In life, even the most simple ambush can go wrong. It's just how life works. If you want a reasonably accurate depiction of life, there has to be a risk. A DM can sort things however they like, but just giving away something that should be earned is rarely a good idea. There is no feeling of victory if you just get given something. That's the whole problem with "everybody wins" deals. If there is no chance to lose, there is no chance to win either.
I've commented about how I don't set out to kill characters, and that I don't have monsters focus on characters that are down. I hold to that. Does that mean I don't require death checks? No. I let things happen. I just don't *push*.
People want to make ambushes easier. Next, people want to stop having to roll to hit. If their enemy didn't see them coming, why should they need to? It's not like the enemy can avoid something they don't know is happening, and you have made it so they know they are going to hit first. Then they don't want to roll for damage either, because if their ambush is perfect and unavoidable, then it should do maximum damage should it not?
Ambushes are not easy in my games, lots of things can go wrong, a snap of a twig as an ambusher shifts weight, a glimpse of the shine of the sun off a crossbow through the undergrowth. But by definition table top roleplay games are meant at times to let players feel cinematic, so, as long as those stealth rolls are all up to scratch and as long as the ambush has been pulled off then I am happy allowing every player to have a combat round before initiative is rolled. But, as I have said, I also apply the same rules to the monsters. It rewards the players for taking the time to think and plan and prepare an ambush. If you don't give them a significant benefit then, from my experience, combat becomes very cookie cutter as the players see no benefit in thinking through interesting approaches.
I will say as well, I don't remember the stream but I saw a Chris Perkins stream where he effectively allowed the "surprise round" to happen out of an ambush much in the same way as I run it. In my opinion if it is good enough for Chris Perkins to put narrative above RAW then I think it is a perfectly acceptable way to go. I very much go for the rule of cool and I also very much take to heart Gygax's first ever rule, that the rules are simply a guide and not meant to be taken strictly as written. But I fully accept other groups and DM's enjoy the challenge that comes from applying RAW. Personally for me Roleplay games are about storytelling and it makes for a much much cooler story if the party pull off a seriously good ambush, or survive being on the end of one.
Let me rephrase that last line. Roleplaying games are about storytelling, and it makes for a much much cooler story if the party tries to pull off a seriously good ambush, or survive being on the end of one, and they succeed.
Few things have any value if you didn't have to try to get them. The harder you had to try, the more valuable your success is. The price is that you could fail.
I note that they largely removed a number of things that came from the Gygax era, like instant death spells, effects that had no save, and... the surprise round. The game has changed a great deal since then. I believe that the action economy rules are a large part of the reason the surprise round went away. Players can take quite a beating, and give out a great deal more of one, if the ones on the wrong side of an ambush just have to stand there for an entire round.
Out of curiosity, do you "fudge" dice rolls when you're behind the screen? I ran into an argument on that point once, when I admitted I did so from time to time. There was a huge torrent of abuse at anyone, not just me, who suggested that they did so. It was said that doing this ruined the game, because players could no longer believe that they had been treated fairly, and the only proper way to play D&D was to have all rolls in public view.
The way I look at an ambush is the party can agree to launch the attack either by all agreeing the same trigger (e.g. when the enemies get to a particular location) or to let one party member decide when to start the attack.
The first approach can cause issues (for example what to do if the enemies have one person scouting ahead). One way of dealing with this is that when there is a situation when any of the party members might consider the trigger has been set start initiative knowing it is quite possible everyone could do nothing or hold an action that never triggers (you can then either move the enemy party on 6 seconds and see it that changes anything or come out of initiative.
If the party want the ambush to start with a particular player (say the wizard casting fireball) I think that works pretty well with the rules, the ambushes are reacting to trigger so don't necessarily have time to be able to do a full turn. Roll initiative and anyone who rolls before the wizard in turn order has the option of holding their action with the trigger being the fireball going off. It does mean the fighter might not be able run up to one of the enemies and start slashing but he is responding to the same trigger than the enemy are so by the time he runs to them they might no longer be surprised. Being able ot hold an action gives the party some advantage for knowing an attack is immminent (as opposed to saying everyone except the wizard is surprised).
Let me rephrase that last line. Roleplaying games are about storytelling, and it makes for a much much cooler story if the party tries to pull off a seriously good ambush, or survive being on the end of one, and they succeed.
Few things have any value if you didn't have to try to get them. The harder you had to try, the more valuable your success is. The price is that you could fail.
I note that they largely removed a number of things that came from the Gygax era, like instant death spells, effects that had no save, and... the surprise round. The game has changed a great deal since then. I believe that the action economy rules are a large part of the reason the surprise round went away. Players can take quite a beating, and give out a great deal more of one, if the ones on the wrong side of an ambush just have to stand there for an entire round.
Out of curiosity, do you "fudge" dice rolls when you're behind the screen? I ran into an argument on that point once, when I admitted I did so from time to time. There was a huge torrent of abuse at anyone, not just me, who suggested that they did so. It was said that doing this ruined the game, because players could no longer believe that they had been treated fairly, and the only proper way to play D&D was to have all rolls in public view.
Ive fudged rolls before but nowadays don't really like it, I'd prefer an easier solution of simply not rolling for dumb things that will mess the story up for silly reasons (failed perception rolls or investigation rolls needed to notice a clue or similar).
As for combat situations, fudging rolls can make combat less interesting since if you know you have plot armor, then there's no risk. I don't WANT to die, of course, but I want to THINK I can die. I've sometimes done things with deadly and non-deadly encounters, basically something like regular fights you don't die but just faint, and boss battles/certain situations (told before so they know in advance some serious shit is going on) where you can die.
In 5e though it's so easy to prevent death I don't really do it as much though. But either way, people who say it's so wrong and blah blah are just dumb, not because of their opinion but because of how they voice it. People play their own way, there's no right and wrong way just because you don't like it one way. Just ignore those a-holes.
A question regarding the previous posts in the thread, would you consider the ambush just as bad if the assassin was allowed to trigger it as well? Like "the assassin goes first, target the spellcaster, then when the bolt hits, you cast entangle. Fighter run to the side, charge the archer and..." and so on?
I mean I've let parties trigger combat with a certain action because there was no combat before it. I feel that sometimes it's just the right action to start with, but it's not always a spellcaster. Often the opposite, a melee combatant or archer triggers the first round.
For a full on ambush though they would all need to succeed on a stealth check, depending on the time in advance MAYBE I'd allow a group check but if it's hasty definitely not. (like they have a few hours to prepare, sure, the good stealthers can go around and make sure people are hiding in the right places). If they all succeed, they get the first round and the enemies can only use their reactions after their initiative count. I can balance battles on the fly easy enough to make many encounters, having the players pull of an ambush just makes them enjoy their success, I don't mind losing a battle. I have as many as I want available. ;)
If an ambush is planned at my table, one person is designated to set it off. That person does not roll initiative, they just go first. Then everyone else rolls initiative and the amusher is put at the top of the order but their turn has just ended. It plays out just like Thoruk's except you don't have a weird situation where the enemies have rolled initiative but don't know anything is happening and thus do nothing.
This might be more generous than the default RAW, but nearly every DM I've seen across multiple editions would play out an ambush by starting with an attack that then triggers initiative. That's typically how people seem to play it when they are just trying to simulate an ambush rather than reading through the absolutely unintuitive rules on the subject. This is still a downgrade from that, and to me seems the best compromise between fairness and common sense.
I don’t know - the rules as written seem to provide a very simple, easy to follow rule set for ambush tactics? Why does giving one person the ability to set off an ambush and giving them an attack out of combat fix anything? What situation could possibly be ruined by using existing rules?
The party works out an extensive plan that hinges on Player A to setting off the ambush. Everyone rolls initiative and Player A ends up going last. So this group of competent, capable adventurers immediately toss their plan in the trash and everyone either jumps the gun and can only Ready actions or Leeroy Jenkinses into combat. It looks and feels like they're too dumb or uncoordinated to pull it off properly.
It's not "good storytelling" or some kind of intended manifestation of luck, it's a player-wrought plan failing because the mechanics can't properly simulate a team acting on a cue. So you can either make excuses for the mechanics and invent reasons why they somehow increase the realism, or you acknowledge the limitations of the mechanics and adjust them to better fit the world that you and your PCs envision.
You know, going back over this thread, I see something I should have seen long ago. The original poster said that they let the caster go first once, and then resumed normal initiative on the second turn, and that's a perfectly reasonable thing for a DM to do. I got it into my head that they wanted to make this into a rule and use it henceforth, and that's not what they said. They just asked if they did the right thing, and I think yes, they did.
I'm in the wrong, and I apologize to all concerned. As long nobody tries to make a rule allowing people to always go first, that's fine, and all I ended up doing was derailing the thread.
Let me rephrase that last line. Roleplaying games are about storytelling, and it makes for a much much cooler story if the party tries to pull off a seriously good ambush, or survive being on the end of one, and they succeed.
Few things have any value if you didn't have to try to get them. The harder you had to try, the more valuable your success is. The price is that you could fail.
I note that they largely removed a number of things that came from the Gygax era, like instant death spells, effects that had no save, and... the surprise round. The game has changed a great deal since then. I believe that the action economy rules are a large part of the reason the surprise round went away. Players can take quite a beating, and give out a great deal more of one, if the ones on the wrong side of an ambush just have to stand there for an entire round.
Out of curiosity, do you "fudge" dice rolls when you're behind the screen? I ran into an argument on that point once, when I admitted I did so from time to time. There was a huge torrent of abuse at anyone, not just me, who suggested that they did so. It was said that doing this ruined the game, because players could no longer believe that they had been treated fairly, and the only proper way to play D&D was to have all rolls in public view.
I think to make something clear it isn't enough for my players simply to say, we will lay an ambush, I describe the environment and they might spend an hour or longer of real time explaining exactly what they are going to do, discussing options and setting things up. I have once dm'd a 5 hour ambush prep session which involved getting fake guard uniforms, getting things set up just right, lots of dice rolls and time spent. If the players are going to invest that much real time in that sort of prep then I think they deserve a bit more then just the standard surprise situation. In a recent Cyberpunk game setting up and getting ready for an ambush took 4x4 hour sessions to do :).
I don't fudge dice rolls because I make all dice rolls open handed, I strongly believe that fudging dice rolls does impact the game if the players ever find out, and I have been witness to 3 campaigns collapsing over the years, as in all the players walking away, because the players found out the DM had fudged dice rolls in their favour, adjusted HP and AC and they felt therefore that they where simply pawns in the DM's game and their decisions had no real impact. I think you mentioned about the dragon arrow missing and I suggested a way narratively you can use that to add to the tension by making the arrow recoverable or, as I allowed in one game, allowing a barbarian with a 2 handed hammer to strike the arrow that was partialy embedded in the flank, and drive it into the dragon doing the full dragon arrow damage.
But I will never tell a DM what they are doing is wrong, I might point out what i see as the mathematical or tactical issues but if fudging works for your table, if following RAW for example is what you and your players enjoy it is not my place to say your doing your fun wrong.
I've pretty much given up on the idea of fudging die rolls myself. Not that I was ever caught, or if someone did notice, they never mentioned it to me. We all had fun. I remember the arrow of slaying incident, though I'm a little vague by now on the details. It was a long and involved campaign where the characters came in at the early stages of a plot to make a being from the Shadowfell into a god. True gods were forbidden to directly meddle in mortal affairs and this one was giving his own blood to a mortal agent to create a kind of potion that compelled people who drank it to worship whomever they were told. The mortal agent wasn't a priest type, he was an Illusionist. The players got hold of a good size amount of the blood in it's raw state and used it to create an arrow specific for the Shadow Lord. They had to travel all over the world to gather the components, perform the ritual to imbue the arrow, and when it was fired... It missed. It hit a stone wall and broke. End of plan.
The players did win in the end. They couldn't defeat the Shadow Lord, but his mortal agents had been overcome except for the Illusionist. They chased him down, losing one of the characters in the process, and beat him in the end. Yay! But I never did really like seeing everything they had worked so hard on fail due to simple bad luck and I always wondered if I should have fudged something. I guess not.
There are much more tools around now for players to overcome bad luck, if nothing else, there is a feat for that. There are other ways that nobody could have dreamed of back in 2nd Edition AD&D, and I actually started playing in 1st.
The party works out an extensive plan that hinges on Player A to setting off the ambush. Everyone rolls initiative and Player A ends up going last. So this group of competent, capable adventurers immediately toss their plan in the trash and everyone either jumps the gun and can only Ready actions or Leeroy Jenkinses into combat. It looks and feels like they're too dumb or uncoordinated to pull it off properly.
It's not "good storytelling" or some kind of intended manifestation of luck, it's a player-wrought plan failing because the mechanics can't properly simulate a team acting on a cue. So you can either make excuses for the mechanics and invent reasons why they somehow increase the realism, or you acknowledge the limitations of the mechanics and adjust them to better fit the world that you and your PCs envision.
Readied actions work like a well oiled plan, but possibly slightly less ambitious to what can happen with luck in their favor. The ambushers, a wizard, a rogue, and a barbarian agree that the wizard will cast hypnotic pattern and they will then take down anyone who makes the save:
Case 1, initative works in the favor (wizard, barb, rogue)
Wizard casts hypnotic pattern on and the 4 enemies, with two of them failing and takes cover behind a tree
Barbarian bonus action goes into rage, runs up to one of the enemies that wasn't affected and attacks him with his greatsword
Rogue fires his bow at the same enemy with advantage as he is hidden, moves to a different place in cover and attempts ot hide as a bonus action.
Case 2, Initiative works badly (rogue, barb wizard)
Rogue readies an action to fire his bow at the nearest enemy that makes the save
Barbarian readies and action to throw a javilin at the same enemy the rogue attacked, (if he is still up if he has been felled I would allow them to pick another target)
Wizard casts hypnotic pattern on and the 4 enemies, with two of them failing and takes cover behind a tree
An arrow immediately is fired at one of the enemies who makes the save with a javelin following a fraction of a second later (both with advantage)
Case 2 still looks like a well co-ordinated plan performed by capable adventurers, even though the babarian wasn't able to get into rage and had to make a ranged attack instead of getting into melee and the rogue wasn't able to attempt to hide they were all able ot get their attacks in before the enemy knew what happened.
On the top is of fudging dice I have done so once when I botched an encounter, TPKs should be a real threat but I believe only if the players do something wrong, even player death should be extremely rare if the party don't act recklessly.
Botched encounter
I wanted the party of 4 level 4 players to encounter a spellcaster and used a creature from BGDIA that was CR4, has 2 3rd level spell slots and knows fireball and animate dead, I thought the abilty to cast two fireball to be a bit much so I decided to give him a zombie as a mob that he had already animated that day. The encounter builder said a CR4 and a CR1/4 would be a hard encounter which I thought would be fine, especially as I had de-buffed him a bit. The master of souls tops the initiave and the party are all on one side of the room, and wanting to scare them a bit I have him cast fireball only the fighter makes the save (who has know healing) and I roll 40 for damage which would knock every one except the fighter unconcious (and an almost certain TPK) so I said it did 20.
I haven't read all 3 pages worth of this thread, so I apologize if I am repeating what has already been said. However, I want to chime in here and point out that the RAW mechanics are built upon hostile actions occurring in an initiative order, and surprise being a Condition.
Any deviations from RAW IS going to harm a class, subclass, monster ability, feat, skill, spell, etc... because all of these are built upon and balanced with respect to how the mechanics are supposed to work.
Let me illustrate with a few scenarios:
NPC: Bugbear has the Surprise Attack feature.
PC: Rogue subclass Assassin has the Assassinate feature.
The surprised condition applies to individuals in the initiative order IF that individual's passive perception is lower than rolled stealth check(s). The surprised condition only lasts until their turn ends in the initiative order.
Say a party of goblins led by a bugbear ambushes your players, and you make house rule(s) that allow certain individuals to go first, either in a pre-initiative surprise round, or allowing an individual to 'skip' ahead in the first round to correctly orchestrate a pre-determined plan of attack.
So in this scenario, our Bugbear rolls poorly and goes last in the initiative order. But because of a house rule, the DM lets the Bugbear get a 'surprise' round, or skip their initiative in the first combat round to apply the Assassinate feature. What this does:
Invalidate builds that focus on high dex and/or initiative bonuses
Invalidate the use of Bardic Inspiration, or DM inspiration if they reroll a bad initiative, or any skill, feature, feat, ability, etc... that would have given those characters a jump on the bugbear.
Invalidate the whole Assassin subclass. Their features depend on the initiative order to get advantage versus others that go after them in the initiative order, in the first round. That advantage would have let them apply sneak attack. But now the Assassin will ignore the very dangerous bugbear and go clobber some minion goblin because the DM broke the mechanics for that whole sub-class.
Another scenario:
NPC caster with an AOE like Fireball
PC wizard with portent and counterspell
In this scenario, the NPC's ambush the party and an enemy caster rolls high initiative and would go first, except your wizard used their portent ability to change a shitty initiative roll to a very good one. The scenario should unfold as follows:
PC Wizard goes first in initiative, but is surprised. They can take no movement, actions or bonus actions. Once their turn ends, they are no longer surprised and gain the use of their reaction.
Eventually, the NPC caster casts an AOE spell, but
PC Wizard uses reaction via counterspell to shut down the NPC caster. Yay for portent!
Except that's not what happens because of house rules. Instead this happens:
PC Wizard burns their portent to get a good initiative roll.
PC wizard's turn in initiative gets overruled by a house rule. The NPC caster goes first.
NPC caster casts Fireball. PC Wizard hasn't had a turn, so they suffer the surprised condition and can't use a reaction.
Party gets blasted by Fireball.
Yay, your house rule for ambushes just wasted your wizard's portent roll/ability. They'll be thrilled with your house rule...
There are plenty more feats, skills, abilities, features, etc... that will get broken in varying degrees by house rules. It's just unavoidable. And to be honest, once you get comfortable with rolling initiative, figuring out surprise, it flows plenty well done RAW.
As for 'cinematic' experiences, there are plenty of narrative reasons an ambush can be spoiled. Maybe an NPC or a PC stinks? Made a sound while casting, releasing an arrow, moving from behind cover, etc.. Maybe the environment gave them away... no animal sounds?
Turn a fail into an opportunity to roleplay. If a PC comes up with an entertaining narrative for the ambush failing due to the luck of the dice, then award them some inspiration for rolling with the punches...
The party works out an extensive plan that hinges on Player A to setting off the ambush. Everyone rolls initiative and Player A ends up going last. So this group of competent, capable adventurers immediately toss their plan in the trash and everyone either jumps the gun and can only Ready actions or Leeroy Jenkinses into combat. It looks and feels like they're too dumb or uncoordinated to pull it off properly.
It's not "good storytelling" or some kind of intended manifestation of luck, it's a player-wrought plan failing because the mechanics can't properly simulate a team acting on a cue. So you can either make excuses for the mechanics and invent reasons why they somehow increase the realism, or you acknowledge the limitations of the mechanics and adjust them to better fit the world that you and your PCs envision.
Readied actions work like a well oiled plan, but possibly slightly less ambitious to what can happen with luck in their favor. The ambushers, a wizard, a rogue, and a barbarian agree that the wizard will cast hypnotic pattern and they will then take down anyone who makes the save:
Case 1, initative works in the favor (wizard, barb, rogue)
Wizard casts hypnotic pattern on and the 4 enemies, with two of them failing and takes cover behind a tree
Barbarian bonus action goes into rage, runs up to one of the enemies that wasn't affected and attacks him with his greatsword
Rogue fires his bow at the same enemy with advantage as he is hidden, moves to a different place in cover and attempts ot hide as a bonus action.
Case 2, Initiative works badly (rogue, barb wizard)
Rogue readies an action to fire his bow at the nearest enemy that makes the save
Barbarian readies and action to throw a javilin at the same enemy the rogue attacked, (if he is still up if he has been felled I would allow them to pick another target)
Wizard casts hypnotic pattern on and the 4 enemies, with two of them failing and takes cover behind a tree
An arrow immediately is fired at one of the enemies who makes the save with a javelin following a fraction of a second later (both with advantage)
Case 2 still looks like a well co-ordinated plan performed by capable adventurers, even though the babarian wasn't able to get into rage and had to make a ranged attack instead of getting into melee and the rogue wasn't able to attempt to hide they were all able ot get their attacks in before the enemy knew what happened.
On the top is of fudging dice I have done so once when I botched an encounter, TPKs should be a real threat but I believe only if the players do something wrong, even player death should be extremely rare if the party don't act recklessly.
Botched encounter
I wanted the party of 4 level 4 players to encounter a spellcaster and used a creature from BGDIA that was CR4, has 2 3rd level spell slots and knows fireball and animate dead, I thought the abilty to cast two fireball to be a bit much so I decided to give him a zombie as a mob that he had already animated that day. The encounter builder said a CR4 and a CR1/4 would be a hard encounter which I thought would be fine, especially as I had de-buffed him a bit. The master of souls tops the initiave and the party are all on one side of the room, and wanting to scare them a bit I have him cast fireball only the fighter makes the save (who has know healing) and I roll 40 for damage which would knock every one except the fighter unconcious (and an almost certain TPK) so I said it did 20.
Yeah, pretty much this whole thing. I’ve already tied it into to my table that if you want that *chefkiss* perfect surprise round, a lot of things have to go right. And you know what? The more rare it is, the more people will talk about it - so often the narrative is even more fantastical when talked about later.
But whatever - have fun with what you want! I was just wondering aloud 🙂
After reading everyone's replies on this, I think my final takeaway is that it doesn't matter whether you run it as RAW or the pre-combat way, as long as the following things are true:
The ambushed party actually has a chance to thwart the ambush. (This could be checking passive perceptions individually or for the whole party)
As you increase the number of ambushers, it becomes more difficult to stay hidden. (Easily solved by having every member involved in the ambush roll a stealth check. If *anyone* is spotted, then the ambush is thwarted.)
As you increase the number of ambushers, it becomes more difficult to stay hidden. (Easily solved by having every member involved in the ambush roll a stealth check. If *anyone* is spotted, then the ambush is thwarted.)
That's how it's supposed to work RAW:
Quote from PHB, emphasis mine:
The DM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares 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.
Quote from the Sage Advice Compendium, emphasis mine:
You can be surprised even if your companions aren’t, and you aren’t surprised if even one of your foes fails to catch you unawares.
That means an opponent will never have the Surprised condition if another creature that will join the initiative in the first round of combat is not being stealthy, or fails their opposed stealth vs passive perception check.
You are correct in both of your points. I outlined earlier in the thread the differences, pros, and cons between RAW and OP's way of doing it ("Pre-combat"). I was just trying to say in my newer post that I see no harm in doing things either way, as long as both of my 2 bullet points are true.
That means an opponent will never have the Surprised condition if another creature that will join the initiative in the first round of combat is not being stealthy, or fails their opposed stealth vs passive perception check.
While I agree with your RAW interpretation of this point, I think this should be left a little up to DM discretion. I prefer to only have the people who are actively trying to ambush/attack make the Stealth check.
Just because someone isn't being stealthy doesn't mean that they would be seen at all or perceived as a threat. For instance, I wouldn't have the following characters make a Stealth check (or I would just treat it as if they rolled a 20) to save on time:
Someone who is just working on the wheel of a broken cart.
The rest of the party, who are just sitting up on the top of a cliff (out of obvious sight), waiting for the one character to ambush the other party by pushing a boulder off the cliff.
A high Charisma character who distracts the unsuspecting party, allowing another character to get into ambush position.
Note: This character would most likely make different checks (i.e. Deception/Performance) but their lack of Stealth wouldn't automatically tip off the other party to the ambush.
Ambushes are not easy in my games, lots of things can go wrong, a snap of a twig as an ambusher shifts weight, a glimpse of the shine of the sun off a crossbow through the undergrowth. But by definition table top roleplay games are meant at times to let players feel cinematic, so, as long as those stealth rolls are all up to scratch and as long as the ambush has been pulled off then I am happy allowing every player to have a combat round before initiative is rolled. But, as I have said, I also apply the same rules to the monsters. It rewards the players for taking the time to think and plan and prepare an ambush. If you don't give them a significant benefit then, from my experience, combat becomes very cookie cutter as the players see no benefit in thinking through interesting approaches.
I will say as well, I don't remember the stream but I saw a Chris Perkins stream where he effectively allowed the "surprise round" to happen out of an ambush much in the same way as I run it. In my opinion if it is good enough for Chris Perkins to put narrative above RAW then I think it is a perfectly acceptable way to go. I very much go for the rule of cool and I also very much take to heart Gygax's first ever rule, that the rules are simply a guide and not meant to be taken strictly as written. But I fully accept other groups and DM's enjoy the challenge that comes from applying RAW. Personally for me Roleplay games are about storytelling and it makes for a much much cooler story if the party pull off a seriously good ambush, or survive being on the end of one.
Let me rephrase that last line. Roleplaying games are about storytelling, and it makes for a much much cooler story if the party tries to pull off a seriously good ambush, or survive being on the end of one, and they succeed.
Few things have any value if you didn't have to try to get them. The harder you had to try, the more valuable your success is. The price is that you could fail.
I note that they largely removed a number of things that came from the Gygax era, like instant death spells, effects that had no save, and... the surprise round. The game has changed a great deal since then. I believe that the action economy rules are a large part of the reason the surprise round went away. Players can take quite a beating, and give out a great deal more of one, if the ones on the wrong side of an ambush just have to stand there for an entire round.
Out of curiosity, do you "fudge" dice rolls when you're behind the screen? I ran into an argument on that point once, when I admitted I did so from time to time. There was a huge torrent of abuse at anyone, not just me, who suggested that they did so. It was said that doing this ruined the game, because players could no longer believe that they had been treated fairly, and the only proper way to play D&D was to have all rolls in public view.
<Insert clever signature here>
The way I look at an ambush is the party can agree to launch the attack either by all agreeing the same trigger (e.g. when the enemies get to a particular location) or to let one party member decide when to start the attack.
The first approach can cause issues (for example what to do if the enemies have one person scouting ahead). One way of dealing with this is that when there is a situation when any of the party members might consider the trigger has been set start initiative knowing it is quite possible everyone could do nothing or hold an action that never triggers (you can then either move the enemy party on 6 seconds and see it that changes anything or come out of initiative.
If the party want the ambush to start with a particular player (say the wizard casting fireball) I think that works pretty well with the rules, the ambushes are reacting to trigger so don't necessarily have time to be able to do a full turn. Roll initiative and anyone who rolls before the wizard in turn order has the option of holding their action with the trigger being the fireball going off. It does mean the fighter might not be able run up to one of the enemies and start slashing but he is responding to the same trigger than the enemy are so by the time he runs to them they might no longer be surprised. Being able ot hold an action gives the party some advantage for knowing an attack is immminent (as opposed to saying everyone except the wizard is surprised).
Ive fudged rolls before but nowadays don't really like it, I'd prefer an easier solution of simply not rolling for dumb things that will mess the story up for silly reasons (failed perception rolls or investigation rolls needed to notice a clue or similar).
As for combat situations, fudging rolls can make combat less interesting since if you know you have plot armor, then there's no risk. I don't WANT to die, of course, but I want to THINK I can die. I've sometimes done things with deadly and non-deadly encounters, basically something like regular fights you don't die but just faint, and boss battles/certain situations (told before so they know in advance some serious shit is going on) where you can die.
In 5e though it's so easy to prevent death I don't really do it as much though. But either way, people who say it's so wrong and blah blah are just dumb, not because of their opinion but because of how they voice it. People play their own way, there's no right and wrong way just because you don't like it one way. Just ignore those a-holes.
A question regarding the previous posts in the thread, would you consider the ambush just as bad if the assassin was allowed to trigger it as well? Like "the assassin goes first, target the spellcaster, then when the bolt hits, you cast entangle. Fighter run to the side, charge the archer and..." and so on?
I mean I've let parties trigger combat with a certain action because there was no combat before it. I feel that sometimes it's just the right action to start with, but it's not always a spellcaster. Often the opposite, a melee combatant or archer triggers the first round.
For a full on ambush though they would all need to succeed on a stealth check, depending on the time in advance MAYBE I'd allow a group check but if it's hasty definitely not. (like they have a few hours to prepare, sure, the good stealthers can go around and make sure people are hiding in the right places). If they all succeed, they get the first round and the enemies can only use their reactions after their initiative count. I can balance battles on the fly easy enough to make many encounters, having the players pull of an ambush just makes them enjoy their success, I don't mind losing a battle. I have as many as I want available. ;)
The party works out an extensive plan that hinges on Player A to setting off the ambush. Everyone rolls initiative and Player A ends up going last. So this group of competent, capable adventurers immediately toss their plan in the trash and everyone either jumps the gun and can only Ready actions or Leeroy Jenkinses into combat. It looks and feels like they're too dumb or uncoordinated to pull it off properly.
It's not "good storytelling" or some kind of intended manifestation of luck, it's a player-wrought plan failing because the mechanics can't properly simulate a team acting on a cue. So you can either make excuses for the mechanics and invent reasons why they somehow increase the realism, or you acknowledge the limitations of the mechanics and adjust them to better fit the world that you and your PCs envision.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
You know, going back over this thread, I see something I should have seen long ago. The original poster said that they let the caster go first once, and then resumed normal initiative on the second turn, and that's a perfectly reasonable thing for a DM to do. I got it into my head that they wanted to make this into a rule and use it henceforth, and that's not what they said. They just asked if they did the right thing, and I think yes, they did.
I'm in the wrong, and I apologize to all concerned. As long nobody tries to make a rule allowing people to always go first, that's fine, and all I ended up doing was derailing the thread.
<Insert clever signature here>
I think to make something clear it isn't enough for my players simply to say, we will lay an ambush, I describe the environment and they might spend an hour or longer of real time explaining exactly what they are going to do, discussing options and setting things up. I have once dm'd a 5 hour ambush prep session which involved getting fake guard uniforms, getting things set up just right, lots of dice rolls and time spent. If the players are going to invest that much real time in that sort of prep then I think they deserve a bit more then just the standard surprise situation. In a recent Cyberpunk game setting up and getting ready for an ambush took 4x4 hour sessions to do :).
I don't fudge dice rolls because I make all dice rolls open handed, I strongly believe that fudging dice rolls does impact the game if the players ever find out, and I have been witness to 3 campaigns collapsing over the years, as in all the players walking away, because the players found out the DM had fudged dice rolls in their favour, adjusted HP and AC and they felt therefore that they where simply pawns in the DM's game and their decisions had no real impact. I think you mentioned about the dragon arrow missing and I suggested a way narratively you can use that to add to the tension by making the arrow recoverable or, as I allowed in one game, allowing a barbarian with a 2 handed hammer to strike the arrow that was partialy embedded in the flank, and drive it into the dragon doing the full dragon arrow damage.
But I will never tell a DM what they are doing is wrong, I might point out what i see as the mathematical or tactical issues but if fudging works for your table, if following RAW for example is what you and your players enjoy it is not my place to say your doing your fun wrong.
I've pretty much given up on the idea of fudging die rolls myself. Not that I was ever caught, or if someone did notice, they never mentioned it to me. We all had fun. I remember the arrow of slaying incident, though I'm a little vague by now on the details. It was a long and involved campaign where the characters came in at the early stages of a plot to make a being from the Shadowfell into a god. True gods were forbidden to directly meddle in mortal affairs and this one was giving his own blood to a mortal agent to create a kind of potion that compelled people who drank it to worship whomever they were told. The mortal agent wasn't a priest type, he was an Illusionist. The players got hold of a good size amount of the blood in it's raw state and used it to create an arrow specific for the Shadow Lord. They had to travel all over the world to gather the components, perform the ritual to imbue the arrow, and when it was fired... It missed. It hit a stone wall and broke. End of plan.
The players did win in the end. They couldn't defeat the Shadow Lord, but his mortal agents had been overcome except for the Illusionist. They chased him down, losing one of the characters in the process, and beat him in the end. Yay! But I never did really like seeing everything they had worked so hard on fail due to simple bad luck and I always wondered if I should have fudged something. I guess not.
There are much more tools around now for players to overcome bad luck, if nothing else, there is a feat for that. There are other ways that nobody could have dreamed of back in 2nd Edition AD&D, and I actually started playing in 1st.
<Insert clever signature here>
Readied actions work like a well oiled plan, but possibly slightly less ambitious to what can happen with luck in their favor. The ambushers, a wizard, a rogue, and a barbarian agree that the wizard will cast hypnotic pattern and they will then take down anyone who makes the save:
Case 1, initative works in the favor (wizard, barb, rogue)
Case 2, Initiative works badly (rogue, barb wizard)
Case 2 still looks like a well co-ordinated plan performed by capable adventurers, even though the babarian wasn't able to get into rage and had to make a ranged attack instead of getting into melee and the rogue wasn't able to attempt to hide they were all able ot get their attacks in before the enemy knew what happened.
On the top is of fudging dice I have done so once when I botched an encounter, TPKs should be a real threat but I believe only if the players do something wrong, even player death should be extremely rare if the party don't act recklessly.
Botched encounter
I wanted the party of 4 level 4 players to encounter a spellcaster and used a creature from BGDIA that was CR4, has 2 3rd level spell slots and knows fireball and animate dead, I thought the abilty to cast two fireball to be a bit much so I decided to give him a zombie as a mob that he had already animated that day. The encounter builder said a CR4 and a CR1/4 would be a hard encounter which I thought would be fine, especially as I had de-buffed him a bit. The master of souls tops the initiave and the party are all on one side of the room, and wanting to scare them a bit I have him cast fireball only the fighter makes the save (who has know healing) and I roll 40 for damage which would knock every one except the fighter unconcious (and an almost certain TPK) so I said it did 20.
I haven't read all 3 pages worth of this thread, so I apologize if I am repeating what has already been said. However, I want to chime in here and point out that the RAW mechanics are built upon hostile actions occurring in an initiative order, and surprise being a Condition.
Any deviations from RAW IS going to harm a class, subclass, monster ability, feat, skill, spell, etc... because all of these are built upon and balanced with respect to how the mechanics are supposed to work.
Let me illustrate with a few scenarios:
The surprised condition applies to individuals in the initiative order IF that individual's passive perception is lower than rolled stealth check(s). The surprised condition only lasts until their turn ends in the initiative order.
Say a party of goblins led by a bugbear ambushes your players, and you make house rule(s) that allow certain individuals to go first, either in a pre-initiative surprise round, or allowing an individual to 'skip' ahead in the first round to correctly orchestrate a pre-determined plan of attack.
So in this scenario, our Bugbear rolls poorly and goes last in the initiative order. But because of a house rule, the DM lets the Bugbear get a 'surprise' round, or skip their initiative in the first combat round to apply the Assassinate feature. What this does:
Another scenario:
In this scenario, the NPC's ambush the party and an enemy caster rolls high initiative and would go first, except your wizard used their portent ability to change a shitty initiative roll to a very good one. The scenario should unfold as follows:
Except that's not what happens because of house rules. Instead this happens:
Yay, your house rule for ambushes just wasted your wizard's portent roll/ability. They'll be thrilled with your house rule...
There are plenty more feats, skills, abilities, features, etc... that will get broken in varying degrees by house rules. It's just unavoidable. And to be honest, once you get comfortable with rolling initiative, figuring out surprise, it flows plenty well done RAW.
As for 'cinematic' experiences, there are plenty of narrative reasons an ambush can be spoiled. Maybe an NPC or a PC stinks? Made a sound while casting, releasing an arrow, moving from behind cover, etc.. Maybe the environment gave them away... no animal sounds?
Turn a fail into an opportunity to roleplay. If a PC comes up with an entertaining narrative for the ambush failing due to the luck of the dice, then award them some inspiration for rolling with the punches...
Yeah, pretty much this whole thing. I’ve already tied it into to my table that if you want that *chefkiss* perfect surprise round, a lot of things have to go right. And you know what? The more rare it is, the more people will talk about it - so often the narrative is even more fantastical when talked about later.
But whatever - have fun with what you want! I was just wondering aloud 🙂
After reading everyone's replies on this, I think my final takeaway is that it doesn't matter whether you run it as RAW or the pre-combat way, as long as the following things are true:
That's how it's supposed to work RAW:
Quote from PHB, emphasis mine:
The DM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares 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.
Quote from the Sage Advice Compendium, emphasis mine:
You can be surprised even if your companions aren’t, and you aren’t surprised if even one of your foes fails to catch you unawares.
That means an opponent will never have the Surprised condition if another creature that will join the initiative in the first round of combat is not being stealthy, or fails their opposed stealth vs passive perception check.
You are correct in both of your points. I outlined earlier in the thread the differences, pros, and cons between RAW and OP's way of doing it ("Pre-combat"). I was just trying to say in my newer post that I see no harm in doing things either way, as long as both of my 2 bullet points are true.
While I agree with your RAW interpretation of this point, I think this should be left a little up to DM discretion. I prefer to only have the people who are actively trying to ambush/attack make the Stealth check.
Just because someone isn't being stealthy doesn't mean that they would be seen at all or perceived as a threat. For instance, I wouldn't have the following characters make a Stealth check (or I would just treat it as if they rolled a 20) to save on time:
Change the name of the surprised condition to flatfooted and things make a lot more sense.