Surprise Surprise!

[Mad_Saulot]

S u r p r i s e
A band of adventurers sneaks up on a bandit camp,
springing from the trees to attack them. A gelatinous
cube glides down a dungeon passage, unnoticed by
the adventurers until the cube engulfs one of them. In
these situations, one side of the battle gains surprise
over the other.
The DM determines w ho might be surprised. If
neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice
each other. Otherwise, the DM com pares the Dexterity
(Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive
Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the
opposing side. Any character or monster that doesn’t
notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter.
If you’re surprised, you can’t move or take an action
on your first turn of the combat, and you can’t take a
reaction until that turn ends. A member of a group can
be surprised even if the other members aren’t.


The above is RAW for Surprise, but i dont understand.

Say the group is marching towards an enemy, not trying to hide, but the groups rogue is sneaking along in the shadows, the enemy group and the player group notice each other and initiative begins, HOWEVER the player rogues stealth beats the enemy perceptions, does this mean the enemy all have the surprised condition imposed upon them?

This is for my wood elf assassin for the purpose of using the Assassinate feature.

The RAW is very confusing and Surprise doesnt make sense to me as a condition that is inflicted, surely it should be subjective?

Would it be a problem do you think if I made surprise subjective, for instance in the above example combat is initiated and the assassin has surprise against all of the enemy, ah wait not this doesnt work either as in RAW it means its a condition that makes the inflicted lose their turn. Is there a solution for this or should I just say that assassinate can work as a once per encounter ability against any target cos thats the only fix i can think of without rewriting the entire thing?

[cutlery]

Say the group is marching towards an enemy, not trying to hide, but the groups rogue is sneaking along in the shadows, the enemy group and the player group notice each other and initiative begins, HOWEVER the player rogues stealth beats the enemy perceptions, does this mean the enemy all have the surprised condition imposed upon them?


If the rogue waits for everyone else in the group to act, then no.

If the rogue sneaks ahead and tried to capitalize on this, acting first, yes.

One of the challenges of this is whether or not the party can get into the melee quickly enough so that the rogue isn't swarmed.

I'd suggest a ranged weapon instead for that.

[NecessaryWeevil]

Is there a solution for this or should I just say that assassinate can work as a once per encounter ability against any target cos thats the only fix i can think of without rewriting the entire thing?

I'd suggest "once per encounter and only against a target that was previously unaware of your presence or hostile intent."

[JackPhoenix]

The above is RAW for Surprise, but i dont understand.

Say the group is marching towards an enemy, not trying to hide, but the groups rogue is sneaking along in the shadows, the enemy group and the player group notice each other and initiative begins, HOWEVER the player rogues stealth beats the enemy perceptions, does this mean the enemy all have the surprised condition imposed upon them?

As long as the enemy is aware of at least one character (i.e. anyone not sneaking), they are not surprised. It doesn't matter what the rogue does, the others ruined the surprise for him.

[sithlordnergal]

Jack is correct, the rest of the party removed all Surprise conditions by not hiding. Its part of why the Assassin Subclass is considered so weak. On paper its decent, but in actual games its terrible because you have to rely on your party to remain stealthy. And if you have a Fighter and/or Paladin that chose Dex as their dump stat while wearing heavy armor...well..You're not gonna Surprise anyone.

[Mad_Saulot]

If the rogue waits for everyone else in the group to act, then no.

If the rogue sneaks ahead and tried to capitalize on this, acting first, yes.

One of the challenges of this is whether or not the party can get into the melee quickly enough so that the rogue isn't swarmed.

I'd suggest a ranged weapon instead for that.

If the Rogue can inflict surprised condition does that mean the unstealthy group members get to act too?

@Jackpheonix but surely thats wrong, a group thats making themselves an obvious threat can facilitate an assassin, while the enemy look to the obvious group members they arent looking for a sneak, it doesnt make sense to treat a group as a singular entity?

[Snails]

The main value of a single PC scouting ahead is not for that PC to get Surprise, but to reduce the likelihood the whole party gets Surprised. Also, being forewarned, the party could do a quick round of buffing just before moving forward into combat ranges (this works in the party's favor because few NPCs have the rich buffing options of the typical PC).

A lone PC scouting ahead could initiate combat and get a Surprise round. The downside is the risk of concentrated return fire from all the enemies having only the scout to target, if the party does not have enough high initiative rolls to offer distractions.

As a practical matter, you need 2-3 PCs built for stealth to get much out of a Surprise round. This is not necessarily hard, but it might mean the heavily armored cleric and/or fighter linger 30-60 feet back, far enough away that the DM is willing to handwave they do not have to make Stealth rolls. A Ranger with the Pass Without A Trace spell sure does help here.

[Snails]

If the Rogue can inflict surprised condition does that mean the unstealthy group members get to act too?

Possibly, the scout could signal the rest of the party to rush forward. But where are they such that they benefit from not being detected in the first place, without having to make Stealth checks themselves? 30 feet back? 60 feet? Further still?

Yes, your Assassin can make the attempt. But the party will probably spend an entire round dashing forward to get themselves into an effective position to fight. They may be able to support you will some arrows or javelins in that first round, but often their fighting is crimped because they cannot see always the possible targets, and lay down AoEs efficiently.

When I have played in stealthy parties, we have one superstealthy PC take the lead, other stealthy PCs lingering 10-30 feet back while out of line of sight of any possible enemies up front, and the unstealthy lingering back 30-40 feet. The DM is pretty willing to just worry about the Stealth roll of the one PC, if the others are being sufficiently cautious. If the layout is of the coming fight, sometimes the whole party can edge forward get in on a Surprise round. Sometimes, it is just 2-3 PCs who can get this good position, and the others are late to the party. That is okay, too, because a heavily armored cleric running forward can cast Bless on key party members.

[Mad_Saulot]

irl when the SAS do hostage extraction the stealth ability of the hostage is covered by the expertise of the operatives.

In my games one or two dudes without stealth are covered by those members with stealth

But thats not my issue.

My issue is that a lone ninja should be able to utilise their abilities despite their groups swaggering beligerence, using them as a distraction to get assassinations. The rules dont explicitly forbid this technique, the only problem im having is that the game treats surprise as an inflicted condition when it should be a subjective issue.

While the enemy focus on my allies why cant my ninja sneak around and assassinate ppl? it just doesnt make any sense

[Tanarii]

As long as the enemy is aware of at least one character (i.e. anyone not sneaking), they are not surprised. It doesn't matter what the rogue does, the others ruined the surprise for him.
With the addendum that if they're a separate group and the second group is far enough away it doesn't ruin surprise for the first, the first group can determine surprise without worrying about the second group. What constitutes a separate group is DM determination.

IMO given the effective range at which normal conversation is a whisper is somewhere between 30ft and 60ft, after some experimentation I used 60ft separation with attempted ambush placing the first group at 30ft. Normal combat as a single group placing them all at 60ft. At first I used only 30ft separation but that was too close, since there was no often reason not to do an ambush and start at 30ft/60ft as opposed to all at 60ft. 30ft/90ft makes it a choice and puts the forward element in some potential danger.

(I'm also not assuming open plains/fields.)

Edit: the DMG screen has 2d6x5 for surprise and 2d6x10 for normal, or starting distances on average of 35ft and 70ft. So my numbers are pretty close to the suggested.

[Mad_Saulot]

Why not just upgrade Assassinate to replace Sneak Attack?

It simply doesnt make any sense that an assassin is inferior to a thief in a battle.

[Snails]

My issue is that a lone ninja should be able to utilise their abilities despite their groups swaggering beligerence, using them as a distraction to get assassinations. The rules dont explicitly forbid this technique, the only problem im having is that the game treats surprise as an inflicted condition when it should be a subjective issue.

While the enemy focus on my allies why cant my ninja sneak around and assassinate ppl? it just doesnt make any sense

I sympathize with your point of view. What you are saying makes sense to me.

Unfortunately, Surprise is not even a condition, so there is no concept of applying the condition to an enemy once the combat has already begun. Worse still, it is a narrow state that only happens during a Surprise round on a target who has not yet had initiative. Thus, there are two obstacles to assassinating: (1) winning the Stealth/Perception test and earning a Surprise round in the first place, (2) rolling a higher Initiative than a good target for the assassination.

As others have pointed out, the Rogue Assassin looks great on paper. But Assassinate is actually quite unreliable, because whether the rest of the party will allow you to get a Surprise round or whether you roll initiative high enough to benefit from this major ability is beyond your control.

However, if the party as a whole is interested in going stealthy for ambushes and your rogue invests in the Alert feat for +5 to initiative, it can work out okay. Otherwise, I think this is likely to be frustrating for you.

[Mad_Saulot]

I really feel for rogue assassins who are expecting to actually be able to assassinate ppl in combat if they have a DM that is not sympathetic. I have the luxury of being the DM in this instance, the only reason I haven't house ruled it is because I'm a big fan of RAW and want as few house rules as possible, I was hoping a dev or old sage could point to me an obscure piece of lore that fixes this issue for me without me having to house rule anything, but this is something I'm going to have to actually make a rule on if i want the assassin subclass to suit its concept aren't I?

[NecessaryWeevil]

Yes, it is.

[JackPhoenix]

@Jackpheonix but surely thats wrong, a group thats making themselves an obvious threat can facilitate an assassin, while the enemy look to the obvious group members they arent looking for a sneak, it doesnt make sense to treat a group as a singular entity?

Surprise in 5e terms means being unaware of *any* threat. When the enemy hears the paladin (or whatever) clanging in their direction, they know there's a threat, and they aren't surprised anymore. Rogue can still sneak, and still gets the advantage from being unseen even if the enemy is already alerted.

[sithlordnergal]

I really feel for rogue assassins who are expecting to actually be able to assassinate ppl in combat if they have a DM that is not sympathetic. I have the luxury of being the DM in this instance, the only reason I haven't house ruled it is because I'm a big fan of RAW and want as few house rules as possible, I was hoping a dev or old sage could point to me an obscure piece of lore that fixes this issue for me without me having to house rule anything, but this is something I'm going to have to actually make a rule on if i want the assassin subclass to suit its concept aren't I?

Yup. I think surprise rules are the most commonly house ruled rules in the game.

[PhoenixPhyre]

In my opinion, the second part of Assassinate is basically a ribbon. It's nice when it happens, but it's not the meat of the feature.

The first part goes off whether there's surprise or not. And it guarantees that as long as you don't go after the last of the enemies, you have an opportunity to Sneak Attack on round 1. This is something that Thief and AT rogues struggle with--if they go before any of their allies go, they're unlikely to have Sneak Attack unless they manage to have somewhere to hide. Assassins want to go first. Put that together with Alert, and you've got basically guaranteed advantage on your first turn. And if you're a melee rogue, you can do it without the difficulty of having to hide and sneak up.

So you get a major benefit up front, pretty much always. And you get a nice cool thing once in a while.

[Asisreo1]

Surprise in 5e terms means being unaware of *any* threat. When the enemy hears the paladin (or whatever) clanging in their direction, they know there's a threat, and they aren't surprised anymore. Rogue can still sneak, and still gets the advantage from being unseen even if the enemy is already alerted.
I interpreted that as the opposite. That being that is a member fails to notice any threat, as in any single threat out of a myriad of possible threats, they are surprised.

So, as long as a single rogue was hidden, any member of the enemy team that didn't notice them are surprised regardless of how they notice the paladin, cleric, and fighter already with their blades out.

[Tanarii]

I interpreted that as the opposite. That being that is a member fails to notice any threat, as in any single threat out of a myriad of possible threats, they are surprised.

So, as long as a single rogue was hidden, any member of the enemy team that didn't notice them are surprised regardless of how they notice the paladin, cleric, and fighter already with their blades out.
Why? A N/PC gets to check for all threats. If they don't notice a threat, they're surprised. If they notice any threat, they didn't "not notice a threat", so they're not surprised.

[Magicspook]

Weird surprise rules aside, what is wrong with the assassin being an out-of-combat class? It makes thematic sense that an assassin should be alone and stalk his prey, not run at them screaming, right?

I'd totally give the assassin use of his feature to take out an unaware guard or a sleeping noble. You know, the stuff you'd expect an assassin to go up against. Just my opinion, let me know if you think otherwise.

[Glorthindel]

If you really wanted to enable the Assassin to impose surprise despite his parties prescence, you could also impose the surprised condition from the Assassins attack on both the enemy and the rest of the party as well; that way the Assassin gets a round where its targets are surprised, without the party benefitting from a surprised condition on their opponents which they haven't earned. Its definitely a bit of a janky way of simulating the situation, and its not going to work if you don't have buy-in from the rest of the party (otherwise you'll face constant arguements trying to justify why they shouldn't also be surprised in this specific condition), but if you explain it as merely a mechanical way to allow the Stealth character to benefit from his stealth preparations, not a way you are trying to screw them (whether you impose Surprise on no-one as per the book rules, or everyone by this House Rule, no one is really losing an attack, just the Assassin is gaining one).

[Chaosity]

I always felt the point of assassinate was to have a easier time dispatching lone enemies you went to take out solo

I don't think it was intended that the auto-crit went off every single combat. You get the advantage on regular combat. The auto crit is more when you, you know actually try to assassinate someone.

A way to make it work with your party is to sneak ahead, assassinate the most valuable enemy and then go back to your party instead of your party going to you

[Segev]

The way I think I would run it is this:

Everyone, on both sides, checks their Perception vs. the Rogue's Stealth check. Anybody who doesn't Perceive the Rogue is Surprised in the first round.

The real problem with this approach is when both sides are stealthy. If anybody is Surprised, they lose the chance to capitalize on others not noticing them. So a single stealthy creature on each side can ensure both sides are Surprised, including the stealthy creatures.

This is one of the advantages of the Surprise Round that 3e had.

[Snails]

I'd totally give the assassin use of his feature to take out an unaware guard or a sleeping noble. You know, the stuff you'd expect an assassin to go up against. Just my opinion, let me know if you think otherwise.

Assassinate is almost there, only some of the rules are undeveloped to support it. This is nothing that an understanding DM could not handle with house rules, but it might confuse the player and DM on the spur of the moment.

The question is what happens when an Assassin that is hidden and has the drop on the target (Surprise), so happens to roll poorly to Initiative? Conceivably a DM might give a sleeping noble a 0 on his Initiative roll, but that would not be the case for a guard.

IMO, a poor Initiative roll by the Assassin and a good roll by the target represents the bad luck that the target is facing the exact wrong way so the Assassin cannot make the attack without being seen first. So what do you do? IMO, the Assassin should be allowed to not attack, but wait a minute to try again later, presumably having to roll another Stealth/Perception check.

Of course, the DM could just handwave it and say this or that situation is exactly where Assassinate applies.

[Snails]

A way to make it work with your party is to sneak ahead, assassinate the most valuable enemy and then go back to your party instead of your party going to you

In practice, that is hard to pull off without a robust set of rules and appropriate tactics that meld with those rules. 5e is not quite there, out of the box.

What you would hope to do is have the Assassin win Initiative in the Surprise round, make the Assassinate, then retreat back to the Party before the enemy takes an action. But if something goes wrong, the Assassin is standing there to suffer a full round of attacks by the entire opposition, while the Party rushes forward, too late to save the Assassin.

Furthermore, "assassinate the most valuable enemy" does not necessarily mean anyone is dead or unconscious, just significantly damaged. Tactically, this is not necessarily a benefit to either the Assassin or the Party, because a wounded enemy is often less useful than simply killing a boring minion outright. As others have pointed out, Assassinate looks good on paper, but is often poor in actual play.

[heavyfuel]

Back in the 3e forums we called the phenomenon of multiple thread about the Monk class "Monk Monday". Maybe we should start a "Surprise Sunday" for threads on the Surprise mechanics.

But yeah, Surprise in 5e makes no sense and Assassins suck because of it. There's very little you can do that wouls make Assassins broken. I don't think OP's suggestion would be at all over powered

[Snails]

I interpreted that as the opposite. That being that is a member fails to notice any threat, as in any single threat out of a myriad of possible threats, they are surprised.

So, as long as a single rogue was hidden, any member of the enemy team that didn't notice them are surprised regardless of how they notice the paladin, cleric, and fighter already with their blades out.

The problem with your interpretation is "fails to notice any threat" is too broad, and will cause confusion. Any enemy or PC who happens to be back out of line of sight is arguably a not-noticed-threat. Even if lingering far in the back is abusive and disallowed, there are so many intermediate cases where one person happens to hide behind a bush and thus strongly shapes the entire start of combat. As a practical matter, it makes Invisibility insanely powerful, as a single invisible creature might give its entire side a full round to beat down its hapless enemies -- that can be bizarrely harsh to both PCs and NPCs.

[sithlordnergal]

The problem with your interpretation is "fails to notice any threat" is too broad, and will cause confusion. Any enemy or PC who happens to be back out of line of sight is arguably a not-noticed-threat. Even if lingering far in the back is abusive and disallowed, there are so many intermediate cases where one person happens to hide behind a bush and thus strongly shapes the entire start of combat. As a practical matter, it makes Invisibility insanely powerful, as a single invisible creature might give its entire side a full round to beat down its hapless enemies -- that can be bizarrely harsh to both PCs and NPCs.

I mean...there is a way to make that method work while keeping it balanced. If both the party and NPCs were given the Surprised condition when the Rogue popped out, then the Rogue would still get Surprise off even with both sides being aware of each other. Of course, now the Rogue has a reason to try and find a Stealth roll where they remain hidden from the NPCs, but not from their party, and it kind of becomes a bit of a mess.

[Asisreo1]

I mean...there is a way to make that method work while keeping it balanced. If both the party and NPCs were given the Surprised condition when the Rogue popped out, then the Rogue would still get Surprise off even with both sides being aware of each other. Of course, now the Rogue has a reason to try and find a Stealth roll where they remain hidden from the NPCs, but not from their party, and it kind of becomes a bit of a mess.
In my interpretation, a threat is only a threat to the individual, not in general. The rogue is a threat to the enemy group but not the party.

Likewise, being hidden is not a condition given to the rogue, it is something that an individual enemy has with respect to the rogue. That way, a rogue is still hidden from those that matters even when the party can still see them and are aware of their position.

[GooeyChewie]

The problem with your interpretation is "fails to notice any threat" is too broad, and will cause confusion. Any enemy or PC who happens to be back out of line of sight is arguably a not-noticed-threat. Even if lingering far in the back is abusive and disallowed, there are so many intermediate cases where one person happens to hide behind a bush and thus strongly shapes the entire start of combat. As a practical matter, it makes Invisibility insanely powerful, as a single invisible creature might give its entire side a full round to beat down its hapless enemies -- that can be bizarrely harsh to both PCs and NPCs.

Oh, absolutely! I would constantly use the Urchin background to start with a mouse, keep the mouse in my pocket, and claim the enemy party did not see it because it was fully concealed and thus they are all surprised.

The surprise rules as currently written work fairly well for standard combat once you understand them. Unfortunately they take some mental gymnastics to understand, and the Assassinate ability isn't useful in standard combat.

[Snails]

Likewise, being hidden is not a condition given to the rogue, it is something that an individual enemy has with respect to the rogue. That way, a rogue is still hidden from those that matters even when the party can still see them and are aware of their position.

It is possible to introduce a concept akin to Flatfooted like we had in 3e. This helps because then Surprise is just one way to achieve Flatfooted, rather than reusing the word Surprise and sowing confusion.

In 5e, with small exceptions, we sweep such things into the simple Advantage/Disadvantage mechanics. It is not unreasonable to expand this to offer more granularity. That would imply a bit of rewriting of how Advantage/Disadvantage is awarded, because we no longer have the simplicity of a nearly "one size fits" all kind of mechanic.

[Theodoxus]

Surprise in 5E is as clunky and badly written as grappling was in 3.x.

Ditch it, return to the "Surprise Round" and all the problems fade away and tactical combat (and assassination) can play out like it's intended.

[Tanarii]

Surprise in 5E is as clunky and badly written as grappling was in 3.x.

Ditch it, return to the "Surprise Round" and all the problems fade away and tactical combat (and assassination) can play out like it's intended.
Surprise rounds were far clunkier.

I'm not sure what's so clunky about "if you don't notice any threats before initiative is rolled, you don't get to act on your first turn".

The only thing I find clunky is some people trying to allow ambushers who have started an ambush and achieved surprise to remain hidden once initiative has been rolled, until their first turn. Nothing in the surprise rules states that is the case. And it's a very big deal for that to a happen that creates all sorts of edge cases in almost all surprise situations that would need further rules on how to handle them, as shown in any thread where people discuss how to handle it. So the lack of comment explicitly saying that ambushers are hidden until their first turn pretty much rules it out as a reasonable interpretation of how surprise works.

[Segev]

Surprise rounds were far clunkier.

I'm not sure what's so clunky about "if you don't notice any threats before initiative is rolled, you don't get to act on your first turn".

The only thing I find clunky is some people trying to allow ambushers who have started an ambush and achieved surprise to remain hidden once initiative has been rolled, until their first turn. Nothing in the surprise rules states that is the case. And it's a very big deal for that to a happen that creates all sorts of edge cases in almost all surprise situations that would need further rules on how to handle them, as shown in any thread where people discuss how to handle it. So the lack of comment explicitly saying that ambushers are hidden until their first turn pretty much rules it out as a reasonable interpretation of how surprise works.

I'm not sure I'm disagreeing or agreeing with you, here, because I think my preconceptions are getting in the way of my understanding what you're saying. Thus, I'm going to outline my understanding of surprise mechanics, and ask you to try to re-explain what you're saying here in light of what I write, with specific call-outs for anything you think I'm getting wrong (or think I'm getting mostly right or right that aligns with what you're saying).

My understanding is that the RAW of Surprise is that, if you detect any member of the combat who isn't on your side, you're not Surprised. So, if 1 hobgoblin thug is trying to do a shakedown of your party, and he has 40 hidden goblins, and nobody in your party sees any of the goblins, none of you are surprised when one of the goblins launches an arrow at you. You all roll initiative. If the goblin who kicked this off by announcing intent to attack rolled lower than the whole party's initiative, despite nobody being Surprised, and everybody having a sense that Something Is Attacking, since the goblin's turn hasn't come up yet and he hasn't fired, he's still hidden. As are the other goblins until they attack.

Is that accurate?

[Tanarii]

1) One side attempts an ambush
2) check for surprise
3) act in initiative order

Nothing says the side attempting an ambush is hidden until their first turn as a result of the check for surprise.

Given the lack of any mention this is the case, and the lack of critical rules for how to handle the situation when a character that is surprised but can act anyway and doesn't have any non-hidden enemies, and the lack of any reference to what this means in the fiction, it's not reasonable to assume that creatures that achieve surprise through an attempted ambush are hidden until their first turn.

The check for surprise as the result of ambush uses dexterity (stealth) skill. But it is not a Hide check.

[Segev]

1) One side attempts an ambush
2) check for surprise
3) act in initiative order

Nothing says the side attempting an ambush is hidden until their first turn as a result of the check for surprise.

Given the lack of any mention this is the case, and the lack of critical rules for how to handle the situation when a character that is surprised but can act anyway and doesn't have any non-hidden enemies, and the lack of any reference to what this means in the fiction, it's not reasonable to assume that creatures that achieve surprise through an attempted ambush are hidden until their first turn.

The check for surprise as the result of ambush uses dexterity (stealth) skill. But it is not a Hide check.

What about actual hiding that has gone on prior to attempting an ambush? Or hiding that is going on when a fight breaks out?

Can both sides attempt an ambush?

Can one side attempt an ambush with only some of the people attempting it?

In a multi-sided conflict, can one side attempt an ambush if the other sides are aware of each other already?


I think the issue with the way you outlined it is that it assumes that only one side is aware of the other (i.e. one side can attempt an ambush), but that the check to see if one side is aware of the other is how you roll to attempt an ambush in the first place. It's almost like you have to already have succeeded on an ambush check before you can attempt an ambush check.

Again, this circular catch-22 is why I think I must be misunderstanding something.

[Tanarii]

What about actual hiding that has gone on prior to attempting an ambush? Or hiding that is going on when a fight breaks out?I'd assume some of that is what's happening as part of attempting an ambush, yes.


Can both sides attempt an ambush?I don't see why not. Nothing says the surprise check can't go both directions.


Can one side attempt an ambush with only some of the people attempting it?Definitely. See the separate parties rule. As I've said though, DM ruling needed on how far apart you have to be.


In a multi-sided conflict, can one side attempt an ambush if the other sides are aware of each other already?Good question! And it depends on how you interpret the surprise paragraph. Either one of:
- 'the DM determines surprise' or 'perception vs stealth'
- 'the DM determines surprise' by 'perception vs stealth'

Regardless, it's not uncommon for DMs on these boards to mention allowing it for deception. The example I like to use is an assassin disguised as a servant at the ball.

However, if they're aware of a threat as a threat, IMO no, you cannot attempt it.



I think the issue with the way you outlined it is that it assumes that only one side is aware of the other (i.e. one side can attempt an ambush), but that the check to see if one side is aware of the other is how you roll to attempt an ambush in the first place. It's almost like you have to already have succeeded on an ambush check before you can attempt an ambush check.

Again, this circular catch-22 is why I think I must be misunderstanding something.Yes it can all be one check. It's an abstraction. I mean, they could have just as easily had surprise be a 1 in 6 at the beginning of combat.

Just as the DM can decide combat begins with everyone already inside a room, instead of forcing you to have the first person open the door then everyone move through in combat order, with people who acted before the door opener losing their turn.

Or you might have a scout using stealth to hide first, then pulling back to tell the party, before they lay out an ambush plan. Then they move forward and the lead element attempts an ambush using the surprise rules. Or an enemy runs away from a fight and while the party mops up notifies their allies who lay an ambush for when the party continues.

[Mad_Saulot]

I think the main problem here is the use of language and the variable interpretations that arise from English.

I think what they mean when they say "Surprised" instead they should say "Ready" or rather "Not Ready" so if we apply this to Assassinate you can auto-crit a target that is "Not-Ready", you could argue that someone who is aware of a threat yet hasnt acted that turn is still "Ready" to act, if you see what i mean. So if we bring back the term "Flat Footed" which to mean means "Ready" (not surprised) but hasnt acted yet.

So you can assassinate a target that is "Not Ready" (ie is surprised)

You gain advantage on a target that is "Flat-Footed" (ie is not surprised but hasnt acted yet but is "Ready" to act when their initiative comes up)