Resolving Surprise

[Platypusbill]

Some time ago I posted in the Simple RAW thread and asked as a question about the initiative order when surprise occurs:

Let's say a party succesfully sneaks up on a group of enemies, and the Ranger initiates combat with a longbow attack. Since the enemy is surprised, they do nothing on their turns during the first round (and cannot take reactions until after their first turn), while the party gets to perform actions as normal.

Should you treat the Ranger's longbow attack (i.e. the event that initiates combat) as A) an entirely separate event, or B) their action during the surprise round?

I.e. in the case of A) does the Ranger basically receive yet another "free attack" before their turn during the surprise round? Meanwhile, if B) is true, this would presumably be a full turn and the Ranger could also use Extra Attack, bonus actions, etc? Would this be the party's first turn regardless of initiative order, with the Ranger acting with normal initiative on subsequent turns?

I then received this reply to my post:


The Ranger initiates combat not by firing but by saying "I'm going to fire my bow". At that point, the DM determines surprise and everyone rolls initiative. If the Ranger's party members beat his or her initiative, they may be able to attack before the Ranger does, even though he or she is the one who determined that combat was going to start.

However, I find this answer a bit unsatisfactory, and the question is still bugging me.

The reply I received asserts that the Ranger will always announce when they will attack, but this is obviously not the case. Perhaps the party agreed not to speak before sneaking closer to the enemy, so as to remain stealthy, and agreed to let the Ranger take the first shot. In such a case, the other characters cannot possibly act before the Ranger, as they would be acting in response to the Ranger's attack that hasn't even occured yet.

A similar problem occurs with the Alert feat. Since a character with Alert is immune to the Surprised condition, they still get to act normally even if someone manages to sneak up on them. However, if everyone is acting according to normal initiative order, a character with Alert can paradoxically act even though they are unaware that combat is about to occur in the first place. While Alert enables a character to respond quickly to danger, they don't detect any and all threats automatically.

The simple solution would be resolving the initiating action outside of normal turn order, but that would be extremely overpowered; with surprise and a good initiative roll, a character could potentially take a free action on top of two full turns before the enemy.

The best system that I've come up with is that if surprise occurs in response to a character's action, that character takes their turn during the initial round of combat first regardless of initiative rolls. What do you think?

[Boci]

If the ranger fires an arrow first, then the surprise round is wasted. They get a free attack in, but then iniitative is rolled. The party needs to attack in near unison to get the full benefit of the surprise round, they cannot wait for one party member to finish.

My bad, initiative is rolled before the surprise round.

[Silkensword]

As soon as the decision to attack someone is made, initiative is rolled. In the first round, surprised creatures cannot act, though they can take reactions if they rolled good initiative.

[JackPhoenix]

If the ranger fires an arrow first, then the surprise round is wasted. They get a free attack in, but then iniitative is rolled. The party needs to attack in near unison to get the full benefit of the surprise round, they cannot wait for one party member to finish.

There's no such thing as attacking before the initiative is rolled.

[Thrudd]

Surprise technically only happens if one party is attempting to be stealthy and the other fails to perceive them. So if it is a social situation, for example, and a character attacks unexpectedly - RAW there is no surprise, because characters are all in plain view of one another. You roll initiative when one player declares they are attacking, and it's possible that their target will get higher initiative, which means the attack was telegraphed and they had a chance to react ahead of the attack (which may mean the intended attack never even really happens and the player has the character do something different, but D&D is very abstract regarding specific movements in combat).

If the party is stealthy and within attack range of an enemy that doesn't see them, then they have surprised the enemy. When one player says they are attacking, all the other players get to take actions, too (if they want to - nobody has to take any particular action in a round of combat) - you could assume that they saw the character preparing the attack and those that chose to joined in within a second or two. That was the surprise round, now the enemy is aware of you and roll initiative (technically, initiative should be rolled immediately when the attack is declared, it's just that the surprised party doesn't get to do anything).

So the archer choosing to attack a party at range might be a waste of a surprise round if nobody else in the party can attack at that range. Of course, getting closer might have meant another stealth check and another chance for the enemy to notice them. So it is all situational.

[Boci]

So if it is a social situation, for example, and a character attacks unexpectedly - RAW there is no surprise, because characters are all in plain view of one another.

I don't think that's RAW. Whilst the two examples involve sneaking, it doesn't say that's the only way to get a surprise round, and in fact twice mentions that it's the DM who decides if a surprise round applies. They may rule that drawing a blade and attacking, in a situation where that is unexpected, results in a surprise round.

[Thrudd]

I don't think that's RAW. Whilst the two examples involve sneaking, it doesn't say that's the only way to get a surprise round, and in fact twice mentions that it's the DM who decides if a surprise round applies. They may rule that drawing a blade and attacking, in a situation where that is unexpected, results in a surprise round.

Well that's true, the DM can decide to give surprise (but they don't have to and the players can't point to a rule and say they should have surprise in any non-stealth situation). I would personally require an opposed check of some sort against a perception check from the target and their allies to determine surprise, in the case of someone attacking in a social situation where the intent or ability to attack is hidden, rather than the presence of the attacker.

The only way you are guaranteed by the rules to have surprise is when you are stealthy enough to defeat a perception check by the other party.

[Boci]

Well that's true, the DM can decide to give surprise (but they don't have to and the players can't point to a rule and say they should have surprise in any non-stealth situation). I would personally require an opposed check of some sort against a perception check from the target and their allies to determine surprise, in the case of someone attacking in a social situation where the intent or ability to attack is hidden, rather than the presence of the attacker.

I'd have the would be traitor roll deception vs. the passive insight of those present.

[Thrudd]

I'd have the would be traitor roll deception vs. the passive insight of those present.

That works, too. It's all situational. Unless the DM decides to codify this process in a house rule, however, the players can't know or expect that this will happen (like when you go to play with a new DM, do adventure league, etc.) There's no way to know or guarantee that this will be possible under any given DM.

[Unoriginal]

However, I find this answer a bit unsatisfactory, and the question is still bugging me.

Well, this answer is 100% accurate.



The reply I received asserts that the Ranger will always announce when they will attack, but this is obviously not the case.

You are incorrect. The Ranger's player MUST announce they will attack before they can attack.



Perhaps the party agreed not to speak before sneaking closer to the enemy, so as to remain stealthy, and agreed to let the Ranger take the first shot.

... that is the player who announces the attack, not the PC.


In such a case, the other characters cannot possibly act before the Ranger, as they would be acting in response to the Ranger's attack that hasn't even occured yet.

Then they will simply use the Ready action.



A similar problem occurs with the Alert feat. Since a character with Alert is immune to the Surprised condition, they still get to act normally even if someone manages to sneak up on them. However, if everyone is acting according to normal initiative order, a character with Alert can paradoxically act even though they are unaware that combat is about to occur in the first place. While Alert enables a character to respond quickly to danger, they don't detect any and all threats automatically.

There is no problem. The Alert feat means that you will never be surprised, and the initiative starts when someone starts something that can be described as starting a fight.


If everyone hides from an enemy, and said enemy has Alert, the initiative will only be rolled when said enemy is attacked. Doesn't mean that said enemy can't react quicker than the attackers can act (aka roll higher initiative).

In other words:

http://www.albertinemeunier.net/master/images/ombre-lucky-luke.jpg



The simple solution would be resolving the initiating action outside of normal turn order, but that would be extremely overpowered; with surprise and a good initiative roll, a character could potentially take a free action on top of two full turns before the enemy.

Wait, what? Why two turns?



The best system that I've come up with is that if surprise occurs in response to a character's action, that character takes their turn during the initial round of combat first regardless of initiative rolls. What do you think?

Just use the Ready action to act when the event you're waiting for happens.

[ad_hoc]

The ranger doesn't announce they are attacking, the player does. Other party members could 'jump the gun'. By winning initiative.

Han shot first because he won initiative even though Freedom's player announced his attack first.

As for Alert, that is why it is a feat. It is special. In The Bourne Identity, Jason Bourne is aware of threats even though there are no clues given to the audience. He doesn't know where they are or when they are coming, he just senses things aren't quite right. He is Alert.

[Boci]

As for Alert, that is why it is a feat. It is special. In The Bourne Identity, Jason Bourne is aware of threats even though there are no clues given to the audience. He doesn't know where they are or when they are coming, he just senses things aren't quite right. He is Alert.

Admittedly that is a little wierd when the surprise round is occurs because hostiles teleport in, yet the alert character wins initiative.

[JackPhoenix]

Admittedly that is a little wierd when the surprise round is occurs because hostiles teleport in, yet the alert character wins initiative.

Why? Hostiles teleports in, and the alert character is able to react faster than they can adjust to their new surroundings.

[Boci]

Why? Hostiles teleports in, and the alert character is able to react faster than they can adjust to their new surroundings.

Nope. If there;s no such thing as attacking before initiative, then hostiles need to roll it before teleporting in. Or do you give creatures that teleport in a full round of action, on top of the action they used to teleport?

[NecessaryWeevil]

Nope. If there;s no such thing as attacking before initiative, then hostiles need to roll it before teleporting in. Or do you give creatures that teleport in a full round of action, on top of the action they used to teleport?

Teleporting doesn't take an action because they aren't in combat. There are no actions outside combat. Combat begins, and initiative is rolled, when the hostiles arrive.

[Boci]

Teleporting doesn't take an action because they aren't in combat. Combat begins, and initiative is rolled, when the hostiles arrive.

Okay, what about an invisible stalker the party fails to detect? They walk up to the wizard, prepare to attack and initiative is rolled. What happens if the alert PC beats the invisible stalker for initiative?

[Mith]

Okay, what about an invisible stalker the party fails to detect? They walk up to the wizard, prepare to attack and initiative is rolled. What happens if the alert PC beats the invisible stalker for initiative?

Right as the invisible stalker prepares to strike, the Alert character feels a tension in the air. They don't know where the opponent is, but may make another Perception check to try and detect the Stalker.

[mephnick]

Okay, what about an invisible stalker the party fails to detect? They walk up to the wizard, prepare to attack and initiative is rolled. What happens if the alert PC beats the invisible stalker for initiative?

They get to act normally in the first round. That doesn't mean they detect the stalker. They can't target something that they don't know is there. A smart player would then either use an ability to reveal a target, ready for when it reveals itself or use an action to search. If, instead, the stalker won initiative and attacked the ranger, the ranger wouldn't be surprised but the stalker would have advantage on the attack because it is still an unseen attacker.

[ad_hoc]

Right as the invisible stalker prepares to strike, the Alert character feels a tension in the air. They don't know where the opponent is, but may make another Perception check to try and detect the Stalker.

Even simpler than that:

'everyone roll initiative'

If the Alert PC goes first then they get to go first. Ask them what they want to do just like every other time someone has a turn.

[Boci]

Right as the invisible stalker prepares to strike, the Alert character feels a tension in the air. They don't know where the opponent is, but may make another Perception check to try and detect the Stalker.

Right, which is a little wierd.

DM: Everyone roll initiative. Okay, PC with the second highest initiative, you may act. The other players may not. Whose the enemy? You have no idea.

[mephnick]

Right, which is a little wierd.

DM: Everyone roll initiative. Okay, PC with the second highest initiative, you may act. The other players may not. Whose the enemy? You have no idea.

Doesn't that sound fun and dramatic? My players woild be crapping their pants

[Boci]

Doesn't that sound fun and dramatic? My players woild be crapping their pants

Yes it does. Those aren't mutually exclusive with "a little wierd".

[Thrudd]

Right, which is a little wierd.

DM: Everyone roll initiative. Okay, PC with the second highest initiative, you may act. The other players may not. Whose the enemy? You have no idea.

That does pretty well represent the situation where the character has a "spidey sense" like ability, but doesn't know yet where the danger is coming from. He knows something is here, and he gets to start trying to figure it out before everyone else. Maybe he runs to get in front or near someone that he could help protect, swings wildly in front of him, or he uses a perception ability to look for hidden things, or he runs away really fast. Then the thing attacks someone and appears, and then first initiative goes, then the alert character gets to go again (because it's back to his initiative), and then everyone else in initiative order (including the creature again).
It's not really a bad thing, as long as you accept that the feat is basically having spiderman-like danger sense.

[NecessaryWeevil]

PC with the second highest initiative, you may act.

Not following you. Why this PC in particular?

[Boci]

Not following you. Why this PC in particular?

Because they're the only ones with alert. The other PCs don't have the feat, and so cannot act since they are surprised.

[mephnick]

That does pretty well represent the situation where the character has a "spidey sense" like ability, but doesn't know yet where the danger is coming from .

Pretty much. Think of literally any martial arts or action movie where the main character suddenly stops, the camera zooms in to his face as his eyes narrow and he quickly surveys his surroundings. Then something jumps out of the bushes, but he's ready! That's Alert.

[Platypusbill]

Well, this answer is 100% accurate.



You are incorrect. The Ranger's player MUST announce they will attack before they can attack.



... that is the player who announces the attack, not the PC.



My bad. I thought the post referred to the character announcing their intent in-universe.




Then they will simply use the Ready action.



The Ready action is limiting in similar ways; for example, it is incompatible with Extra Attack.




There is no problem. The Alert feat means that you will never be surprised, and the initiative starts when someone starts something that can be described as starting a fight.


If everyone hides from an enemy, and said enemy has Alert, the initiative will only be rolled when said enemy is attacked. Doesn't mean that said enemy can't react quicker than the attackers can act (aka roll higher initiative).

In other words:

http://www.albertinemeunier.net/master/images/ombre-lucky-luke.jpg



Do you not find it a bit baffling that with Alert, you could hypothetically react to an attack that has not even occured yet? In fact, you could potentially kill the attacker before his turn comes around. And all this when you weren't aware they were there in the first place.




Wait, what? Why two turns?



As in, once during the surprise round and once more for beating initiative.

[Reynaert]

Do you not find it a bit baffling that with Alert, you could hypothetically react to an attack that has not even occured yet? In fact, you could potentially kill the attacker before his turn comes around. And all this when you weren't aware they were there in the first place.

Do you not find it baffling that each character takes it in turn to attack, while the other characters stand around idly doing nothing, waiting for their turn to come around?

For example: Me and my buddy want to attack this archer who is 200 feet away, shooting at us. After my turn,. I'm 60 feet away from my buddy. And then after his turn, we are right next to each other again. And then 60 feet apart. And then together again. Baffling...

But seriously folks... stop trying to see D&D combat through the lens of realism. Doesn't work. And certainly don't try to "fix" one thing you happen to find baffling.

[Unoriginal]

My bad. I thought the post referred to the character announcing their intent in-universe.

Glad this is cleared out.



The Ready action is limiting in similar ways; for example, it is incompatible with Extra Attack.

Indeed. It represents the limitations of having to wait for someone to act first.

[QUOTE=Platypusbill;23293844]
Do you not find it a bit baffling that with Alert, you could hypothetically react to an attack that has not even occured yet? In fact, you could potentially kill the attacker before his turn comes around. And all this when you weren't aware they were there in the first place.

Nope, I don't find that baffling.

The Alert feat is ALL about reacting to threats which haven't occured yet.

Remember: if a PC is not aware of a creature, it's that the creature is hiding. If the creature tries to initiate an hostile situation, it reveals them.

[mAc Chaos]

It's not that the attack "hasn't occurred yet" in the fiction.

What you have happening is this: let's say a player tries to ambush an NPC during a convo.

Player: Give me your treasure.
NPC: No, but you can buy it.
Player: (to GM) I'll just stab him and take it.

GM: OK, roll initiative.
> Player rolls a 10
> NPC rolls a 15

GM: You begin to take out your sword to attack the NPC, but they see it coming and react faster than you, pulling out their own sword too and striking at you.

> NPC rolls a 18 to-hit against Player's 15 AC

GM: You take 10 damage. You then follow through with your attack. Or do you want to do something else instead now?

---

So basically while you didn't actually get a chance to make the attack yet, once you've declared the intent to attack, the other characters see this being telegraphed to them and initiative is just to determine whether anyone has a chance to try and stop you first.

Whether or not you are then -committed- to the attack is another question.

[ClearlyTough69]

Do you not find it a bit baffling that with Alert, you could hypothetically react to an attack that has not even occured yet? In fact, you could potentially kill the attacker before his turn comes around. And all this when you weren't aware they were there in the first place.

But what are the reactions that would enable you to kill or even harm another creature before it had a chance to hurt you? I can't find any.

[JackPhoenix]

But what are the reactions that would enable you to kill or even harm another creature before it had a chance to hurt you? I can't find any.

Polearm Master attack on opponents moving into range? Readied actions, technically, even though you can't Ready an action before rolling initiative, and you won't get an Action to use Ready if you're surprised.

[Arial Black]

Do you not find it a bit baffling that with Alert, you could hypothetically react to an attack that has not even occured yet? In fact, you could potentially kill the attacker before his turn comes around. And all this when you weren't aware they were there in the first place.

No, not baffling.

Let's take this step-by-step.

First, forget Alert (and any other way to get immunity to surprise) for a moment and understand the basic surprise/initiative mechanics.

What are the rules for surprise? Forget about the fluff, the examples, and the explanatory notes; the actual rule about 'determining who is surprised' is that 'the DM determines who is surprised'. That's it! End of!

So, RAW, the DM can simply announce that those guys are surprised and these guys are not. And although we might not consciously notice this happening because it's so ubiquitous, the DM frequently just announces that 'you guys' or 'the bad guys are not surprised', simply because they are the ones that set the ambush or know about the enemy already.

But what about creatures who might or might not sense the attackers? Well, RAW, the DM could simply decide and announce by fiat. However, what DMs usually do (and, TBH, are expected to do) to resolve the uncertainty is opposed skill checks.

But, which skills?

Because of the modus operandi of the typical bunch of murderhobos that are our adventuring party, where our heros are exploring unknown territory and stumble across in-place monsters, the usual contest is Perception/Stealth.

Other times, the presence of creatures is obvious and ongoing: the party are at a party (heh!) when, suddenly, a guy who you've been chatting to peacefully for 10 minutes whips out a dagger and attacks the mayor! Perception is irrelevant because his presence is already known. What is unknown (but, crucially, might be detected) is his intention to suddenly attack, and his efforts to disguise the fact that he's about to attack. Here, Perception/Stealth would not make sense, so Insight/Deception is the way to go.

So, back to the discussion, a successful Perception check over their opponent's Stealth (or Insight over Deception) means you are not surprised. Hooray!

But there is something else that's happening here which is so subtle that we usually don't consciously notice: the successful Perception (or Insight) check here not only determines that you are not surprised, but also gives you the information that is gated behind the successful check!

So your successful Perception check tells you that....you here the sound of a heavy bow being drawn to the north of you, or you see the orc hiding behind the tree....as well as being 'not surprised'!

And your successful Insight check tells you that the pleasant ambassador from the Next Kingdom Over gets an odd look into his eyes and reaches into his sleeve and moving into a fighting stance...as well as being 'not surprised'!

So here's where Alert (or other way to be immune to surprise) comes in: the Alert guy makes the same Perception (or Insight) check as everyone else, and if successful he gets the information that is gated behind a successful check.

But if the Alert guy fails his Perception (or Insight) check, well sure he's 'not surprised', but the crucial thing is he does NOT get the information gated behind a successful check! His Spider Sense pings, he 'gets a bad feeling about this, his Weapon of Warning vibrates, whatever, but he does not hear the bow being drawn, see the orc behind the tree, or interpret the body language of the ambassador from the Next Kingdom Over. All he knows is that it's all about to kick off!

Now, he might be able to use an educated guess as to what or where the threat is coming from, but he doesn't know.

To illustrate this, let's compare the difference between a ranger who is 'not surprised' because he succeeded in a Perception check to notice the orc hiding behind a tree drawing a bow about to attack you, and the Alert fighter who failed that check but is 'not surprised' anyway because Alert.

The combat was initiated by the orc firing an arrow at the party from hiding. Or, to be more precise, the orc drawing an arrow from his quiver, nocking said arrow to the string of his greatbow, aiming at the wizard, and being ready to loose.

If the orc is the first in the initiative order between all those who are 'not surprised' then him actually shooting the arrow will be the first event in the combat. But, for the purposes of this illustration, let's say our 'not surprised' pair of Alert fighter and perceptive ranger both rolled higher initiative than the orc that 'started' the combat.

First, the Alert fighter on initiative 28. Boy, that +5 from the Alert feat really helps here! Now, he acts first, knows that it's all about to kick off, but doesn't know why! If he'd succeeded on his Perception check then he'd've seen the orc, but he failed that check so he doesn't!

What does he do? Well, he hasn't seen the orc but he has seen the trees because, well, the trees weren't hiding. And since that seems to be the only place where a threat could come from he might....move to cover (relative to the trees), he might take the Dodge action, he might draw his bow and take the Search action to get another go at spotting the orc, he may cast mage armour (eldritch knight) and wish he'd cast it hours ago.

Of course, if it turns out that he was about to be attacked by an invisible stalker then his chosen action may or may not help. :smallsmile:

Moving on to initiative count 21, the ranger. He is not only 'not surprised' on account of his successful Perception check, but he also has the information gated behind the successful check: the orc hiding behind the tree. The ranger can cast hunter's mark at the orc, draw an arrow and shoot it....because he has actually seen the orc, unlike his Alert friend!

Note that the Alert guy, going first, cannot announce that he is attacking the orc, because he doesn't know about the orc yet! All he know for sure is that combat is about to start.

'Immunity to surprise' is definitely useful, but it is NOT a successful Perception/Insight check!

Does that all make sense?

[Malifice]

Some time ago I posted in the Simple RAW thread and asked as a question about the initiative order when surprise occurs:

Let's say a party succesfully sneaks up on a group of enemies, and the Ranger initiates combat with a longbow attack. Since the enemy is surprised, they do nothing on their turns during the first round (and cannot take reactions until after their first turn), while the party gets to perform actions as normal.

Should you treat the Ranger's longbow attack (i.e. the event that initiates combat) as A) an entirely separate event, or B) their action during the surprise round?

I.e. in the case of A) does the Ranger basically receive yet another "free attack" before their turn during the surprise round? Meanwhile, if B) is true, this would presumably be a full turn and the Ranger could also use Extra Attack, bonus actions, etc? Would this be the party's first turn regardless of initiative order, with the Ranger acting with normal initiative on subsequent turns?

I then received this reply to my post:


The Ranger initiates combat not by firing but by saying "I'm going to fire my bow". At that point, the DM determines surprise and everyone rolls initiative. If the Ranger's party members beat his or her initiative, they may be able to attack before the Ranger does, even though he or she is the one who determined that combat was going to start.

However, I find this answer a bit unsatisfactory, and the question is still bugging me.

The reply I received asserts that the Ranger will always announce when they will attack, but this is obviously not the case. Perhaps the party agreed not to speak before sneaking closer to the enemy, so as to remain stealthy, and agreed to let the Ranger take the first shot. In such a case, the other characters cannot possibly act before the Ranger, as they would be acting in response to the Ranger's attack that hasn't even occured yet.

A similar problem occurs with the Alert feat. Since a character with Alert is immune to the Surprised condition, they still get to act normally even if someone manages to sneak up on them. However, if everyone is acting according to normal initiative order, a character with Alert can paradoxically act even though they are unaware that combat is about to occur in the first place. While Alert enables a character to respond quickly to danger, they don't detect any and all threats automatically.

The simple solution would be resolving the initiating action outside of normal turn order, but that would be extremely overpowered; with surprise and a good initiative roll, a character could potentially take a free action on top of two full turns before the enemy.

The best system that I've come up with is that if surprise occurs in response to a character's action, that character takes their turn during the initial round of combat first regardless of initiative rolls. What do you think?

Dude as soon as hostilities are declared by any participant then you switch to initiative and resolve actions in turn order.

As soon as a PC declares they're attacking, or you as the DM decide your monsters are, narrate the attack beginning and roll initiative.

The attack itself occurs on that creatures turn in round one.

[BurgerBeast]

No, not baffling.

Let's take this step-by-step.

(Snip)

That seems like the best explanation there is to handle this situation, but it still presents two problems.

1. What is it that allows the alert character to know that his spidey-senses are detecting a real threat and not a false positive? Because it seems to me that so-called “alert” characters, under this explanation (which I again acknowledge is the best offered) are less “alert” than paranoid and skittish, jumping for cover every time they think they might be attacked.

2. This causes alert to be a negative instead of a positive in some cases. Since the options are limited, the player would often rather have lost initiative than won it. (Because receiving an action without knowing where any enemies are or taking a readied action before an enemy acts is almost always worse than taking a full action after at least one enemy has acted.

I can live with these, but they are not satisfactory and constitute a legitimate issue with the rules in this specific case.

[Lord Vukodlak]

In my group we reinstituted surprise rounds from earlier editions. Thus if your surprised you will remained surprised until the end of the round. So for example an assassin doesn’t have to win initiative against the foe to pull off his assassinate. He just has to surprise the enemy.

Furthermore on the first round only one may lower their initiative to go after someone else from that point forward.

So an alert character who rolls 28 on his initiative gets to act during the surprise round. And can elect to drop his initiative by 15 points to ensure he gets his full round of action after the enemy has acted and revealed themselves.

This means winning initiative never punished you but also will never save you from being surprised.

[Thrudd]

That seems like the best explanation there is to handle this situation, but it still presents two problems.

1. What is it that allows the alert character to know that his spidey-senses are detecting a real threat and not a false positive? Because it seems to me that so-called “alert” characters, under this explanation (which I again acknowledge is the best offered) are less “alert” than paranoid and skittish, jumping for cover every time they think they might be attacked.

2. This causes alert to be a negative instead of a positive in some cases. Since the options are limited, the player would often rather have lost initiative than won it. (Because receiving an action without knowing where any enemies are or taking a readied action before an enemy acts is almost always worse than taking a full action after at least one enemy has acted.

I can live with these, but they are not satisfactory and constitute a legitimate issue with the rules in this specific case.

1. Because spidey sense only tingles when there is a real threat. There is never a false positive. They aren't skittish, they have a sixth sense for danger. They don't just think they will be attacked, they know they are being attacked.

2. It is never a negative to be able to do something first, if you're smart about what you do. It seems like a ready action would be the obvious choice in the case where the enemy remains unseen, and that is far better than being surprised and not being able to do anything. You could set the trigger to move toward and attack, move in general, or use a ranged attack against the first enemy that reveals itself (which will happen as soon as they attack).

[Arial Black]

That seems like the best explanation there is to handle this situation, but it still presents two problems.

1. What is it that allows the alert character to know that his spidey-senses are detecting a real threat and not a false positive? Because it seems to me that so-called “alert” characters, under this explanation (which I again acknowledge is the best offered) are less “alert” than paranoid and skittish, jumping for cover every time they think they might be attacked.

2. This causes alert to be a negative instead of a positive in some cases. Since the options are limited, the player would often rather have lost initiative than won it. (Because receiving an action without knowing where any enemies are or taking a readied action before an enemy acts is almost always worse than taking a full action after at least one enemy has acted.

I can live with these, but they are not satisfactory and constitute a legitimate issue with the rules in this specific case.

Thrudd explained it pretty well.

About 2.): I see this a lot, "it's better to roll low initiative than high, because Readied actions aren't as strong as normal".

Here, we already know that you (the Alert guy) rolled higher initiative that the orc who 'starts' the fight. But, this debate is about 'immunity to surprise', NOT about 'initiative rolls cannot be altered during combat'.

The game's combat/initiative system is what it is, and immunity to surprise doesn't change it. So, you rolled higher initiative than the orc, failed your Perception check, but go before the orc. This is equally true with or without the immunity to surprise!

So, the only difference immunity to surprise makes is that you can act in round one, instead of being unable to act in round one!

Example 1 = no immunity to surprise: your turn is first, but you are surprised and cannot move or act. The orc acts next and shoots you, but (because you rolled higher initiative) you can use a Reaction to do something; objectively better than rolling lower initiative than the orc. Round 2, act normally and you can see the orc.

Example 2 = Alert: your turn is first, but you have not seen the orc. You can do something: hide, move to cover, Dodge, Search, cast a spell, Ready an action to do any of these things as soon as you see the orc. The orc acts next and shoots you, but your action may have made that more difficult (Dodge, a useful spell) or even made it impossible (moved to cover that the orc cannot reach); again, objectively better than rolling lower initiative, better than being surprised and not being able to act. Round 2, act normally, same as without Alert.

Being immune to surprise (when you failed your Perception/Insight check) is objectively better. There is nothing better about being surprised; the best you can hope for is that it made no difference because you have no useful Reactions or couldn't think of a useful thing to do.

So your frustration is not really with surprise immunity; your frustration is with the inability to Delay your turn like you could in 3e. Whether that is a good thing or a bad thing is mere opinion.

In my humble opinion, and that of the 5e devs, is a good thing. I've played 3.0, 3.5 and PF extensively for nearly two decades, and have seen the effects Delay has on combat (and the Ready action altering your initiative). Initially, nothing seemed wrong or bad. Soon though, we got the hang of using Ready/Delay to alter the initiative order So that the party members had an unbroken sequence of every party member getting their full actions, one after the other, and the enemy not being able to realistically do anything about it simply because of the game mechanics of initiative.

I really didn't think anything of it, until I started playing 5e. Here, there is no Delay action and the Ready action does not alter your place in the initiative order. The result is that the chaotic order of combat-and it should be chaotic-is preserved. It is possible to mess with it a bit through the Ready action, but Readied actions aren't usually as good as normal ones; it's a fair price to pay, a cost/benefit analysis rather than a free, unrealistic and unfun initiative conga line of death.

YMMV on that, but in 5e 'immunity to surprise' is never worse than being surprised! :smallsmile:

[Platypusbill]

Remember: if a PC is not aware of a creature, it's that the creature is hiding. If the creature tries to initiate an hostile situation, it reveals them.

Indeed, the rules say that attacking always reveals a creature that is hiding (except missed ranged attacks with the Skulker feat). It also seems fair that an arrow flying through the air would be noticed and potentially give away the location of the attacker.

However, bows or crossbows don't really make any noise until they are actually shot, at which point the projectile would already be underway. Even if someone acted instantly in response to the noise, they couldn't possibly attack before whoever managed to get the drop on them.


But what are the reactions that would enable you to kill or even harm another creature before it had a chance to hurt you? I can't find any.

When I said "react", I meant "act in response to danger"; I did not refer to the 5e game mechanic of reactions.


But if the Alert guy fails his Perception (or Insight) check, well sure he's 'not surprised', but the crucial thing is he does NOT get the information gated behind a successful check! His Spider Sense pings, he 'gets a bad feeling about this, his Weapon of Warning vibrates, whatever, but he does not hear the bow being drawn, see the orc behind the tree, or interpret the body language of the ambassador from the Next Kingdom Over. All he knows is that it's all about to kick off!

Now, he might be able to use an educated guess as to what or where the threat is coming from, but he doesn't know.


The flavour text of Alert doesn't say exactly what the feat is supposed to represent, but I've interpreted it as responding quickly to threats, even if caught pants down, rather than a "sixth sense" that magically tells you something bad is coming before you've even perceived it.

Let's use a cheesy analogy, shall we?
-A bunch of ninjas are crashing Bob's BBQ party, lurking in the bushes with shurikens at the ready. Bob is standing next to the grill, and does not notice them.
-The GM announces that the ninjas are about to attack, but Bob manages to act before them because Alert bypasses the surprised condition and he has the highest initiative roll.
-If we use the "sixth sense" interpretation, Bob knows something is up, but can't really do much with his turn because he doesn't even know what is threatening him and where it is.
-If we assume that Alert does not warn about imminent threats, Bob would realistically remain blissfully ignorant and spend his turn flipping burgers or whatever, effectively rendering the immunity to surprise a moot point. Also, in that case, a high initiative would ironically become a bad thing, because it would result in Bob's turn occuring before he can really do anything with it.



The combat was initiated by the orc firing an arrow at the party from hiding. Or, to be more precise, the orc drawing an arrow from his quiver, nocking said arrow to the string of his greatbow, aiming at the wizard, and being ready to loose.


Again, drawing a bow is nearly silent, and a crossbow that is already loaded makes zero noise until the trigger is pulled.



Does that all make sense?

Nope. I understand that turn-based combat has to sacrifice some realism in exchange for being easier to run than some kind of real-time system, but the rules as written create counterintuitive situations that could be easily avoided with some small alterations.

[Tanarii]

A high initiative roll in an ambush situation isn't a problem. Just run it as an ambushing side reveals itself when initiative is rolled. If the other side rolls higher and isn't surprised, they react to the incoming attackers before they can complete the ambush. They're just that bad ass & quick on the draw. Done and done.

It's all abstract anyway. For example, if players bust through a door into a room with enemies, a DM can put half of them inside the room at the start of combat. You don't have to resolve moving through the door in initiative order unless you want to.

[Louro]

For example, if players bust through a door into a room with enemies, a DM can put half of them inside the room at the start of combat. You don't have to resolve moving through the door in initiative order unless you want to.

You don't want to. Trust me.

Having all the ambushers toss their prepared attacks or spells feels more natural (and faster) to us. Then we roll initiative.

I just do some adjustments on the fly, like a couple of the guards immediately unsheathing their weapons (players know those ones are not surprised, no advantage Vs them).
If their stealth tactic/roll was good all guards will be surprised
If the tactic/roll or circumstances were poor but still beats enemy awareness players get their free actions but none of the guards will be surprised (they are like half-surprised).

In my opinion this encourages smart playing and gives a better "ganking" feeling as they all are doing exactly the same at the same time.

[greenstone]

However, I find this answer a bit unsatisfactory,

We are using serialized turns to model a simultaneous situation. There really isn't an answer that will be satisfactory.

I find that initiative makes a bit more sense if you treat the initiative roll as when a character's action is "resolved", rather than "started".

E.g. The ranger stars the action by nocking their arrow and drawing the bow. Depending on the reflexes of the other combatants, some of them may finish their actions before the ranger releases the arrow and it strikes its target.

[Thrudd]

The flavour text of Alert doesn't say exactly what the feat is supposed to represent, but I've interpreted it as responding quickly to threats, even if caught pants down, rather than a "sixth sense" that magically tells you something bad is coming before you've even perceived it.

I also had/have a problem with alert.
There are two ways to look at it. Ignore the flavor text, look at the actual mechanical effects it has in the game, and decide how you would interpret a character that can do that and how they can do it. That is why I arrive at the "spidey sense" interpretation, because that's the only way to explain what is happening mechanically, with someone commonly able to act before any potential ambusher.

If, instead, we are going with the flavor text and not the mechanics, then you might say that they are immune to surprise but automatically get the first initiative position after the first ambusher, rather than rolling for it. They get the +5 in non-surprise combat situations. Or, alter the rules for surprise in the game to be closer to,old editions- a surprise round occurs before initiative is rolled, in which alert characters can act immediately following the ambush.

[Malifice]

So many people who dont understand the rules here.

If a DM had a creature ready attacks outside of initiative, or conduct a 'surprise round' I'd likely quit the campaign there and then.

It tells me all I need to know that this DM is useless and doesn't know what hes doing.

[BurgerBeast]

1. Because spidey sense only tingles when there is a real threat. There is never a false positive. They aren't skittish, they have a sixth sense for danger. They don't just think they will be attacked, they know they are being attacked.

Again, this is the best explanation, and I have considered it myself, but it is not reconcileable. Take the example of the orc in the woods with an arrow ready to fire. Assume that the character with the alert feat wins initiative. He uses his action to dive to the ground, or to shout a warning to his allies, or to ready an attack.

Now, the orc decides that this is not a good time to spring the ambush. He waits and then sneaks away.

Not even the alert character can know if he was right or not. So, even alert characters do not know whether their spidey sense is accurate or not. Suppose this happens a few times in the presence of his allies. How the hell are they supposed to see their ally as anything other than a paranoid maniac?


2. It is never a negative to be able to do something first, if you're smart about what you do. It seems like a ready action would be the obvious choice in the case where the enemy remains unseen, and that is far better than being surprised and not being able to do anything. You could set the trigger to move toward and attack, move in general, or use a ranged attack against the first enemy that reveals itself (which will happen as soon as they attack).

We can argue all day about whether it is ever a negative to act first. That’s not really what matters. All that matters is that sometimes it would be better to act second. If you selected a feat and it traps you into taking the worse of two options (even if that option is a positive) then it is functioning to do the opposite of what you selected it to do. That's counterproductive.


…

About 2.): I see this a lot, "it's better to roll low initiative than high, because Readied actions aren't as strong as normal".

Here, we already know that you (the Alert guy) rolled higher initiative that the orc who 'starts' the fight. But, this debate is about 'immunity to surprise', NOT about 'initiative rolls cannot be altered during combat'.

The game's combat/initiative system is what it is, and immunity to surprise doesn't change it. So, you rolled higher initiative than the orc, failed your Perception check, but go before the orc. This is equally true with or without the immunity to surprise!

…



No. with respect, you’ve misunderstood the problem entirely. The problem we are talking about only occurs when a character who ought to be surprised (but is not surprised specifically because of the alert feat) wins initiative.

If it were not for the alert feat, this would never be a problem, because the character would be surprised and would not have an opportunity to act in round 1.

But because of the alert feat, the character is able to act in round 1, and acts first. This is significantly worse than the typical case of simply winning initiative. When you win initiative, and you know something about your enemies, you have much more power to use your turn well. When you win initiative and no nothing about your enemies or where they are, it is significantly more difficult to do anything useful, and it is possible to do something that is demonstrably worse than doing nothing.

To be clear, there is absolutely nothing problematic about running this scenario (alert character who would've been surprised but for the alert feat wins initiative) as per the RAW. It plays out exactly as has been explained, many times over: the alert character is provided the opportunity to act but has no information about his enemies. He acts, then the DM continues with the initiative order.

The problem is how to explain this (within the narrative) in a satisfactory way. You don’t have to care about being satisfied, narratively, by the rules. But if you do care, it’s a legitimate problem.


Indeed, the rules say that attacking always reveals a creature that is hiding (except missed ranged attacks with the Skulker feat). It also seems fair that an arrow flying through the air would be noticed and potentially give away the location of the attacker.

No, actually. This is a precise point, but an important one. Attacking does not reveal the attacker. The attacker is revealed when the attack hits or misses (PHB 195).

If this were not the case, the problem would be solved. We could treat the alert character as effectively being able to interrupt the initial attack of the first enemy, and (it’s not perfect but) effectively act first. Alas, the rules are very clear. Spidey senses are the best explanation.


A high initiative roll in an ambush situation isn't a problem. Just run it as an ambushing side reveals itself when initiative is rolled. If the other side rolls higher and isn't surprised, they react to the incoming attackers before they can complete the ambush. They're just that bad ass & quick on the draw. Done and done. (emphasis added)

By RAW, they do not reveal themselves until their attacks hit or miss (PHB 195), so it would be wrong (so to speak) to rule that the attackers are revealed at the time of initiative. (It would also be unfair to rule that hidden characters are suddenly revealed simply because the battle started.)

Also, the situation of interest is when the party is surprised, except one character has the alert feat and rolls higher initiative than every enemy.


It's all abstract anyway. For example, if players bust through a door into a room with enemies, a DM can put half of them inside the room at the start of combat. You don't have to resolve moving through the door in initiative order unless you want to.

Again, you don’t have to care about this particular problem. But for those who do care about it, it is a legitimate problem (however small or rare).


If a DM had a creature ready attacks outside of initiative, or conduct a 'surprise round' I'd likely quit the campaign there and then.

This is a mischaracterization of the problem.

[Rixitichil]

Winning initiative is always better even if you cannot see your foe. The case of winning initiative is as follows:

PC: Weak Action with undetected foe
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
etc

This is better than:
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
etc

The difference isn't as much as a full action usually is, but it is still an advantage.

I quite like Alert also covering seeing a movement out of the corner of your eye, or a flash of sunlight against drawn steel. Not enough to know where it came from, but enough to put you on guard. I can see it also being a supernatural sense of knowing when someone is coming at you with killing intent, which you pick broadly depends on who your character is.

[Boci]

Winning initiative is always better even if you cannot see your foe. The case of winning initiative is as follows:

PC: Weak Action with undetected foe
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
etc

This is better than:
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
etc

The difference isn't as much as a full action usually is, but it is still an advantage.

I quite like Alert also covering seeing a movement out of the corner of your eye, or a flash of sunlight against drawn steel. Not enough to know where it came from, but enough to put you on guard. I can see it also being a supernatural sense of knowing when someone is coming at you with killing intent, which you pick broadly depends on who your character is.

That's 3.5. There's no "action/full action" in 5th ed.

[Louro]

So many people who dont understand the rules here.

If a DM had a creature ready attacks outside of initiative, or conduct a 'surprise round' I'd likely quit the campaign there and then.

It tells me all I need to know that this DM is useless and doesn't know what hes doing.

I would rather have players at my table than lawyers. Have you forgotten the first DMG rule?

So, if players successfully sneaked and they all declare they get ready to shoot at the guard as soon as he is in line of sight... what should I do? Roll initiative right there? Ok, 3 rounds later the guard finally shows up and they shoot (in the guard's turn).
By having them just shoot the outcome is the same but faster. Adds some tension to the scene.

[Blymurkla]

That's 3.5. There's no "action/full action" in 5th ed. Read 'full action' not as a 3.5 game turn, but as 'action with full potential', i.e. there are enemies to strike, extra attack is possible etc.

[Malifice]

So, if players successfully sneaked and they all declare they get ready to shoot at the guard as soon as he is in line of sight... what should I do?

You: 'After a few seconds waiting that stretches into an eternity, the Guard enters your line of sight, whistling quietly to himself as he walks past, 50' from you all. Roll initiative; the guard is surprised and cannot act on turn 1.'

What is so hard about that?

It also works in reverse. Lets presume some Orcs of yours are waiting to ambush the PCs in a forest. The Orcs have rolled 20 for Stealth, the highest PC passive perception is 15:

You: 'As you wander down the forest trail, you are woken out of your thoughts of home by the wizzing sounds of black fletched Orcish arrows as they fill the air around you, from all around. From the forest to the left, some Orcs leap from the woods and charge towards you swords in hand! Roll initiative, you're all surprised and cannot act on your first turns'

If one of the PCs has the Alert feat, simply swap the last sentence for: You're all surprised aside from you [PC with Alert feat]; you spring into action like quicksilver!'

Seriously, what is the difficulty here?

[JackPhoenix]

I would rather have players at my table than lawyers. Have you forgotten the first DMG rule?

So, if players successfully sneaked and they all declare they get ready to shoot at the guard as soon as he is in line of sight... what should I do? Roll initiative right there? Ok, 3 rounds later the guard finally shows up and they shoot (in the guard's turn).
By having them just shoot the outcome is the same but faster. Adds some tension to the scene.

And how do you have players at your table, when they quit because of your houserules?

What you should do is to roll the initiative when the characters initiate the hostile action, which means when the guard enters their line of sight.

What stops the PCs from declaring "I'm ready to shoot the enemy as soon as I see it" to get free attacks every time?

How will your player react when their characters open a door and you declare "You're all dead. There was a platoon of orcs waiting for you in the room, ready to shoot you the moment you opened the door"?

And what if the PCs are also ready to shoot the orcs as soon as they see them? If only there were some rules to decide what happens if you surprise your enemy and who acts first...

[RSP]

2. It is never a negative to be able to do something first, if you're smart about what you do. It seems like a ready action would be the obvious choice in the case where the enemy remains unseen, and that is far better than being surprised and not being able to do anything. You could set the trigger to move toward and attack, move in general, or use a ranged attack against the first enemy that reveals itself (which will happen as soon as they attack).

Caveat: you cannot Ready “move toward and attack,” you can eitherReady and attack, or Ready a Dash. Normal movement still occurs on the regular turn.

[Louro]

Seriously, what is the difficulty here?
What difficulty? I just said it fits better with our narrative style the way we do it. Rules are not core, fun and story are core. Rules are just tools (DMG)

[Malifice]

What difficulty? I just said it fits better with our narrative style the way we do it. Rules are not core, fun and story are core. Rules are just tools (DMG)

I get that, but there is no reason to deviate from them for narrative purposes (as show in the example I showed above).

How is the 'narrative style' of my examples different from your tables 'narrative style' or the 'fun and story' of your table?

I mean you can play being stabbed with a dagger = auto death and not 1d4 slashing damage if you want and that fits your narrative style, but i wouldnt play in that game either.

[Louro]

And how do you have players at your table, when they quit because of your houserules?
I play with adults.



What stops the PCs from declaring "I'm ready to shoot the enemy as soon as I see it" to get free attacks every time?
Nothing. This encourages them to play smart to get good surprise opportunities. It's better than just rolling stealth, in my opinion.



How will your player react when their characters open a door and you declare "You're all dead. There was a platoon of orcs waiting for you in the room, ready to shoot you the moment you opened the door"?
"Oh damn, we are screwed."
If all players got killed with just one attack... that encounter was definitively wrong.



And what if the PCs are also ready to shoot the orcs as soon as they see them? If only there were some rules to decide what happens if you surprise your enemy and who acts first...
The player who opens the door gets blasted, a random orc gets blasted also. Not a big deal.
Rules must bend to accommodate gaming style, not the other way around.

[Louro]

I get that, but there is no reason to deviate from them for narrative purposes (as show in the example I showed above).

We resolve the surprise before initiative, that way it feels more impactful and dramatic (and effective) for everyone. It's not just rolls.

[JackPhoenix]

Nothing. This encourages them to play smart to get good surprise opportunities. It's better than just rolling stealth, in my opinion.

And where exactly is the smart play in declaring to have action readied all the time?


"Oh damn, we are screwed."

Yes, they are, because the GM doesn't know what he's doing when he's messing with the rules and denies them the chance to act.

[Malifice]

We resolve the surprise before initiative, that way it feels more impactful and dramatic (and effective) for everyone. It's not just rolls.

That's unintuitive and unnecessary.

[Louro]

Excuse me, you really saying that having the ambushing group have their attacks on the surprised group is unintuitive? How so?
Well, this very thread is proof of the intuitiveness of the rules I guess.

Also... Are you implying that a DM that does a bit of houseruling has no idea of what is he doing? I would say that the ignorant here is the one thinking such thing.

[Louro]

And where exactly is the smart play in declaring to have action readied all the time?
Who said that?



Yes, they are, because the GM doesn't know what he's doing when he's messing with the rules and denies them the chance to act.
If they got surprised they get no chance to act. And this is true wether using RAW or my simplification.

[Dalebert]

E.g. The ranger stars the action by nocking their arrow and drawing the bow. Depending on the reflexes of the other combatants, some of them may finish their actions before the ranger releases the arrow and it strikes its target.

Exactly this. When someone says they're readying to do something before combat, I just translate that in my mind to "I'm going to get surprise on the enemy." I then re-translate by inserting a "TRY". You are going to TRY to get surprise on the enemy. Whether you actually do depends on things like stealth rolls, initiative rolls, and feats like Alert.

So if you try to initiate combat by popping out of hiding and shooting, I'm going to immediately roll initiative and we'll see whether your action happens as early as you were hoping or whether a high perception creature was already hearing rustling in the bushes and its hackles were raised and it was staring at the bushes and reacts faster than you.


Teleporting doesn't take an action because they aren't in combat. There are no actions outside combat. Combat begins, and initiative is rolled, when the hostiles arrive.

Niche enough scenario that the DM has some leeway to resolve whether the teleport itself happens before and triggers combat or happens during the first round.

[Malifice]

Excuse me, you really saying that having the ambushing group have their attacks on the surprised group is unintuitive?

That already happens in the RAW. No monster has the Alert feat or the ability to act when surprised so the only reason you're doing it is to 'gotcha' the players.

You're also depriving surprised creatures of possible reactions (presuming they're quick enough to react in time with a shield spell or deflect arrows or parry or defensive duelist or whatever). Again this mostly punishes PCs.

And yes it's counter intuitive. Youre allowing creatures to act before you determine the order of those actions. You're also depriving creatures (mostly PCs) of reactions to those actions (presuming they act fast enough determined via initiative).

Its a senseless houserule. There is zero need for it. It just skews the game, is unintuitive and pointless.

[Tanarii]

Every time people share their house rules for Surprise or Ready outside of initiative or even just attack first by declaration, it just reinforces for me why it's a good idea to stick with the basic rules and their abstract nature. :smallamused:

[PhoenixPhyre]

Every time people share their house rules for Surprise or Ready outside of initiative or even just attack first by declaration, it just reinforces for me why it's a good idea to stick with the basic rules and their abstract nature. :smallamused:

Amen and double amen.

[Arial Black]

The flavour text of Alert doesn't say exactly what the feat is supposed to represent, but I've interpreted it as responding quickly to threats, even if caught pants down, rather than a "sixth sense" that magically tells you something bad is coming before you've even perceived it.

You can fluff it how you like. The only thing that matters is that your fluff matches what the game mecahnics of the feat allow.

So, if your fluff means that the Alert guy couldn't be immune to surprise in situation X, Y or Z, then your fluff is wrong because we know for a fact that the Alert guy IS immune to surprise while conscious, no exceptions. If your fluff allows exceptions then your fluff is wrong; go away and think of fluff that matches the mechanics.


Let's use a cheesy analogy, shall we?
-A bunch of ninjas are crashing Bob's BBQ party, lurking in the bushes with shurikens at the ready. Bob is standing next to the grill, and does not notice them.
-The GM announces that the ninjas are about to attack, but Bob manages to act before them because Alert bypasses the surprised condition and he has the highest initiative roll.
-If we use the "sixth sense" interpretation, Bob knows something is up, but can't really do much with his turn because he doesn't even know what is threatening him and where it is.
-If we assume that Alert does not warn about imminent threats, Bob would realistically remain blissfully ignorant and spend his turn flipping burgers or whatever, effectively rendering the immunity to surprise a moot point. Also, in that case, a high initiative would ironically become a bad thing, because it would result in Bob's turn occuring before he can really do anything with it.

I find it astonishing that people don't get this. Burger Bob, on his first turn, gets a sub-optimal action on round 1 if he has Alert, but no action at all if he doesn't! Both versions of Bob have the same optimal action on round 2. How can 'having a sub-optimal action' possibly be worse than having no action?


Again, drawing a bow is nearly silent, and a crossbow that is already loaded makes zero noise until the trigger is pulled.

Nearly silent, but not quite. The bow creaks, the bushes move, etc. Whether or not the ambusher gives these clues or the victim notices them is resolved via the opposed Perception/Stealth check.

Not that this makes a difference to those who are immune to surprise and fail their Perception. Even if the ambusher were perfectly undetectable (infinite Stealth?) the Alert guy would still not be surprised, and with a higher initiative would still act first, knowing nothing more than 'combat is starting'. Your fluff for the Alert feat must be able to explain this. If it can't then modify your fluff until it can, because the fact is that Alert creatures are immune to surprise while conscious, end of!

[Arial Black]

So many people who dont understand the rules here.

If a DM had a creature ready attacks outside of initiative, or conduct a 'surprise round' I'd likely quit the campaign there and then.

It tells me all I need to know that this DM is useless and doesn't know what hes doing.

Harsh, but fair. :smallsmile:

[BurgerBeast]

Winning initiative is always better even if you cannot see your foe. The case of winning initiative is as follows:

PC: Weak Action with undetected foe
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
etc

This is better than:
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
Orc: Action
PC: Full Action
etc

The difference isn't as much as a full action usually is, but it is still an advantage.

I quite like Alert also covering seeing a movement out of the corner of your eye, or a flash of sunlight against drawn steel. Not enough to know where it came from, but enough to put you on guard. I can see it also being a supernatural sense of knowing when someone is coming at you with killing intent, which you pick broadly depends on who your character is.

So, you say winning initiative is "always" better. Then you provide an example in which it is supposedly better (and by the way, it isn't necessarily better, but we don't need to go there). Well, I'm sorry, but one example is not enough to say that it is "always" better.

On the flip side, one example (of where it is worse) is sufficient to show that it is not always better.

So, let's try an example where there are other characters and monsters involved. How about three more PCs and 7 more orcs?

Case 1:

Alert wizard: decides to take cover and ready a cantrip.
Orc 1: attacks rogue. (Interrupted)
Readied Alert wizard: casts cantrip.
Orc 1: completes attack on rogue.
Orc 2: attacks rogue.
Orc 3: attacks rogue.
Rogue: attacks an orc.
Orc 4: attacks fighter.
Orc 5: attacks rogue.
Orc 6: attacks fighter.
Cleric: casts bless.
Orc 7: attacks wizard.
Fighter: moves and attacks an orc.
Orc 8: attacks rogue.

Alert wizard gets to act again. After 8 orcs have had their turns. All 8 orcs are still alive, the party was subjected to 8 attacks this round, and there are 8 orcs remaining to potentially attack next round.

Case 2:

Orc 1: attacks rogue.
Alert Wizard: realizing that the enemies are orcs, casts a fireball centered on the orc he can see. Three orcs die and two take half damage.
Orc 2: attacks rogue. is dead from the fireball.
Orc 3: attacks rogue.
Rogue: attacks an orc. It's Orc 1, who took half damage from the fireball, and is now dead.
Orc 4: attacks fighter. is dead from the fireball.
Orc 5: attacks rogue.
Orc 6: attacks fighter.
Cleric: casts bless. Or decides that the battle is going well, and rather than waste a spell slot, he attacks with his crossbow or a cantrip. Maybe he even kills the other orc who took half damage.
Orc 7: attacks wizard. is dead from the fireball.
Fighter: moves and attacks an orc.
Orc 8: attacks rogue.

Alert wizard gets to act again. This time, only five orcs were able to take turns this round, the party was subjected to 5 attacks, and there are only 3-4 orcs left to attack next round, the fifth of which has half points if he's still alive. The cleric may have saved a spell slot. That's better.

Case 3:

Orc 1: attacks rogue.
Alert Wizard: realizing that the enemies are orcs, casts sleep centered on the orc he can see. Three orcs fall asleep.
Orc 2: attacks rogue. is asleep.
Orc 3: attacks rogue.
Rogue: attacks a sleeping orc. Auto-crit.
Orc 4: attacks fighter. is asleep.
Orc 5: attacks rogue.
Orc 6: attacks fighter.
Cleric: casts bless. Or decides that the battle is going well, and rather than waste a spell slot, moves up to a sleeping orc and kills it.
Orc 7: attacks wizard. is asleep.
Fighter: moves and attacks an orc.
Orc 8: attacks rogue.

Alert wizard gets to act again. This time, only five orcs were able to take turns this round, the party was subjected to 5 attacks, and there are only 5 orcs left to attack next round. That's better.

So, I'm sorry, but it possible, in at least one case, for acting later in the first round to be better than acting earlier with no information.

Also, consider the same scenario, but instead of 8 orcs, it's one hydra. Now the wizard can choose a more appropriate spell than sleep once he becomes aware of this fact.

[Unoriginal]

Indeed, the rules say that attacking always reveals a creature that is hiding (except missed ranged attacks with the Skulker feat). It also seems fair that an arrow flying through the air would be noticed and potentially give away the location of the attacker.

However, bows or crossbows don't really make any noise until they are actually shot, at which point the projectile would already be underway. Even if someone acted instantly in response to the noise, they couldn't possibly attack before whoever managed to get the drop on them.

See it that way:

Alert character manages to see the ambush *before* the attack that reveals it for most people is done.

[Arial Black]

Again, this is the best explanation, and I have considered it myself, but it is not reconcileable. Take the example of the orc in the woods with an arrow ready to fire. Assume that the character with the alert feat wins initiative. He uses his action to dive to the ground, or to shout a warning to his allies, or to ready an attack.

Now, the orc decides that this is not a good time to spring the ambush. He waits and then sneaks away.

Not even the alert character can know if he was right or not. So, even alert characters do not know whether their spidey sense is accurate or not. Suppose this happens a few times in the presence of his allies. How the hell are they supposed to see their ally as anything other than a paranoid maniac?

Initiative isn't rolled and combat hasn't started until the orc's player (DM) states that he is shooting, not when the orc is thinking about shooting. The orc cannot change his mind about initiating combat after he already initiated it!

The fact that some victims are so, well, alert and so fast that they get their retaliation in first doesn't mean that the orc's actions (rather than thoughts) initiated combat, even if he gets killed before he actually looses the arrow.

It's like a gunfight: the gunslinger that reaches first is not automatically the one that gets to shoot first, but he's the one that started it anyway.


We can argue all day about whether it is ever a negative to act first. That’s not really what matters. All that matters is that sometimes it would be better to act second. If you selected a feat and it traps you into taking the worse of two options (even if that option is a positive) then it is functioning to do the opposite of what you selected it to do. That's counterproductive.

Acting first or second is about the initiative order as rolled, not about immunity to surprise. Being able to do a sub-optimal thing on round 1 is never worse that being unable to do anything on round 1.

You might wish that you'd rolled lower initiative, but them's the breaks! Combat is chaotic, and whatever your plans to impose order on it so as to ensure your victory they are opposed by the enemy who is trying to impose their order to ensure their victory! These two incompatible aims result in the chaos of combat. You cannot control your place in the initiative order, and attempting to act out of that order has downsides re: optimal actions. Tough! Suck it up, big guy! The baddies are under the same constraints as you.

BTW BurgerBeast; are you related to Burger Bob? :smallsmile:

[Louro]

That already happens in the RAW. No monster has the Alert feat or the ability to act when surprised so the only reason you're doing it is to 'gotcha' the players.
Already happens by RAW. Ok. Any problem with that?
To gotcha the players. Ok. What's the problem with that?


You're also depriving surprised creatures of possible reactions (presuming they're quick enough to react in time with a shield spell or deflect arrows or parry or defensive duelist or whatever). Again this mostly punishes PCs.
Sorry? Surprised creatures can't take reactions. This benefits whoever puts the best effort in stealth and deceive.


And yes it's counter intuitive. Youre allowing creatures to act before you determine the order of those actions. You're also depriving creatures (mostly PCs) of reactions to those actions (presuming they act fast enough determined via initiative).
Yes and no. I let the ambushers determine the order they want to act, instead of random dice results. The general outcome is just a bit better than RAW, not a big deal.
Depriving creatures of reactions?
If it's not surprised it can have its reaction, as RAW.


Its a senseless houserule. There is zero need for it. It just skews the game, is unintuitive and pointless.
What a bold statement. It just skews YOUR idea of what the game is.

[Arial Black]

So, you say winning initiative is "always" better. Then you provide an example in which it is supposedly better (and by the way, it isn't necessarily better, but we don't need to go there). Well, I'm sorry, but one example is not enough to say that it is "always" better.

On the flip side, one example (of where it is worse) is sufficient to show that it is not always better.

So, let's try an example where there are other characters and monsters involved. How about three more PCs and 7 more orcs?

Case 1:

Alert wizard: decides to take cover and ready a cantrip.
Orc 1: attacks rogue. (Interrupted)
Readied Alert wizard: casts cantrip.
Orc 1: completes attack on rogue.
Orc 2: attacks rogue.
Orc 3: attacks rogue.
Rogue: attacks an orc.
Orc 4: attacks fighter.
Orc 5: attacks rogue.
Orc 6: attacks fighter.
Cleric: casts bless.
Orc 7: attacks wizard.
Fighter: moves and attacks an orc.
Orc 8: attacks rogue.

Alert wizard gets to act again. After 8 orcs have had their turns. All 8 orcs are still alive, the party was subjected to 8 attacks this round, and there are 8 orcs remaining to potentially attack next round.

Case 2:

Orc 1: attacks rogue.
Alert Wizard: realizing that the enemies are orcs, casts a fireball centered on the orc he can see. Three orcs die and two take half damage.
Orc 2: attacks rogue. is dead from the fireball.
Orc 3: attacks rogue.
Rogue: attacks an orc. It's Orc 1, who took half damage from the fireball, and is now dead.
Orc 4: attacks fighter. is dead from the fireball.
Orc 5: attacks rogue.
Orc 6: attacks fighter.
Cleric: casts bless. Or decides that the battle is going well, and rather than waste a spell slot, he attacks with his crossbow or a cantrip. Maybe he even kills the other orc who took half damage.
Orc 7: attacks wizard. is dead from the fireball.
Fighter: moves and attacks an orc.
Orc 8: attacks rogue.

Alert wizard gets to act again. This time, only five orcs were able to take turns this round, the party was subjected to 5 attacks, and there are only 3-4 orcs left to attack next round, the fifth of which has half points if he's still alive. The cleric may have saved a spell slot. That's better.

Case 3:

Orc 1: attacks rogue.
Alert Wizard: realizing that the enemies are orcs, casts sleep centered on the orc he can see. Three orcs fall asleep.
Orc 2: attacks rogue. is asleep.
Orc 3: attacks rogue.
Rogue: attacks a sleeping orc. Auto-crit.
Orc 4: attacks fighter. is asleep.
Orc 5: attacks rogue.
Orc 6: attacks fighter.
Cleric: casts bless. Or decides that the battle is going well, and rather than waste a spell slot, moves up to a sleeping orc and kills it.
Orc 7: attacks wizard. is asleep.
Fighter: moves and attacks an orc.
Orc 8: attacks rogue.

Alert wizard gets to act again. This time, only five orcs were able to take turns this round, the party was subjected to 5 attacks, and there are only 5 orcs left to attack next round. That's better.

So, I'm sorry, but it possible, in at least one case, for acting later in the first round to be better than acting earlier with no information.

Also, consider the same scenario, but instead of 8 orcs, it's one hydra. Now the wizard can choose a more appropriate spell than sleep once he becomes aware of this fact.

Heh. A long post. The answer is mercifully short: the Alert wizard should choose a better Readied action. For example, he could've Readied a fireball and ended up with the 'best option' you presented above, without the rogue being shot in the meantime.

And, y'know, sometimes combat doesn't go the way you want. Tough. You might want to have more information before you act, but you didn't. Suck it up.

[RSP]

Initiative isn't rolled and combat hasn't started until the orc's player (DM) states that he is shooting, not when the orc is thinking about shooting. The orc cannot change his mind about initiating combat after he already initiated it!

The fact that some victims are so, well, alert and so fast that they get their retaliation in first doesn't mean that the orc's actions (rather than thoughts) initiated combat, even if he gets killed before he actually looses the arrow.

It's like a gunfight: the gunslinger that reaches first is not automatically the one that gets to shoot first, but he's the one that started it anyway.

RAW, this just isn’t true: “If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.”

The hidden creature doesn’t reveal themselves until they attack: if a character didn’t beat a Stealth check with their perception, they don’t get to know where a hidden creature is just because they rolled higher initiative. The hidden creature is hidden until they attack.

[Malifice]

To gotcha the players. Ok. What's the problem with that?

Because 'gotcha' in this case means [depriving the players of a chance to use earnt abilities, reactions, and feats] for no good reason.


Sorry? Surprised creatures can't take reactions.

Yes they can.

A surpriosed creature still has a turn on round 1 (but cant do anything with it). After that turn ends, they can take reactions.

So a surprised Monk or Wizard is rolling initiative to determine if they can go before the surprising creatures to enable them to (maybe, if they're quick enough) get off a shield or a deflect missiles.

Can they turn their sword in time to knock aside the blow from the Orc charging from the darkness, or can they snatch an arrow from the air launched at them from the bushes at the last second.

You're not only ignorant of the rules, but you're arbitrarily telling a 20th level Monk Mr Myagi that he has zero chance to catch an arrow from the air when surprised, even though he is so much of a kung fu badass he can turn ethereal, run up walls and along water and give dudes the death touch.

Hostile action gets declared. Initiative gets rolled, and the actions are resolved in that order, with narration to match.

It really isnt hard to do.


This benefits whoever puts the best effort in stealth and deceive.

They already get a benefit. A whole rounds worth of actions (if they roll well enough on initiative, maybe even two whole turns before someone can strike back, seeing as they're a 50/50 chance - all else being equal of acting first on round 2) after having all of round one to themslves.

Thats a massive benefit.


Yes and no. I let the ambushers determine the order they want to act, instead of random dice results.

Thats already the RAW. Your ambushers simply take the Ready action if they must, and wait for a colleague to strike before they do.

As initiative is a Dexterity ability check I see no reason why the PCs cant voluntarily accept a lower check result than they rolled in any event. If I can intentionally flub a Strength check to lift something, I can do the same with a Dexterity check.


general outcome is just a bit better than RAW, not a big deal.


No it's not. Its much worse than RAW in your interpretation. You're denying creatures possible reactions for a start.

Like I said earlier. A DM who does what you do is simply showing me he doesnt know the rules well enough to get behind the screen in the first place. I'd politely raise an objection, and then based on the result of that objection, likely quit the game. It just demonstrates poor rules knowledge and a propesity to screw over players arbitrarily.

Two things I loathe in a DM.

[Thrudd]

You: 'After a few seconds waiting that stretches into an eternity, the Guard enters your line of sight, whistling quietly to himself as he walks past, 50' from you all. Roll initiative; the guard is surprised and cannot act on turn 1.'

What is so hard about that?

It also works in reverse. Lets presume some Orcs of yours are waiting to ambush the PCs in a forest. The Orcs have rolled 20 for Stealth, the highest PC passive perception is 15:

You: 'As you wander down the forest trail, you are woken out of your thoughts of home by the wizzing sounds of black fletched Orcish arrows as they fill the air around you, from all around. From the forest to the left, some Orcs leap from the woods and charge towards you swords in hand! Roll initiative, you're all surprised and cannot act on your first turns'

If one of the PCs has the Alert feat, simply swap the last sentence for: You're all surprised aside from you [PC with Alert feat]; you spring into action like quicksilver!'

Seriously, what is the difficulty here?
Your example is flawed. Didn't the arrows whizzing around count as the surprise attack? So initiative had to have been rolled before they started flying. If the alert character wins initiative, he knows there is something hidden in the woods about to attack, but he can't see them or know what sort of attack it will be. He can spend his turn performing a search for hidden enemies, or moving into the woods and maybe running into something, or casting a defensive spell or using the dodge action, or readying a ranged attack.

Or are you saying that every surprise attack must have a narrated reveal (ineffectually whizzing arrows) that isn't actually a game attack, followed by the hidden attackers revealing themselves before imitative is rolled and they make their actual attacks, so that it makes sense why the alert character gets to act before the ambushers?

Alert can cause narrative and verisimilitude problems. It seems very contrived to suggest that this must always be resolved by narrating away the first attempt at a surprise attack and forcing enemies to reveal themselves when an alert character is present.

Maybe the alert feat should also give the character a +5(or advantage) perception check whenever initiative is rolled, to locate hidden attackers, or even to automatically locate hidden attackers within a certain range. So their action always has a target and information to work on.

Another option is to create a rule that the first character or creature initiating an attack must follow through with that declared attack (whether player or DM) even if something is able to preempt it, unless the attack is physically stopped somehow, by the attacker being dropped or losing their weapon or losing targets. So there will never be a case where a hidden attacker reacts to an alert character's activity by cancelling their attack and sinking away.

RE: the "gotcha" issue- if a character fails a perception check to notice something, it makes sense for there to be a consequence to that. In the ambush situation, that consequence is a less-than-optimal choice of actions due to lacking information. That isn't a "gotcha" meant to rob characters of their abilities. The alert feat doesn't help your perception, it just makes you immune to surprise (as counter intuitive as that might seem). The character should also take the Observant feat, maybe, to be a truly awesome preemptive ambush spoiler. Or, amend Alert as recommended above, to reduce the odds that they will be unable to find the source of the attack they know us coming.

[BurgerBeast]

See it that way:

Alert character manages to see the ambush *before* the attack that reveals it for most people is done.

Nothing in the rules gives the alert creature the ability to see a hidden attacker before the attack.


Initiative isn't rolled and combat hasn't started until the orc's player (DM) states that he is shooting, not when the orc is thinking about shooting. The orc cannot change his mind about initiating combat after he already initiated it!

But the orc can change his mind on his turn, just like anyone else. Initiative is used to determine the order of combat. If you initiate a combat, that doesn’t mean you get to act. We roll initiative to see who acts and in what order. You decide what to do on your turn. Nobody has to declare their action in advance of their turn, or be bound by a declaration made before their turn.


The fact that some victims are so, well, alert and so fast that they get their retaliation in first doesn't mean that the orc's actions (rather than thoughts) initiated combat, even if he gets killed before he actually looses the arrow.

Neither the orc’s actions nor the orc’s thoughts initiate combat, in the sense you are talking about. The DM decides when initiative is rolled, and this is true regardless of the narrative. If we are trying to determine what, in the narrative, is the best moment to link to the moment of mechanical initiative, well… that’s what this debate is about. I say there is no moment in the narrative that makes sense.

Other people keep suggesting that sense can be made of it. Nobody has succeeded. Every proposed solution leads to a problem.


It's like a gunfight: the gunslinger that reaches first is not automatically the one that gets to shoot first, but he's the one that started it anyway.

Yes, but if the enemy runs behind cover, the gunslinger is not forced to shoot at the empty space where his enemy stood. He can choose to move, and then choose any action he wants. That’s how the rules work.


Acting first or second is about the initiative order as rolled, not about immunity to surprise.

This is a failure to understand my point. I know this is true. But it has nothing to do with my point.


Being able to do a sub-optimal thing on round 1 is never worse that being unable to do anything on round 1.

Yes, it is. See above.


You might wish that you'd rolled lower initiative, but them's the breaks! Combat is chaotic, and whatever your plans to impose order on it so as to ensure your victory they are opposed by the enemy who is trying to impose their order to ensure their victory! These two incompatible aims result in the chaos of combat. You cannot control your place in the initiative order, and attempting to act out of that order has downsides re: optimal actions. Tough! Suck it up, big guy! The baddies are under the same constraints as you.

Again, not the point. Players select the feat for its benefits. It’s understandable that sometimes this will not help you but hinder you – that’s fine. But when the feat functions in a way opposite to it’s intented effect, that’s a problem.


BTW BurgerBeast; are you related to Burger Bob? :smallsmile:

No.


Heh. A long post. The answer is mercifully short: the Alert wizard should choose a better Readied action. For example, he could've Readied a fireball and ended up with the 'best option' you presented above, without the rogue being shot in the meantime.

But then it might not be a group of orcs. It might be a single orc, in which case he has just used his AOE to hit a single target, when he could have tried a better option (i.e. killed the same orc without wasting a third level spell slot). Or it might be a single hydra. Or is might be a monster that is immune or resistant to fire damage. The wizard doesn't know. It's usually better to know.

Likewise, a cleric could prepare banish against a hydra, which would be nice, but then it might be 8 orcs. If he acted immediately after the first attacker, he’s have more information to work with, which would be better. Objectively.


And, y'know, sometimes combat doesn't go the way you want. Tough. You might want to have more information before you act, but you didn't. Suck it up.

Again, not my point. I agree with this. It would be nice if you address my point.

[Unoriginal]

Nothing in the rules gives the alert creature the ability to see a hidden attacker before the attack.


They see the *ambush* before the attack is done.

As in "Orc Ranger is about to fire. Initiative is rolled. Alert PC is not surprised by this ambush".

[Malifice]

RAW, this just isn’t true: “If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.”

The hidden creature doesn’t reveal themselves until they attack: if a character didn’t beat a Stealth check with their perception, they don’t get to know where a hidden creature is just because they rolled higher initiative. The hidden creature is hidden until they attack.

A question simply resolved via narration should it ever become an issue (an alert PC going 1st against hidden enemies that have surprise).

The PCs walk down a forest trail and some Orcs (Stealth check 20) wait in ambush. The DM determines they fire on the PCs, and narrates the start of the encounter thus:

DM: 'As you walk down the forest trail, black fletched orc arrows rain down all around you. It's an ambush! Roll initiative, PC [Alert] you are not surprised, other PCs you all are surprised and miss your first turns and cant take reactions till that turn ends.'

The PCs now have enough information to respond to what is going on, and know why they just made a Dexterity check. Moving on:

PC [Alert]: (goes first, before hidden Orcs): DM what do I see?
DM: Nothing, other than the bushes around you, and you can hear the twang of bows and the squeels of something that sounds vaguely orcish... but you can take the Search action if you want?
PC [Alert]: (Makes decision about what to do.) I'll move and dive into cover, draw my bow and ready an action to shoot an enemy the instant I see one!
DM: 'Great. PC 2; it's your turn. Youre surprised and cant do anything. Your turn ends, you can now take reactions. Right... now it's the Orcs turn. (DM places Orc minis on board, and then rolls a series of ranged attack rolls for the Orcs; PC 2 was a Wizard and deflects the arrows with a shield spell as a reaction, the other PCs cant do **** all about the arrows seeing as they're still surprised and havent had a turn yet). PC [Alert] you can take your readied action now...'

And so on.

How are people finding that hard or counter intuitive?

[BurgerBeast]

They see the *ambush* before the attack is done.

As in "Orc Ranger is about to fire. Initiative is rolled. Alert PC is not surprised by this ambush".

Nothing in the rules gives an alert creature the ability to see a hidden "ambush.".

This is semantic and it is going to turn into a Bhagavad Gita -esque debate about what a wagon is.

You can say that the alert creature sees an "ambush" even though he failed his perception check, but then you'd need to explain exactly what was seen, and how it can be identified as an ambush. And this explanation would either (a) give so little information that it is roughly the same as "vaguely knowing you are about to be attacked," which is fine, but is precisely the problem we are discussing; or (b) give information about the type of attack or attacker, which would break the RAW by giving a success on a failed check.

Edit: in your example, you have given away the information "orc" and "ranger" and "about to fire" that was gated behind a perception check which was failed.

[Malifice]

Nothing in the rules gives an alert creature the ability to see a hidden "ambush.".


Presumably the DM, asking for a Dexterity check to determine reaction speed, provides the Players with enough information to enable them to figure out they're in an ambush, and why they're making the check in the first place.

Thats the DMs job. Narrating and interpreting the check result and providing information to the players.

As you walk down the forest trail, arrows rain down on you from all around...
The sounds of arcane chanting can be heard echoing around you in the darkness...
You catch a glint out of the corner of your eye, and hear the creak of a bow being drawn back...
You get a sudden sense of impending dread..
You feel the swell of arcane energy building nearby..
A battle cry rings out from all around...
You hear swords being drawn from the bushes all round you...

Etc.

Provide enough information so they know something is happening, without giving away the precise position of whatever it is attacking them (only important when a PC is Alert, or otherwise immune to surprise; if that doesnt apply, you can describe the monsters leaping out of bushes etc if you want to trigger the initiative roll)

[BurgerBeast]

A question simply resolved via narration should it ever become an issue (an alert PC going 1st against hidden enemies that have surprise).

DM:'As you walk down the forest trail, black fletched orc arrows rain down all around you. Roll initiative, PC [Alert] you are not surprised, other PCs you all are surprised and miss your first turns and cant take reactions till that turn ends.'
PC [Alert]: (goes first, before hidden Orcs): DM what do I see?
DM: Nothing, other than the bushes around you, but you can take the Search action if you want?
PC [Alert]: (Makes decision about what to do.) I'll move and dive into cover, draw my bow and ready an action to shoot an enemy the instant I see one!
DM: 'Great. PC 2; it's your turn. Youre surprised and cant do anything. Your turn ends, you can now take reactions. Right... now it's the Orcs turn. (DM rolls a series of ranged attack rolls for the Orcs; PC 2 was a Wizard and deflects the arrows with a shield spell as a reaction, the other PCs cant do **** all about the arrows seeing as they're still surprised and havent had a turn yet). PC [Alert] you can take your readied action now...'

And so on.

How are people finding that hard or counter intuitive?

I'm not. This is fine. It just leads to the same two problems that I have been describing all along.

1. I'd rather act second and fireball the orcs so that they can't attack my friends than search and let them attack my friends. And if, RAW, the thing that prevents me from doing so is that I selected a feat to be more alert... well that's B.S. because all my alert feat did was allow me to waste an action searching for danger and then watch the first round unfold without getting a worthwhile turn.

2. What if the orcs decide, on their turns, not to attack, but successfully sneak away and never do ambush these particular heroes? Now the "alert" PC is effectively a paranoid nutjob, because as far as anyone knows, there was never a sufficient threat to warrant his actions. He becomes the guy who "thought he heard something" all the time.

[Louro]

Because 'gotcha' in this case means [depriving the players of a chance to use earnt abilities, reactions, and feats] for no good reason.
Wow. So when a foe uses silence on the wizard... Am I depriving the wizard of his abilities?
The reason is one group being more skilled than the other.




A surpriosed creature still has a turn on round 1 (but cant do anything with it). After that turn ends, they can take reactions.
After their first turn they are no longer surprised, so they can take reactions.



You're not only ignorant of the rules, but you're arbitrarily telling a 20th level Monk Mr Myagi that he has zero chance to catch an arrow from the air when surprised, even though he is so much of a kung fu badass he can turn ethereal, run up walls and along water and give dudes the death touch.
Again, the monk can't do Kung Fu badass stuff if he is surprised, no matter he can turn ethereal or into an unicorn.
And you keep saying I'm the one who does not know the rules.



Hostile action gets declared. Initiative gets rolled, and the actions are resolved in that order, with narration to match.

It really isnt hard to do.
Never said otherwise. It just fits better our narrative/pace style the way we do it.


They already get a benefit. A whole rounds worth of actions (if they roll well enough on initiative, maybe even two whole turns before someone can strike back, seeing as they're a 50/50 chance - all else being equal of acting first on round 2) after having all of round one to themslves.

Thats a massive benefit.
It's actually worse than raw in that situation. They get readied actions, not a "whole round of actions".
Acting twice before the surprised ones can strike back also happens by RAW.


As initiative is a Dexterity ability check I see no reason why the PCs cant voluntarily accept a lower check result than they rolled in any event. If I can intentionally flub a Strength check to lift something, I can do the same with a Dexterity check.
Woukd you please show me the RAW for that?




No it's not. Its much worse than RAW in your interpretation. You're denying creatures possible reactions for a start.
That's exactly what surprised means.



Like I said earlier. A DM who does what you do is simply showing me he doesnt know the rules well enough to get behind the screen in the first place. I'd politely raise an objection, and then based on the result of that objection, likely quit the game. It just demonstrates poor rules knowledge and a propesity to screw over players arbitrarily.

Two things I loathe in a DM.
Lawyers, lawyers everywhere.

[Tanarii]

They see the *ambush* before the attack is done.

As in "Orc Ranger is about to fire. Initiative is rolled. Alert PC is not surprised by this ambush".
Yep. Nothing wrong with determining that's how the abstract nature of surprise and initiative work.

[JNAProductions]

Yeah, by RAW, you cannot choose to lower your Init score.

It's totally fine to port in the Delay action from 3.5 or an equivalent, but it's not there in 5E base.

[BurgerBeast]

Presumably the DM, asking for a Dexterity check to determine reaction speed, provides the Players with enough information to enable them to figure out they're in an ambush, and why they're making the check in the first place.

What? Why are you making a redundant ruling to handle a situation that is already handled by the rules?

Reaction speed is what initiative is for. Figuring out you're in an ambush is resolved by the DM using Perception vs Stealth or one of the other options described in the rules.

You're adding in a houserule ruling to do what the rules already do. Or worse: to give a second chance after a failed perception check.

At least you're finally acknowledging the problem, though. You'd never suggest this if you didn't recognize the problem.


Thats the DMs job. Narrating and interpreting the check result and providing information to the players.

But that's not what you've suggested. I agree that it's the DM's job to "narrate and interpret the check result and provide information to the players." But you're suggesting that the DM make a redundant ruling to solve a problem that's already solved by existing rules.


(snipped example)

We've done this debate before. You keep adding information into the narrative that is gated behind a failed check. I don't like to break the rules in that way.

You can play how you want. But if you're going to say that your way is the RAW way, then I disagree.

[BurgerBeast]

Yep. Nothing wrong with determining that's how the abstract nature of surprise and initiative work.

Maybe, but it's not a problem with surprise and initiative.

It's a problem with perception and stealth, and when hidden attackers are revealed.

There is something wrong with giving away information that is gated behind a failed perception check.

[Malifice]

I'm not. This is fine. It just leads to the same two problems that I have been describing all along.

1. I'd rather act second and fireball the orcs so that they can't attack my friends than search and let them attack my friends. And if, RAW, the thing that prevents me from doing so is that I selected a feat to be more alert... well that's B.S. because all my alert feat did was allow me to waste an action searching for danger and then watch the first round unfold without getting a worthwhile turn.

Take the Search action and then Quicken a Fire-ball and you can do just this. As can you if you take the Perceptive feat from UA, are a high enough level inquisitive rogue or a ranger (both of whom can Search as a bonus action).

Your feat lets you be alert enough to react to danger quickly. It does nothing to let you precisely know what that danger is, or where it is.

Other feats, abilities and class features let you do that.


2. What if the orcs decide, on their turns, not to attack, but successfully sneak away and never do ambush these particular heroes?

They cant. They have declared (via the DM) that they are attacking, and the DM has narrated as much.

If a PC (while chatting to the King) declared to me that 'I draw my bow and shoot the King in the face', after confirming that he REALLY wants to do that, I call for initiative.

The PC is lifting his bow, nocking an arrow and trying to shoot the King in the face.

There is no 'taking back' at that stage. An action has been declared by a player, and the resolution of that action (rolling for reaction speed of nearby creatures in response to that action) has started. Action and combat is now in motion.

Its narrated accordingly (the Ranger gets a cold glint in his eyes, and quickly reaches for an arrow bringing his bow to bear... roll initiative).

It's too late for the PC to take it back now. Once that action is confirmed and those dice hit the table, that's it.

He's not necessarily locked into his action (by the time his shot gets fired, he might have had a change of heart), but the action has started. We can resolve it [mechanically] on his turn.

[JackPhoenix]

Snip

Shouldn't that be:

Case 2&3:

Orc 1: attacks rogue.
Alert Wizard: Realizing that there's one orc, the wizard focuses on the only opponent he can see, not aware there's more of them, because they are still hidden?
?

How about:

Case 1:

Alert wizard: decides to do something useful and pops smoke casts Fog Cloud on his position, ruining the orc's advantage
?

Or even

Case four

Orc 1: attacks the wizard for massive damage
Alert Wizard: lies on the ground bleeding, wishing he'd won initiative to be able to use Shield

And there's always


Case five

Alert wizard: Aware he's in danger, but not what sort of danger, and being the twitchy type, Fireballs the bush big enough to hide 7 orcs, just in case.
Orcs 1-7: wish they weren't on fire.


But then it might not be a group of orcs. It might be a single orc, in which case he has just used his AOE to hit a single target, when he could have tried a better option (i.e. killed the same orc without wasting a third level spell slot). Or it might be a single hydra. Or is might be a monster that is immune or resistant to fire damage. The wizard doesn't know. It's usually better to know.

Likewise, a cleric could prepare banish against a hydra, which would be nice, but then it might be 8 orcs. If he acted immediately after the first attacker, he’s have more information to work with, which would be better. Objectively.

Funny that didn't stop the wizard in your cases 2&3 from using AoE's when all they could see was lonely orc. What if the orcs aren't actually conveniently gathered in one place, but hidden all around? And what if it's an orc and his pet hydra? The wizard wastes his action to Firebolt an orc, propably not even killing him, then the hydra comes out.

[Malifice]

What? Why are you making a redundant ruling to handle a situation that is already handled by the rules?

Reaction speed is what initiative is for. Figuring out you're in an ambush is resolved by the DM using Perception vs Stealth or one of the other options described in the rules.

You're adding in a houserule ruling to do what the rules already do. Or worse: to give a second chance after a failed perception check.

Dont be silly.

The DM gives the PCs enough information to let them know why they're making a Dexterity check (what they are reacting to), but not to reveal hidden foes. This varies depending on what is triggering the Dexterity check.

I dont know about your games, but if your DM calls for initiative and doesnt say why, that is super weird.

DM: Roll initiative.
Players: Ummm sure. Why?
DM: You dont know.
Players: Then why are we making a dexterity check to react to something if there is nothing to react to?

That's madness. The DM has the responsibility to narrate the action (the players dont narrate the combat or the environment, beyond what their characters do in response to it, the DM does).

Give them enough information to know that combat has started, and what they are making dexterity checks to react to, but without revealing any hidden monsters locations.

If you lack the imagination to be able to do that, stop DMing immediately.

[Louro]

Alert wizard: Aware he's in danger, but not what sort of danger, and being the twitchy type, Fireballs the bush big enough to hide 7 orcs, just in case.
Orcs 1-7: wish they weren't on fire.
By RAW the wizard is not aware of the danger, he just can't be surprised. But the spidy danger sense is cool, and also adds a dramatic effect.

[Thrudd]

Dont be silly.

The DM gives the PCs enough information to let them know why they're making a Dexterity check (what they are reacting to), but not to reveal hidden foes. This varies depending on what is triggering the Dexterity check.

I dont know about your games, but if your DM calls for initiative and doesnt say why, that is super weird.

DM: Roll initiative.
Players: Ummm sure. Why?
DM: You dont know.
Players: Then why are we making a dexterity check to react to something if there is nothing to react to?

That's madness. The DM has the responsibility to narrate the action (the players dont narrate the combat or the environment, beyond what their characters do in response to it, the DM does).

Give them enough information to know that combat has started, and what they are making dexterity checks to react to, but without revealing any hidden monsters locations.

If you lack the imagination to be able to do that, stop DMing immediately.

There is only one reason to roll initiative- combat is starting. Asking for the roll is all the information the players should need or expect if the attacker is hidden- their characters don't know anything until the attack actually happens and the hidden is revealed. They should know what their characters see and hear around them- the dense foliage maybe, the sound of cicadas or birds, etc.

DM says "surprise attack! Everyone roll initiative."
"What's happening?"
"Roll the dice and I'll tell you."
Initiative is rolled.
DM rolls attacks for orcs with bows
"Arrows fly out of the forest! Anyone with initiative higher than 15 can take a reaction"
*wizard with 17 init casts shield on himself*
Arrow attacks and damage are applied
Shooters are now revealed
Next round begins

[Mellack]

A character with Alert is able to know that there is danger imminent, not what form that danger is. A couple of ways to narrate that is your ranger notices that the sounds of birds and insects has stopped, something must have spooked them. Someone walking into town notices that the shutters are closed on businesses that should be open at this time, or vice versa. There are other things in the environment that can tip them off besides the shooting of an arrow.

[Malifice]

There is only one reason to roll initiative- combat is starting. Asking for the roll is all the information the players should need or expect if the attacker is hidden- their characters don't know anything until the attack actually happens and the hidden us revealed. They should know what their characters see and hear around them- the dense foliage maybe, the sound of cicadas or birds, etc.

DM says "surprise attack! Everyone roll initiative."
"What's happening?"
"Roll the dice and I'll tell you."
Initiative is rolled.
DM rolls attacks for orcs with bows
"Arrows fly out of the forest! Anyone with initiative higher than 15 can take a reaction"
*wizard with 17 init casts shield on himself*
Arrow attacks and damage are applied
Shooters are now revealed
Next round begins

Thats horrific DMing.

Asking for a Dexterity check from your players, without telling them why or what they are reacting to. Your players want to know what is it their characters are reacting to.

Your players have no way of knowing what is going on unless you tell them. You've just asked them to roll to determine how fast they react, the least you can do is give them enough information to know what the **** they are reacting to.

For the love of God, it's a combat encounter. There are about to be fireballs lobbed about, swords stuck in bellies and screams of war. Set the encounter up with a bit of narration!


As you enter the room, the screams of battle crys ring out from around you, and you see half a dozen Orcs charging at you with blood rimmed eyes; roll initiative!
As you walk down the forest trail, the click of bows being drawn back and the whizz of arrows through the air sounds from all around. Youre in an ambush, roll initiative!
The Evil necromancer grins, and his hands start to weave together the threads of a foul spell, as an incantation in the black speech comes from his thin mouth; roll initiative!
OK Thogg, you draw your axe and start to charge the Orcs. They ready their weapons and all hell breaks loose; roll initiative!


Etc.

[Malifice]

A character with Alert is able to know that there is danger imminent, not what form that danger is. A couple of ways to narrate that is your ranger notices that the sounds of birds and insects has stopped, something must have spooked them. Someone walking into town notices that the shutters are closed on businesses that should be open at this time, or vice versa. There are other things in the environment that can tip them off besides the shooting of an arrow.

Exactly. You could narrate it like this, or as them catching the glint of armor in the bushes somewhere nearby, or hearing the click of crossbow being drawn back, or the birds suddenly going silent, or them simply moving and reacting with lighting speed, or getting a bad feeling, or a warning from their deity or being a Kung Fu bad ass or whatever.

Just be a good DM and narrate it.

It's only ever the bad DMs that cant. Not intentionally bad mind you, but they just either lack the imagination or rules knowledge or experience to be able to do it. Somtimes they are bad DMs that just want to constantly spring 'gotcha' moments on players.

And generally I dont want to play in games run by DMs that have any of those traits.

[BurgerBeast]

Take the Search action and then Quicken a Fire-ball and you can do just this. As can you if you take the Perceptive feat from UA, are a high enough level inquisitive rogue or a ranger (both of whom can Search as a bonus action).

None of which have any bearing on my point.


They cant. They have declared (via the DM) that they are attacking, and the DM has narrated as much.

Well, that's how you play, but it's not prescribed by the rules. Do you apply this same logic when the someone tries to stop the the attacker?

King: "Stop! Don't shoot! I'll declare you king and give you my entire realm!"
Player: "Cool! I don't shoot him. I let him live so I can be king."
DM: "Sorry. you already declared that you wanted shoot him. Roll the attack."

What a bunch of B.S.


If a PC (while chatting to the King) declared to me that 'I draw my bow and shoot the King in the face', after confirming that he REALLY wants to do that, I call for initiative.

So do I. But then the PC (sic) decides what he does when his turn arrives. He is not bound to any given action.


The PC is lifting his bow, nocking an arrow and trying to shoot the King in the face.

Again, you can narrate this way if you wish. It doesn't solve the problem. It make more problems.


There is no 'taking back' at that stage. An action has been declared by a player, and the resolution of that action (rolling for reaction speed of nearby creatures in response to that action) has started. Action and combat is now in motion.

I'm not arguing for "taking back." I'm telling you to stop committing PCs to actions when, by the rules, they aren't even allowed to take actions.

You choose to commit PCs to actions when they can't, and so you run into the problem of "taking back" actions. Instead, just play the game how it is supposed to be played - players can choose what to do on their turn. The DM doesn't get to force them to do something before their turn arrives.


Its narrated accordingly (the Ranger gets a cold glint in his eyes, and quickly reaches for an arrow bringing his bow to bear... roll initiative).

According to you, it is. According to me, you're not narrating it properly.


It's too late for the PC to take it back now. Once that action is confirmed and those dice hit the table, that's it.

Those dice should not hit the table until the PC's turn.


He's not necessarily locked into his action (by the time his shot gets fired, he might have had a change of heart), but the action has started. We can resolve it [mechanically] on his turn.

Again, this is all your invention. This is not RAW.


Shouldn't that be:

(snip)

Funny that didn't stop the wizard in your cases 2&3 from using AoE's when all they could see was lonely orc. What if the orcs aren't actually conveniently gathered in one place, but hidden all around? And what if it's an orc and his pet hydra? The wizard wastes his action to Firebolt an orc, propably not even killing him, then the hydra comes out.

This is all a part of my point. I’m not crying about the fact that PCs should be allowed to have information they’re not entitled to. They can still make good or bad decisions. But knowing that there is a threat has to be reconciled somehow. And however it is reconciled it cannot break the rules. Being forced to act on no information is worse than having minimal information.


Dont be silly.

The DM gives the PCs enough information to let them know why they're making a Dexterity check (what they are reacting to), but not to reveal hidden foes. This varies depending on what is triggering the Dexterity check.

Sure if you ignore the rules, in this case. This is the entire debate, which you contiue to fail to understand. And you continue to repeat the same rules-breaking solutions.


I dont know about your games, but if your DM calls for initiative and doesnt say why, that is super weird.

Yes, that is weird. But it doesn’t break any rules.

On the other hand, if every PC fails their checks, so the orcs are hidden. But then, the alert character wins initiative… you have a problem. Whatever you choose to narrate, you can’t break the rules.

You choose to break the rules. That’s fine.


DM: Roll initiative.
Players: Ummm sure. Why?
DM: You dont know.
Players: Then why are we making a dexterity check to react to something if there is nothing to react to?

That's madness. The DM has the responsibility to narrate the action (the players dont narrate the combat or the environment, beyond what their characters do in response to it, the DM does).

No s@#t, Sherlock. Maybe you’re finally understanding the problem.

So how do you fulfill that responsibility without breaking the rules? Every solution you’ve offered breaks the rules.

All I am trying to say it that’s fine. You have no choice here but to break the rules. But you keep insiting that you’re not breaking the rules. You are, because you have to.


Give them enough information to know that combat has started, and what they are making dexterity checks to react to, but without revealing any hidden monsters locations.

This breaks the rules. The point of hidden is that they don’t know you’re there. If anything is giving away your presence, then you’re not hidden. You’re certainly not surprising anyone, which is more to the point.


If you lack the imagination to be able to do that, stop DMing immediately.

Again, you demonstrate that you do not understand my point.

I have the imagination to break the rules in the way you describe. But when I do it, I understand that I’m breaking the rules.

If you lack the ability to understand when you’re breaking the rules, then maybe you need to stop DMing. It’s much more egregious.


Thats horrific DMing.

It's really not. And in fairness, most of what you write is horrific.


Asking for a Dexterity check from your players, without telling them why or what they are reacting to. Your players want to know what is it their characters are reacting to.

Dexterity checks are not for reactions. They are for actions. Saving throws are for reactions. Initiative checks are to act, not to react.


Your players have no way of knowing what is going on unless you tell them. You've just asked them to roll to determine how fast they react, the least you can do is give them enough information to know what the **** they are reacting to.

And the characters have no way of knowing what is going on in this case. So if you narrate it, as the DM, then you're making a mistake. Because in the narrative, the characters can't detect what you are narrating to them.


(snip)

The rest of what you write is more of the same. Break the rules because if you don't, Malifice thinks you're horrible.

[BurgerBeast]

Exactly. You could narrate it like this, or as them catching the glint of armor in the bushes somewhere nearby, or hearing the click of crossbow being drawn back, or the birds suddenly going silent, or them simply moving and reacting with lighting speed, or getting a bad feeling, or a warning from their deity or being a Kung Fu bad ass or whatever.

Just be a good DM and narrate it.

Yeah, sure. The next time a rogue successfully hides in my game, I'll be sure to narrate it as: "you are hiding in the dark, but the guard sees a glint of your armour... so he is able to act before you."

Player: "I thought I was hidden."
DM: "You were, but I'm not imaginative enough to think of a reason why the guard, who is alert, could act before you without seeing you... so I'm going to go ahead and consider you to have failed the check because I am so imaginative."

...

No thanks.

Keep your imagination to yourself. I'd much rather the DM just have the guard act on no information than break the rules at someone's expense because my imagination is so great.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Thats horrific DMing.

Asking for a Dexterity check from your players, without telling them why or what they are reacting to. Your players want to know what is it their characters are reacting to.

Your players have no way of knowing what is going on unless you tell them. You've just asked them to roll to determine how fast they react, the least you can do is give them enough information to know what the **** they are reacting to.

For the love of God, it's a combat encounter. There are about to be fireballs lobbed about, swords stuck in bellies and screams of war. Set the encounter up with a bit of narration!


As you enter the room, the screams of battle crys ring out from around you, and you see half a dozen Orcs charging at you with blood rimmed eyes; roll initiative!
As you walk down the forest trail, the click of bows being drawn back and the whizz of arrows through the air sounds from all around. Youre in an ambush, roll initiative!
The Evil necromancer grins, and his hands start to weave together the threads of a foul spell, as an incantation in the black speech comes from his thin mouth; roll initiative!
OK Thogg, you draw your axe and start to charge the Orcs. They ready their weapons and all hell breaks loose; roll initiative!


They're being ambushed by unseen attackers, all this DM did was ask them to roll for initiative before he told them what was happening. There is no reason to give the PC's information on enemies they haven't seen yet. They failed their perception checks so they won't know whats happening until its already happened.

[Malifice]

They're being ambushed by unseen attackers, all this DM did was ask them to roll for initiative before he told them what was happening. There is no reason to give the PC's information on enemies they haven't seen yet. They failed their perception checks so they won't know whats happening until its already happened.

Yes there is, otherwise why are they making dexterity checks to determine reaction speed?

As the DM its your job to give the enough information to know why they are making the check (and to indicate the shift from narrative time to combat time).

Seriously dude. Its just poor and lazy DMing not to do so.


Yeah, sure. The next time a rogue successfully hides in my game, I'll be sure to narrate it as: "you are hiding in the dark, but the guard sees a glint of your armour... so he is able to act before you."

Player: "I thought I was hidden."
DM: "You were, but I'm not imaginative enough to think of a reason why the guard, who is alert, could act before you without seeing you... so I'm going to go ahead and consider you to have failed the check because I am so imaginative."

...

No thanks.

Keep your imagination to yourself. I'd much rather the DM just have the guard act on no information than break the rules at someone's expense because my imagination is so great.

This kind of reducto ad absurdium is typical of you mate. When you need to argue from absurdity to try and make a point you know youve lost.

If your Rogue is hidden, he's hidden. He stays that way until he makes an attack (which triggers initiative) or otherwise reveals himself.

Presume he (while hidden) decides to shoot a guard. Presume that guard is another PC with the Alert feat (no monsters have it or an ability like it that I know of). Also presume the Alert PC goes first.

In that specific outlier of a situation the DM describes it as such (or in one of a million different ways):

DM '[Alert PC] As you sit there you here the click of what sounds like a crossbow arm being cocked, you dont know where from - what do you do?

Congratulations. Youve just translated the mechanics into a narrative (an Alert PC reacting in time to an impending attack during a surprise round). That's your job as DM. You can save the hand wringing and reducto ad absurdum for a different thread, like the hiding and invisiblity thread, where you were also horribly wrong.

Narrate the game for your players, translating the mechanics as a while into an intresting narrative and world for them to explore and interact with. Thats your job as a DM. Youre a **** DM if you dont.

[Louro]

As you walk down the forest trail, the click of bows being drawn back and the whizz of arrows through the air sounds from all around. Youre in an ambush, roll initiative
Arrows through the air means the ambushers have already attacked, thus revealing their positions. All this before initiative..
You basically doing the same I do.

[BurgerBeast]

Yes there is, otherwise why are they making dexterity checks to determine reaction speed?

They're not. They're making dexterity checks to determine the order in which they act. They are acting, not reacting.


As the DM its your job to give the enough information to know why they are making the check (and to indicate the shift from narrative time to combat time).

This would apply to saving throws. Not to checks. Players initiate checks. Players don't have to participate in the combat. If they wish to, they must make a dexterity check.

Also, sometimes "enough information" is no information. Sometimes the knowledge gained by the player when initiative is rolled is all that is required to convey the narrative sense that the character feels... "s@#t... combat is beginning... what the f@#k is going on?"


This kind of reducto ad absurdium is typical of you mate. When you need to argue from absurdity to try and make a point you know youve lost.

Perhaps you don't know what a reductio absurdum is. Let me help you.

When you want to show someone that their argument is terrible, you assume it is a good argument. Then you follow it until it produces an absurdity. If it does produce an absurdity, then you know the argument is invalid. If it does not, then it may be a valid argument.

So, yes, this type of reductio ad absurdum is typical of me. I took your argument, and followed it through an example to which produced an absurdity. That's why your argument is invalid.

And you agreed that it is absurd... so there is no mistaking that the argument must therefore be invalid.


If your Rogue is hidden, he's ****ing hidden. He stays that way until he makes an attack (which triggers initiative) or otherwise reveals himself.

False. He says that way until his attack hits or misses.

If you narrate his attack before it hits or misses (i.e. is resolved), then you are breaking the rules.


]Presume he (while hidden) decides to shoot a guard. Presume that guard is another PC with the Alert feat (no monsters have it or an ability like it that I know of). Also presume the Alert PC goes first.

In that specific outlier of a situation the DM describes it as such (or in one of a million different ways):

DM '[Alert PC] As you sit there you here the click of what sounds like a crossbow arm being cocked, you dont know where from - what do you do?

This breaks the rules. The "click" of a crossbow constitutes "otherwise revealing himself." So you've just narrated a failed check where the PC succeeded. You took away a success because you lack imagination.


Narrate the game for your players. Youre a **** DM if you dont.

You're a bigger d@#k if you use your lack of imagination to justify forcing narration of gated information on characters who failed the required checks.

Follow the rules. You're a s@#t DM if you don't.

[BurgerBeast]

Arrows through the air means the ambushers have already attacked, thus revealing their positions. All this before initiative..
You basically doing the same I do.

Bingo. But at least you have to decency (self-awareness?) to admit it.

[Malifice]

Arrows through the air means the ambushers have already attacked, thus revealing their positions. All this before initiative..
You basically doing the same I do.

Thats just background information to set up the encounter and the scene, and link the transition from narrative time to cyclic round based initiative.

There are no attack rolls. Its just the DM setting up the encounters for his players. Those arrows in the air get resolved on the Orcs turns.

The players now have enough information to act on (should one of them be alert or able to act in the surprise round) and to know why they are making Initiative checks and what they are reacting to, but the Orc attackers remain hidden.

I groan whenever a DM just calls for initiative without telling the players why.

You provide enough information to set the scene. Thats it.

[BurgerBeast]

You provide enough information to set the scene. Thats it.

Bingo. Now just apply this.

If there are no arrows flying through the air, then you don't need them in the scene.

Inventing them just because you lack the imagination to properly envision the scene, or because you're too lazy to do the intellectual work to reconcile the rules and the narrative...

That's lazy DMing. That's not caring. That's bad DMing. That's lack of respect for players. That's lack of respect for the game.

So go ahead and keep doing it, but at least admit it.

[KorvinStarmast]

Every time people share their house rules for Surprise or Ready outside of initiative or even just attack first by declaration, it just reinforces for me why it's a good idea to stick with the basic rules and their abstract nature. :smallamused:
Yeah. Here's a good analysis of how surprise works. It was sadly deleted from the site where it was posted by a very thoughtful member called Dale_M.
The key issue is: forget everything you knew about surprise before, and embrace the new surprise.


Surprise is about Combat. Surprise is only something to be considered when combat starts.

In a non-combat encounter a creature may be amazed, startled, flabbergasted, dumbfounded or shocked but they can't be surprised.


Surprise is a quasi-condition.
Surprise is something that happens to creatures; it does not happen to "sides".
Surprise is a quality of a creature; it does not describe a relationship between two or more creatures.
Surprise can only happen once ... surprised at the start of the encounter.


When your character enters combat, then and only then, can they be surprised.

Example 1:
When you start fighting the Horrible Monster from the Underdark (the HMU); then you or the HMU (or both) might be surprised. If, a few rounds later, the Vicious Monster from the Underdark (the VMU) joins the fight then neither you nor the HMU can be surprised. The VMU could be surprised (e.g. if you were fighting in a Silence spell and it was blind and possibly stupid) because it is the start of the encounter for it.

Should the HMU and VMU be driven off to the extent that the encounter is over; then if they come back that would be a new encounter with surprise to be determined anew.

Surprise by DM Fiat: The DM determines who might be surprised.

Stealth and perception may not be a factor at the DMs discretion.

Example 2:
Alice and Bob are talking; each fully aware of the other. If Alice, without warning, attacks Bob then it is perfectly reasonable that Bob is surprised because he "doesn't notice a threat".

Example 3:
An adventuring party performs a home invasion on some innocent bugbears by kicking down the door to their room. The bugbears are watching the goblin fights with the sound turned up and the adventurers are singing a happy song about murdering bugbears and taking all their loot. Obviously, neither side is trying to hide but the DM may still rule that the bugbears are surprised because a) they did not hear the adventurers over the sound of goblin agony and b) most people knock. The DM could also rule that the adventurers are surprised because a) they thought the bugbears were out and b) the wizard was singing off-key which distracted them. In both cases this would be because the creature concerned "doesn't notice a threat".

Surprise without Hiding
If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other.

Example 4:
Alice challenges Bob to a duel. They meet at dawn and their seconds exchange pleasantries while they sharpen their rapiers. When they start fighting, clearly, neither is going to be surprised.

Obviously, Alice really hates Bob!

Surprise with Hiding
Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side.

There are a few possibilities:


Neither side is hiding: no one on either side will be surprised.
One side is hiding: only the creatures on the non-hiding side can be surprised.
Both sides are hiding: none, some or all of the creatures on both sides can be surprised. It is possible that everyone could be surprised; particularly when two relatively stealthy groups are creeping around in the dark - this makes for a very boring first round of combat.


In general being hidden and your enemy being surprised are two separate factors to track. They sometimes combine, but the effects can just as easily apply separately.

Any character or monster that doesn’t notice a threat is surprised

As discussed in How to determine surprise when only part of a side is stealthy (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/46339/how-to-determine-surprise-when-only-part-of-a-side-is-stealthy)? and Does a single PC who is stealthy get to surprise monsters when the rest of the group is not (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/44430/does-a-single-pc-who-is-stealthy-get-to-surprise-monsters-when-the-rest-of-the-g)?; "... doesn’t notice a threat ..." has to be interpreted as "... doesn't notice any threat ..."; even if only one member of a hiding side blows their stealth roll then the other side will not be surprised.

Sorry, a rogue with expertise in Stealth and 20 Dexterity is not going to surprise anyone if he hangs around with the fighter in plate mail with no proficiency and 8 Dexterity. He may still get to be hidden at the start of combat though (and indeed, subsequently), with the benefits that brings.

Stealth and Perception
This is worthy of a Q&A in its own right ... I'll get to it.

Surprise and Initiative
After determining surprise, both surprised and unsurprised creatures roll initiative as normal (see sidebar PHB p. 189).

This may mean that a surprised creature's turn happens before an unsurprised creature's turn; this is perfectly fine - remember surprise belongs to the creature, it does not define a relationship.

Effects of 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.

Until your turn end you cannot take reactions. Among other things this means that creatures can leave your reach without provoking Attacks of Opportunity or you can be hit with Magic Missile spells or attacks without being able to cast your Shield spell.

When it is your first turn "you can’t move or take an action"; this includes not being able to take the Ready action in a vain attempt to duck the effects of surprise. It also prohibits any Bonus Actions as they are still Actions.

And ... that's it.

Once your turn has come and gone you are no longer surprised and combat proceeds normally.

If you are really lucky and come out on top of the initiative then the only effect of surprise is that you lose your move and action for the first turn.

Example 5:
Continuing Alice and Bob's enmity. Alice is a 17th level Rogue with the Assassin Archetype and she has surprised Bob who is a Sorcerer. They roll initiative:

Alice beats Bob: Bob is in trouble. Alice attacks using her Assassinate feature to have advantage on the roll because Bob hasn't taken his turn; if she hits it will a critical hit because Bob is surprised. If she hits with her dagger she will do 2d4 + 18d6 sneak attack damage plus her Dexterity modifier. Bob must make a DC 8 + Dexterity Bonus + Proficiency Constitution save or the damage is doubled because of her Death Strike feature.

Bob beats Alice: Bob got lucky. Alice doesn't strike until after Bob's first turn. She no longer gets the Assassinate or Death Strike features and, depending if she has allies available, she may not get Sneak Attack. Bob can also throw up a Shield spell as he can now take reactions.

Now, Alice's player might complain that she got no benefit from surprising Bob; this is simply not true. If she had not surprised Bob and Bob had won the initiative then Alice might already be a corpse because Bob cast Power Word - Kill on the turn he would have had; instead Alice can assess that her ambush has not been as successful as she hoped and now has the opportunity to "get the hell out of Dodge" and try another time.

In D&D 5e initiative is in some ways more important than surprise.

[Malifice]

They're not. They're making dexterity checks to determine the order in which they act. They are acting, not reacting.

In a 'surprise round' (round 1 of a combat in which some creatures are surprised) initiative is vitally important to determine reactions. In fact thats all it is determining on round one (unless the PC is immune to surprise, in which case he can react whenever).

Your surprised Monks dexterity check (initiative) tells me (the DM) if you are fast enough to snatch that arrow out of the air (you rolled higher than the attacking orcs) on round 1, or if you are not (the orcs are faster, you cant react in time, and you cant deflect the arrow).

The long and short of it is, you are hillariously wrong again.


This would apply to saving throws. Not to checks. Players initiate checks. Players don't have to participate in the combat. If they wish to, they must make a dexterity check.

You might want to check your rulebook again. All participants in a combat make initiative checks to start it.

Unless your argument is some kind of reducto ad absurdum again, where Harry the fighter just stands there 'not rolling initiative' while the battle swirls around him, and Harrys player can respond with 'No' when the DM calls for initiative, effectively placing him in some weird psuedo 'not in combat' half world.

Harry makes his check at the start of combat with everyone else. On Harrys turn he can ready, or just stand there dodging or doing nothing with his actions if he wants.


Also, sometimes "enough information" is no information. Sometimes the knowledge gained by the player when initiative is rolled is all that is required to convey the narrative sense that the character feels... "s@#t... combat is beginning... what the f@#k is going on?"


Dude that's the player. The dexterity check represents something the CHARACTER is doing. The player wants to know why his CHARACTER is required to make a Dexterity check to react to in time or to respond to.

I get that 'roll initiative' is enough for a player to know combat has started. But your job as DM is more than that.

A lot more than that.


And you agreed that it is absurd... so there is no mistaking that the argument must therefore be invalid.

Oh lol. Yet here I am applying the RAW, and as it turns out with RAI (going by tweets on the topic).

You are just blindly hashing out your own (incorrect) interpretation of the rules, just like you did with hiding and invisiblity.

Youre wrong bro. And its hillarious.


If you narrate his attack before it hits or misses (i.e. is resolved), then you are breaking the rules.

No, I am not dude. He is still hidden. Our alert PC doesnt know where the attacker is, how many attackers there are, what the attacker is or anything else. The attacker is still hidden - the Alert PC cant see him, target him with spells, or anything else until he finds him.

Combat has started (which is pretty obvious seeing as I just rolled initiative for everyone). Ive also narrated why everyone is rolling initiative.

I am also narrating the effects of the Alert feat. The attacker is still hidden, and the Alert PC cant find him unless he uses the Search action, or until after the Crossbow attack is resolved (at which point the hidden attacker ceases being hidden).

Get it yet man? Youre wrong.


This breaks the rules. The "click" of a crossbow constitutes "otherwise revealing himself." So you've just narrated a failed check where the PC succeeded. You took away a success because you lack imagination.

A failed check results in no surprise )or maybe even thefailed stealth check PC being surprised) and not being hidden. This attacker is hidden. Even when his hyper alert target (with the Alert feat) noticed something was amiss (precisely what the feat allows him to do) and avoided bieng surprised 9again precisely what the feat allows him to do) the DM narrated the rules accordingly.

Call the waahmbulance all you want mate, but this is the express RAW and RAI.


You're a bigger d@#k if you use your lack of imagination to justify forcing narration of gated information on characters who failed the required checks.

Follow the rules. You're a s@#t DM if you don't.

Yes, channel your anger! Channel your hatred!

Come on mate, you're wrong. Let it go.

We can send off a tweet request if you want for sage advice. IF gambling is allowed here, I'll happily put a bet on me being correct?

A wager of some kind. One for joke value if nothing else.

[Thrudd]

Thats horrific DMing.

Asking for a Dexterity check from your players, without telling them why or what they are reacting to. Your players want to know what is it their characters are reacting to.

Your players have no way of knowing what is going on unless you tell them. You've just asked them to roll to determine how fast they react, the least you can do is give them enough information to know what the **** they are reacting to.

For the love of God, it's a combat encounter. There are about to be fireballs lobbed about, swords stuck in bellies and screams of war. Set the encounter up with a bit of narration!


As you enter the room, the screams of battle crys ring out from around you, and you see half a dozen Orcs charging at you with blood rimmed eyes; roll initiative!
As you walk down the forest trail, the click of bows being drawn back and the whizz of arrows through the air sounds from all around. Youre in an ambush, roll initiative!
The Evil necromancer grins, and his hands start to weave together the threads of a foul spell, as an incantation in the black speech comes from his thin mouth; roll initiative!
OK Thogg, you draw your axe and start to charge the Orcs. They ready their weapons and all hell breaks loose; roll initiative!


Etc.

Others have said it, but so will I. This has nothing to do with how imaginative you are in narrating. It is about narration that is consistent with what the rules and the dice are telling us. If enemies are hidden, the characters don't know they are there, and vice versa. This is determined by stealth and perception checks. You don't narrate that a hidden character is revealed unless/until something spots them with a perception check, or their attack hits or misses, or they choose to reveal themselves some other way. They aren't revealed by thinking about making an attack or by the Alert feat which says nothing about perception or spotting hidden things. An initiative dex check does not reveal hidden creatures. Fast/dextrous characters are not automatically perceptive characters, they are two different abilities.

Initiative is not something that requires the characters know what's going on, it's a game abstraction to provide the order for combat turns, which is affected by a character's dexterity.
If it is meant to be a reaction to a perceived threat or event, then initiative should not be rolled before the surprise attack happens, because the characters were not aware of the attackers, they can't react to something they haven't perceived, right? But as we have gone over, that's against the rules and not how the game works.

On that model, maybe initiative in surprise situations should be rolled secretly by the DM instead of in the open, and then announce to the players when they get to act so that the narration can match the characters' perception. I think this would be extreme, since I don't think players should have a problem being asked to roll initiative before I tell them exactly what happens.

It isn't a "gotcha" - it's playing by the rules. If you failed your perception check, then you don't know where hidden things are (or even that there are hidden things at all!). That's how it's supposed to work, that's why there are perception checks - there's a consequence for failing. The game rules allow for you to be "Alert" and react very quickly to danger while at the same time possibly having a poor wisdom score or just rolling poorly and failing to notice things. The DM has to figure out how to resolve those things through narration. Your method seems to be to ignore the character's failed perception and narrate it as though they have located the enemies that are attacking them. You seem to want it both ways - you don't want there to be actions outside of combat or special rules for initiating attacks before initiative, but you also insist that everyone knows what's going on when initiative is rolled by having the enemy make attacks (like arrows flying) before initiative is rolled. By doing this, you are giving players information about their attackers that the rules say they should not have - their locations, what sort they are, how they are armed, etc.

The way D&D's abstraction works, is, you roll the dice and then narrate the results based on the circumstances that result. A hit in combat isn't a deadly blow until the enemy has lost all their HP - so you can't narrate a spear going through someone's neck until after the dice have been rolled and after you know the victim has lost all their HP. Just so, you don't narrate how the characters perceive the ambush scenario until after perception has been checked and initiative has been rolled and you have determined if anyone has the Alert feat. Roll the dice, account for persistent abilities (the feat), then tell them what their characters perceive happening in accord with what the rules and the dice reveal.

[Malifice]

Others have said it, but so will I. This has nothing to do with how imaginative you are in narrating. It is about narration that is consistent with what the rules and the dice are telling us. If enemies are hidden, the characters don't know they are there, and vice versa.

Not necessarily; the PCs could know they're there, but not know precisely where.

And in any event, the enemies are attacking; they're in the process of revealing themselves. That (according to the RAW) is what triggers combat. The implication of making a Dexterity check to determine reaction speed is there is some kind of stimuli to react to.

Look man, nothing says you have to tell your Players why their characters are making Dexterity checks to see if they can react in time to stuff. You could do it individually on thier turns. **** your table might just not narrate battles at all, and leave it at mechanics and math if you want.

I prefer to give my players as much information as I can to enable them to have their characters respond and react with the environment and the world around them. This immerses them more, and after all, theyre the protagonists, not me.

[Malifice]

Ill bow out at this point and leave you guys to it.

Feel free to run your games however you want to, Its no skin off my nose.

[Lord Vukodlak]

Not necessarily; the PCs could know they're there, but not know precisely where.
That would be a perception check to hear the enemy but for whatever reason you can't see them. Or just the alert feat.


And in any event, the enemies are attacking; they're in the process of revealing themselves. That (according to the RAW) is what triggers combat. The implication of making a Dexterity check to determine reaction speed is there is some kind of stimuli to react to.
The nature of combat in D&D makes initiative and turns necessary. In normal combat you roll for initiative then act in order, no reason to change this up because some foes are surprised. Sam the Sorcerer who got a 21 on his initiative acts before the orcs but like any surprised character can't take his turn because he doesn't know he needs to. But his reactions where fast enough he can still REACT to Grog the Orc's surprise attack. He doesn't know Grog's attacking until Grog attacks but his initiative is high enough so that it foil's Grog's surprise. In that moment his reaction time was fast enough that Grog just couldn't get the drop on him. But he still wouldn't have known what Grog was doing until after Grog attempted to do it.




I prefer to give my players as much information as I can to enable them to have their characters respond and react with the environment and the world around them. This immerses them more, and after all, theyre the protagonists, not me.
Immersive would be they don't know they are being ambushed until after the enemy has taken their turns. In your example of
"As you walk down the forest trail, the click of bows being drawn back and the whizz of arrows through the air sounds from all around. Youre in an ambush, roll initiative!"

An Alert character who won initiative now KNOWS what the enemy is doing before they've actually done it.

[Louro]

An Alert character who won initiative now KNOWS what the enemy is doing before they've actually done it.

Which means that the alert wizard who won the initiative can cast his fireball and kill all the ambushers even before they shoot their arrows creating a paradox.

[PhoenixPhyre]

Which means that the alert wizard who won the initiative can cast his fireball and kill all the ambushers even before they shoot their arrows creating a paradox.

No paradox.

Being able to sense bloodlust/intent to harm and counter it is a staple fantasy trope. The swordsman who dodges the sniper's bullet by feeling the intent and reacting, the wizard who casts a spell that stops a hidden ninja from backstabbing them, etc.

The hostile intent is what triggers combat, not a hostile action being taken. While the two often go together, they don't have to.

In this case (ambushing orcs taken down before they fired), the narration could go

(Everyone fails perception checks)
DM: (to Alert character) You feel a sense of menace like eyes full of bloodlust but you can't pin down a location.
DM: (to everyone) Roll initiative, everyone's surprised except <Alert PC>.
<Alert PC wins initiative>
APC: I fireball those bushes (guessing luckily). Rolls damage, enemies all die
DM: The sense of menace fades, you find several scorched corpses of orcs in the bushes with bows half-drawn.
DM: You're out of initiative at this point. (This line is optional depending on style).


The Alert PC knows a threat exists in the immediate vicinity. How do we know this? Because he's not surprised, and only those characters that notice a (any) threat are not surprised. He doesn't know where or what the threat is (because they're hidden, meaning unseen and unheard, not unnoticeable)--that fireball may have been targeted on the wrong point and wasted or may have been total overkill, or may have caused significant collateral damage.

[Maelynn]

I'm surprised (ha!) to see how many people in this thread think that someone who wins initiative gets to act before the one who actually does the surprising. Guys, puhlease, read the rules, that's not how it works. They don't get an action, all they get is that they're allowed to use their reaction during the surpriser's turn! And that makes perfect sense, because your high initiative means you have a great response time. This faster response time allows you to take a reaction during the surpriser's turn. That's it. No other actions till your next turn in round 2.

Surprised character with lower initiative:

- does nothing on his own turn
- get hit in the face with an arrow
- ow! He did not see that coming
- next turns proceed as normal

Surprised character with higher initiative:

- does nothing on his own turn
- notices an arrow zooming his way
- uses his reaction to Deflect Missiles and bats the arrow away
- next turns proceed as normal

[BurgerBeast]

In a 'surprise round' (round 1 of a combat in which some creatures are surprised) initiative is vitally important to determine reactions. In fact thats all it is determining on round one (unless the PC is immune to surprise, in which case he can react whenever).

Your surprised Monks dexterity check (initiative) tells me (the DM) if you are fast enough to snatch that arrow out of the air (you rolled higher than the attacking orcs) on round 1, or if you are not (the orcs are faster, you cant react in time, and you cant deflect the arrow).

The long and short of it is, you are hillariously wrong again.

You can try to use rhetoric and semantics all you like. Ability checks are for actions. Saving throws are for reactions.


You might want to check your rulebook again. All participants in a combat make initiative checks to start it.

Yes. And who initiates the decision? Can a DM tell you that you’re attacking whether you like it or not? No. The player has a say in the matter. This is not so with saving throws.


Unless your argument is…

Nope.


Dude that's the player. The dexterity check represents something the CHARACTER is doing. The player wants to know why his CHARACTER is required to make a Dexterity check to react to in time or to respond to.

More irrelevant word acrobatics.


I get that 'roll initiative' is enough for a player to know combat has started. But your job as DM is more than that.

There may well be more to it.

But that doesn’t mean it’s okay to make **** up that’s not there, nor to break the rules. Nice try, though.


Oh lol. Yet here I am applying the RAW, and as it turns out with RAI (going by tweets on the topic).

You are just blindly hashing out your own (incorrect) interpretation of the rules, just like you did with hiding and invisiblity.

Youre wrong bro. And its hillarious.

Well, you do have the right to be wrong.


No, I am not dude. He is still hidden.

That’s not what I’m talking about. Even if he’s still hidden, you’re breaking the rules, because you’re narrating his action before he has had his turn. You’re narrating something that has not happened. This means you are deciding on a player action before the player must decide. You’re taking away his chance to act on his turn by locking it in ahead of time.


Get it yet man? Youre wrong.

You still don’t even understand what I’m saying. Once you do, if that ever happens, then you’ll be in a position to decide if I’m right or wrong.


A failed check results in no surprise )or maybe even thefailed stealth check PC being surprised) and not being hidden. This attacker is hidden. Even when his hyper alert target (with the Alert feat) noticed something was amiss (precisely what the feat allows him to do) and avoided bieng surprised 9again precisely what the feat allows him to do) the DM narrated the rules accordingly.

The alert feat does not give you the mechanical ability to succeed on a failed check. You’re making this up, like the rest of what you’ve written.


Call the waahmbulance all you want mate, but this is the express RAW and RAI.

This is a bizarre thing to say from the only person who has used whining to try to convince people. You may notice that every instance that I used was a parallel of yours.


Yes, channel your anger! Channel your hatred!

Come on mate, you're wrong. Let it go.

We can send off a tweet request if you want for sage advice. IF gambling is allowed here, I'll happily put a bet on me being correct?

A wager of some kind. One for joke value if nothing else.

I’m not convinced that you undertand what my point is, yet. There is no evidence that you do. Also, I’m not mad. I’m not sure what’s giving you that impression. I’m just trying to explaining something. I honestly don’t care what you think. I’m just putting the arguments out there for others to read, in case they make the mistake of thinking you know what you’re talking about.


And in any event, the enemies are attacking; they're in the process of revealing themselves.

False. The RAW are very clear. An attacker is revealed when the attack hits or misses. There’s no process. You’re making s@#t up.


That (according to the RAW) is what triggers combat.

False. See above.


The implication of making a Dexterity check to determine reaction speed is there is some kind of stimuli to react to.

There is nothing to support this invention. Someone has a wild imagination.


I prefer to give my players as much information as I can to enable them to have their characters respond and react with the environment and the world around them. This immerses them more, and after all, theyre the protagonists, not me.

Except you don’t. You stop narrating at some point. You could always give more. But you don’t. You stop at some point. Everyone does.

You give them what is available, in the amount of depth that you think is useful.

But so does everyone. This is not the point.

The point is that you give the players imaginary information about things that are not actually happening in the fictional narrative in order to compensate for the fact that you can’t understand how to resolve the RAW without doing so.

I can forgive your inability to understand how to solve the problem. Clearly the problem of incorporating multiple rules in a way that doesn't break any of them is a challenge for you. That's understandable. We all come into this world with different gifts. But when you knowingly break a rule, and then make noises about why you can't think of a better way, or repeatedly tell us "how you do it" as if it should be okay to break the rules because you do it, or when you try to tell DMs who actually care about following the rules that they are bad DMs because they refuse to follow your incorrect lead, well... that's not being a bad DM. That's just being a bad person. I'm assuming you're over 18. I don't accept excuses from adults for this sort of thing. I just expect better.

That’s why you’re wrong, and that’s why you’re a bad DM.

Poor narration is a splash in the pond compared to the ocean of problems you create when you try to force PCs to do things they don’t want to do because you narrated something before it happened and refuse to let PCs act freely when it's their turn.

You can say that you care abut the PCs and want them to be the protagonists, but that can’t be reconciled with way you DM. You make up rules, act for players, and force them to commit to actions before their turns even happen.

I'm not here to change how you DM, but if you're going to claim that it's good, when it's probably the worst DMing i've ever heard of, then I'll point out that it's actually bad.

[BurgerBeast]

No paradox.

Being able to sense bloodlust/intent to harm and counter it is a staple fantasy trope. The swordsman who dodges the sniper's bullet by feeling the intent and reacting, the wizard who casts a spell that stops a hidden ninja from backstabbing them, etc.

The hostile intent is what triggers combat, not a hostile action being taken. While the two often go together, they don't have to.

In this case (ambushing orcs taken down before they fired), the narration could go

(Everyone fails perception checks)
DM: (to Alert character) You feel a sense of menace like eyes full of bloodlust but you can't pin down a location.
DM: (to everyone) Roll initiative, everyone's surprised except <Alert PC>.
<Alert PC wins initiative>
APC: I fireball those bushes (guessing luckily). Rolls damage, enemies all die
DM: The sense of menace fades, you find several scorched corpses of orcs in the bushes with bows half-drawn.
DM: You're out of initiative at this point. (This line is optional depending on style).


The Alert PC knows a threat exists in the immediate vicinity. How do we know this? Because he's not surprised, and only those characters that notice a (any) threat are not surprised. He doesn't know where or what the threat is (because they're hidden, meaning unseen and unheard, not unnoticeable)--that fireball may have been targeted on the wrong point and wasted or may have been total overkill, or may have caused significant collateral damage.

This sort of thing works well in stories, where there are no players to mess things up with their agency, because the omniscient writer can guarantee that spider senses only apply when they are correct.

However, in a TTRPG, the agents in play can cause spider senses to be unreliable, so the trope doesn't work. Examples are given above.

So, when the character guesses wrongly, and wastes a fireball, and the ambushes, having seen the fireball, decide to call off the ambush and retreat...

What you get for the "alert" feat is the opportunity to waste fireballs and appear insane. And from your character's point of view, he has no way of knowing if his senses are accurate or not, either. So he may start questioning his own sanity.


I'm surprised (ha!) to see how many people in this thread think that someone who wins initiative gets to act before the one who actually does the surprising. Guys, puhlease, read the rules, that's not how it works. They don't get an action, all they get is that they're allowed to use their reaction during the surpriser's turn! And that makes perfect sense, because your high initiative means you have a great response time. This faster response time allows you to take a reaction during the surpriser's turn. That's it. No other actions till your next turn in round 2.

Surprised character with lower initiative:

- does nothing on his own turn
- get hit in the face with an arrow
- ow! He did not see that coming
- next turns proceed as normal

Surprised character with higher initiative:

- does nothing on his own turn
- notices an arrow zooming his way
- uses his reaction to Deflect Missiles and bats the arrow away
- next turns proceed as normal

The alert feat (PHB 165) means that a character "can't be surprised while conscious." That is the context for this thread. A character with the alert feat can win initiative and act in the first round of combat even though the ambushers are undetected by him (via a Perception vs Stealth contest or any other such rule).

[Louro]

The alert feat (PHB 165) means that a character "can't be surprised while conscious." That is the context for this thread. A character with the alert feat can win initiative and act in the first round of combat even though the ambushers are undetected by him (via a Perception vs Stealth contest or any other such rule).
Which means he will continue whatever he was doing, cause he didn't notice anything (failed perception).
Ambushers don't get advantage on their attacks on the alert character, and he can use reaction.
That's it.

[PhoenixPhyre]

This sort of thing works well in stories, where there are no players to mess things up with their agency, because the omniscient writer can guarantee that spider senses only apply when they are correct.

However, in a TTRPG, the agents in play can cause spider senses to be unreliable, so the trope doesn't work. Examples are given above.

So, when the character guesses wrongly, and wastes a fireball, and the ambushes, having seen the fireball, decide to call off the ambush and retreat...

What you get for the "alert" feat is the opportunity to waste fireballs and appear insane. And from your character's point of view, he has no way of knowing if his senses are accurate or not, either. So he may start questioning his own sanity.


I would say that a DM who does that (backs away after initiative is rolled because someone acted first) is metagaming in a bad way--they're taking different actions than they would have otherwise because of a game-level event (initiative is game-level, not fiction-level).

Combatants have a meta-responsibility to not uninvoke initiative-provoking actions in my mind, in part because going into initiative is an expensive operation. Narratively, initiative in my eyes happens when the crossbow is being aimed and the trigger squeezed (past the point of consciously being able to stop but the instant before it goes off). At that point, the characters are committed. All these actions (the fireball and the arrows) are all happening in the same short span of time.

The orcs have their bows already drawn and are an instant from release when the fireball hits them and cooks them. Or they have released their arrows, but the fireball burns them to ash. Or whatever else is appropriate narration.

This preserves a) the benefit of the feat (or weapon if you have a weapon of warning), b) the value of a high initiative result, and c) surprise/stealth (anyone who didn't get fireballed gets advantage on their attack because they're still unseen, and those surprised can't defend themselves), all while remaining very narratively-justifiable.

Edit: And I agree that randomly fireballing the landscape may earn you a reputation for being unreliable. But that doesn't hold for taking the search action (which, if successful would negate the advantage from being unseen), dropping fog cloud to level the playing field, casting sanctuary, taking the dodge action, or any number of other possible actions that would be foreclosed if the ambushers always went first.

[ad_hoc]

If you don't want the sort of genre tropes that Alert supports in your game, just don't allow Alert.

[BurgerBeast]

Which means he will continue whatever he was doing, cause he didn't notice anything (failed perception).
Ambushers don't get advantage on their attacks on the alert character, and he can use reaction.
That's it.

You may have it. That might be the best solution. You win initiative, but having no reason to act, you don’t act.

However this seems like it might be a bit too penalizing, to me. The alert feat says that you can’t be surprised (unless I’m mistaken - I’m AFB). If you can’t be surprised then you can’t lose your turn in the first round, since that’s an effect of surprise. I’ll think about this, more.

I’m totally fine with the RAW, as I’ve said before. It’s pretty clear how to run the scenario. The alert player, if he wins initiative, must act on whatever incomplete information he has, and still receives some benefit in that he got to act during the first round, he doesn’t give up advantage to attackers, and he can take reactions (I’m AFB and don’t remember if surprise grants advantage or if the advantage comes only for being unseen.) No problems there. That’s just how the game works.


I would say that a DM who does that (backs away after initiative is rolled because someone acted first) is metagaming in a bad way--they're taking different actions than they would have otherwise because of a game-level event (initiative is game-level, not fiction-level).

But this isn’t necessarily what the DM is doing. He might just be honestly role-playing.

Suppose a groups of goblins decides to ambush the PCs, but because they do not outnumber he PCs 2 to 1, and they’re cowardly, they will only attack from an ambush. Now suppose the alert PC wins initiative and uses his action to ready his bow, move toward cover, and shout “Ambush!”

Now, the goblins may think twice about attacking. They may change their mind.

Also consider examples given above, where it is the PCs who wish to adjust their actions. If an NPC is moving to assassinate the king and a PC wants to intervene, but not kill the enemy attacker, he should be able to move between them and shout “Stop!” and the attacker should be able to use his turn to stop if he wishes. The DM is not, in my opinion, correct to force the attacker to continue with the attack in this scenario - it is entirely up to the player.

So it cuts both ways.


Combatants have a meta-responsibility to not uninvoke initiative-provoking actions in my mind, in part because going into initiative is an expensive operation. Narratively, initiative in my eyes happens when the crossbow is being aimed and the trigger squeezed (past the point of consciously being able to stop but the instant before it goes off). At that point, the characters are committed. All these actions (the fireball and the arrows) are all happening in the same short span of time.

Sure. But there ought to be some benefit to winning initiative. The fact that an alert character can potentially stop an action by winning initiative is not a bad thing. It adds to the possibilities. In some cases the attacker may wish to stop because the actions of the person before him changed the scenario. He should have that right. Conversely, if he won initiative he should not have that right.


The orcs have their bows already drawn and are an instant from release when the fireball hits them and cooks them. Or they have released their arrows, but the fireball burns them to ash. Or whatever else is appropriate narration.

Agreed. This is consistent with the rules.


This preserves a) the benefit of the feat (or weapon if you have a weapon of warning), b) the value of a high initiative result, and c) surprise/stealth (anyone who didn't get fireballed gets advantage on their attack because they're still unseen, and those surprised can't defend themselves), all while remaining very narratively-justifiable.

Agreed.


Edit: And I agree that randomly fireballing the landscape may earn you a reputation for being unreliable. But that doesn't hold for taking the search action (which, if successful would negate the advantage from being unseen), dropping fog cloud to level the playing field, casting sanctuary, taking the dodge action, or any number of other possible actions that would be foreclosed if the ambushers always went first.

Well, not to the same degree. It depends on what the narrative explanation of alertness is. Because it is possible to be the guy who spends five minutes every hour thinking he’s being attacked when he’s not. And that’s going to get you a reputation for being paranoid or a coward etc.


If you don't want the sort of genre tropes that Alert supports in your game, just don't allow Alert.

But that’s not my point. My point is that the sort of genre trope described is not provided by the feat.

[Thrudd]

Which means he will continue whatever he was doing, cause he didn't notice anything (failed perception).
Ambushers don't get advantage on their attacks on the alert character, and he can use reaction.
That's it.

Being immune to surprise means he can act normally on his first turn even when his attackers were hidden or have been granted surprise for some other reason by the DM.

All characters who roll higher initiative than the ambushers can take a reaction, since their turn (on which they were required to do nothing due to surprise) is now over. That's not a special thing Alert grants.

Since Alert gets +5 to initiative, there's a very good chance he will have higher initiative than the ambushers (maybe there should be a rule giving hidden attackers advantage on initiative rolls as the default, to reduce the likelihood of this situation). This means he gets a normal turn where he can move and take an action when no attacks have actually happened yet.

He won't just continue what he was doing, because he does know that an attack is happening - initiative has been rolled and it's his turn and he's not surprised. He just heard a noise or smelled a smell or hairs raised on his neck, not enough to know exactly where the bad guys are but enough to know he's got a few seconds to do something before an attack happens.

[PhoenixPhyre]

But this isn’t necessarily what the DM is doing. He might just be honestly role-playing.

Suppose a groups of goblins decides to ambush the PCs, but because they do not outnumber he PCs 2 to 1, and they’re cowardly, they will only attack from an ambush. Now suppose the alert PC wins initiative and uses his action to ready his bow, move toward cover, and shout “Ambush!”

Now, the goblins may think twice about attacking. They may change their mind.


I find that unlikely, mainly for meta reasons. Especially if it happens frequently (or only when the Alert player wins initiative). It smells like DM being a poor loser who's trying to weasel the benefit out of the player's feat choice.

And if my supposition about the timing of initiative is correct (after the action is too late to consciously stop) and the alert PC acts essentially simultaneously with the trigger, then there's no opportunity in-fiction to rethink it. We let players re-choose their actions for game reasons (maximizing player fun), not because in-fiction there's time to reconsider. So reconsidering NPC actions on that scale feels like meta-gaming, especially if it nullifies an action or makes the PC look foolish.



Also consider examples given above, where it is the PCs who wish to adjust their actions. If an NPC is moving to assassinate the king and a PC wants to intervene, but not kill the enemy attacker, he should be able to move between them and shout “Stop!” and the attacker should be able to use his turn to stop if he wishes. The DM is not, in my opinion, correct to force the attacker to continue with the attack in this scenario - it is entirely up to the player.

So it cuts both ways.


Initiative is called for because E (the assassin) has the intent of murdering the king (a hostile action) and timing of actions will be important. From this point on, initiative is in play until there is no more possibility of hostile intent. Even if E stops the active attack, he still remains a potential threat until the king is out of range or he's dealt with/surrenders/leaves. Thus, no action he takes will cancel initiative. So he can do whatever.

This is different from the abandoned ambush case (where everyone failed their perception) because there the threat is unknown, so if the enemies really do abandon the ambush and stealth off, we're in an inconsistent state. There's no possibility of hostile actions but the players can't know that because they failed their checks. Thus, you either have to end initiative (telling them that there was a threat but it's gone, something they can't know, and wasting the time spent going into initiative) or keep it going needlessly (which wastes time as well). To get around this, I simply enforce that once initiative is called, there will be at least one obvious trigger for it. Someone will fire an arrow/drop a rock/make themselves visible. Or get blasted to pieces if the alert PC guesses right, but then will be visible as corpses. This minimizes time-wastage and leaves the game consistent.



Sure. But there ought to be some benefit to winning initiative. The fact that an alert character can potentially stop an action by winning initiative is not a bad thing. It adds to the possibilities. In some cases the attacker may wish to stop because the actions of the person before him changed the scenario. He should have that right. Conversely, if he won initiative he should not have that right.


That would seem to make going first as the attacker a detriment, because then (by your standards) he's committed and can't change. I'd say that no matter what he does, initiative is still in effect because hostile intent was declared. That doesn't mean active combat is still happening, just that timing matters.

As a matter of personal policy, I'd never "undo" an ambush to nullify an Alert PC. It just feels wrong. They took the feat, and the feat only warns them correctly. It doesn't say "roll a dice for false alarms." It's a supernatural awareness of danger. It just plain works.



Well, not to the same degree. It depends on what the narrative explanation of alertness is. Because it is possible to be the guy who spends five minutes every hour thinking he’s being attacked when he’s not. And that’s going to get you a reputation for being paranoid or a coward etc.

But that’s not my point. My point is that the sort of genre trope described is not provided by the feat.

That's why the danger-sense/bloodlust-sense tropes work so well, and why I'm convinced that they're exactly what's provided by the feat. No other explanation works both narratively and mechanically. Remember that everyone is magic, and feats (and features) often represent going beyond what normal Earth humans can do whether they're explicitly tagged as spells or not. D&D is much more about emulating archetypes and representing tropes (like this) than it is about simulating anything in particular. And someone who gets hunches about danger is a really common archetype and trope, even outside of fantasy.

[Louro]

I agree with RAW being too rough on alert feat. When I have an alert PC I usually go like:

- Kobolds stealth Vs passive perception.
- Surprise houseruled round.
"Mr. Awer, you feel like someone is watching you... (wait for his action). You hear something, and you know it is the sound of flying arrows towards you. Like a dozen of kobolds unload their shortbows upon you from the now revealed tunnels you didn't notice."
-Roll attacks (only one per attacker, usually with advantage, cantrips allowed)
Mr Awer can use reaction.
-"Initiative!" Which sometimes I even roll beforehand, so I can follow with:
- [I]"Mr. Hitalot, like 10 or more, they came out of the 6 disguised tunnels. It doesn't look like they will be charging you. What do you do"

I don't like losing the momentum.
Having players eat all that damage even before rolling initiative is kind of tough. As kobolds are.

[Thrudd]

I agree with RAW being too rough on alert feat. When I have an alert PC I usually go like:

- Kobolds stealth Vs passive perception.
- Surprise houseruled round.
"Mr. Awer, you feel like someone is watching you... (wait for his action). You hear something, and you know it is the sound of flying arrows towards you. Like a dozen of kobolds unload their shortbows upon you from the now revealed tunnels you didn't notice."
-Roll attacks (only one per attacker, usually with advantage, cantrips allowed)
Mr Awer can use reaction.
-"Initiative!" Which sometimes I even roll beforehand, so I can follow with:
- [I]"Mr. Hitalot, like 10 or more, they came out of the 6 disguised tunnels. It doesn't look like they will be charging you. What do you do"

I don't like losing the momentum.
Having players eat all that damage even before rolling initiative is kind of tough. As kobolds are.

That seems rougher than RAW. The ambushing creatures get an extra attack before initiative is rolled, and nobody has a chance for reactions except the alert character. The alert character still needs to take their first turn without knowing where or what the attackers are. You're just making it worse for everyone else, not giving the alert character any extra advantage (which they don't need anyway.)

A boost to Alert, for people who think it is actually a disadvantage to get a turn without knowing where the attackers are- add a fourth item to the list of effects:

When rolling initiative, the character may make a wisdom/perception check with advantage to spot hidden attackers, against the DC of their prior stealth checks. This occurs before/outside of combat and does not count as a search action.

OR

After initiative is rolled, the character automatically detects the nearest enemy even if a previous perception check had failed.

Alternatively, a fix to reduce the occasion of the Alert character (or anyone) getting a turn before ambushers can attack and be revealed, rather than boosting the feat's utility -

When combat is initiated by a creature/character hidden from all potential enemies, it gets advantage on its initiative roll. If the creature is detected by any of its potential targets, this advantage is not granted.

OR

When combat is initiated by a creature/character hidden from all enemies, roll initiative as normal. After initiative is rolled, if the hidden creature has lower initiative than any of its targets, its initiative score is changed to be one higher than the highest score.

[Louro]

That seems rougher than RAW. The ambushing creatures get an extra attack before initiative is rolled
Actually worse. By RAW Kobolds would have full turns instead of just one attack.



and nobody has a chance for reactions except the alert character.
A PC with high ini would have his reaction, not a big deal. PCs who missed the perception by little might have a reaction.


The alert character still needs to take their first turn without knowing where or what the attackers are.
That's exactly RAW. And I gave him all he needed to know (someone's watching you). He can dodge, move back, get cover, go invisible...


You're just making it worse for everyone else, not giving the alert character any extra advantage (which they don't need anyway.)
He acted before the ambush even happened!



A boost to Alert, for people who think it is actually a disadvantage to get a turn without knowing where the attackers are- add a fourth item to the list of effects...
Now you suggest to improve alert far way beyond RAI. It is already great!

Excuse me, but it seems you want alert to allow you to attack the ambushers before they attack you. That's not what the feat says.

[Tanarii]

If you want to start combat with creatures that launched an ambush being 'hidden' until they make their attack on their turn, you're going to have to accept some weirdness in terms of interacting with the initiative system. There are multiple ways to not be surprised, the Alert Feat being only one.

All in all, it's much simpler to just say creatures reveal themselves when they launch their ambush, at which point initiative is rolled.

Of course, you can do it if you want to. Plenty of people have explained ways they make it work just fine in this thread.

Edit: I was wrong, surprise does indeed mention the creatures hiding in reference to attempting an ambush. Still, point remains there's no particular reason to assume they continue to do so once the ambush is launched and combat commences.

[Lord Vukodlak]

A simple solution can be on the first round of combat you may lower you’re initiative to go after someone else. So Mr Alert with an initiative 26 may change that to a 17 for the rest of the combat. That way his turn isn’t wasted via beating the unseen enemies. But he also doesn’t know what the enemy is doing before they do it.

[Tanarii]

A simple solution can be on the first round of combat you may lower you’re initiative to go after someone else. So Mr Alert with an initiative 26 may change that to a 17 for the rest of the combat. That way his turn isn’t wasted via beating the unseen enemies. But he also doesn’t know what the enemy is doing before they do it.
There's the danger of a Delay conga-line of PC actions in that.

An alternative, if a given table wished to avoid that, is for a player to optionally lower his initiative to right behind the first enemy action, only in the cases where they can detect no enemies, and not surprised due to a special feature. Or possible group of enemies, if the DM rolls enemy initiative in groups. That would prevent some abuses.

[Louro]

If you want to start combat with creatures that launched an ambush being 'hidden' until they make their attack on their turn you're going to have to accept some weirdness in terms of interacting with the initiative system. There are multiple ways to not be surprised, the Alert Feat being only one.
That's exactly what RAW says. My houserule plays out really close trading reactions for readied actions instead of full rounds.



Edit: I was wrong, surprise does indeed mention the creatures hiding in reference to attempting an ambush. Still, point remains there's no particular reason to assume they continue to do so once the ambush is launched and combat commences.
They continue to do what?
By RAW those kobolds could shoot and move back into concealment on their turns. They could even run to a PC and stab him... by surprise!! And flee without OA if enough movement left.

Alert is fine as it is. Otherwise it won't be so popular.

[Lord Vukodlak]

There's the danger of a Delay conga-line of PC actions in that.
That danger is kinda meh when its limited to the first round of combat.

[BurgerBeast]

I think the game plays perfectly fine using the RAW.

The two problems I pointed out are problems, but they have solutions. It's just that some people insist on hammering square pegged solutions into circular shaped holes. In other words, some of the proposed solutions are problematic.

But to solve the two problems:

1. The problem of alert characters degenerating into paranoid schizophrenics.

A. You can narrate using only the available information. "There is imminent danger present... roll initiative." Then, if the the alert character wins initiative, allow him to take his turn with this minimal information. If a surprised character wins initiative, simply narrate their cluelessness until a monster acts. There is the potential problem here that initiative will be rolled but no combat will occur. However I don't see that as a problem. In fact, if it's not overused, it could be a good narrative device for a variety of reasons.

B. If you really hate the idea of rolling initiative and then not having a combat... you could first narrate to the alert character's player... "your spidey senses are tingling... what would you do in this situation?" and if his actions could possibly lead to a no-combat result, you could then have him roll initiative. You could roll the monster initiatives behind the screen and if it plays out as no combat then there's no need to have every roll initiative. I would not personally do this. I have no problem with having everyone roll initiative and then having no combat.

2. The problem of the alert feat being a penalty, of sorts, in some of these situations.

A. Take the "tough titty" approach. If anyone takes the alert feat, simply make them aware of this rare corner case and how you will resolve it (by RAW). Explain that if they happen to win initiative in an ambush situation, they will be given an opportunity to act with no information. Take care to point out that they will still receive benefits due to the feat: they will not receive advantage to hit you, and you will be allowed to use reactions, and you will be allowed to move and act on your turn even though it's with limited information.

---

So, the solutions are there. But this is a very useful conversation and/or problem for DMs to consider. It brings to light potential mistakes that DMs can make when they try to MacGyver the rules unnecessarily. Good DMs make the effort to reconcile the rules with the narrative, and when those two things are not apparently reconcilable, they go to great pains to find a way to re-think their preconceptions and arrive at a solution that compromises neither the RAW not the narrative, because immersion depends on a consistent and predictable narrative.

Most DMs will encounter a problem like this for the first time in-game, and they will have to make a ruling on the fly. And that's the nature of the game. But situations like this remind us that "fortune favours the prepared mind" or however that saying goes.

Every DM needs to understand the system by internalizing it and making the rules and the narrative consistent. This is a necessary part of being a good DM. However, the worst and most dangerous types of DMs are the ones who are rigid in this. They re-word the rules in their heads and do so in a way that makes sense, but is slightly different than the actual RAW. Then, when they run into problems that are caused by this re-wording, they refuse to abandon their re-wording. And this is where the problem lies - in the refusal to abandon an obviously flawed understanding of the rules. They instead start to MacGyver the system so that their re-worded way of thinking can be preserved. Soon the whole game is jerry-rigged and ad-hocced until it no longer resembles the game we love... but these DMs can't tell, because the same aspect of their personality that causes them to cling to their re-worded attempts to understand the rules is the mentality what drives them to never give up on their obviously flawed understanding. They look back at years of playing "their way" and they feel that if they concede that they are wrong, then somehow it invalidates those years or even they themselves, as people. Soon they are spouting out nonsense about how everyone else's way (the RAW) is nonsense, or ridiculous, or what have you.

Then, and only then, you become a Malifice.

New DMs take heed.

[Thrudd]

If you want to start combat with creatures that launched an ambush being 'hidden' until they make their attack on their turn, you're going to have to accept some weirdness in terms of interacting with the initiative system. There are multiple ways to not be surprised, the Alert Feat being only one.

All in all, it's much simpler to just say creatures reveal themselves when they launch their ambush, at which point initiative is rolled.

Of course, you can do it if you want to. Plenty of people have explained ways they make it work just fine in this thread.

Edit: I was wrong, surprise does indeed mention the creatures hiding in reference to attempting an ambush. Still, point remains there's no particular reason to assume they continue to do so once the ambush is launched and combat commences.

"once the ambush is launched" is exactly when the rules say they come out of hiding - when their attacks are launched (and either hit or miss). And they can't launch their attacks (or move) until after initiative is rolled and their turn comes up. If they stand up and reveal themselves before initiative is rolled, then there won't be any surprise, since they aren't attacking from hidden positions.

However, since by RAW the DM may fiat when surprise occurs, I suppose the DM can say "even though the creatures have revealed themselves before they attack, you are still surprised because you didn't notice them earlier." And just make it the policy for creatures to jump up out of hiding so Alert characters have something to target with their un-surprised turn.

I personally don't have a problem telling an Alert player that they get a turn to act without seeing the attackers. It's better than not getting to act, and it isn't going to happen every time anyway. The cancelling of advantage from hidden attackers and the +5 to initiative are probably worth taking the feat anyway.

[Tanarii]

"once the ambush is launched" is exactly when the rules say they come out of hiding - when their attacks are launched (and either hit or miss).
The rules don't say any such thing. A DM is entirely within their rights and RAW to run it as they are revealed at the beginning of combat.

[Lord Vukodlak]

The rules don't say any such thing. A DM is entirely within their rights and RAW to run it as they are revealed at the beginning of combat.

"When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on Attack rolls against it. If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an Attack, you give away your location when the Attack hits or misses."

The rules say that a hidden creature is not revealed until it attacks. A DM saying they are revealed at the beginning of combat means ambusher's never have advantage for being hidden or a creature who decides NOT to act in the first round of combat but remain hidden is revealed anyway.

[Malifice]

Then, and only then, you become a Malifice.

New DMs take heed.

Lol.

Mate, you're wrong. You were wrong about hiding, you were wrong about invisibility and you're wrong again here.

It's weird how you continue to argue despite the RAW and every single sage advice and Dev tweet stating as much.

DM determines surprise and positioning, initiative is rolled, turns are taken in order. Surprised creatures cant act or move on turn 1 and cant take reactions until that turn ends.

Looks like we're largely in agreement with that.

Where we disagree is with the information and narration provided by the DM to the Players to allow them to interpret why they have just rolled initiative (why their characters are making Dexterity checks to react in time relative to other creatures).

You prefer to say nothing, or narrate some kind of weird spider sense kick in to preserve the 'hidden' status of the creatures present and then make a whole lot of blind rolls. I prefer to narrate the combat starting, while also preserving the hidden status of the creatures present.

You're acting as if Hiding is some kind of absolute rule that doesnt rely on (heavy) DM interpretation and adjudication (which is demonstrably false in the rules) and that that turn based cyclic combat isnt an abstraction and conceit of the rules (also demonstrably false).

Like I said a million times; I groan when I see tables run by DMs like you who call for 'initiative' out of the blue with no narration or information given to the players to start the combat, and to inform them (through their characters) why their characters are rolling such a check. I groan even more when I see 'attacks outside of turn based order' or 'surprise rounds'.

It just shows me that your ability to grasp the rules, and to use them as a whole, to create a fun and engaging encounter and campaign, is incomplete at best.

But whatever mate. You do you.

[Louro]

You are the one playing Heisenberg's principle here.
You see the attackers but they are still hiding.They are both hidden and revealed at the same time!!!

And you keep saying this way of yours is both RAW and intuitive. Are you trolling or what?

[Malifice]

"When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on Attack rolls against it. If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an Attack, you give away your location when the Attack hits or misses."

The rules say that a hidden creature is not revealed until it attacks. A DM saying they are revealed at the beginning of combat means ambusher's never have advantage for being hidden or a creature who decides NOT to act in the first round of combat but remain hidden is revealed anyway.

The Rules also give the DM express flexibility in adjudicating hiding, when you're hidden and when you reveal yourself.

Note that a DM can easily provide information that allows his Players (through their characters) to know that an attack is imminent ('you hear the twang of a multiple bow strings from the bushes' or 'arcane chanting springs up around you, echoing from the darkness') without revealing a hidden creatures position or location.

This brings them into character seeing the encounter through their characters eyes and ears.

The attacking creature is not yet revealed, but the DM has given the PCs enough information to allow them to (in character) transition from narrative time to combat sequencing.

Once we get to the attacking creatures turn, the DM reveals his location, after the attack is finally resolved (initiative being the first step in the attacks resolution).

Remember; all this **** is happening largely simultaneously, despite the stop/start nature of cyclic turn based combat. People dont stand around frozen for six seconds waiting for one person to move and act at a time in the game world. Everyone is moving, acting and reacting together.

For example, a group of PC Soldiers walking along a jungle trail get ambushed. The DM starts the encounter stating 'As you patrol along the trail, machine gun fire rings out from the bushes around you, and bullets start to whizz past your ears'.

Your Alert PC might win initiative and decide to [ready an action once the hidden ambusher is revealed on his turn] or [duck into cover] or [dodge] or whatever. He's hyper alert (hence the feat) and literally is never surprised. He also rolled better in an opposed Dexterity check with the ambusher, meaning he's also extremely fast and able to act (and react) faster than the ambusher.

Note that he still does not know where the ambusher is, until after the ambusher has his turn and the attack is resolved. The ambusher remains hidden till that point. All you have revealed is that combat has started (which is already known to the players in any event). Youve just relayed that information to them via their characters, and narrated the encounter (and the combination of ability checks, feats and environment appropriately).

I dont get why anyone would have any difficulty here. Take a pause and read the above. Have a think about it for a second. Ask yourself which is preferable if you were a player or DM. Blind rolls and a lack of information, or intresting narration and the ability to see the encounter through the eyes of your character?

[Lord Vukodlak]

Note that he still does not know where the ambusher is, until after the ambusher has his turn and the attack is resolved. The ambusher remains hidden till that point. All you have revealed is that combat has started (which is already known to the players in any event). Youve just relayed that information to them via their characters, and narrated the encounter (and the combination of ability checks, feats and environment appropriately
None of that was what Tanarii said. Tanarii made the claim that a hidden creature is revealed at the start of combat not when they actually take their turn and do something to reveal themselves such as attacking.

Take a pause and read the chain of posts and quotes going backwards.

[Malifice]

You are the one playing Heisenberg's principle here.
You see the attackers but they are still hiding.They are both hidden and revealed at the same time!!!

And you keep saying this way of yours is both RAW and intuitive. Are you trolling or what?

They are hidden.

DM: (Decides monsters will attack from hiding with an ambush of arrows. Pauses and narrates the start of the encounter as such): As you walk down the forest trail, arrows rain down all around you, coming from the bushes, and undergrowth; roll initiative!
(Alert PC rolls higher than the attackers)
Alert PCs turn: Can I see the attackers?
DM: Nope, they're hidden... more arrows rain down! What do you do?
Alert PC: [Ducks for cover, dodges, fireballs a random area, casts defensive spell, readies etc).
DM: Finishes resolving monster attacks (calling for initiative was the first step) with attack rolls and possibly damage rolls (and possible PC reactions) and places monster minis on the board.

Combat continues as normal.

The monsters were hidden all the way up to the attack being resolved (hit or miss). The DM simply narrated 'combat is starting' with flavor text to give the players enough information to know that combat was starting, and what was starting the combat.

In your (and BB's games) it goes:

DM: Roll initiative.
Players: Yeah... umm why, whats happening?
DM: Nothing.
Players: So what exactly is it that our PCs are checking to see if we can react to in time?
DM: Nothing. It hasnt happened yet. But it will happen. So thats why Im calling for initiative.
Players: Huh?
DM: Just roll.
Players: But what does this roll represent in game for our characters?
DM: Nothing. You're all just standing around chatting.
Players: What? Whatever (they roll dice).
[Alert PC rolls highest]
DM: Alert PC, its your turn.
Alert PC: Um so I'm acting now, has the thing I made the Dexterity check for happened yet?
DM: Nope. It hasnt happened yet
Alert PC: So my character knows nothing, and is currently reacting and acting in response to nothing? Like... I am super Alert, and nailed my Dexterity check to determine reaction speed... in response to something that hasnt happened yet and you wont tell me what is going on?
DM: Yep. It hasnt happened yet.
Alert PC: Well I guess I keep doing whatever I was doing before then seeing as nothing has happened.
DM: OK. Monsters leap out of nowhere and and attack you.

Player quits the campaign.

The reality is that despite the stop start nature of turn based cyclic combat, actions in combat are largely simultaneous, and those monsters were charging out at the PC the moment the DM decided they were and called for initiative. On the Alert PCs turn, the monsters had swords out, and were on their way into battle, commencing their charge, with the final resolution of that charge to be mechanically resolved on the monsters first turn. They werent just standing there frozen in time and dealthy silent, yet to do anything.

But the DM said nothing. He couldnt find a way to narrate the encounter to mesh together the rules into a whole, preserving the monsters 'hidden' status (they remain so until they attack on their turn) and reconciling that with the mechanics of surprise, cyclic turn based combat, an Alert PC, Dexterity checks, stealth and hiding, and so forth.

In other words, he's a poor DM. Whether due to inexperience, or inability to merge the rules into an intresting whole, or forge a narrative, or inform the players of what their characters experience or whatever. All i know is I dont want to play in that campaign anymore.

Pick your preferred method. Id quit a campaign featuring method 2.

[Louro]

Don't you see what you are doing?
You are giving your players false information. Those arrows you tell your players about don't even exist (that's why all of them missed). Now you roll initiative and go back in time when ambushers haven't attacked yet.
It's raw nonsense.

And I'm glad to not having to deal with players that do not respect rule zero, golden rule, common sense and their DM.

Raw nonsense hehe. Did I make a pun?

[Thrudd]

They are hidden.

DM: (Decides monsters will attack from hiding with an ambush of arrows. Pauses and narrates the start of the encounter as such): Arrows rain down all around you, coming from the bushes, and undergrowth; roll initiative!
(Alert PC rolls higher than the attackers)
Alert PCs turn: Can I see the attackers?
DM: Nope, they're hidden. What do you do?
Alert PC: [Ducks for cover, dodges, fireballs a random area, casts defensive spell, readies etc).
DM: Finishes resolving monster attacks (calling for initiative was the first step) with attack rolls and possibly damage rolls (and possible PC reactions) and places monster minis on the board.

They were hidden all the way up to the attack being resolved (hit or miss). The DM simply narrated 'combat is starting' with flavor text to give the players enough information to know that combat was starting, and what was starting the combat.

In your (and BB's games) it goes:

DM: Roll initiative.
Players: Yeah... umm why, whats happening?
DM: Nothing.
Players: So what exactly is it that our PCs are checking to see if we can react to in time?
DM: Nothing. It hasnt happened yet. But it will happen. So thats why Im calling for initiative.
Players: Huh?
DM: Just roll.
Players: But what does this roll represent in game for our characters?
DM: Nothing. You're all just standing around chatting.
Players: What? Whatever (they roll dice).
[Alert PC rolls highest]
DM: Alert PC, its your turn.
Alert PC: Um so I'm acting now, has the thing I made the Dexterity check for happened yet?
DM: Nope. It hasnt happened yet
Alert PC: So my character knows nothing, and is currently reacting and acting in response to nothing?
DM: Yep.
Alert PC: Well I guess I keep doing whatever I was doing before then seeing as nothing has happened.
DM: OK. Monsters leap out of nowhere and and attack you.

Pick your preferred method. Id quit a campaign featuring method 2.

Method 2 is a straw man, unrealistically obtuse DM. My only problem with your Method 1 is choosing to use a purely narrative attack as the description that calls for initiative to be rolled - if arrows are flying, then someone has attacked already and initiative should have been rolled already. Even if you know that none of the arrows were ever going to hit them, the players will perceive this as an attack happening outside of the combat procedure, and also having made an attack, the attackers should now all be revealed.

Exchange that with "you hear some rustling leaves in the forest around you, and some birds suddenly fly away from the trees nearby. It's an ambush! Roll initiative!"
And there's no disagreement at all. That's the only thing I ever had a problem with. Narration should not give the players information their characters don't have, nor preemptively describe the results of things that should be mechanically resolved (like attacks and anything else on which the characters' abilities have an effect).

[BurgerBeast]

I dont get why anyone would have any difficulty here. Take a pause and read the above. Have a think about it for a second. Ask yourself which is preferable if you were a player or DM. Blind rolls and a lack of information, or intresting narration and the ability to see the encounter through the eyes of your character?

The reason you don’t get it is because you are not understanding the point. This is betrayed in your question.

Everyone agrees that interesting narration is better than blind rolls. But this is only one piece of relevant information. (Evidently, you have trouble dealing with more than one moving part.)

That’s because some of us think that even though interesting narration is a good thing, you still shouldn’t break the rules just to make the game more interesting. (See how complicated this gets? It’s not a simple question of better or worse. It’s not even a dilemma, despite the fact that you’ve treated it as one for this entire conversation which is why you keep breaking the rules when you don’t have to. Sorry nice it’s not a dilemma, you don’t have to sacrifice the rules or the narrative.

I can hear the whoosh as this flies over your head. (See what I did there? This is how I indicate to you that I understand your view. I demonstrate it back.) (You probably didn’t see what I did there. I narrated the sound of a claim flying over your head before it actually happened.) (Now, here’s a stretch: imagine if you actually understand the claim when you read it. For bonus points, consider what happens to the truth value of my narration if you end up understanding my point. Will it still be true that the claim flew over your head?) (Hint: the answer is no. The claim didn’t fly over your head (hypothetically, obviously)... but I already narrated that it did. So it did not happen... but it has already been narrated to have happened... hmmm... so If we assume that what I narrated was true, then it has to be false... because it can’t both fly over your head and not fly over your head... hmmm... that’s a contradiction.)

All you have to do is not break the rules. That is apparently too hard for you.

Also, you are absolutely wrong about your explanation of initiative. I shouldn’t have to tell you this, because essentially none of what you said about it is mentioned in the rules. It’s entirely your own invention.

Also you’re wrong about what a reductio ad absurdum is.

Also, you were wrong about the previous conversations that you mentioned as well... but it fairness to you, you can’t know that, because you still can’t properly represent my opinion on any of it. For that matter, you can’t properly represent the RAW the majority of the time.

[Malifice]

Don't you see what you are doing?
You are giving your players false information. Those arrows you tell your players about don't even exist (that's why all of them missed).

I am narrating the start of the Orcs attacks (they're shooting bows). I know this because I am the DM and I already decided this is what they are doing. Thats why I called for initiative in the first place.

Im narrating this occuring. I'll resolve those arrow attacks, on the Orcs turns. All I am doing at the 'initiative' phase of the start of combat, is explaining to the players what is happening (i.e. you're being shot at, with bows, from hidden attackers; likely Orcs).

Just because your fighter doesnt have his turn until the end of a round, after everyone else has acted, this doesnt mean he hasnt been swinging his sword for the entire round already by the time it comes for you make your attack roll. He hasnt been standing there like an idiot for six seconds; the reality is that he has been hacking, slashing, parrying, riposting etc for several seconds (in this round alone) by the time we come around to mechanically resolving the attack.

We dont resolve it till the end of the round (after every one else as acted). But the reality it mirrors is the fact that youve actually been going at it for several seconds already (in the game), by the time we (at the table) get to rolling the dice to see if you hit.

Turn based resolution of largely simultaneous action covering six seconds requires a bit of narrative license. What seems like retro causality, really isnt. Its just how we narrate the action given the abstraction of the rules.

Get it yet? Youre forgetting tht cyclic stop/ start combat rounds are a conceit and an abstraction, and not an absloute measure of objective time. They require narration in order to make sense.

[Malifice]

The reason you don’t get it is because you are not understanding the point. This is betrayed in your question.

Everyone agrees that interesting narration is better than blind rolls. But this is only one piece of relevant information. (Evidently, you have trouble dealing with more than one moving part.)

That’s because some of us think that even though interesting narration is a good thing, you still shouldn’t break the rules just to make the game more interesting.

Im not breaking the rules. Hidden creatures remain hidden. Even should the Alert PC go first, they enemy monsters are still hidden. The only information the PCs have is 'we are under attack' which is something the players already know already on account of you calling for initiative in the first place.

Im simply providing flavor text via naration so the players look at the battle via their characters, and to make sense of several abstract rules (a feat, cyclic turn based combat round abstraction of simultaneous activity, hiding, super alert characters etc) all coming together at one point.

Nothing changes (mechancially) due to the way I have chosen to narrate the entire action of a six second combat round unfolding around the PCs. Im simply narrating the combat.

[Louro]

Bull****.
Now you trying to disguise the mess you made with surprise talking about how time works in D&D.

You should be more respectful to the DM. He is the one putting the effort to make the game possible. Rule zero is rule zero because it comes even before rule one. Learn this you must.
Golden rule depends on the DM/group, but in the end is also a must.

[Malifice]

Here is an example.

Harry is locked in combat with an Orc.

On the Orcs turn, it decides it will run away (using the Disengage action) towards a door. The DM moves the miniature and places it 30' away.

On Harrys turn, he follows up the Orc, moving 30' and attacks it (missing).

To us at the table it appears as if the Orc moved 30' away from Harry while Harry stood there, before Harry then moved over to the Orc and swung at it.

What really happened was Harry and the Orc were locked in a swirling melee, and they moved at the same time towards the door, the Orc backing up and not exposing his back, as Harry pressed the advantage and lunged, slashed and hacked at the Orc, his blows largely parried by the frightened Orc. At no stage was there more than a few feet separating them for this time. After six seconds of this, they found themselves by the door, still locked in deadly face to face combat.

Get it yet? The abstraction of stop/start turn based cyclic combat is not mirroring identical activity in the game world. A level of narration is required as is a level of interpreting the abstraction and weaving it into a sensible and common sense narrative.

Harry wasnt standing there, frozen in time like an idiot, waiting for the Orc to move 30' before he did so. He followed the Orc the whole way, hacking and slashing at it (something we didnt find out until Harry had his turn, and declared and resolved his action). Whatver he was doing on his turn, he was doing for the entire six seconds; the fact we wait to resolve the action on his turn, doesnt mean that it wasnt already happening prior to that turn occurring.

[BurgerBeast]

Well, apparently I’m not the only one who would never go anywhere near your game. The game where the DM just puts arrows in the air, fired from orc arrows but never actually really fired by any irc in the fictional world, ever...

Yeah, someone has some real issues with narrative license and it’s limits.

Sounds like your games are more about “watch Malifice do whatever he wants” than they are about D&D.

Lol.

Just imagine the situation was reversed. The PCs are doing the ambushing. (But they failed their stealth checks). They tell the DM: we start our attack.

DM: okay. Your arrows are flying through the air at the orcs, and their arrows are flying at you. Everyone roll initiative. (Because you have to NARRATE SOMETHING, right? Or else it CAN’T be understood by those stupid players, after all.)

The orcs win initiative.

It turns out that the particular orc that rolled highest is within range because due to his aggressive feat. So he attacks with his axe.

Then the PC with the bow is the one who got attacked, so he attacks back in melee.

The cleric heals his ally.

The fighter joins the melee.

The Wizard lays down some cover.

The other orcs decide to close in.

...

...

...

Players: Um... what was all that about arrows coming from both sides?

DM: ... Um ... well ... that was just me narrating the start of combat... you guys have to know what you’re REACTING TO, after all.

Players: but there weren’t any arrows. That’s not how combat started.

DM: I am MalifIce and all of you suck at D&D because I say so. WRONG. BAD. STUPID FACES. If you ever DMed, I would GROAN! GROAN!

Players: ... but where did those arrows come from? Did that happen?

DM: What do you want me to do? Narrate nothing? WRONG. BAD. GROAN. STUPID. GROAN.

[Louro]

That’s because some of us think that even though interesting narration is a good thing, you still shouldn’t break the rules just to make the game more interesting.
I'm sorry but that's a wrong thought. And even more, it goes against the rules.

[Malifice]

Well, apparently I’m not the only one who would never go anywhere near your game.

Thats a good thing mate


The game where the DM just puts arrows in the air, fired from orc arrows but never actually really fired by any irc in the fictional world, ever...

They were fired. I know they were fired because I am the DM and Im running the Orcs. The fact arrows were fired is what triggered initiative, and I will finish resolving those attacks on the Orcs turn (with a roll vs AC and possible damage).

Here is one for you. Your Orc is adjacent to a PC fighter. The Fighter wants to talk, but you (the DM) have decided the Orc will attack the Fighter. The Fighter is alert and watching the Orc and expecting an attack. Both are circling one another, ready for the other, swords drawn.

However the Fighter rolls higher on initiative.

Do you narrate it as

'OK fighter, its your turn but the Orc is still doing nothing, seeing as we have yet to come to the point of the round where his attack gets resolved yet; so I guess he is still just standing there looking at you still, make your attack roll'

or

'The Orcs eyes narrow and and bellows a war cry, lunging forward at you, hacking madly. With blinding speed you counter his attack and thrust forward with your sword. Make your attack roll.'

Narrate the action, and what the rolls youre asking your players to make, represent in the game world, bearing in mind the action is simultaneous and concurrently, and you are the source of what your players know and react to.

Remember initiative only models when an action gets resolved in turn based order of the real world, not necessarily when it happens in the game world. Your conflating 'turn based activity as reflective of some real world absolute reality and not as the abstraction it actually is.

[Malifice]

Just imagine the situation was reversed. The PCs are doing the ambushing. (But they failed their stealth checks).

If the situation was reversed, and the PCs failed their stealth checks, it would be narrated differently wouldnt it!

DM: (noting the PCs failed their stealth checks): As you lie there in ambush, you see some Orcs approaching up the trail. Just as they're about to get into range, the Ranger lets out a loud cough. The Orcs turn to face you all, and after a seconds pause as you fumble for weapons and spell components, they bellow a war cry and commence a charge towards your position! Roll initiative.

See how it works yet?

[BurgerBeast]

What’s wrong with this:

DM: You’re walking along the path and nothing seems out of the ordinary, however things might be about to change... roll initiative, please.

Payers: Wait... what... what’s going on? What’s happening?

DM: This is one of those rare situations where I’m not sure yet... it’s one of those cool things about role-playing games. Once the dice are rolled, I’ll be able to give you more information...

(Players roll dice)

DM: Chris, your character is so alert that he is able to sense that something is amiss. You know that things are about to get deadly but you don’t see anything in particular... a quick scan of the trees reveals nothing. What do you do?

Chris: I draw my bow and position myself behind the wagon, ready to attack the first enemy I see.

(DM rolls a few dice)

DM: Lisa, you were lost in thought when Chris suddenly drew his bow and ran to the other side of the path. You just look up as you take an arrow from your right, for 7 damage.

Chris, as the arrow strikes Lisa you spot the orc that fired the arrow... this is your chance to loose that arrow. Roll your attack!

Etc.

If it’s your claim that your players are so delicate that this sort of treatment will break them, then I don’t know who you’re playing with.

Given this option, or making up actions on the spot before they happen, at the risk of being wrong... I just can’t fathom how you can think it’s better to just make **** up.

[BurgerBeast]

They were fired. I know they were fired because I am the DM and Im running the Orcs. The fact arrows were fired is what triggered initiative, and I will finish resolving those attacks on the Orcs turn (with a roll vs AC and possible damage).

Except you don’t know.

1. The Wizard wins initiative and casts fireball. All four orcs fail their saves... oops.

2. All the players roll higher than all the orcs. The fighter action surges and everyone rolls enough to hit... all the orcs die before the van act. Oops.

3. The PCs close in on the orcs in melee, killing two. Only two orcs remain, in melee with the fighter and Paladin... so now you’re going to have them fire their bows from melee at disadvantage instead of making melee attacks? Just because you made a stupid decision earlier, to narrate something without complete infornation?

Yeah, you’re a real champion.

[Malifice]

Given this option, or making up actions on the spot before they happen, at the risk of being wrong... I just can’t fathom how you can think it’s better to just make **** up.

Youre aware actions (in the game world) start happening before they get declared in the real world right?

Like when the guy that rolled a 1 for initiative declares he's attacking the Orc (on his turn) he hasnt necessarily been standing there frozen in time for the entire six seconds of the round while everyone else does stuff, before swinging at the Orc.

He's actually been swinging at the Orc for several seconds while everyone else does stuff. We're only resolving it in turn order. mechanically. Him and the Orc have been going at it for the whole six seconds of the combat round, parrying, hacking, thrusting etc.

You get that right? You get that actions are largely occurring at once, and concurrently over the space of several seconds, and that a 'turn' is just the time the narrative is focused on one individual.

[BurgerBeast]

Youre aware actions (in the game world) start happening before they get declared in the real world right?

Like when the guy that rolled a 1 for initiative declares he's attacking the Orc (on his turn) he hasnt necessarily been standing there frozen in time for the entire six seconds of the round while everyone else does stuff, before swinging at the Orc.

He's actually been swinging at the Orc for several seconds while everyone else does stuff. We're only resolving it in turn order. mechanically. Him and the Orc have been going at it for the whole six seconds of the combat round.

You get that right? You get that actions are largely occurring at once over the space of several seconds, and that a 'turn' is just the time the narrative is focused on one individual.

Stop trying to change the subject. Everyone knows this, and it’s irrelevant to the point.

You lose. Again.

Edit: Except. Oh my God. You actually don’t get it.

You don’t even understand how the initiative abstraction works.

No, they don’t necessarily happen before the rolls. They could happen before, around the same time, or after. It’s not relevant. All that’s relevant is that every action within a given round happens simultaneously.

This just gets better and better. Is there a single rule that you haven’t changed in your head by over specifying it?

[Lord Vukodlak]

Im not breaking the rules. Hidden creatures remain hidden. Even should the Alert PC go first, they enemy monsters are still hidden. The only information the PCs have is 'we are under attack' which is something the players already know already on account of you calling for initiative in the first place.
No that is not the only information they have. Your narration included two things, they were being attacked with arrows and it was from the underbrush.


I am narrating the start of the Orcs attacks (they're shooting bows). I know this because I am the DM and I already decided this is what they are doing. Thats why I called for initiative in the first place.

Im narrating this occuring. I'll resolve those arrow attacks, on the Orcs turns. All I am doing at the 'initiative' phase of the start of combat, is explaining to the players what is happening (i.e. you're being shot at, with bows, from hidden attackers; likely Orcs).

Just because your fighter doesnt have his turn until the end of a round, after everyone else has acted, this doesnt mean he hasnt been swinging his sword for the entire round already by the time it comes for you make your attack roll. He hasnt been standing there like an idiot for seix seconds; the reality is that he has been hacking, slashing, parrying, riposting etc for several seconds (in this round alone) by the time we come around to mechanically resolving the attack

Get it yet? Youre forgetting tht cyclic stop/ start combat rounds are a conceit and an abstraction, and not an absloute measure of objective time. They require narration in order to make sense.

Alert wizard, "I cast wind wall" or "I cast Fireball" because you gave away what the Orcs were doing and their likely location, the underbrush.
So tell me how did arrows go flying by if the attackers DIED before they had the chance to act?
The PC wizard can now negate the attack from ever happening. But if the only information you gave was. "you hear some rustling leaves in the forest around you, and some birds suddenly fly away from the trees nearby. It's an ambush! Roll initiative!" The wizard could guess its arrows and cast wind wall or fireball the most likely hiding place. But it could be monsters swinging through the trees, or a low flying dragon rushing towards them from inches above the tree line. Or hell it could be a purple worm is going to burst out of the ground next to said tree.

But with you as the DM I'd know the nature of the attack before it happens as if I had made the perception check.

Yes its an abstract measurement of time but in an ambush situation you don't know they are firing arrows before they're firing arrows. Just like I won't know the purple worm



What’s wrong with this:

DM: You’re walking along the path and nothing seems out of the ordinary, however things might be about to change... roll initiative, please.

Payers: Wait... what... what’s going on? What’s happening?

DM: This is one of those rare situations where I’m not sure yet... it’s one of those cool things about role-playing games. Once the dice are rolled, I’ll be able to give you more information...

(Players roll dice)

DM: Chris, your character is so alert that he is able to sense that something is amiss. You know that things are about to get deadly but you don’t see anything in particular... a quick scan of the trees reveals nothing. What do you do?

Chris: I draw my bow and position myself behind the wagon, ready to attack the first enemy I see.

(DM rolls a few dice)

DM: Lisa, you were lost in thought when Chris suddenly drew his bow and ran to the other side of the path. You just look up as you take an arrow from your right, for 7 damage.

Chris, as the arrow strikes Lisa you spot the orc that fired the arrow... this is your chance to loose that arrow. Roll your attack!
Given this option, or making up actions on the spot before they happen, at the risk of being wrong... I just can’t fathom how you can think it’s better to just make **** up.
That's how its done.

[Malifice]

Except you don’t know.

1. The Wizard wins initiative and casts fireball. All four orcs fail their saves... oops.

The Alert PC (who went first in the surprise round) is a Sorcerer and successfully takes the Search action, locating the Orcs and then quickens a fireball incinerating them before the arrow attacks are resolved.

DM: (pauses to narrate the action): As the twang of a bowstring rings out, the Sorcerers head snaps around to stare directly at an Orc archer. The Sorcerers hand moves with blinding speed as the arrow leaves the Orcs bow, and the Sorcerer utters but a single word of power. The bushes burst into flame, and you can all now see several Orcs, on fire and screaming, collapsing, smoldering bows in hands. The arrows land harmlessly around you.


2. All the players roll higher than all the orcs. The fighter action surges and everyone rolls enough to hit... all the orcs die before the van act. Oops.

Derp. The Fighter is surprised isnt he? Thats why I chose the narration that I did.

[Malifice]

Alert wizard, "I cast wind wall" or "I cast Fireball" because you gave away what the Orcs were doing and their likely location, the underbrush.

A PC Wizard with the Alert feat, using that feat to avoid surprise, and then winning initiative in the surprise round and incinerating a bunch of Orcs with a lucky guess and a fireball, or having enough time to cast a prepared spell to deal with said ambush?

Feature, not a bug.

[BurgerBeast]

Derp. The Fighter is surprised isnt he? Thats why I chose the narration that I did.

Bulls@#t. If the fighter was not surprised, what narration would you have chosen?

[Thrudd]

Thats a good thing mate



They were fired. I know they were fired because I am the DM and Im running the Orcs. The fact arrows were fired is what triggered initiative, and I will finish resolving those attacks on the Orcs turn (with a roll vs AC and possible damage).

Here is one for you. Your Orc is adjacent to a PC fighter. The Fighter wants to talk, but you (the DM) have decided the Orc will attack the Fighter. The Fighter is alert and watching the Orc and expecting an attack. Both are circling one another, ready for the other, swords drawn.

However the Fighter rolls higher on initiative.

Do you narrate it as

'OK fighter, its your turn but the Orc is still doing nothing, seeing as we have yet to come to the point of the round where his attack gets resolved yet; so I guess he is still just standing there looking at you still, make your attack roll'

or

'The Orcs eyes narrow and and bellows a war cry, lunging forward at you, hacking madly. With blinding speed you counter his attack and thrust forward with your sword. Make your attack roll.'

Narrate the action, and what the rolls youre asking your players to make, represent in the game world, bearing in mind the action is simultaneous and concurrently, and you are the source of what your players know and react to.

Remember initiative only models when an action gets resolved in turn based order of the real world, not necessarily when it happens in the game world. Your conflating 'turn based activity as reflective of some real world absolute reality and not as the abstraction it actually is.

There are situations where the orc moves 30 ft away, then something else has time to move in between you and the orc before you can follow him. When it gets to your turn in the combat, you might decide not to follow him. In any case, true narration for how everything happened simultaneously can only happen after all the actions in a round are resolved, so you have the full picture. If you narrate too early, a subsequent action in the round may prove your picture incorrect and force a retcon. That is the danger of narrating arrows flying before initiative gets rolled. Roll initiative, start taking turns and describing actions, then you can put together the picture of what happened and narrate it. Simplicity and flow of the game usually dictate that you narrate in an ongoing fashion, nobody is going to suspend everything while ten turns get resolved in abstract. So it turns out that it makes more sense to narrate things happening roughly in turn order, even though it is all in a very short period of time.

And you don't narrate things that have a mechanical effect until after those things have had a chance to be mechanically resolved, because you don't know what the result will be. Narrating the orc lunging and hacking madly may provoke a response from the player, wondering if they can use some sort of ability that is triggered by being attacked, or wondering why the enemy gets to attack before them when they won initiative. Then you need to explain "no, it isn't really getting an attack, that's just narration so you know that the orc wants to fight you. You still get to attack first."
Isn't it better to narrate that the orc is maybe menacing and ready to fight, and then ask for the player's action, rather than actually describing the orc as attacking when they are mechanically not doing that yet? After the character's attack roll, then you describe the back-and-forth exchange that occurred depending on the result of the dice.

[Malifice]

Stop trying to change the subject. Everyone knows this, and it’s irrelevant to the point.

Its not irrelevant to the point. It proves it (which is why you keep ignoring it).

The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one!

If Harry the Fighter has really been swinging his sword for several seconds before he declares and resolves that action on his turn, it establishes a phenomena that looks a little bit like retrocausality, but really isnt (its a conceit of the turn based stop/star nature of cyclic combat rounds).

We can say (in retrospect) that Harry was really swinging his sword before he his turn came up and he told us he was swinging his sword, and those attacks were resolved.

Just like I can say that the arrows are in the air, before the Orcs turns come up and those attacks get resolved.

Now you can jump up and down about this all you want, but its the truth and its a consequence of the absrtract turn based nature of cyclic combat rounds. People are not frozen in time, waiting for other people to act, despite the fact (to us at the table) they are.

Once you wrap your head around that, you'll get it.

You'll also understand Heisenbergs uncertainty principle and Schroedingers Cat paradox a lot better too.

[Malifice]

If the fighter was not surprised, what narration would you have chosen?

Presume the Fighter was the Alert PC. It gets narrated the exact same. Lets presume on the Alert Fighers turn he rolls higher than the Orcs in initiative, Action surges (on his turn) using his first action to take the Search action locating the Orcs, them moves to the Orcs, and takes the attack action (cutting down the Orcs).

The DM narrates it as such:

DM: You reflexively raise your shield into the air, stopping an arrow in midflight aimed for the Wizards neck. As the rest of the party stand there in shock, you instinctively turn and follow the shaft of the arrow, noting its trajectory and pinpointing several Orcs hiding in the bushes. You leap forward springing into the air as they furtively reload, your sword arcing from its scabbard, cutting them down in a matter of seconds. All is quiet, aside from the gargling of a dying Orc.

Remember, all this **** happened at the same time. I know what the Orcs were doing seeing as I was the one who decided they were doing it. From the POV of both the players and the characters everything makes sense (taking into account the conceit and contrivances of a turn based nature of concurrent activity).

Ive narrated the PCs being surprised, the Fighter being super alert, siezing the initiative and reacting with the blinding speed and superlative skill granted to him via Action surge to avoid being surprised, react to the situation, locate the Orcs, move to them, and kill them (he's relying on a feat, and a class feature to do this, plus has rolled pretty damn well mind you to locate and then kill the Orcs, and deserves his moment of awesome).

Feature of this method, and not a bug.

[BurgerBeast]

Its not irrelevant to the point. It proves it (which is why you keep ignoring it).

The cognitive dissonance is strong in this one!

If Harry the Fighter has really been swinging his sword for several seconds before he declares and resolves that action on his turn, it establishes a phenomena that looks a little bit like retrocausality, but really isnt (its a conceit of the turn based stop/star nature of cyclic combat rounds).

We can say (in retrospect) that Harry was really swinging his sword before he his turn came up and he told us he was swinging his sword, and those attacks were resolved.

Just like I can say that the arrows are in the air, before the Orcs turns come up and those attacks get resolved.

Now you can jump up and down about this all you want, but its the truth and its a consequence of the absrtract turn based nature of cyclic combat rounds. People are not frozen in time, waiting for other people to act, despite the fact (to us at the table) they are.

Once you wrap your head around that, you'll get it.

You'll also understand Heisenbergs uncertainty principle and Schroedingers Cat paradox a lot better too.

It’s amazing that someone who tries to pass himself off as some kind of expert DM online can’t grasp the most fundamental aspect of a table top RPG.

When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the outcome.

You don’t make up the outcome before the dice determine it.

You are categorically wrong when you say thahave he was swinging his sword before the rolled. There is no meaningful to connect game time to real time. It could all happen three hours after the roll. It’s not relevant.

You keep doing exactly what I described. You invent arbitrary, over specific, and completely unnecessary explanations for the game rules. Then you insist that your way is THE way.

It’s not.

When actions happen is a totally independent consideration of whether time freezes between turns, by the way.

Anyway. I’ve had enough. Keep playing in those imaginary games with your imaginary friends.

Maybe one day you’ll take up Dungeons and Dragons. Who knows?

[Louro]

You have no idea what are you talking about.

Combat is combat. "Everything happens at the same moment" is actually a lie. We take turns. One after another. That's it. Simple and effective.
You can have init rolled the old way to encourage the simultaneous feeling if you wish, but if
you play a turn based game things happen one AFTER another.
You might tell a new player all that crap about 6 seconds, all acting together and such but on their 2nd encounter they won't even remember what you said. They will be planing their turn according to ini order as everyone else does.

[Louro]

Hey burgerbeast, do you really think rules must prevail over interesting stuff?

[Malifice]

There is no meaningful connect [between] game time to real time. It could all happen three hours after the roll. It’s not relevant.

Lol! Then why do you keep trying to impose a meaningful connect between the two?

The 'in game' reality (during a six second combat round) is that the combatants (characters and Monsters alike) are all running around and largely doing things at the same time. Those 'in game' actions simply get mechanically resolved on the players turn. What looks like its violating causation (to us at the table) really isnt from the POV of the people in the game world.

Youre the one arguing that the arrows cant be in the air before the Orcs turn (they're just sitting there doing nothing waiting for their turn), or the Fighter cant swing his sword till his turn comes up (he's also standing there doing nothing).

Thats not the case. Both the Orcs and the Fighter are doing something for the entire six second round in the game world. We just generally dont know what it is that they have been doing until the real world persons turn comes up and they tell us what they've been doing, and we resolve it.

This is due to the stop/start turn based resolution of the combat sequence. To us at the table, it looks like everyone (other than the acting character) is frozen in time doing nothing while one person acts. To the people in the game world it looks very different indeed, with arrows flying over head, spells getting lobbed, a swirling melee and people running everywhere all at the same time.

Due to this phenomenon and high levels of abstraction, a certain amount of narration is required. What is happening in the game world, is very different to what is happening at the table. And while it looks like retro-causality sometimes, that's kind of unavoidable due to the level of abstraction.

Instead of getting angry at me now, pause for just a second and think about this. Just think about it for a second.

[Malifice]

You have no idea what are you talking about.

Combat is combat. "Everything happens at the same moment" is actually a lie. We take turns. One after another. That's it. Simple and effective.

Like I said earlier. I had you figured at your first post.

You dont really get abstraction do you? I presume hit point loss from a sword attack represents PCs getting stabbed in your games then?

Actually dont answer. I already have that figured out too.

[Malifice]

There are situations where the orc moves 30 ft away, then something else has time to move in between you and the orc before you can follow him. When it gets to your turn in the combat, you might decide not to follow him. In any case, true narration for how everything happened simultaneously can only happen after all the actions in a round are resolved, so you have the full picture. If you narrate too early, a subsequent action in the round may prove your picture incorrect and force a retcon.

Oh I agree.

A Wall of Force might spring up (from your friendly wizard) blocking your move to the Orc (for example).

Again it can be narrated as:

DM (on the fighters turn) As you advance towards the Orc, and go to cut him down your sword bumps into an invisible wall that has sprung from nowhere and your sword bounces off harmlessly. The Orc opens his eyes, and snickers at you, running away. What do you do?

In the case of the 'Orc arrows being in the air' part of the narration its a conceit of the abstract nature of cyclic combat rounds. I (the DM) know the Orcs are going to shoot those arrows, and even if they dont for some reason, they already have and the arrows land harmlessly around the PCs. There is no need to 'retcon' anything.

Note how Ive already provided two examples of the Orcs getting wiped out by PCs before they have their turns (to highlight the extreme outliers of an Alert PC acting first, locating the orcs via the Search action, and them killing them before they act). In both those examples the descriptive fluff text of 'arrows whizz past your ears' affects nothing in the game world other than add to the story (narrative purposes) and link together a seerious of abstract mechanics into a hollistic and beleivable story.

I wouldnt (for example) 'retcon' the arrows. The arrows were fired (in the game world), that triggered combat, its just (mechanically) the attacks never got to be mechanically resolved (at the table) due to the Orcs getting killed by a super alert, super perceptive, and super fast PC before hand. He likely moved so damn fast, and was so damn alert that the arrow wound up in the spot he was before be moved to kill the orcs, and as they were starting to reload. Or however you want to narrate it so it makes sense, taking into account the abstraction and conceits involved here.

The arrows thunk into trees, and scatter around the PCs harmlessly. There is no retcon. The characters are none the wiser (the players know what happened though, but that's due to them having a different experience of the battle).

[Louro]

. To us at the table, it looks like everyone (other than the acting character) is frozen in time doing nothing while one person acts. To the people in the game world it looks very different indeed, with arrows flying over head, spells getting lobbed, a swirling melee and people running everywhere all at the same time.

Due to this phenomenon and high levels of abstraction, a certain amount of narration is required. What is happening in the game world, is very different to what is happening at the table. And while it looks like retro-causality sometimes, that's kind of unavoidable due to the level of abstraction.
.

No narration is required at all. You can just do combat without narration perfectly fine.
I never had to use retro-causality but that time I put time travel on a game.

HP represents endurance.
And yes, when someone stabs a character that character is getting stabbed. And they bleed. And feel pain.

[Tanarii]

"When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on Attack rolls against it. If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an Attack, you give away your location when the Attack hits or misses."

The rules say that a hidden creature is not revealed until it attacks. A DM saying they are revealed at the beginning of combat means ambusher's never have advantage for being hidden or a creature who decides NOT to act in the first round of combat but remain hidden is revealed anyway.
The rules do not say that you must be hidden to get surprise. It's a stealth thing. There are many ways to do it, and hiding is only one.

The rules for being hidden also say you reveal yourself if you come out of hiding. Which a DM is absolutely within their rights to classify "initiatiating combat through an ambush" to be.

[BurgerBeast]

Hey burgerbeast, do you really think rules must prevail over interesting stuff?

I’m not sure if I’d put it that way. I’d have to think about it more but I think you’ve created a false dichotomy. Playing by the rules provides a framework in which plenty of interesting stuff can happen.

I think it is important for the DM to strive to reconcile the RAW with a coherent and consistent game world. The more reliable and intuitive the match-up between the rules and player intuitions, the less players think in rules and the more they think in narrative.

I’m also one of the people who gives (tries to give) weight to all of the rules, without making the fluff/mechanics distinction.


Lol! Then why do you keep trying to impose a meaningful connect between the two?

Because, if you’d pay attention to what I’m saying, instead of straw-manning, you’d see that these views are entirely consistent and objectively better than your ridiculously contrived ideas.

What I am saying is that there is no good reason to assume that there is synchronization between the world. So that, for example, when you assert that an orc is doing things like swinging his sword, and you make that assertion before it has had a chance to happen, you’re wrong.

More or less everything you are saying now just makes my post, about why you are terrible, more and more obviously true.


The 'in game' reality (during a six second combat round) is that the combatants (characters and Monsters alike) are all running around and largely doing things at the same time. Those 'in game' actions simply get mechanically resolved on the players turn. What looks like its violating causation (to us at the table) really isnt from the POV of the people in the game world.

This is why your way of thinking is stupid:

1. You could do it your way, and assume that it is all happening in the game world before the DM and Players play it out at the table.

2. You could do it the way that was suggested earlier: you could assume that it happens in the game world a few seconds after the DM and players play it out at the table.

The only difference here is is the differential in synchronicity. There is no need to change anything else, and there is certainly no reason to suggest that this changes how one abstracts the information.

Given how glaringly obvious it is that option 2 is better, why would anyone insist on option 1? The only answer comes down to Malifice, his ego, and his inability to think flexibly. Your childlike desire to ignore the dice and unilaterally determine outcomes in your world impedes your ability to play an RPG. You have a desire to decide outcomes that prevents you from letting the dice do it. And when you use the dice, and they give you information, you override it with your own. I’m not a fan of the phrase “you’re not playing D&D properly,” but dude: You’re not playing D&D properly, and the evidence suggests you never have.

You are too blind to see that what you’re doing is effectively railroading in a micro-scale. Once the almighty Malifice has decided that the arrows are in the air, they are in the air... no matter how obviously impossible it is given the evidence, you’ll twist and contort everything to make it fit your proclamations. God-complex, much?


Your the one arguing that the arrows cant be in the air before the Orcs turn (they're just sitting there doing nothing waiting for their turn), or the Fighter cant swing his sword till his turn comes up (he's also standing there doing nothing).

Again, your inability to understand. The orcs are simply doing whatever they were doing six seconds ago in your world. That’s the thing about narrative time in an imaginary world: you can decide where to place the scene.

Play out the first round at the table, so you know what actually happens in the game world. Then narrate the s@#t out of it.

There’s some infectious stupidity in your head that is trying to synchronize the fictitious world with players at the table. I can imagine you saying “but it’s happening as we roll the dice!” No, genius. It isn’t. It’s a fictitious world. What is happening in the fiction could have happened ten years prior in or ten years later.

But the fact that you choose when to narrate doesn’t bestow the ability to know outcomes before you know them. You can’t know what happens the in the game world until you know. You figure it out using the rules.

Then, you know what to narrate. So narrate it.


Thats not the case. Both the Orcs and the Fighter are doing something for the entire six second round in the game world. We just generally dont know what it is that they have been doing until the real world persons turn comes up and they tell us what they've been doing, and we resolve it.

That’s right, genius. So wait until you know what you’re narrating before you narrate it.

Instead of stupidly thinking that narrative time is out of your control and therefore the characters stand around while the players at the table roll dice... just PRESS THE F@#KING PAUSE BUTTON on the narrative. Play out the round at the table. Then unpause and narrate what happens in all of its abstracted and narrative glory. And now you’ll have the benefit of being able to figure out what actually did happen in the narrative world before you narrate it.

It’s pretty amazing that you’re willing to play god and create outcomes in your fictitious world even to the point of overriding the dice-determined outcomes... but it hasn’t occurred to you that you control the flow of time in your world. You act as if it’s out of your control and you just have to try to keep up with a narrative world that is happening faster than you can handle.


Due to this phenomenon and high levels of abstraction, a certain amount of narration is required. What is happening in the game world, is very different to what is happening at the table. And while it looks like retro-causality sometimes, that's kind of unavoidable due to the level of abstraction.

Yes. A certain amount of narration is required. What is not required is that you narrate before you know what you’re narrating. This is all your personal delusion. And it’s why your games suck.


I wouldnt (for example) 'retcon' the arrows. The arrows were fired (in the game world), that triggered combat, its just (mechanically) the attacks never got to be mechanically resolved (at the table) due to the Orcs getting killed by a super alert, super perceptive, and super fast PC before hand. He likely moved so damn fast, and was so damn alert that the arrow wound up in the spot he was before be moved to kill the orcs, and as they were starting to reload. Or however you want to narrate it so it makes sense, taking into account the abstraction and conceits involved here.

All you have to do is play the round out at the table, and then narrate it to the players. In cases where there is enough information to narrate in real time, go ahead. Just be careful not to narrate anything before you know if it happens or not, and don’t play god by forcing a future on a scene. That’s railroading.

Just don’t narrate anything before you know if it happens in the game world at all.

...

You know that this is a better solution, and you know that it is how the game was intended to be played. Everyone knows it, because it’s self-evident. It’s not Malifce’s story. It’s an RPG. Your ego and fear are preventing you from owning up.

These examples you’re giving are so obviously stupid that you’re doing a better job of refuting yourself than I ever could.

[BurgerBeast]

The rules do not say that you must be hidden to get surprise. It's a stealth thing. There are many ways to do it, and hiding is only one.

Nitpick: It’s not even necessarily a stealth thing. You can surprise someone by accident. And you can surprise someone while being noisy if they are distracted. They can even be watching you and still be surprised by something you do, if the conditions are right.


The rules for being hidden also say you reveal yourself if you come out of hiding. Which a DM is absolutely within their rights to classify "initiatiating combat through an ambush" to be.

You appear to be falling into the trap of thinking that rolling initiative directly translates into character actions in the narrative. I don’t think it does.

“Initiating combat through ambush” strikes me as suspiciously vague. An ambush is initiated when the first ambusher attacks.

I don’t think the DM is within his rights to rule that a hidden character has come out of hiding before that character has had a turn.

Just imagine it from the players’ side. Your a ranger, hidden in a tree. Your companions are also hidden about. As a group, you initiate an ambush.

The rogue wins initiative and darts in to sneak attack and darts out.

Do you think it’s fair to rule that the you and the rest of the party are not hidden any more?

[Louro]

I’m not sure if I’d put it that way. I’d have to think about it more but I think you’ve created a false dichotomy. Playing by the rules provides a framework in which plenty of interesting stuff can happen.

I think it is important for the DM to strive to reconcile the RAW with a coherent and consistent game world. The more reliable and intuitive the match-up between the rules and player intuitions, the less players think in rules and the more they think in narrative.

I’m also one of the people who gives (tries to give) weight to all of the rules, without making the fluff/mechanics distinction.

I agree consistency and coherence are important, but I don't mind changing rules to accommodate for different playstyles.
I might be opening a new thread to discuss this. I got surprised by how many people seems reluctant to deviate from RAW.

[Thrudd]

Oh I agree.

A Wall of Force might spring up (from your friendly wizard) blocking your move to the Orc (for example).

Again it can be narrated as:

DM (on the fighters turn) As you advance towards the Orc, and go to cut him down your sword bumps into an invisible wall that has sprung from nowhere and your sword bounces off harmlessly. The Orc opens his eyes, and snickers at you, running away. What do you do?

In the case of the 'Orc arrows being in the air' part of the narration its a conceit of the abstract nature of cyclic combat rounds. I (the DM) know the Orcs are going to shoot those arrows, and even if they dont for some reason, they already have and the arrows land harmlessly around the PCs. There is no need to 'retcon' anything.

Note how Ive already provided two examples of the Orcs getting wiped out by PCs before they have their turns (to highlight the extreme outliers of an Alert PC acting first, locating the orcs via the Search action, and them killing them before they act). In both those examples the descriptive fluff text of 'arrows whizz past your ears' affects nothing in the game world other than add to the story (narrative purposes) and link together a seerious of abstract mechanics into a hollistic and beleivable story.

I wouldnt (for example) 'retcon' the arrows. The arrows were fired (in the game world), that triggered combat, its just (mechanically) the attacks never got to be mechanically resolved (at the table) due to the Orcs getting killed by a super alert, super perceptive, and super fast PC before hand. He likely moved so damn fast, and was so damn alert that the arrow wound up in the spot he was before be moved to kill the orcs, and as they were starting to reload. Or however you want to narrate it so it makes sense, taking into account the abstraction and conceits involved here.

The arrows thunk into trees, and scatter around the PCs harmlessly. There is no retcon. The characters are none the wiser (the players know what happened though, but that's due to them having a different experience of the battle).

If the characters are none the wiser, I'd also prefer the players to be none the wiser whenever possible. That's one of my goals in DMing. That's why I'd prefer not to introduce narrative elements which under other circumstances would be interacting with the game's mechanics - especially if I have players who know the rules of the game and have expectations. Arrows flying through the air means they are going to expect the attackers locations to have been revealed, and also will wonder or be upset at the lack of having a chance to roll initiative and react to the arrow attack. I need to be consistent - so when I narrate a thing that looks and sounds like an attack, it has to be following the use of game rules that represents the attack and dictates its results. I know if I were a player in the game, I would question what's happening and why attacks are going on before initiative has been rolled and why the enemies aren't revealed before my turn. It sounds/feels a lot like something one of those "terrible DM's who do things like have actions occurring outside of combat and have surprise rounds" would do.

[Louro]

It sounds/feels a lot like something one of those "terrible DM's who do things like have actions occurring outside of combat and have surprise rounds" would do.
What's wrong with surprise rounds, as long as they are consistent?
Do you think games using surprise rounds are terrible designed?
What do you mean by "actions outside of combat"?
Can't your players take the hide action outside of combat?

[Thrudd]

What's wrong with surprise rounds, as long as they are consistent?
Do you think games using surprise rounds are terrible designed?
What do you mean by "actions outside of combat"?
Can't your players take the hide action outside of combat?

I was paraphrasing something Malifice said himself a couple times in the thread.

5e doesn't have a thing called "surprise rounds", and you can't attack or take other actions before initiative is rolled. You can hide outside of combat, and make other ability checks or cast spells, but it isn't called a "hide action", because actions are things that you do during combat rounds.

Other games that are designed differently are different games. I don't have any problems with any other game or well designed house rules for 5e. I actually prefer old D&D and AD&D style retroclones for dungeon adventure games. I like surprise rolls and group initiative. But that's not how 5e works.

[Louro]

I actually prefer old D&D and AD&D style retroclones for dungeon adventure games. I like surprise rolls and group initiative. But that's not how 5e works.
But... that's irrelevant because rule 0.
If you want surprise rounds in 5e just add them. I was the first of my group to DM 5e and we figured out a pretty consistent houserule on the fly during one of the first sessions.

5e works the way you want it to work. With little experience and help from veteran players you can get away with almost anything. And that's what the game is designed for, in my opinion.

[Thrudd]

But... that's irrelevant because rule 0.
If you want surprise rounds in 5e just add them. I was the first of my group to DM 5e and we figured out a pretty consistent houserule on the fly during one of the first sessions.

5e works the way you want it to work. With little experience and help from veteran players you can get away with almost anything. And that's what the game is designed for, in my opinion.
5e can't be called "anything you want", it doesn't just "work the way you want it to work". There is a system in the book that works a certain way. When we have a discussion about the game, we have to start with what is actually written because that is the thing we can all look at and analyze in common.
House rules can be discussed, too, but we all are starting from the common understanding of the system that is written in the book.

Rule 0 doesn't mean that anything you say will be a good rule.
Its possible to create poor, broken or breakable house rules. Also, I'm not the one who says making house rules makes someone a bad DM, that was a paraphrase of something he said. I'm all for good house rules that make the game work how you want it to. Though I do think house rules need to be considered carefully, in any game system, to ensure they do a good job creating the desired effect and work with the rest of the rules.

Also, almost every game has a "rule 0" that says the GM can change things and should do what works for their game. It's pointless to bring that up in a discussion about how the mechanics of this particular game functions in the way the designers wrote them. We can't discuss anything unless we all agree on a basic premise in common- for this, the premise is the RAW of 5e regarding surprise.

I'm afraid the stuff I'm saying might not be translating very well for anyone who isn't a primary English speaker, but it isn't really important anyway.

[BurgerBeast]

I agree consistency and coherence are important, but I don't mind changing rules to accommodate for different playstyles.
I might be opening a new thread to discuss this. I got surprised by how many people seems reluctant to deviate from RAW.

Oh yeah, look... I have no problem at all with changing rules or adding house rules. I just think that such things should be done for good* reasons.

* maybe good is the wrong word. You don't need particularly good reasons to change the rules. "It's more fun" or "our group prefers it this way" or "I wanted to try it" are all good enough reasons for me. The only things that I think are a bad reasons (and it happens - I see it all the time) is when the DM doesn't understand the RAW well enough to realize that the rules already do what the new rule is supposed to do, or the new rule interferes with other rules in ways that more or less destroy coherence.

It always helps to know the RAW first, and then modify from there.

As an aside, I also take the view that designing structures to handle situations is not the same as house ruling. If you create a structure to measure progress in a chase scene (a la Angry GM), then you're not using house rules in the sense that you're changing the written rules... in my opinion the DM is expected to create ways to handle situations that are not delineated in the rules.

In the games I play in, we often use house rules. The most common one is probably for critical hits: instead of rolling twice the dice, we (1) consider the first set of dice to score maximum damage, and roll one other set; or (2) roll twice the dice, but the damage has a floor of maximum value +1 per die, so you can't roll lower than maximum damage of a regular hit + 1 damage per die. Everyone in our group agrees that all of the excitement and high fives that follow a natural 20 fall fun-shatteringly flat when the damage rolled is less than a regular hit would have done.

I ruthlessly ban classes, races, and race-class combinations in home-brewed worlds. And even when playing published materials, I still prefer to use core rules... by which I don't only mean PHB/DMG/MM... I mean none of the optional rules - no variant humans, no half-elves, no dragonborn, no drow, no tieflings, no gnomes; no feats. i prefer the game with no feats. None of the optional rules.

I have also considered locking-in character decisions, so that players simply roll abilities, pick a race, class, and background. Everything else is decided on the basis of those choices. We get to business. This would only be for home-brewed worlds in which I would adjust spell lists, but in my opinion it provides more variety - not less. Because you can create what are essentially different classes out of a single class or sub-class in such a way. (For example, you can create two different locked in spell lists for two different types of Eldritch Knights, and each type might some from a different culture and attitude toward combat) This can be used to enrich the effects of racial differences and cultural differences in the campaign-world. It also works very well in old school meat-grinder campaigns, which are my favourite kind, because of the old motto that frequency of character deaths should be inversely proportional to length of time spent in character creation.

I would use 2e-style initiative (everyone declares their actions, then everyone rolls initiative, and the actions happen in the order revealed, with flexibility to account for hose-jobs) because it's just way better in my opinion (even if it slows the game down).

[Louro]

I pretty much agree with you on almost everything. I'm assuming that when you change something you know what you are changing. If after testing it doesn't work fix it if possible or revert the changes. As a golden rule I don't change things if I need to add more rules (complexity)
We changed to surprise round because on a social interaction a player said he charges onto someone. He got to act last and did nothing... even when he was the one starting the action. Felt really weird.

You ban gnomes???
What kind of games you guys play?

Yeah, I love AD&D init too, but my players prefer the commodity of just taking turns.

[Reynaert]

We changed to surprise round because on a social interaction a player said he charges onto someone. He got to act last and did nothing... even when he was the one starting the action. Felt really weird.

I don't understand how that would have happened.

If, during a social interaction, a player states 'I charge onto someone', without having pre-discussed with the other players that he was going to do that, the other players -along with all the npcs- should have been surprised.

So he would certainly have acted first (except if another player had the alert feat).

[Louro]

If, during a social interaction, a player states 'I charge onto someone', without having pre-discussed with the other players that he was going to do that, the other players -along with all the npcs- should have been surprised.

So he would certainly have acted first (except if another player had the alert feat).
How so?
He didn't put any effort to conceal his attack. He just said he charges while shouting something like "that was your last offense!"
No opposed check or any other circumstance that would grant him surprise over the enemy. The situation was tense so everyone was kind of "ready to go". We just rolled initiative (RAW).
When he got to act the guy was already dead, there was a summoned demon there, several civilians were already dead.

He started the action by charging.
We roll ini.
Lots is stuff happens.
Finally, in his turn, he just fleed (wise decision).

So, we just agreed on giving the starter character a surprise round. Depending on the enemy awareness and attitude I roll DEX to grant them reaction or even action.

[Arial Black]

He didn't put any effort to conceal his attack. He just said he charges while shouting something like "that was your last offense!"
No opposed check or any other circumstance that would grant him surprise over the enemy. The situation was tense so everyone was kind of "ready to go". We just rolled initiative (RAW).

As a 5e game mechanic, 'surprise' isn't about the 'unexpected'. It is ONLY about 'can you act normally on your first turn? Can you use Reactions before your first turn?' That's it.

So he says he just suddenly charges while shouting. Sure, roll initiative (you HAVE to!) but the determination of surprise has nothing to do with anyone expecting this kind of behaviour from him, it's just about whether or not you were caught flat-footed by the sudden hostilities and determining if you understand what you perceive to be combat quickly enough to act efficiently to it (not surprised therefore can act and use Reactions normally, or surprised and essentially 'miss a turn' by not being able to move or act on your first turn or take Reactions until after it).

[Arial Black]

I wrote: "Initiative isn't rolled and combat hasn't started until the orc's player (DM) states that he is shooting, not when the orc is thinking about shooting. The orc cannot change his mind about initiating combat after he already initiated it!

The fact that some victims are so, well, alert and so fast that they get their retaliation in first doesn't mean that the orc's actions (rather than thoughts) initiated combat, even if he gets killed before he actually looses the arrow.

It's like a gunfight: the gunslinger that reaches first is not automatically the one that gets to shoot first, but he's the one that started it anyway."

Then you reply:-


RAW, this just isn’t true: “If you are hidden—both unseen and unheard—when you make an attack, you give away your location when the attack hits or misses.”

The hidden creature doesn’t reveal themselves until they attack: if a character didn’t beat a Stealth check with their perception, they don’t get to know where a hidden creature is just because they rolled higher initiative. The hidden creature is hidden until they attack.

Are you sure your response was to my post?

I agree with what you quote about hidden and being revealed when the attack hits or misses and not before. Nothing in my post suggested any different!

What "just isn't true"? What are you talking about?

[Reynaert]

How so?
He didn't put any effort to conceal his attack. He just said he charges while shouting something like "that was your last offense!"
No opposed check or any other circumstance that would grant him surprise over the enemy. The situation was tense so everyone was kind of "ready to go". We just rolled initiative (RAW).
When he got to act the guy was already dead, there was a summoned demon there, several civilians were already dead.

He started the action by charging.
We roll ini.
Lots is stuff happens.
Finally, in his turn, he just fleed (wise decision).

So, we just agreed on giving the starter character a surprise round. Depending on the enemy awareness and attitude I roll DEX to grant them reaction or even action.

It would have been much simpler to just have agreed that the other characters were surprised by the existing rules, instead of making up a whole surprise round houserule.

Also, it could be argued that the RAW state: 'The DM decides who is surprised' and the DM can therefore decide to make everybody surprised in this case.

The other text about surprise talks about 'noticing a threat', and it's well within the realm of reasonableness to say nobody notices a threat if somebody suddenly decides to attack out of the blue.

But even if you argue that RAW, you can't be surprised by somebody you can see, you have to concede that houseruling 'you can be surprised by somebody you can see' is much closer to the original rules than 'if you suddenly attack you get a whole surprise round'.

[stoutstien]

After reading this whole post I'm glad I have very few players that take alert. Im surprised no one has brought up the lv7 barbarian feature yet.