if both sides are aware of each other through the door, I would probably say that combat has started even though no actual attack is been loosed yet. Certainly, if the enemies were trying to bash down the door, I would most likely be running the rounds where they are making the attempt in initiative.


Of course it is. It's an contested ability check among all participants, with turn order determined in result of highest to lowest.

It's certainly not an ability check vs a fixed DC, a passive check, or a group check. A Contests Check is the only kind of abilty check which fits.
Except it doesn't: if it were a Contest, then ties would result in no result. Instead, ties on initiative have to be resolved. It's a special kind of check, with its own mechanics.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Sorry, but you're very simply wrong here. 'Rolling Initiative' is an ability check. It's a special one that has rules for multiple participants, ties, etc.

Yes, Rolling initiative is an ability check. No, Rolling Initiative isn't a Contested Ability check, as Contested checks use different rules.



You roll initiative when combat starts, not before. and the roll is an opposed ability checks. Jack-of-all-trades, remarkable athlete, guidance, and bardic inspiration all can apply to it. I'd argue that combat can't be said to have started until people are taking hostile action. So the roll should happen when the door is knocked down, and not before.

Obviously, in a real game there are a variety of things which the DMG suggests using initiative for. But the driving point here is that the DM decides when to roll initiative, and for purposes of simplicity, it makes sense to do this when a combat or chase or social battle begins.

No disagreement here. But, I argue that in this particular situation it makes sense to roll initiative before the door is opened, not after.



You're misunderstanding things. So are a lot of people in this thread.

actions do exist outside of combat. You can move, cast spells, shove things, interact, etc.

Turns do not. Turns are part of the construct called 'combat.' They are defined in the combat section, and when combat stops, you explicitly stop taking turns.


Actions, such as Cast a Spell, or Attack are only defined in the context of Turns. I don't see them defined anywhere else in the rules.



You can explicitly only ready actions on your turn in combat. Stated differently, the 'ready' action is different from the 'cast a spell' action in that in can only be taken on your turn. Since turns on take place during combat, you can only take the ready action during combat. QED


Please refer to spellcasting rules that describe how to cast a spell. Some of the casting times in that section explicitly say that you are required to expend some sort of Action on your turn. For example, Bonus Action:


BONUS ACTION
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn. You can't cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of I action.

Or longer casting times:

LONGER CASTING TIMES
Certain spells (including spells cast as rituais) require more time to cast: minutes or even hours. When you cast a spell with a casting time longer than a single action or reaction, you must spend your action each turn casting the spell, and you must maintain your concentration while you do so (see "Concentration" below). If your concentration is broken, the spell fails, but you don't expend a spell slot. If you want to try casting the spell again, you must start over.

These rules explicitly call out that you must spend actions (or bonus actions) on your turn to cast these spells, therefore either you can't cast these spells outside of combat (which would be fun with 10-minute casting times) or you have to admit that turns do, in fact, exist outside combat.



That's not a ruling, its the rules.

Turns only exist when combat sequencing is called for by the DM (he asks for initiative). Turns have no meaning outside of initiative having been rolled and turn order determined. Players arent taking turns unless there is a determined initiative order and combat sequencing.

You can sook and whinge about that if you want, but its the rules. No initiative (which determines turn order) = no turns. We're simply in narrative time and actions are resolved via narrative. You dont pick up your miniature and move it 30' and ready an action, followed by another player doing the same, and then another player and then another player and so on all the way to the dungeon, or indeed once inside of it until and unless the DM calls for initiative (he switches to combat sequencing).

If this seems odd to you, stay away from electrons and the uncertainty principle.

Oh and stay away from this tweet: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2016/10/06/can-players-use-the-ready-action-before-initiative-is-rolled/
No matter how loud or how often you repeat "THESE ARE THE RULES", this doesn't become true unless you provide a proof for it. You also still haven't answered - do you allow your players to cast spells outside of combat. If so, why and why don't you follow The Rules?

[Malifice]

No matter how loud or how often you repeat "THESE ARE THE RULES", this doesn't become true unless you provide a proof for it. You also still haven't answered - do you allow your players to cast spells outside of combat. If so, why and why don't you follow The Rules?

Spells are allowed to be cast outside of combat. As are skills allowed to be used outside of combat. There are sections on each, not included in the combat section.

Not that it matters, because you're wrong. Its confirmed by the devs. Keep arguing otherwise though if it makes you happy.

[ThePolarBear]

As a Dexerity check, I guess the PC is under no obligation to keep the highest roll, and should be able to substitute a lower number for the check result if he wants (like any ability check, I dont see anything wrong with intentionally performing below your ability).

Once the order is set though, its set.

Notice: You do not get to choose what you roll, since there's no degree of success in the rules for ability checks. Not even variants, as far as i can see, if not for failures. It is, variants and options not applying, binary: you succeed or you don't. Making a simple swords at DC 15 will yield the same simple sword on a 15 or on a 156. There is no reason to "lower your score", and it isn't even listed as a possibility. You use the result of the check, not another random number that has not shown up. If a character wants to pass as less competent (or more competent) that's most likely a good STAT(deception) check candidate.
You can't even choose to apply simply a part of proficiency: you add it or you don't.

But, to make sure it's clear: i would be ok playing it that way, and definetly i would use a similar system if applying a "degree of success" mentality to rolls.


Of course it is. It's an contested ability check among all participants, with turn order determined in result of highest to lowest.

Which is not how contested check works. And since you are making an exception, the very same principle could be applied to "simple" ability checks against DC, you don't roll against DC. And again, it doesn't make a difference, that i know of.

But... all of this is off topic, so i'll shut up :D

[Kuu Lightwing]

I'm not the poster who you're replying to here, but I would agree on that.

I have no objection to some situation which might call for initiative timekeeping before the door is opened, especially if both sides are aware someone is on the other side: as I've pointed out in the thread already, you should be in initiative when there is a time crunch and importance to turn sequence.

The rules give bright-line direction that initiative should be rolled once someone declares an action to start combat: but it also suggests that it should be used for "other fast-paced situations." Your example seems like a good case to me. Your door example doesn't even seem to need to go that far to me - if both sides are aware of each other through the door, I would probably say that combat has started even though no actual attack is been loosed yet. Certainly, if the enemies were trying to bash down the door, I would most likely be running the rounds where they are making the attempt in initiative.


I cut the most of the post, just to not have the huge quote. But if this is your position, then, I don't have much to disagree with in your post. Like I said several times already, I do not necessarily advocate that you should be able to ready without initiative at all, which, as it seems is what many people argue with, even though, I don't actually say it. However, I do argue, that in some cases Initiative is needed earlier than you come into a direct contact with enemy.

Even the position that turns do exist outside of combat, doesn't mean that players are required to track turns in every single situation. But, sometimes it's needed - like you said, in time-sensitive situations. My door example, in my opinion, is one of those situations, and therefore characters should roll initiative and sequence their actions like I've described.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Spells are allowed to be cast outside of combat. As are skills allowed to be used outside of combat. There are sections on each, not included in the combat section.

Not that it matters, because you're wrong. Its confirmed by the devs. Keep arguing otherwise though if it makes you happy.

"I AM RIGHT AND YOU ARE WRONG!!!" You didn't even try to read the sections you refer to, did you?

It's funny how even the tweets you're used as an argument don't actually contradict any of my statements.

[Malifice]

It's funny how even the tweets you're used as an argument don't actually contradict any of my statements.

Its funnier that you can be so willfully blind. Nelson-esque.

There aint no ready action outside of combat. Sorry to be the one to tell you.

[Tanarii]

Which is not how contested check works. And since you are making an exception, the very same principle could be applied to "simple" ability checks against DC, you don't roll against DC. And again, it doesn't make a difference, that i know of.There is no exception. Initiative checks are contested checks.

[Unoriginal]

THE ORDER OF COMBAT
A typical combat encounter is a clash between two sides, a flurry of weapon swings, feints, parries, footwork, and spellcasting. The game organizes the chaos of combat into a cycle of rounds and turns. A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative. Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to the next round if neither side has defeated the other.

Is it proof enough for you?

EDIT:

And if it's not enough for you:


CAST A SPELL
Spellcasters such as wizards and clerics, as well as many monsters, have access to spells and can use them to great effect in combat. Each spell has a casting time, which specilies whether the caster must use an action, a reaction, minutes, or even hours to cast the spell. Casting a spell is, therefore, not necessarily an action.

[tieren]

I am curious how many of you police the burning of the spell slot if there are no orcs on the other side of the door?

The spell is supposed to be cast when the ready action is taken and released when the trigger occurs before the end of the casters next turn. If the trigger doesn't occur the spell slot is lost.

Let that wizard burn a few 3rd level slots and I think he won't be readying so many fireballs.

[RSP]

I am curious how many of you police the burning of the spell slot if there are no orcs on the other side of the door?

The spell is supposed to be cast when the ready action is taken and released when the trigger occurs before the end of the casters next turn. If the trigger doesn't occur the spell slot is lost.

Let that wizard burn a few 3rd level slots and I think he won't be readying so many fireballs.

And just to further clarify: the Ready Action to cast a spell this way can only “hold” the spell off until the start of the next turn so if it isn’t triggered prior to the next turn/6 seconds, the slot is likewise wasted.

[MaxWilson]

And just to further clarify: the Ready Action to cast a spell this way can only “hold” the spell off until the start of the next turn so if it isn’t triggered prior to the next turn/6 seconds, the slot is likewise wasted.

Correct, by RAW.

I reserve the right as DM to think that RAW is dumb and unthematic here, and to let you continue holding your readied spell for as long as you spend your action + concentration every round to maintain it.

[RSP]

Turns exist outside of combat, as Rounds exist outside of combat. From Ch 8, Adventuring:

“In combat and other fast-paced situations, the game relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described in chapter 9.”

‘And other fast-paced situations’ means rounds exist outside of combat. This line also tells us where to find the description of Rounds, which is in chapter 9. Ch 9 tells us:

“A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn.”

So if a Round is made up of Turns, by definition, and Rounds exist outside of combat, then Turns must also exist outside of combat.

[Kuu Lightwing]

Its funnier that you can be so willfully blind. Nelson-esque.

There aint no ready action outside of combat. Sorry to be the one to tell you.

It's funny how a person can utterly fail at reading. The tweet you've linked merely states that you can't ready an action before rolling an initiative, which isn't what I'm arguing for.


Is it proof enough for you?

EDIT:

And if it's not enough for you:


Casting a spell is, therefore, not necessarily an action.

Yes, exactly. It could also be a Bonus Action or a Reaction - you know, the other things that only exist in Combat, or longer. But... Have you actually tried to read how to cast spells? You know, in the Spellcasting chapter under "casting a spell" section. I won't even bother quoting this, because I've done so just a few posts above. Reading is hard, I understand.

[Pelle]

Turns exist outside of combat, as Rounds exist outside of combat. From Ch 8, Adventuring:

“In combat and other fast-paced situations, the game relies on rounds, a 6-second span of time described in chapter 9.”

‘And other fast-paced situations’ means rounds exist outside of combat. This line also tells us where to find the description of Rounds, which is in chapter 9. Ch 9 tells us:

“A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn.”

So if a Round is made up of Turns, by definition, and Rounds exist outside of combat, then Turns must also exist outside of combat.

Turns existing out of combat isn't really under contention, it is if turns exist out of fast-paced situations (i.e. in Initiative). Combat has just been used as shorthand for in Initiative.

[RSP]

Turns existing out of combat isn't really under contention, it is if turns exist out of fast-paced situations (i.e. in Initiative). Combat has just been used as shorthand for in Initiative.

Just pointing that out as a couple times I noted people saying turns don’t exist outside of combat.

[JoeJ]

Just to throw something else out, if the orcs are aware of the party, they don't necessarily have to ready an action and wait for the door to open. They can open the door themselves, possibly even before the wizard is ready. If this is happening outside of initiative order, how do you know whether or not the wizard is prepared for the door to open?

[Hecuba]

There is no exception. Initiative checks are contested checks.

I think you mean Contests - they changed the name in 5e.

And - again - if that were the case, then the result of ties would be different.
Also, contests are only structured to take 2 people.
Also, they are only structured to handle pass/fail checks.

The fact that there are multiple characters making multiple checks that are relevant for both sides does not make it a contest. Adhering to the Contests rules would make it a contest, and initiative doesn't.

[RSP]

I think you mean Contests - they changed the name in 5e.

And - again - if that were the case, then the result of ties would be different.
Also, contests are only structured to take 2 people.
Also, they are only structured to handle pass/fail checks.

The fact that there are multiple characters making multiple checks that are relevant for both sides does not make it a contest. Adhering to the Contests rules would make it a contest, and initiative doesn't.

I think I’d have to agree that Initiative is not a Contest. And, it’s actually a unique Dex Check in that it doesn’t follow the normal rules for Ability Checks in that there is no “failure.”

“The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure.”

There is no “failure” in initiative, that is, it’s used to determine who acts first, but doesn’t negatively prevent action, which is what anyone involved is trying to achieve. “Winning” initiative doesn’t inherently mean the “losers” didn’t achieve their goal.

In fact, if the goal of initiative is to determine turn order, then everyone succeeds as that is strictly what has occurred.

[Arial Black]

Since you're asking:

As I recall, the wizard has readied a Fireball as soon as the door opens, right? And the orcs have readied to shoot whatever opens the door? Result at my table: initiative contest between the wizard and the orcs to see if the wizard can save the fighter from getting shot a bunch of times.

Initiative contests are sometimes among the most memorable moments of play, because I only call for initiative rolls when the order in which actions happen matters. If all the orcs had too many HP to die to a Fireball I wouldn't call for initiative at all, I would just roll a bunch of orc attacks and saving throws and apply them all.

So you are having combat outside of combat? The fireball happens outside initiative?

You're doing it wrong, RAW.

Sure, you can do what you like in your house, but it has no impact in a debate about the RAW.

[Arial Black]

JC said, "The options, including Ready, in the "Actions in Combat" section (PH, 192–93) are meant to be used in combat, after rolling initiative."

The PHB says that initiative is rolled as combat starts.

Therefore, if combat has not started then initiative has not been rolled.

Any attempt to have initiative rolled so you can have a few rounds of using Actions In Combat before combat starts is cheating.

If the wizard wants to have initiative rolled just so he can use a Ready action for his fireball through the door, then the only way to do this is say that combat has already started, and the only way to justify that is that combat has started because the enemies are aware of each other.

At that point, the orcs are not hanging around waiting for the wizard to complete his preparations, they are opening the door and peppering him with arrows and charging him with axes, because there are a bunch of orcs.

So whether the wizard has had a chance yet to Ready his fireball depends on who has the higher initiative.

Just. Like. Normal.

[Kane0]

Previous editions used to have a 'Delay' in addition to a 'Ready' that did different things in regards to your initiative, so players could set the order of their turns the way they liked. Delays were omitted from default 5e, presumably to simplify and speed up play at the cost of that tactical granularity which might be handy in these sorts of situations.

It would be an easy thing to reinstate, when a PCs turn comes up the player can opt to act later at a permanently reduced initiative, ie 'after X has had their turn'.
If one of those orcs had an ability to not be surprised, such as the Alert feat or a Weapon of Warning they'd get to respond to the PCs SWAT-breaching the door and it would be combat as usual with surprise.

Regardless, I allow PCs to take 'actions' outside of combat. In combat actions are specific things PCs can choose to do to communicate what's happening to others at the table and determine how those things interact with other game mechanics, I see no reason for that not to be the case outside of combat too. When it affects other creatures that usually calls for initiative. Note that 'initiative' does not automatically mean 'combat' to me, one can roll initiative when dealing with hazards, chases, and other time or pressure sensitive situations.

[MaxWilson]

So you are having combat outside of combat? The fireball happens outside initiative?

You're doing it wrong, RAW.

Sure, you can do what you like in your house, but it has no impact in a debate about the RAW.

I wasn't answering a question about RAW. I was answering a question addressed to me about how things work under the rules I'm using, to illustrate that it's better and more logical than how they work under vanilla PHB rules.

[Kuu Lightwing]

JC said, "The options, including Ready, in the "Actions in Combat" section (PH, 192–93) are meant to be used in combat, after rolling initiative."

The PHB says that initiative is rolled as combat starts.

Therefore, if combat has not started then initiative has not been rolled.

Any attempt to have initiative rolled so you can have a few rounds of using Actions In Combat before combat starts is cheating.

If the wizard wants to have initiative rolled just so he can use a Ready action for his fireball through the door, then the only way to do this is say that combat has already started, and the only way to justify that is that combat has started because the enemies are aware of each other.

So, wait, you want to say that combat doesn't start before both enemies are aware of each other? So if I sneak up on someone, I cannot attack them unless they also notice me? And why that would be the case?

Also, Chapter 8 of PHB describes that in combat, and other fast-paced situations, the game relies on rounds that are described in Chapter 9. Which tells us that during rounds participants takes turns in the order defined by initiative. So, we've established, that fast-paced situations, and not necessarily combat require switching to rounds, which in turn means that players have to roll initiative.

I say that by trying to execute their plan party creates a fast-paced situation, that requires switching to rounds, which in turn means that this requires them to roll initiative, thus allowing for Wizard to Ready an action. So no, this isn't "cheating", this is legal and fair procedure.


At that point, the orcs are not hanging around waiting for the wizard to complete his preparations, they are opening the door and peppering him with arrows and charging him with axes, because there are a bunch of orcs.

So whether the wizard has had a chance yet to Ready his fireball depends on who has the higher initiative.

Just. Like. Normal.

There might be other reasons why orcs don't open the door. Maybe they are too busy, or too dumb, or door doesn't open from their side. Or, even funnier, let's say the door is an invisible Wall of Force, that could be turned on and off from player's room. When do you roll initiative? And if you do so only when Wall of Force is down, what's your reason for that?

[Malifice]

So, wait, you want to say that combat doesn't start before both enemies are aware of each other? So if I sneak up on someone, I cannot attack them unless they also notice me? And why that would be the case?

Combat sequencing starts when at least one side is aware of the other, and the DM determines hostilities are imminent (i.e. have been declared).

An Assassin sneaking up on an oblivious guard doesn't trigger initiative till he declares a hostile action (or the guard notices him and declares one). At that point initiative is declared, surprise is determined and turns start getting taken in order.


Also, Chapter 8 of PHB describes that in combat, and other fast-paced situations, the game relies on rounds that are described in Chapter 9. Which tells us that during rounds participants takes turns in the order defined by initiative. So, we've established, that fast-paced situations, and not necessarily combat require switching to rounds, which in turn means that players have to roll initiative.

The other example given is complex traps (who also have initiative).

Everything else can be (and is supposed to be) resolved in narrative time.


I say that by trying to execute their plan party creates a fast-paced situation, that requires switching to rounds, which in turn means that this requires them to roll initiative, thus allowing for Wizard to Ready an action. So no, this isn't "cheating", this is legal and fair procedure.

If your DM lets that fly good for you. The point in this thread is that plenty (indeed most) DMs wouldn't.

If your wizard (and your party) are aware of some Orcs in a nearby room, and sneak up to the door with a plan to fireball them once the fighter opens the door, good for you. Initiative gets rolled once the door gets opened, and the Orcs are all surprised on round one. The door gets opened, and the Orcs get fire-balled all before they can react.

There is no need to create some kind of weird 'pre initiative' where initiative gets rolled minutes out from the combat, with nothing to react to.

I would imagine the Assassins in your party would be very pissed off at any DM that houseruled initiative being determined minutes out from any actual hostilities happening.


There might be other reasons why orcs don't open the door. Maybe they are too busy, or too dumb, or door doesn't open from their side. Or, even funnier, let's say the door is an invisible Wall of Force, that could be turned on and off from player's room. When do you roll initiative? And if you do so only when Wall of Force is down, what's your reason for that?

If the Orcs become aware of the PCs before the door gets opened, then initiative is called for at that point (both sides aware of each other, and the Orcs are going to do something about the PCs outside the room i.e. hostilities are imminent).

Or the DM simply states: 'As you advance, suddenly the door opens and you see a quizzical looking Orc staring at you as you clumsily sneak down the hallway. Roll initiative.'

[Kuu Lightwing]

Malifice, would you stop repeating the same stuff over and over again, without even addressing anything I tell you? You don't even provide arguments, you simply assert A is B because you said so. This isn't even a discussion at this point.

[Malifice]

Malifice, would you stop repeating the same stuff over and over again, without even addressing anything I tell you? You don't even provide arguments, you simply assert A is B because you said so. This isn't even a discussion at this point.

Give me an example then of something outside of the actual rules on initiative and surprise where your house-rule of 'ready action outside of combat' is needed.

[DM_Trick]

So you are having combat outside of combat? The fireball happens outside initiative?

You're doing it wrong, RAW.

Sure, you can do what you like in your house, but it has no impact in a debate about the RAW.

Is the intent of your message to mean that a character cannot cast fireball outside of combat? Like, Merlin the Great, pondering life and the futility of it all, erupts in anger and slings a fireball at a nearby oak tree setting the tree ablaze. Are you saying he can't do that unless there's an orc hiding in the bushes behind him about to stab him in the wiggly bits?

I'm just looking for clarification here. Because I don't think there are any rules restricting casting a spell outside of combat. Regardless of what that spell is or isn't.

I'm pretty sure a player can cast Feather Fall regardless if he's in combat or not.

[Tanarii]

So, wait, you want to say that combat doesn't start before both enemies are aware of each other? So if I sneak up on someone, I cannot attack them unless they also notice me? And why that would be the case?Interacting with each other, at the least.

Remember, the order of combat is surprise check, establish positions, roll initiative.

The DM can just as easily place the PCs inside the room in marching order as place them outside the door with the door just opened by the PCs. This isn't a simulation. It's an abstraction translating the in-game situation into a usable set of rules for resolution of the hostile (combat) interaction. The DM determines the reasonable point at which the fast-paced hostile interactions begin and where everyone is, within the framework of some balanced rules.

Meanwhile you're arguing it should be possible to gain an unsurpassed advantage based on manipulating the rules in an attempt to simulate an in-game situation. Not only that, basing it on a very specific interpretation of how the in-game situation needs to be modeled.

So, going back to the OP question, would I allow it: No way. It's trying to manipulate the rules to gain an advantage. The rules are balanced around a certain way of applying them, and they can be translated/mapped/narrated into the in-game situation successfully without issue. In other words, rules --> describing in-game, works just fine for all situations posited in this thread so far. It's only if you insist that the in-game situation MUST be translated/mapped into a specific set of rules that you run into cognitive dissonance when they don't. In other words, if you're insisting on a specific in-game situation must --> specific rules, of course when the specific rules aren't the ones in the book you run into problems. But the issue isn't the rules in the book. It's the stubborn insisting that specific in-game situation must --> specific rules, based on a specific set of assumptions that aren't required to hold true.

[Unoriginal]

It's possible to attack someone before they're aware of you. It's represented by the surprised condition.

[Hecuba]

Previous editions used to have a 'Delay' in addition to a 'Ready' that did different things in regards to your initiative, so players could set the order of their turns the way they liked. Delays were omitted from default 5e, presumably to simplify and speed up play at the cost of that tactical granularity which might be handy in these sorts of situations.

Mearls has actually discussed the decision to omit a delay action, and it was indeed simplification. By folding it into the ready action/reaction framework, it avoids the rules granularity necessary to deal with situations like managing effect duration that would resolve on the delayed turn or does the surprised position persist in the turns between your initial initiative position and the initiative you delay to.

The rules necessary to deal with that are not inordinately complex or particularly controversial. But they are more granular and book-keeping-esque than is generally in keeping with 5e's tone.

For example, I doubt that anyone would disagree with the following rules were they implemented as part of a delay action:
If you delay, effect duration resolves at the initial initiative turn before you make the decision to delay: this avoids the possibility of using the delay action to extract additional turns of from an X round spell effect.
If you delay, surprised ends when you elect the delay action: the character is now aware of the situation an making choices, even if it's just to a decision to hold back a split second.

But if you want to implement a delay action, you're going to either need to tackle the edge cases like that or put up with the relevant side effects. Linking it instead to the ready action/reaction framework largely gets rid of these concerns by framing it as an action taken on someone else's turn, using a discrete and well-defined component of the action economy.

[MaxWilson]

For example, I doubt that anyone would disagree with the following rules were they implemented as part of a delay action:
If you delay, effect duration resolves at the initial initiative turn before you make the decision to delay: this avoids the possibility of using the delay action to extract additional turns of from an X round spell effect.
If you delay, surprised ends when you elect the delay action: the character is now aware of the situation an making choices, even if it's just to a decision to hold back a split second.

But if you want to implement a delay action, you're going to either need to tackle the edge cases like that or put up with the relevant side effects. Linking it instead to the ready action/reaction framework largely gets rid of these concerns by framing it as an action taken on someone else's turn, using a discrete and well-defined component of the action economy.

Just do combat on a round-by-round basis, and read all effects that refer to turns as rounds. For example, Shield says, "Until the start of your next turn, you have a +5 bonus to AC," but since you're treating rounds and turns as the same thing, Shield ends at the start of next round, before everyone declares actions for that round.

Now Delay is simple: it lets you declare your action after everyone else has declared and resolved their action. If everyone with actions remaining chooses Delay, the round ends. Easy, peasy.

[RSP]

The other example given is complex traps (who also have initiative).

Everything else can be (and is supposed to be) resolved in narrative time.


No. There are plenty of things outside of complex traps that could require moving into Rounds and Turns, including anything non-combat that has a time crunch, which can be essentially anything in D&D.

If the devs meant “In combat and with complex traps, the game relies on rounds,” they would have said so. They purposely went with “In combat and other fast-paced situations.”

[JackPhoenix]

No. There are plenty of things outside of complex traps that could require moving into Rounds and Turns, including anything non-combat that has a time crunch, which can be essentially anything in D&D.

If the devs meant “In combat and with complex traps, the game relies on rounds,” they would have said so. They purposely went with “In combat and other fast-paced situations.”

Ending of the Death House from CoS is one of the examples: it explicitly tells the DM to have the player roll initiative and act in turns, even if there are no enemies present. Though that could be considered a complex trap, due to few areas that cause damage if you end your turn there.

[p_johnston]

I've actually had this discussion with my players before and until this thread didn't realize that the subject was so controversial.

1) yes you can prepare actions out of combat. You can do anything out of combat that you could do in combat. D&D isn't a final fantasy game where initiative magically causes the world to fracture and the party to transport to anther sub dimension for murder times. Initiative is simply a way of timekeeping that makes combat easier. Put another way initiative is just another way of looking at and ordering what the party is already always doing. I'm probably explaining this poorly.

2) yeah if the party wants to enter initiative have at em.

The reason prepared actions outside of combat are important, and different then surprise is because they are something that are fundamentally different than a full round of combat. You cannot change a prepared action, and it limits what you can do.

Let's take a scenario where an archer has a bow pointed at an orc who is 60 feet away. The orc knows the archer is there, the archer knows the orc is there. Neither is surprised. Both are wounded and waiting on the other to make a move. It's a standoff. let's look at this situation without prepared actions

A)orc goes first. Crosses sixty feet and hit's the archer, Before the archer can twitch his fingers and kills him. One hell of an orc.

B)archer goes first. Shoots the orc. Orc is dead.

Now let's look at the above scenario with prepared actions.

A) The archer has prepared to shoot when the orc moves. The archer kills the orc.

Which one sounds more reasonable?

Allowing players and NPC's to ready actions outside of combat gives a fairly nice middle ground between full round of extra combat and straight up initiative with no advantage for either side.

P.S I should clarify how I actually use Readied action outside of combat. You can ready actions outside of combat. They do not go off outside of combat, but instead use your reaction on the first turn.

[RSP]

I've actually had this discussion with my players before and until this thread didn't realize that the subject was so controversial.

1) yes you can prepare actions out of combat. You can do anything out of combat that you could do in combat. D&D isn't a final fantasy game where initiative magically causes the world to fracture and the party to transport to anther sub dimension for murder times. Initiative is simply a way of timekeeping that makes combat easier. Put another way initiative is just another way of looking at and ordering what the party is already always doing. I'm probably explaining this poorly.

2) yeah if the party wants to enter initiative have at em.

The reason prepared actions outside of combat are important, and different then surprise is because they are something that are fundamentally different than a full round of combat. You cannot change a prepared action, and it limits what you can do.

Let's take a scenario where an archer has a bow pointed at an orc who is 60 feet away. The orc knows the archer is there, the archer knows the orc is there. Neither is surprised. Both are wounded and waiting on the other to make a move. It's a standoff. let's look at this situation without prepared actions

A)orc goes first. Crosses sixty feet and hit's the archer, Before the archer can twitch his fingers and kills him. One hell of an orc.

B)archer goes first. Shoots the orc. Orc is dead.

Now let's look at the above scenario with prepared actions.

A) The archer has prepared to shoot when the orc moves. The archer kills the orc.

Which one sounds more reasonable?

Allowing players and NPC's to ready actions outside of combat gives a fairly nice middle ground between full round of extra combat and straight up initiative with no advantage for either side.

So you’re okay with:

A) Archer Ready’s to shoot Orc. Orc moves and archer misses. But archer wins initiative, so gets to shoot again, essentially getting two full Actions, or 2 turns worth of Actions, before Orc.

B) Orcs are set up in ambush and Ready to attack when they see the PCs. PCs come within view and so every Orc gets a free attack. Then the DM determines the Players are surprised and initiative is rolled. The Orcs get another full turn of attacks before the PCs get to do anything.

[Kane0]

You missed the 'middle ground' part.

[Tanarii]

Just do combat on a round-by-round basis, and read all effects that refer to turns as rounds. For example, Shield says, "Until the start of your next turn, you have a +5 bonus to AC," but since you're treating rounds and turns as the same thing, Shield ends at the start of next round, before everyone declares actions for that round.

Now Delay is simple: it lets you declare your action after everyone else has declared and resolved their action. If everyone with actions remaining chooses Delay, the round ends. Easy, peasy.
That gives a huge advantage to going first. It'll be like AD&D all .... oh, i get it.

[MaxWilson]

So you’re okay with:

A) Archer Ready’s to shoot Orc. Orc moves and archer misses. But archer wins initiative, so gets to shoot again, essentially getting two full Actions, or 2 turns worth of Actions, before Orc.

Wait. What happened to the orc's attack? Don't you mean, "Orc moves, archer misses, orc moves the rest of the 60' (using Aggressive) and then attacks the archer"?


B) Orcs are set up in ambush and Ready to attack when they see the PCs. PCs come within view and so every Orc gets a free attack. Then the DM determines the Players are surprised and initiative is rolled. The Orcs get another full turn of attacks before the PCs get to do anything.

Doesn't make sense. If the PCs got readied attacks off, then their action for that (implicit) first round on which surprise occurred must have been "Ready an attack". They can't both Ready an Attack and also Attack on the same round with the same action. Choose one or the other.

[JoeJ]

Let's take a scenario where an archer has a bow pointed at an orc who is 60 feet away. The orc knows the archer is there, the archer knows the orc is there. Neither is surprised. Both are wounded and waiting on the other to make a move. It's a standoff. let's look at this situation without prepared actions

Did they just teleport to those positions? Each knows the other is there, they're hostile, one is pointing a weapon. How do you get to the archer pointing a drawn bow at an aware enemy without having rolled initiative already?

[p_johnston]

So you’re okay with:

A) Archer Ready’s to shoot Orc. Orc moves and archer misses. But archer wins initiative, so gets to shoot again, essentially getting two full Actions, or 2 turns worth of Actions, before Orc.

B) Orcs are set up in ambush and Ready to attack when they see the PCs. PCs come within view and so every Orc gets a free attack. Then the DM determines the Players are surprised and initiative is rolled. The Orcs get another full turn of attacks before the PCs get to do anything.

I should clarify how I actually use Readied action outside of combat. You can ready actions outside of combat. They do not go off outside of combat, but instead use your reaction on the first turn. It's been a long day and I'm very tired otherwise I would have included it in my original post, my apologies.. I'll add it in.

with that in mind

A) If the archer misses the orc probably kills him before he gets off another shot because it is in the archers face.

B) Orcs set up ambush. I use surprise round as normal. I probably don't bother with initiative in the surprise round unless I have mages who know shield or a similar spell.

I don't use readied actions to abuse the rules. I use them when they make sense. I allow my PC's to do the same. Just blanket statement saying "no readied actions outside of combat" leads to some very silly situations and it's own abuses.

[p_johnston]

Did they just teleport to those positions? Each knows the other is there, they're hostile, one is pointing a weapon. How do you get to the archer pointing a drawn bow at an aware enemy without having rolled initiative already?

That situation was just an example to highlight the most absurd case. The most typical example for why this comes up is with highway robbers and prisoners.

Robbers- Party is facing bandit group who have 15 crossbows trained on party. Party draws weapons, closes distance and starts killing bandits before bandits can twitch a finger.

Prisoners- Archer says he is prepared to shoot the prisoner if he runs. Prisoner runs. Enter initiative, prisoner wins and escapes before archer can fire.

Both scenarios seem absurd to me.

[JoeJ]

That situation was just an example to highlight the most absurd case. The most typical example for why this comes up is with highway robbers and prisoners.

Robbers- Party is facing bandit group who have 15 crossbows trained on party. Party draws weapons, closes distance and starts killing bandits before bandits can twitch a finger.

Prisoners- Archer says he is prepared to shoot the prisoner if he runs. Prisoner runs. Enter initiative, prisoner wins and escapes before archer can fire.

Both scenarios seem absurd to me.

The absurdity is because you're arbitrarily allowing one side to take a hostile acton - pointing a weapon - without rolling initiative, and forcing the other side to just stand there and wait.

Here's how I'd do it (still assuming nobody is surprised). Everyone is pretending to be friendly when, suddenly, the bandits pull out crossbows and point them toward the party. Roll initiative.

1. Bandits win initiative. They Ready an action to attack if anybody moves and call for the party to surrender.

2. PCs win initiative and attack before the bandits can raise their crossbows and take aim.

The prisoner scenario works the same way. Roll initiative when somebody commits a hostile act, like pointing a weapon.

[Kane0]

If we could all agree on when exactly initiative should be rolled and in what circumstances surprise is determined we could end a lot of these disagreements. The fact that it varies seems to be at the root of the problem.

[RSP]

I should clarify how I actually use Readied action outside of combat. You can ready actions outside of combat. They do not go off outside of combat, but instead use your reaction on the first turn. It's been a long day and I'm very tired otherwise I would have included it in my original post, my apologies.. I'll add it in.

with that in mind

A) If the archer misses the orc probably kills him before he gets off another shot because it is in the archers face.

B) Orcs set up ambush. I use surprise round as normal. I probably don't bother with initiative in the surprise round unless I have mages who know shield or a similar spell.

I don't use readied actions to abuse the rules. I use them when they make sense. I allow my PC's to do the same. Just blanket statement saying "no readied actions outside of combat" leads to some very silly situations and it's own abuses.

In A) the archer goes twice if they win initiative: once for the Ready Action and once for their turn, hence two Actions before the Orc gets a chance to go.

In B), and every ambush that should ever happen, if you play this way, the Orcs would take the Ready Action outside of combat to attack whomever they see. Therefore, using your rules, they’d get their Reaction off right after initiative is rolled, then the first round of combat would kick off with the PCs being surprised and the Orcs getting their normal turns.

I’m not sure why, if you allow Ready Actions outside of combat, ambushes wouldn’t always have it prepared.

[RSP]

Wait. What happened to the orc's attack? Don't you mean, "Orc moves, archer misses, orc moves the rest of the 60' (using Aggressive) and then attacks the archer"?

No. If you allow Ready outside of combat, then in the scenario I was responding to, the Archer could very well go twice: once with their Reaction and then on their own Turn, which if the Archer has a higher initiative, would happen with back-to-back attacks.



Doesn't make sense. If the PCs got readied attacks off, then their action for that (implicit) first round on which surprise occurred must have been "Ready an attack". They can't both Ready an Attack and also Attack on the same round with the same action. Choose one or the other.

In this scenario, it’s not the PCs who Ready; it’s the ambushing Orcs. Again, going with the idea that Ready is allowed outside of combat, every ambush would start with Reaction attacks, then with initiative order with the ambushed side being surprised.

Allowing Ready outside of combat essentially makes ambushes twice as effective.

[RSP]

That situation was just an example to highlight the most absurd case. The most typical example for why this comes up is with highway robbers and prisoners.

Robbers- Party is facing bandit group who have 15 crossbows trained on party. Party draws weapons, closes distance and starts killing bandits before bandits can twitch a finger.

Prisoners- Archer says he is prepared to shoot the prisoner if he runs. Prisoner runs. Enter initiative, prisoner wins and escapes before archer can fire.

Both scenarios seem absurd to me.

Nothing says you can’t give Advantage or Disadvantage on initiative rolls, in fact: “The DM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant advantage or impose disadvantage as a result.”

In either situation you could give Dis/Advantage or consider it a fast paced situation in which you enter initiative before combat begins.

Keep in mind, drawing a weapon isn’t really considered much in 5e; though, giving Advantage on initiative to a character who has already drawn doesn’t seem inappropriate to me.

[Malifice]

Wait. What happened to the orc's attack? Don't you mean, "Orc moves, archer misses, orc moves the rest of the 60' (using Aggressive) and then attacks the archer"?



Doesn't make sense. If the PCs got readied attacks off, then their action for that (implicit) first round on which surprise occurred must have been "Ready an attack". They can't both Ready an Attack and also Attack on the same round with the same action. Choose one or the other.

Th readied attack was readied the round before. It used the PCs reaction. He still has his action left this round.

[Xetheral]

I don't use readied actions to abuse the rules. I use them when they make sense. I allow my PC's to do the same. Just blanket statement saying "no readied actions outside of combat" leads to some very silly situations and it's own abuses.

I like this approach. Ready is available outside of combat on an ad-hoc basis, and only when it makes the most sense for how to model the in-game action. In most cases it won't be needed, and therefore isn't generally available. That keeps the upsides (for those tables that see an upside) while avoiding the downside of potential exploitability. If a player is uncertain if Ready is available in a given out-of-combat situation, they can simply ask.

[MaxWilson]

No. If you allow Ready outside of combat, then in the scenario I was responding to, the Archer could very well go twice: once with their Reaction and then on their own Turn, which if the Archer has a higher initiative, would happen with back-to-back attacks.

If it's the archer's turn, the orc isn't moving, so no triggering the readied attack.



In this scenario, it’s not the PCs who Ready; it’s the ambushing Orcs. Again, going with the idea that Ready is allowed outside of combat, every ambush would start with Reaction attacks, then with initiative order with the ambushed side being surprised.

Allowing Ready outside of combat essentially makes ambushes twice as effective.

No. Doesn't matter who the ambusher is, he can't both Ready an attack and also Attack on the same round, in combat or out of it. Being out of combat doesn't magically double your number of actions per round.

[Malifice]

A blanket statement saying "no readied actions outside of combat" leads to some very silly situations and it's own abuses.

Such as?

Name one.

[Kane0]

"When X tosses the rope I jump"

"I take the reins and get ready for when Y gets on"

"I note the pattern of the gates and sprint through when they all open in sequence"

Any sort of situation that requires timing and also features the looming threat of combat or other cause for initiative. You readying these actions means your PC is busy on that task, and cannot respond as they normally would if combat begins in the meantime.
If there is no such urgency, just narrate it.

[RSP]

If it's the archer's turn, the orc isn't moving, so no triggering the readied attack.

You’re missing the situation. Per what was given, Ready happens outside of combat, but prior to whatever the Ready is, combat starts and initiative is rolled.

Therefore, in the given situation, the Archer Ready’s to Attack when the Orc starts to move. When the Orc starts to move combat starts, initiative is rolled but the Reaction Attack from Ready occurs, then the Archer wins initiative, and, as such, gets to attack again.



No. Doesn't matter who the ambusher is, he can't both Ready an attack and also Attack on the same round, in combat or out of it. Being out of combat doesn't magically double your number of actions per round.

Well, if you believe you can Ready outside of combat, then you certain can: the Ready occurs outside of combat so it cannot also be their first Turn within combat.

Once combat starts, Ready would use the character’s Reaction, not their Action. In an ambush situation, you would have the out-of-combat Ready of “I Ready to Attack the first enemy I see.” Upon seeing the enemy, your Reaction would kick in, giving an attack. Then you would also get your normal turn in initiative and all that brings: Actions, Bonus Actions, whatever.

Why would the rules of how Ready works change from the RAW? That alone would suggest RAW, you can not Ready outside of combat.

Now, I’m of the mind Ready can’t happen outside combat, but if you play it can, this is completely valid.

[Kane0]

You’re missing the situation. Per what was given, Ready happens outside of combat, but prior to whatever the Ready is, combat starts and initiative is rolled.

Therefore, in the given situation, the Archer Ready’s to Attack when the Orc starts to move. When the Orc starts to move combat starts, initiative is rolled but the Reaction Attack from Ready occurs, then the Archer wins initiative, and, as such, gets to attack again.


But if the Archer won init the orc hasn't done anything yet, no? He has to decide between preemptively attacking the orc before he charges, or maintaining his ready for if the orc charges.

[RSP]

But if the Archer won init the orc hasn't done anything yet, no? He has to decide between preemptively attacking the orc before he charges, or maintaining his ready for if the orc charges.

The situation was something like a standoff where the Archer is Ready to fire if the Orc moves. If you allow the Ready outside of combat, then when the Orc moves, the Reaction occurs. Nothing happens until the Orc moves but everything goes in motion from that, including, presumably, the start of combat.

The Reaction occurs immediately after it’s trigger. So Orc move, then Reaction. Now the Archer’s turn starts. The Reaction, by RAW, will complete before the next turn starts.

Think of it like this: let’s say the Ready was “If the Orc Attacks Steve, I Attack the Orc.” The Orc then Attacks Steve, but the Orc’s Turn ends following the attack and you go next. Do you lose your Ready Action because you’re next in the order and coincidentally the trigger occurred right before your turn? No. You get your Reaction Attack, then your turn starts.

[Kane0]

The way i see it:

start
1 Player readies to attack if orc moves
2 Orc moves
3 Player uses reaction, attacks orc
4 If player kills orc goto end, else to go 5
5 Orc finishes move
6 Roll initiative (no surprise), resolve combat.
end

So it appears that yes, the player can attack and then attack again, but the orc still gets to finish his move in between the two if he doesn't die in that hit.
Personally I'd chalk that up to the benefits of winning initiative.

[RSP]

The way i see it:

start
1 Player readies to attack if orc moves
2 Orc moves
3 Player uses reaction, attacks orc
4 If player kills orc goto end, else to go 5
5 Orc finishes move
6 Roll initiative (no surprise), resolve combat.
end

So it appears that yes, the player can attack and then attack again, but the orc still gets to finish his move in between the two if he doesn't die in that hit.
Personally I'd chalk that up to the benefits of winning initiative.

So you essentially allow combat outside of combat. That is, each Ready an action (move vs attack) and for whatever reason one goes first, each get to complete their Action, then combat starts?

Why have the arbitrarily decided not Round of Combat and why not just start combat and have initiative determine who goes when?

More often than not there’s more than one Player and more than one enemy. If they all Ready, who goes when? Why create a whole system of “not combat” to decide combat when initiative already does this?

In this example, the standoff is in place. Start initiative. If Archer wins, then they Ready to Attack on the Orc’s move. If the Orc wins, they move before firing. Is it odd that the Orc moves before the Archer looses an arrow? Not anymore than any other round of combat where individuals get to move before others can take any sort of action.

Flip it around. If the Player says “I Ready to move when the Orc nocks an arrow,” should the Player just get a full move, out of combat round, before the Orc can fire an already nocked arrow?

[Kane0]

So you essentially allow combat outside of combat. That is, each Ready an action (move vs attack) and for whatever reason one goes first, each get to complete their Action, then combat starts?

Why have the arbitrarily decided not Round of Combat and why not just start combat and have initiative determine who goes when?

More often than not there’s more than one Player and more than one enemy. If they all Ready, who goes when? Why create a whole system of “not combat” to decide combat when initiative already does this?

In this example, the standoff is in place. Start initiative. If Archer wins, then they Ready to Attack on the Orc’s move. If the Orc wins, they move before firing. Is it odd that the Orc moves before the Archer looses an arrow? Not anymore than any other round of combat where individuals get to move before others can take any sort of action.

Flip it around. If the Player says “I Ready to move when the Orc nocks an arrow,” should the Player just get a full move, out of combat round, before the Orc can fire an already nocked arrow?

I didn't say it's what I do, that is my reading of what you were discussing with p_johnston.

Combat and turns have to start somewhere, any time chosen is potentially arbitrary to somebody. It is a chicken-and-egg scenario where there is a potentially awkward clunk when gears are changed between narration and initiative.

For what it's worth, I agree with you. 99% of the time initiative solves our problems. Its those weird edge cases that can stump some DMs and bring them here to ask about it.

[MaxWilson]

You’re missing the situation. Per what was given, Ready happens outside of combat, but prior to whatever the Ready is, combat starts and initiative is rolled.

Therefore, in the given situation, the Archer Ready’s to Attack when the Orc starts to move. When the Orc starts to move combat starts, initiative is rolled but the Reaction Attack from Ready occurs, then the Archer wins initiative, and, as such, gets to attack again.

Well, if you believe you can Ready outside of combat, then you certain can: the Ready occurs outside of combat so it cannot also be their first Turn within combat.


Dude, if you're inventing bad rules that lead to illogical outcomes, that's on you, not on me. I already told you how to rule out such that everything works together logically; when you introduce extra rules on top such as "the orc doesn't get to finish his turn because combat just started," you're responsible for the breakage.

Consider how it would work of combat had already started: archer readies an action, orc does nothing except talk, round ends without triggering the action. Repeat for a while until orc eventually charges. Archer gets his readied attack, then the orc hits him if he's still alive. The scenario should play out identically whether you count that Ready as happening "outside of combat" or not. When you decide to end the round in the middle of the orc's turn so you can reroll initiative, you're cheating the orc out of his action. That's on you.

It's not readying "outside of combat" that's causing the problem here. It's the way you're running the transition from non-combat you combat, as if it were some kind of videogame loading a separate combat mode divorced from the pre-combat reality.

[Arial Black]

Is the intent of your message to mean that a character cannot cast fireball outside of combat? Like, Merlin the Great, pondering life and the futility of it all, erupts in anger and slings a fireball at a nearby oak tree setting the tree ablaze. Are you saying he can't do that unless there's an orc hiding in the bushes behind him about to stab him in the wiggly bits?

I'm just looking for clarification here. Because I don't think there are any rules restricting casting a spell outside of combat. Regardless of what that spell is or isn't.

I'm pretty sure a player can cast Feather Fall regardless if he's in combat or not.

I'm happy to clarify. :smallsmile:

My comment was directed at an example where a fireball was cast at enemies, before initiative was rolled.

There is nothing preventing spell casting outside combat, per se. But, and this is the crucial bit, IF the spell you cast is an attempt to harm (or otherwise mess with) the enemy, this is combat, and MUST therefore be resolved in combat rounds and initiative order.

NOT because you cast a spell, but because that particular casting initiated combat.

If you want to cast a spell outside of a Combat Round, where that spell does NOT initiate combat, then you can, and you don't need to use the Cast A Spell action to do so (and can't even if you wanted to); you just cast it.

Does that answer your question?

[Fuzzy Logic]

I guess my last question wasn't as clear cut as I thought it was. Here's what I tell players who ask if they can ready an attack outside of combat:
"No that's what the surprise mechanic is for"
Or alternatively
"Yes but all the monsters are also readying attacks for the first opponent they see. So we'll just do initiative"

If you could ready attacks to go off before initiative, everyone would carry a crossbow around for that first free hit.

[Arial Black]

Also, Chapter 8 of PHB describes that in combat, and other fast-paced situations, the game relies on rounds that are described in Chapter 9. Which tells us that during rounds participants takes turns in the order defined by initiative. So, we've established, that fast-paced situations, and not necessarily combat require switching to rounds, which in turn means that players have to roll initiative.

I say that by trying to execute their plan party creates a fast-paced situation, that requires switching to rounds, which in turn means that this requires them to roll initiative, thus allowing for Wizard to Ready an action. So no, this isn't "cheating", this is legal and fair procedure.

I'll tell you why what you are doing is cheating: you are trying to get your side of the imminent combat into Combat Rounds and initiative order, while at the same time denying your opponents access to their place in the initiative order, to do their own planning, their own Actions, denying them their chance to act before you by being immune to surprise/beating your Stealth check/not suffering from surprise, and possibly getting your side the chance to act twice before they even get to act once, even if they are NOT surprised and three times if they are.

And your excuse for this is to misuse the 'initiative can also be used for fast-paced situations' clause, saying that the very fact you are planning for combat means that you need the 'non-combat fast-paced' initiative so that you can use it to to segue nicely into actual combat, giving your side a massive, unfair advantage, against the rules, just by saying, "I'm planning!"

It is a breathtakingly blatant attempt to cheat.

[Mordaedil]

I can't believe there's 8 pages worth of discussion being had over this.

There is really no right or wrong way to handle this, it's all really up to what you as a DM will allow.

For me personally, I would allow the players to perform one round of actions in the order they want to as their surprise actions, as I count it as them setting off the combat only when the enemy is made aware of their prescence. A surprise round is after all usually afforded monsters caught off-guard. If the players plan is to open a door, launch a fireball through it and close it again, I will count that as their surprise round. If the players say they want to throw open the door and rush in, fireballs and swords flashing, I will ask everyone to roll their initiative and roll the goblins and then afford the players a whole round of actions for free. Their actions become determined by their rolls. Meanwhile in the former scenario, they got things to play out how they wanted it to at the cost of no need to worry about order, delay or readying.

For monsters setting up ambushes, I will usually allow the players a perception check to see if they catch the ambush and if they don't, the monsters will get a surprise round against the player. I get to determine their order as I am the DM and usually it won't involve "open the door and fireball the party and close the door on them". That seems needlessly cruel to do to the players.

Also combat rounds do exist outside of combat, it's referred to as time passing. That is why you can do things like cast teleport outside of combat, you can throw fireballs at trees on the horizon if you want to and you can hit walls with your swords and break through dungeon walls if you want to. There is a reason we refer to 10 rounds as a minute.

[Unoriginal]

"When X tosses the rope I jump"

"I take the reins and get ready for when Y gets on"

"I note the pattern of the gates and sprint through when they all open in sequence"

Any sort of situation that requires timing and also features the looming threat of combat or other cause for initiative. You readying these actions means your PC is busy on that task, and cannot respond as they normally would if combat begins in the meantime.
If there is no such urgency, just narrate it.

None of those situations requires a Ready action unless initiative was rolled, in which case the situation is combat-rule-based.


The way i see it:

start
1 Player readies to attack if orc moves
2 Orc moves
3 Player uses reaction, attacks orc
4 If player kills orc goto end, else to go 5
5 Orc finishes move
6 Roll initiative (no surprise), resolve combat.
end

By the rules, the Orc and the PC would both have had to roll initiative BEFORE the Orc could move, and by definition before the PC could prepare.

Because they were clearly engaging in a combat encounter.

The PC don't get an extra out-of-turn Ready action for no reason so that they can shoot the Orc.

[JoeJ]

I get to determine their order as I am the DM and usually it won't involve "open the door and fireball the party and close the door on them". That seems needlessly cruel to do to the players.

How is that needlessly cruel? Aren't the players prepared for their characters to be on the receiving end of the same tactic they themselves use? If you're playing the monsters as if they want to lose, aren't you basically cheating your players out of a fair challenge?

[Kuu Lightwing]

I'll tell you why what you are doing is cheating: you are trying to get your side of the imminent combat into Combat Rounds and initiative order, while at the same time denying your opponents access to their place in the initiative order

I do not do such thing. If orcs are aware of the party they are free to ready their own actions and do their own planning. If the players are the ones that have access to door's open/close mechanism, then they have tactical advantage - as it should be. But that doesn't mean that orcs cannot do their own thing.


And your excuse for this is to misuse the 'initiative can also be used for fast-paced situations' clause, saying that the very fact you are planning for combat means that you need the 'non-combat fast-paced' initiative so that you can use it to to segue nicely into actual combat, giving your side a massive, unfair advantage, against the rules, just by saying, "I'm planning!"

It is a breathtakingly blatant attempt to cheat.

I use the rules, I don't misuse them. Yes, they create a fast-paced situation, because they want to precisely sequence their actions, therefore they need to roll initiative. Players have tactical advantage by being able to exploit the fact that they control when exactly they are going to be able to affect the enemy. Denying them this advantage for no apparent reason, feels like bad DMing.

[RSP]

Dude, if you're inventing bad rules that lead to illogical outcomes, that's on you, not on me. I already told you how to rule out such that everything works together logically; when you introduce extra rules on top such as "the orc doesn't get to finish his turn because combat just started," you're responsible for the breakage.

Consider how it would work of combat had already started: archer readies an action, orc does nothing except talk, round ends without triggering the action. Repeat for a while until orc eventually charges. Archer gets his readied attack, then the orc hits him if he's still alive. The scenario should play out identically whether you count that Ready as happening "outside of combat" or not. When you decide to end the round in the middle of the orc's turn so you can reroll initiative, you're cheating the orc out of his action. That's on you.

It's not readying "outside of combat" that's causing the problem here. It's the way you're running the transition from non-combat you combat, as if it were some kind of videogame loading a separate combat mode divorced from the pre-combat reality.

Please read back before responding. It’s not my situation. I was responding to how another stated they play it.

Now as to what you’ve said: “when you introduce extra rules on top such as "the orc doesn't get to finish his turn because combat just started," you're responsible for the breakage.”

How does the Orc get to “finish his turn” when you’re outside of combat and initiative, and there are no Turns yet? That’s an issue because there are no turns yet. Plus, the Orc didn’t Ready anything, so why would they get a “Turn?” If you just assume everyone “Readys” an Action before combat, all you’ve done, again, is create a ‘non-combat combat’ that doesn’t have the benefit of initiative to dictate who goes first.

[RSP]

I didn't say it's what I do, that is my reading of what you were discussing with p_johnston.

Combat and turns have to start somewhere, any time chosen is potentially arbitrary to somebody. It is a chicken-and-egg scenario where there is a potentially awkward clunk when gears are changed between narration and initiative.

For what it's worth, I agree with you. 99% of the time initiative solves our problems. Its those weird edge cases that can stump some DMs and bring them here to ask about it.

The DM calls for initiative, that’s when combat starts. If there’s something that occurs that the DM feels isn’t covered by initiative or the surprise rules, they are always free to adjudicate it, obviously.

[RSP]

Also combat rounds do exist outside of combat, it's referred to as time passing. That is why you can do things like cast teleport outside of combat, you can throw fireballs at trees on the horizon if you want to and you can hit walls with your swords and break through dungeon walls if you want to. There is a reason we refer to 10 rounds as a minute.

Combat Rounds do not exist outside of combat: you’re either in combat or are not. Rounds can exist outside combat.

Either way, initiative is how Rounds and Turns are defined:

“A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative.”

You cannot, RAW, have Turns without initiative. When initiative is rolled, combat or fast paced timing begins:

“Initiative determines the order of turns during combat. When combat starts, every participant makes a Dexterity check to determine their place in the initiative order.”

So you cannot have Turns outside of initiative.

Also, keep in mind, the Player describes what their character does, and the DM determines how to resolve what is described. So a Player stating “I Ready to Attack” is really just shorthand for “My character gets ready to attack the Orc if the Orc moves.” Obviously, the Orc is also getting ready to do something (at the least, moving). So whose “ready to do something” goes first? Whomever has the higher initiative.

[Mordaedil]

How is that needlessly cruel? Aren't the players prepared for their characters to be on the receiving end of the same tactic they themselves use? If you're playing the monsters as if they want to lose, aren't you basically cheating your players out of a fair challenge?

I already have the advantage for determining what is a challenge and not, I don't need to employ the players tactics to one-up them or rub their noses into the rug.


Combat Rounds do not exist outside of combat: you’re either in combat or are not. Rounds can exist outside combat.

Either way, initiative is how Rounds and Turns are defined:

“A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world. During a round, each participant in a battle takes a turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative.”

You cannot, RAW, have Turns without initiative. When initiative is rolled, combat or fast paced timing begins:

“Initiative determines the order of turns during combat. When combat starts, every participant makes a Dexterity check to determine their place in the initiative order.”

So you cannot have Turns outside of initiative.

Also, keep in mind, the Player describes what their character does, and the DM determines how to resolve what is described. So a Player stating “I Ready to Attack” is really just shorthand for “My character gets ready to attack the Orc if the Orc moves.” Obviously, the Orc is also getting ready to do something (at the least, moving). So whose “ready to do something” goes first? Whomever has the higher initiative.
You gotta help me out here, cause these semantics don't contradict anything I said. I never mentioned turns, I only concern myself with rounds, which do exist outside of combat. Ostensibly there is not discernment between combat rounds and non-combat rounds in 5th edition. Combat turns, yes, because it only really determines the current active actor and there's almost nothing meaningful or tangible or interesting about turns. The most a turn will concern itself with, is the return to your next turn, or the passing of a full round.

Outside of combat, players can take any turn they want, to set up however they want to set up their ambush to make it work. If Player A) opens a door, player B) casts a spell through the door and Player (A) closes the door again, I don't see the problem in allowing them to do this as their surprise round before I ask them to roll initiative and declare turn order is from now on, in effect.

[Unoriginal]

I already have the advantage for determining what is a challenge and not, I don't need to employ the players tactics to one-up them or rub their noses into the rug.


You gotta help me out here, cause these semantics don't contradict anything I said. I never mentioned turns, I only concern myself with rounds, which do exist outside of combat. Ostensibly there is not discernment between combat rounds and non-combat rounds in 5th edition. Combat turns, yes, because it only really determines the current active actor and there's almost nothing meaningful or tangible or interesting about turns. The most a turn will concern itself with, is the return to your next turn, or the passing of a full round.

Outside of combat, players can take any turn they want, to set up however they want to set up their ambush to make it work. If Player A) opens a door, player B) casts a spell through the door and Player (A) closes the door again, I don't see the problem in allowing them to do this as their surprise round before I ask them to roll initiative and declare turn order is from now on, in effect.

The turn during which the combatants may or may not be surprised is AFTER you roll initiative.

[ThePolarBear]

Let's take a scenario where an archer has a bow pointed at an orc who is 60 feet away. The orc knows the archer is there, the archer knows the orc is there. Neither is surprised. Both are wounded and waiting on the other to make a move. It's a standoff.

edit: Forgot an Imho, so i'll put it at the beginning.

This scenario has to happen in initiative. I mean, the elf is allowed to take actions, but the orc isn't? Why should the elf act before the Orc, given that both know that the other exists?

What i mean is: This is another whiteroom situation where initiative was to be rolled on round -1 : The round when the Elf, not having the bow pointed, decided to be aggressive and pointed its bow. Or the round where the orc came into vision.

Absurd situations lead to absurd results.

[RSP]

I already have the advantage for determining what is a challenge and not, I don't need to employ the players tactics to one-up them or rub their noses into the rug.


You gotta help me out here, cause these semantics don't contradict anything I said. I never mentioned turns, I only concern myself with rounds, which do exist outside of combat. Ostensibly there is not discernment between combat rounds and non-combat rounds in 5th edition. Combat turns, yes, because it only really determines the current active actor and there's almost nothing meaningful or tangible or interesting about turns. The most a turn will concern itself with, is the return to your next turn, or the passing of a full round.

Outside of combat, players can take any turn they want, to set up however they want to set up their ambush to make it work. If Player A) opens a door, player B) casts a spell through the door and Player (A) closes the door again, I don't see the problem in allowing them to do this as their surprise round before I ask them to roll initiative and declare turn order is from now on, in effect.

Here’s your statement:



Also combat rounds do exist outside of combat, it's referred to as time passing. That is why you can do things like cast teleport outside of combat, you can throw fireballs at trees on the horizon if you want to and you can hit walls with your swords and break through dungeon walls if you want to. There is a reason we refer to 10 rounds as a minute.

The point being, how are their combat turns or combat rounds, outside of combat?

To what you just wrote, how do you have Rounds without Turns? How do you run them? How do you determine which character acts when? How do you determine what each character can accomplish during that Round?

And more to the point, why would you have Rounds without Turns?

[Hecuba]

Just do combat on a round-by-round basis, and read all effects that refer to turns as rounds. For example, Shield says, "Until the start of your next turn, you have a +5 bonus to AC," but since you're treating rounds and turns as the same thing, Shield ends at the start of next round, before everyone declares actions for that round.

Now Delay is simple: it lets you declare your action after everyone else has declared and resolved their action. If everyone with actions remaining chooses Delay, the round ends. Easy, peasy.

That, too, is a relatively straightforward and uncontroversial option. But it still adds a layer of additional rules to manage for deal with for what is ultimately an edge case. One of the deliberate design decisions for this edition was to avoid adding additional rules where it is reasonable and possible to do so.

On a side note here, I'm persistently mystified as to why so many people seem to want a delay action back rather than using ready. Yes, it costs your reaction - but you get to hold onto your higher place in initiative in case you want it later. And it's not like your trigger has to be particularly related to what action you take: "after ally A does stuff, attack the closest enemy to B" and similar can work. I suppose the reaction cost can be more significant for some characters than others, but I generally see getting the original spot in initiative back as a big boost over the more traditional permanent initiative move.

[Malifice]

I can't believe there's 8 pages worth of discussion being had over this.

There is really no right or wrong way to handle this, it's all really up to what you as a DM will allow.

For me personally, I would allow the players to perform one round of actions in the order they want to as their surprise actions, as I count it as them setting off the combat only when the enemy is made aware of their prescence. A surprise round is after all usually afforded monsters caught off-guard. If the players plan is to open a door, launch a fireball through it and close it again, I will count that as their surprise round. If the players say they want to throw open the door and rush in, fireballs and swords flashing, I will ask everyone to roll their initiative and roll the goblins and then afford the players a whole round of actions for free. Their actions become determined by their rolls. Meanwhile in the former scenario, they got things to play out how they wanted it to at the cost of no need to worry about order, delay or readying.

For monsters setting up ambushes, I will usually allow the players a perception check to see if they catch the ambush and if they don't, the monsters will get a surprise round against the player. I get to determine their order as I am the DM and usually it won't involve "open the door and fireball the party and close the door on them". That seems needlessly cruel to do to the players.

Also combat rounds do exist outside of combat, it's referred to as time passing. That is why you can do things like cast teleport outside of combat, you can throw fireballs at trees on the horizon if you want to and you can hit walls with your swords and break through dungeon walls if you want to. There is a reason we refer to 10 rounds as a minute.

There is a right way and a wrong way to do this.

What you're talking about above, is the wrong way.

Read the rules please.

[Unoriginal]

On a side note here, I'm persistently mystified as to why so many people seem to want a delay action back rather than using ready. Yes, it costs your reaction - but you get to hold onto your higher place in initiative in case you want it later. And it's not like your trigger has to be particularly related to what action you take: "after ally A does stuff, attack the closest enemy to B" and similar can work. I suppose the reaction cost can be more significant for some characters than others, but I generally see getting the original spot in initiative back as a big boost over the more traditional permanent initiative move.

This and this thread as a whole is so mystifying Mike Mearls is going to make an online poll to know if it should be called psionifying instead.

More seriously, it baffles me how far from logic people try to go with their arguments just to avoid spending a ressource/taking risks

[Xetheral]

On a side note here, I'm persistently mystified as to why so many people seem to want a delay action back rather than using ready. Yes, it costs your reaction - but you get to hold onto your higher place in initiative in case you want it later. And it's not like your trigger has to be particularly related to what action you take: "after ally A does stuff, attack the closest enemy to B" and similar can work. I suppose the reaction cost can be more significant for some characters than others, but I generally see getting the original spot in initiative back as a big boost over the more traditional permanent initiative move.

In addition to not using your Reaction, Delay has two main advantages over Ready that help make up for your initiative permanently being lower:

Delay permits you to use your action after already having seen the results of previous actions. By contrast, Ready requires you to predict what may happen, and pre-select a chosen response. Delay lets you take an entire turn, whereas Ready limits you to a single Action OR Move. Also, Extra Attack can't be used with a Readied action (unless it happens to trigger before your turn ends, which would be a waste), and ALL spells require concentration when used with the Ready action.
There are also occasionally RP reasons to want to Delay instead of Ready. For example, in a legal jurisdiction where it's a crime to draw one's weapon first, a character who wins initiative may want to Delay until after an opponent takes their turn.

(Notes on the RP example: (a) Ready isn't a good option, because you can't use your free Item Interaction as part of a Readied action, so you wouldn't be able to draw your weapon and attack; (b) in a two-combatant fight, Dodge would be functionally superior to Delay, but is a much worse option if facing multiple opponents; (c) this example may be moot if your table would wait until after someone drew their weapon to call for initiative, instead of rolling initiative when the weapon-drawing is declared; (d) this example may also be moot if your table treats all actions in a round as starting simultaneously (in which case the only way to avoid legal liability would be to wait until round 2 to draw your weapon).)


There is a right way and a wrong way to do this.

What you're talking about above, is the wrong way.

Read the rules please.

There's no Right way and Wrong way when talking about the approach a particular DM chooses to use at their table. Right and Wrong only come into it when discussing interpretations of the rules (and even there reasonable people often disagree, see, e.g., this forum). The poster you quoted appeared to talking about how they approach the situation at their table. Ergo, by definition, they cannot be right or wrong.

[strangebloke]

This and this thread as a whole is so mystifying Mike Mearls is going to make an online poll to know if it should be called psionifying instead.

More seriously, it baffles me how far from logic people try to go with their arguments just to avoid spending a ressource/taking risks

I think that there's roughly three groups of people on the side of the 'readied action outside of combat.'

1: You have the guys you actually meet IRL. That poser who in the middle of conversation with the king says "If he goes for his sword I shoot 'im." They're just trying to get a free action.
2: The RAW maniacs who are more concerned with the meaning than the intent.
3: The guys who think that readied actions could happen outside of combat to represent very specific situations. IE, a chase scene that fluidly transitions into an ambush and fight scene.

I don't really have any beef with guy #3. Guy #2 is a pain, but he's not new to the forum, exactly. Guy #1 is annoying and will get shut down in any game I run.

[Xetheral]

More seriously, it baffles me how far from logic people try to go with their arguments just to avoid spending a ressource/taking risks

We appear to be interpreting the thread quite differently. From my standpoint, most of the posters discussing Readied actions (contrasted with the posters insisting on adherence to RAW/RAI in a thread where many posters aren't discussing RAW/RAI) are DMs considering how to mechanically model edge cases consistent with what they consider to be plausible in the game world. I haven't seen many players posting here angling to get an advantage.

I don't find it particularly surprising that there are so many contrasting opinions. People inevitably have different opinions about what is plausible in the game world, and even disagree on whether it's important that mechanical outcomes simulate plausible in-game events.

Backing out to take a wider view, the transition from simultaneous action resolution outside of combat to sequential action resolution inside combat is a severe discontinuity in the flow of the game. The choice on exactly when to make that transition matters immensely, because the two resolution methods can have wildly different outcomes. For example, in combat a Cleric can choose to heal an ally who fell in the same round, even though the the healing and the mortal wound have to occur simultaneously since they happened in the same round. Outside of combat, that's not possible: rocks falling from the ceiling require everyone to choose simultaneously whether to flee the area, and they all take damage at the same time: the Cleric can't wait to see if any party members fall before deciding whether to wait around in the danger zone to heal.

Morever, the choice on when to start initiative is nuanced. If a player declares that they are drawing their sword and attacking, most posters would agree that it's time to roll initiative. But where in the sword-drawing process does the transition to initiative occur? Is the character's sword already drawn when the fastest character begins their turn? Is the sword in the process of being drawn? Has the intent to draw the sword been set, but the action not begun? Does the fastest character know the drawing character's intentions? Can the drawing character opt not to draw their sword (or opt not to attack) after all when their initiative comes up? Answering any of these questions differently will produce (sometimes wildly) different results, and the rules do not provide explicit answers to any of them. (Queue arguing that the rules do provide explicit answers with posters having differing opinions on what those explicit answers are.)