Pseudo-surprise

[Crucius]

Imagine: you have exposed some enemies hiding in the bushes nearby and the party face is currently talking to them to gain information. The rogue has their bow trained on one of enemies, while the fighter is pointing their longsword at another. The wind rustles through the leaves and the enemies use that minor distraction in that split second to spread out and equip their weapons, effectively starting combat.

In all games I have played this scenario would not trigger a surprise round, even though the party clearly had the upper hand in this situation. Therefore (based on my own experiences) I would like to homebrew a rule that can apply to this scenario:

In a pseudo-surprise situation: When initiative is rolled, you can use your reaction to make an attack (melee or ranged) against an enemy, or you can use your reaction to get advantage on your initiative roll.

This way nobody has to call out beforehand that they'll ready some attack, and it gives the option to capitalize on the situation by being faster than the enemy (I thought about giving half movement as a reaction, but I think advantage on initiative has better flavor).

Opinions?

I am aware you could technically ready a spell to be cast as soon as an enemy makes a move, but in practice I have never seen one pulled off. The DM(s) always say(s) that their move was too quick for you to respond with the casting of the spell.

I kinda get where that's coming from, since starting a combat with a fireball on the cluster of enemies is kinda problematic for the DM. So balance-wise I'm thinking about purposefully omitting (non-attack) spellcasting, but there is no logical reason not to allow it beyond that. Letting the spellcaster(s) blast the enemies before combat starts is a reward for setting up the pseudo-surprise situation after all. Bonus points for your opinion on this specific topic!

[Man_Over_Game]

Personally, I think you're playing with the wrong DMs. If you're holding someone up, you should be able to get the drop on them. It doesn't matter what the mechanics are; as long as you're not abusing some kind of cheap trick that makes you overly powerful compared to the rest of the team, the DM should find a way to make it work.

I let Ready Actions, or their equivalent in out-of-combat scenarios, take place before the trigger finishes, as long as the trigger is very specific. Ready Actions are almost always worse than a standard Attack Action, and include inherent risk (casters can lose Concentration, martials can have their specific trigger not ever occur, wasting an Action AND their Extra Attack feature), so I like to make Ready Actions inherently very powerful.

For example, I'd let you hold someone hostage, aiming your weapon at their throat, releasing it as soon as they try to move or reach for their weapon. I wouldn't accept you drawing your bow, ready to shoot the first threat that you see. One is much more specific than the other. The hostage situation takes work, where the scouting scenario is generic and lazy.

That ties in fairly similarly with your example.


You mention spellcasting preemptively is a concern, but I have to ask why is a Readied Fireball worse than a standard Fireball? If you're worried about someone spamming the Ready Action to constantly be prepared for a threat, I think that indicates more of a problem with the Ready Action, and how it's implemented, than spellcasting.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

If I'm an intelligent enemy I'm going to take a chance when an opponent starts to cast and either let him blow a readied action and I think spell slot if I'm familiar with those or I'm going to target the caster.

[Crucius]

Personally, I think you're playing with the wrong DMs.

Heh, I guess I am. I tend to overcompensate for these kinds of things in my own games by trying to make rules that prevent scenarios that those DMs interpret differently. Just to make it clear to the players that I interpret it differently (the groups have a lot of people in common, so ruling has to be strict and precise if you want to deviate from the other DMs)


I wouldn't accept you drawing your bow, ready to shoot the first threat that you see.

Interesting, this is exactly the scenario that the (out of combat) ready action is solely used for in those games. How did you come to the decision that you wouldn't allow such a broad ready action?


You mention spellcasting preemptively is a concern, but I have to ask why is a Readied Fireball worse than a standard Fireball?

You get one off just before combat (on the trigger) and with a bit of luck on the initiative roll you'll get another one fairly soon after that. Sure you're blowing a lot of resources, but you're also (potentially) trivializing the combat encounter by opening with 2 spells (fireballs in this example).

[Keravath]

Readying a spell out of combat has the issue that, in theory, it would only last one round or 6 seconds before being lost or cast. In combat and out of combat have very different time scales. In addition, if for some reason you do not cast the readied spell, it is lost including the spell slot which is expended. The situation isn't comparable to an out of combat readied weapon attack. On the other hand a readied weapon attack is only one attack while the spell isn't limited.

[Tanarii]

A simpler rule would be the pseudo-surprisers get advantage on intiative, and/or the pseudo-surprised get disadvantage on initiative.

It's not even a house rule. The DM can apply Advantage or Disadvantage to any check they feel it's appropriate. DMG 239.

[Hail Tempus]

Actions only exist in combat, in any meaningful sense. And surprise is like pregnancy: you either are or aren’t.

From my perspective as a DM, combat starts as soon as one side takes any hostile actions. The situation you described (swords waving, bows drawn) should’ve been preceded by initiative rather rolls by everyone involved.

And, just as a matter of style, people need to stop using “surprise round” when talking about 5e. There’s no such thing in this edition. Surprise is basically just a condition.

[Kane0]

Actions only exist in combat, in any meaningful sense.


I hope you're ready for the can of worms that statement leads to.

[Tanarii]

I hope you're ready for the can of worms that statement leads to.
The OP already opened that can of worms by describing a situation in which hostile actions (pointing weapons) were previously taken and timing already mattered without rolling for intiative in the first place.

Or possibly combat was "paused" so conversation could ensue without turn order. It's not clear.

[Hail Tempus]

I hope you're ready for the can of worms that statement leads to.
I don’t see why it’s controversial. Unless PCs are in some sort of adversarial or time-sensitive situation, worrying about actions isn’t needed.

But, once a situation turns hostile, initiative needs to be rolled to determine the order of actions.

If a PC says “I ready an action” before rolling initiative, he’s trying to cheat the initiative order.

[Tanarii]

If a PC says “I ready an action” before rolling initiative, he’s trying to cheat the initiative order.Agreed. But that the same time, DMs just love to let characters get into a lopsided Mexican standoff, where one side clearly has a better chance of reacting quicker or slower, or occasionally need to take into account things like a reasonable level of distraction that doesn't qualify as surprise.

And that's exactly the kind of thing advantage and disadvantage are for.

[Aprender]

"I don't see why it's controversial" is included in all of the threads that have feuds. :)

With that said, I agree with you. I don't like "I ready a pre-combat action". I like the advantage/disadvantage for initiative as an elegant and familiar way of giving a bonus/disadvantage as appropriate.

To stir the pot, can the party be engaged with group of bad guys A and still be surprised by the bad guy group B that is sneaking around to flank? I know my answer, and it doesn't seem controversial to me. :)

[CorporateSlave]

To stir the pot, can the party be engaged with group of bad guys A and still be surprised by the bad guy group B that is sneaking around to flank? I know my answer, and it doesn't seem controversial to me. :)

I would say it all depends what you mean by "surprised" doesn't it?

If you mean the Surprised Condition, then functionally and by RAW, both hard no. The RAW is pretty clear - the Surprised Condition only applies at the start of the first round of combat. So if the party is already engaged, they can no longer be subject to the Surprised Condition. From a functional standpoint, their guard is up, they're on high alert for enemies from all directions, etc etc. They are under attack, and a new enemy popping up from the underbrush or shadows is not entirely unexpected, certainly not enough to catch them completely of guard. In the midst of a fight, it wouldn't be all that surprising if another enemy or two suddenly rushes around the corner.

Now, that isn't to say that the Players won't be "surprised" by the new group of enemies. (Maybe "unprepared for" or "not aware of" would be better terms than "surprised") However, there is already a non-Surprised Condition game mechanic in the RAW for this sort of situation - the Unseen Attacker rule. If group B has been successfully Stealth checking over the party's collective Passive Perceptions, then they get free Advantage on their Attack rolls (or possible other benefits depending on class feature or whatnot).

By the common language definition of the word "surprise," sure they might be "surprised" in that there is a new enemy they weren't aware of before. By the RAW definition of Surprise, absolutely not. The Surprised Condition would preclude Actions and Reactions - hardly fair or reasonable for PC's already engaged in combat. Should the DM try to uber-complicate combat by saying the party has the Surprised Condition but only pertaining to the group B enemies? The Hidden group B enemies already enjoy two major benefits - they could not be targeted directly (as they are not perceived yet), and they will get Advantage on their Attacks due to being unnoticed.

When it comes to RAW, common use of a word may have a very different meaning than the RAW version (in this case, "surprised" vs "Surprised Condition")

If that was your answer, then absolutely, I don't see any controversy.

[Segev]

In the OP's scenario, if initiative hadn't already been rolled, the enemies scrambling for their weapons/gear/fleeing would trigger an initiative roll. The enemies don't get to rush to their gear, pick it up, ready it, and take other meaningful combat actions all in the same round. Further, if they're in melee reach of the PCs, the PCs who have their weapons all but laid at their throats get an Opportunity Attack unless the enemies take the Disengage action, which would prohibit readying any weapons that round.

So, the way I'd run it, those enemies who took the "distraction" to make a Disengage action could move to their gear without provoking the Opportunity Attack, and could use their one free object interaction in a round to pick up one weapon, but they couldn't otherwise act, essentially giving the PCs a free round. Those who, instead, chose to rush for their weapons and try to ready/use them as their action would provoke an OA from the PCs on top of them. Additionally, the initiative order may or may not be in their favor, and if they wind up going slower than a given PC, that given PC gets to act before they can so much as move. And no, the PC isn't unaware of their plan to do so; their starting to act is what provoked the initiative roll.

If initiative HAD already been rolled, I wouldn't let combat end just because they're in a tense stand-off. I'd force them to take turns taking actions, even if those actions were to hold or ready, and thus the PCs would, indeed, have the ability to ready attacks if the enemies tried to run or engage in hostilities or the like.

[Hail Tempus]

Agreed. But that the same time, DMs just love to let characters get into a lopsided Mexican standoff, where one side clearly has a better chance of reacting quicker or slower, or occasionally need to take into account things like a reasonable level of distraction that doesn't qualify as surprise.

And that's exactly the kind of thing advantage and disadvantage are for. And players seem to think that being the first one to say that your character is doing something means you get to take that action. DMs shouldn't reward the player who is always trying to get an advantage for his PC by blurting stuff out.

Even if your character has their sword pointed at somebody before combat, so what? That doesn't mean you automatically get to act first. You might (emphasis on might) get advantage on initiative, but saying your character did something out of combat is not an "I win" button.

[Segev]

And players seem to think that being the first one to say that your character is doing something means you get to take that action. DMs shouldn't reward the player who is always trying to get an advantage for his PC by blurting stuff out.

Even if your character has their sword pointed at somebody before combat, so what? That doesn't mean you automatically get to act first. You might (emphasis on might) get advantage on initiative, but saying your character did something out of combat is not an "I win" button.

By the same token, though, being prepared to act should be better for taking those actions than not being prepared. It should be much harder for Bob to pull out his sword and shank Alice before she can do grievous bodily harm to him if Alice has her sword point at Bob's throat while Bob is sitting on a bar stool with his hands up over his head than it is if Alice and Bob both have their swords out and are standing five feet apart.

[Aprender]

@corporateslave I agree. :) see? Non-controversial.

[GooeyChewie]

If initiative had not been rolled, I’d most likely have the players roll to see if they are distracted by the noise (probably Wisdom-Insight since it’s really more about realizing the goblins are trying to take advantage of a distraction than about hearing the noise) and roll initiative. Assuming the goblins are going for their weapons no matter what, that gives the players three potential outcomes:

-Pass the check for the distraction, no surprise, you get your normal turn plus an opportunity attack.
-Fail the check for the distraction but beat the goblin on initiative. You don’t get your normal turn (or rather, you do but don’t take any actions and then lose the Surprised condition), but you do get to make an opportunity attack.
-You fail the check for the distraction AND the goblins beat you in initiative. The goblins get to their weapons before you realize it, and now you are facing armed goblins! I hope some of your friends rolled better than you did!

And then from there have combat proceed as normal.

[Man_Over_Game]

Heh, I guess I am. I tend to overcompensate for these kinds of things in my own games by trying to make rules that prevent scenarios that those DMs interpret differently. Just to make it clear to the players that I interpret it differently (the groups have a lot of people in common, so ruling has to be strict and precise if you want to deviate from the other DMs)



Interesting, this is exactly the scenario that the (out of combat) ready action is solely used for in those games. How did you come to the decision that you wouldn't allow such a broad ready action?



You get one off just before combat (on the trigger) and with a bit of luck on the initiative roll you'll get another one fairly soon after that. Sure you're blowing a lot of resources, but you're also (potentially) trivializing the combat encounter by opening with 2 spells (fireballs in this example).

Sorry, didn't get a chance to respond.

The important thing about Ready vs. Surprise is that Surprise (that is, an extra/lost action at the start of combat) is due to a problem on the enemy's part, and the Ready Action (reacting to someone's action) is due to preparation on the ally's part.

Is the ally especially prepared? They take the Ready Action, and it gets treated as an extra action.
Is the enemy especially unprepared? They suffer Surprise, and lose their first action.

You SHOULDN'T allow someone to say "I Ready my arrow to attack as soon as I see a hostile" when they're casually travelling about, because of the fact that there's no real way to be more combat ready than anyone else.

Magic is the same way. In the middle of combat, you should definitely allow someone to Ready a Fireball, but before combat, they should only be allowed to trigger their Fireball early if they were more prepared than the enemy. In a way, you use Ready and Surprise to indicate how prepared someone is in comparison to everyone else in the battle. If EVERYONE is "Ready", then nobody gets it. If EVERYONE is Surprised, then nobody gets it.

Ready should only be a substitute for Surprise when Surprise isn't mechanically accurate for the scenario, but there should be some basis in mechanics. A good example of such a scenario is a negotiation/hostage situation, where it's more sensible to have one person be prepared for a specific action than it is for a few people to be lethargic.

Otherwise, you end up with problems like you mentioned.

[CorporateSlave]

@corporateslave I agree. :) see? Non-controversial. :smallsmile: Well, for us at least!

[Demonslayer666]

I really like the idea of modifying initiative with advantage/disadvantage.

You could also grant advantage on the first attack, or disadvantage for those held at bay.