Everyone is focused on the "Characters can't be surprised while conscious" part of the feat, which is what this thread is about.
The +5 to initiative and never giving advantage to unseen attackers justifies the feat, never mind the very infrequent Surprised condition.
As for the feat allowing a player to choose to Dodge instead of staying on task, that is a DM choice. Doing it either way doesn't constitute a houserule. There's nothing RAW that says they player is owed the Dodge action or not.
The player is absolutely allowed to take any action they wish on their turn in initiative order. That's not DM choice, that's RAW. The player is absolutely owed an action. Which action they take is up to them, of course.
Order of events:
DM wants Goblin to make attack roll against PC.
DM announces that initiative needs to be rolled.
Initiative is rolled.
Combat begins as any other non-surprise combat would start.
If the Ranger gets the higher initiative roll, then they are allowed to take their turn as normal. The PC doesn't know who or what might be where or what they might be doing. Still, they need to take their action(s) - Attack (with disadvantage per unseen attackers), cast a spell, dash, dodge, hide, skill check, etc., as well as any relevant bonus actions if desired and able.
The goblin, on its turn, gets to make its attack without advantage, but otherwise reveals itself to the Ranger and allows the Ranger to attack as normal and not with disadvantage on their turn (unless it successfully hides as a bonus action per its stat block or DM).
If instead the goblin rolls the higher initiative, then the attack is made (without advantage) and the goblin reveals itself and the Ranger proceeds with their turn.
I'm pretty sure that anything other than this is a houserule. That's neither good nor bad, just my interpretations of the RAW. If I'm missing something, feel free to let me know.
There's no RAW that says players/characters in initiative are owed ANY action they wish. If I'm wrong, feel free to quote/link the pertinent section of the published sourcebooks.
It is very much RAW that DM's adjudicate the scenario and present the situation for players to react to.
... Sometimes mediating the rules means setting limits. If a player tells you, “I want to run up and attack the orc,” but the character doesn’t have enough movement to reach the orc, you say, “It’s too far away to move up and still attack. What would you like to do instead?” The player takes the information and comes up with a different plan...
This argument between us is a DM style choice, and not a black and white RAW requirement.
As for my style, in the scenario outlined previously in this tread, the goblin would be considered under Total Cover, which means, per RAW, it can't be directly targeted at all. Only an AoE spell that flows around obstacles could hit it, if cast in the right place.
A target with total cover can't be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect. A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle.
The point of disagreement was whether or not the character with Alert knows there is a potential enemy nearby.
I've inferred that they do, indeed, know a potential is nearby when initiative is to be rolled. Again, I wouldn't say they know who it is or where they are, but they know something is out there. After all, how else would they not be surprised and not allow advantage on attacks by unseen attackers? And it is with this understanding that I would allow them any reasonable action they might want to take.
Anyway, that's how I would rule it at my table. I'm a proponent of allowing a feat, especially one as situational as Alert, to get the "benefit of the doubt", or what have you.
Otherwise, it is an assumption that the creature would be behind total cover. I mean, sure, they /could/ be, but that isn't an absolute, and would be reliant to where the creature is at the start of the round. If they are, then yeah, can't be targeted it would be an auto miss.
They still have the choice to make an attack, though. They would just waste their turn, after all. Only bad for the player.
Making an Attack states that they can, indeed, choose a location. So, they choose a direction in which to shoot their arrow. Even if they pick the right direction, it'll just miss, per total cover.
IMO, the Alert Feat doesn't allow a character to know there is an enemy nearby. It removes the possibility of an enemy causing a surprised condition, and it removes the ability of unseen attackers to gain advantage on attacks. And the rest of the time, it gives the character a big bump in initiative.
To me that means the character is fast... and *ahem* alert. They hear the thump of the bow releasing the arrow and react. Or they see the javelin sailing towards them. Or the spell effect building up. But only once the attack has happened because the enemy WON the stealth vs. perception contest.
At my table, if I made my players roll initiative without revealing any enemies and then my players say, "I attack that area..." I would rule that as metagaming and not allow it. If my players complained, then I would allow them to metagame, but I would introduce fake initiatives where they would blow ammo and spells only to discover that 'Oh, there's nothing there afterall..."
On a separate note, the player took the feat instead of an ASI, so don't try to force a surprise on them, regardless of what actions you allow/disallow, let them act.
you literally cannot surprise him so I would suggest you find some way to knock him unconscious (maybe from a trap that is the beginning of the ambush?) and maybe getting the other characters to have to drag his body along. just a suggestion.
I would recomend just not sending foes after the party that require surprise. Antagonist could still find hiding places and attack from stealth, the P.C. with alert will never be under the surprise condtion while awake. Creating conditions where the party is forced to separate or take different paths in order to complete the objectives at hand or lose out on possible rewards to play it safe and stay as one group.
As a GM I would suggest not taking the stance of "I am the advisory" as opposed to "I am here to make a good story".
I wouldn't make it to where their alert becomes useless because at that point what is the point in having it if you don't respect it. However I think I would somehow make it to where that player in particular isn't surprised but didn't have time to warn the other players and have them realise that they are surrounded by impossible odds and willingly get captured. Unless one of your players is like "I'm never going back to prison AAHH!!" lol
FoxFire Inferno the player can't be surprised while they are conscious, if they are unconscious their feat does nothing, again not saying that you should so don't hate me.
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.
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.
In the example of the ranger above in the thread, the ranger wins initiative but is not aware of the threat. Without the Alert feat, the DM would determine the Ranger is surprised. They wouldn't be allowed to move or take an action, period.
With the Alert feat, they CAN continue to move and take an action, because they can't be surprised. So they could move and roll a perception check for the sake of continuity, because the character doesn't know it's in initiative order, but any other action that would foil the goblin's ranged attack would be metagaming. If the ranger succeeds with a perception check, THEN they could move behind a tree for cover, or at the very least remove advantage from the goblin's attack as it is no longer an unseen attacker.
Those are the benefits of the Alert Feat.
The Alert feat says:
ALERT Always on the lookout for danger, you gain the following benefits: • You gain a +5 bonus to initiative. • You can't be surprised while you are conscious. • Other creatures don’t gain advantage on attack rolls against you as a result of being unseen by you.
A character with the Alert feat can't be surprised and attackers do NOT get advantage on attack rolls due to being unseen by you. This is part of the Alert feat already. The character doesn't need to move or do anything else to prevent the advantage on the attack, they are so aware of their surroundings that even attacks from people that they can't see do NOT get advantage.
In addition, if the attacker is not actually HIDDEN, then the Ranger could make an attack against a target that they can't see but whose location they are aware of because they made a noise or left tracks. If the attacker is hidden, then the ranger could make an attack with disadvantage at a designated location. If that location is occupied and the attack hits with disadvantage then the ranger can hit the target even though they didn't know where it was, they guessed. If it is not where the ranger targeted they miss anyway. I've actually done this firing a crossbow into an apparently empty room, chose a location, hit with disadvantage and there happened to be something hiding in the webs. Of course, combat started at that point with no one being surprised.
P.S. To the OP, you may not be able to "surprise" a character with the Alert feat in the mechanical sense. However, the player will still be surprised as will the rest of the party. In the situation you described, after initiative is rolled, the surrounding creatures will be able to take their actions on the first round of combat as will the character with the Alert feat. The rest won't be able to do anything. In addition, how the characters/players react will come down to how you describe the scene. If you state that they are surrounded by so many opponents that are certain that they will die if they resist then the decision on what actions they will take is up to the party. If they still decide to fight then so be it though the Alert ranger will get a turn in which they could attack or possibly run while the rest of the party is surprised. Being alert and aware does not necessarily extend to having time to let the rest of the party know. It has to do with the character's own reaction time.
Well thought out and put, I believe the feat should be rewritten to be can’t be surprised when “conscious of a threat”. If, for the purpose of let’s say Assassinate in the Assassin Rogue subclass, that individual successfully puts themself in a position to not seem a viable threat to the character who has Alert, I believe that Alert would not go off because while the character is “conscious” it is not cognizant of the person in front of them preparing to stab them if they do not seem a viable threat.
A very specific instance, but one I’m sure many people are wondering about.
Well thought out and put, I believe the feat should be rewritten to be can’t be surprised when “conscious of a threat”. If, for the purpose of let’s say Assassinate in the Assassin Rogue subclass, that individual successfully puts themself in a position to not seem a viable threat to the character who has Alert, I believe that Alert would not go off because while the character is “conscious” it is not cognizant of the person in front of them preparing to stab them if they do not seem a viable threat.
A very specific instance, but one I’m sure many people are wondering about.
Also. Implied there with “conscious.”
if you wake up someone who is alert when they are sleeping. They are not going to be instantly prepared and “alert” for it then either.
Well thought out and put, I believe the feat should be rewritten to be can’t be surprised when “conscious of a threat”. If, for the purpose of let’s say Assassinate in the Assassin Rogue subclass, that individual successfully puts themself in a position to not seem a viable threat to the character who has Alert, I believe that Alert would not go off because while the character is “conscious” it is not cognizant of the person in front of them preparing to stab them if they do not seem a viable threat.
A very specific instance, but one I’m sure many people are wondering about.
"Conscious of a threat" is no different than any other character without the Alert feat, no?
I mean, to me, "conscious of a threat" is that you are aware there is certainly, definitely a threat nearby. If creatures are behind total cover or invisible, then you can't be conscious of that threat, thus nullifying the Alert feat - what it was specifically designed to do.
I understand what you're trying to do here, but if a player is going to spend a significant resource (use an ASI) to take the Alert feat, then why are people trying to negate it? It will hardly ever come up in game anyway, nor is it overpowered in any way.
If your campaign relies heavily on Surprise, then just disallow the taking of the Alert feat in the first place, I guess?
Either way, it definitely doesn't need to be worked around or re-written.
Agreed. The PC that took Alert made a substantial investment to always be "conscious of a threat" the same way that real life military and police are constantly watching people's body language and hands, checking exits, keeping the door in front of them, etc. The feat is fine the way it is.
That said, you can get around it by having the attack while the PC unconscious, or scouting ahead of the party, or after an enemy casts a control spell on them, or while they're taking a bath, and so on. You just have to get creative. But being inconvenient to a DM's "I wanna surprise the whole group" plans is not reason to rewrite a feat.
For the love of god what a bunch of nonsense. The guy asked how can you surprise a character with the Alert feat, the answer is simple, your the DM, you just do it. The rules are not there to bind you in a way that you can't perform a scene. Alert is not a magical ability that makes it impossible for a person to ever be surprise again, its a bloody mechanic that can be ignored whenever the DM see's fit to do so as can any mechanic in the game.
My advice is stop fussing about with the bloody rules trying to run everything RAW, its a role-playing game, your the DM, just surprise him.
.. caveat of course, make sure you write that into the social contract, your the DM, you reserve the right to change the rules as you see fit and don't abuse it.
I agree that the DM can change whatever he likes in his game. That is the nature of D&D. However, there are a couple of provisos from my point of view.
1) The characters live in the world and they should KNOW that things generally work a certain way. If the DM is going to change it in general the characters should know that,. if the DM is going to create circumstances that break the general rule in one instance then the DM should give some indication of what is going on ... otherwise the players become frustrated and irritated. They spend rare and valuable resources on an ability for their character which, for some reason, doesn't work. Making this happen all the time leads to unhappy players.
2) The "world" is a shared narrative experience between the DM and the players. The DM provides the world context and adjudicates the interactions of the characters with the world and resolves the actions the characters choose to take in the given context. The DM should never need to surprise the characters. As soon as the DM requires this, he is essentially trying to dictate how the interaction of the characters with the world must turn out. They must be surprised or something won't work. From my perspective, neither the DM nor the players should really know how any encounter or interaction will turn out. The DM doesn't know what the characters will choose to do and the characters don't know all the details of the situation. It is immensely enjoyable when you set a scene, create the elements and then the players interact with it in completely unexpected ways leading to a memorable encounter that neither the DM nor the players envisaged.
An adventure should typically NOT be built as (in my opinion).
1) Encounter 1 - fight ->
2) Encounter 2 - talk or fight ->
3) Encounter 3 - explore ->
4 ) Encounter 4 - fight - defeat minor boss -> etc.
The characters could win/lose/avoid any of these encounters depending on their choices and motivations and instead might run into encounters 23, 47, and 12 before coming back to (4).
I guess I am pretty firmly in the sandbox side of world building. Create the environment, NPCs, politics, fill in some of the blanks of the world and let the players interact with it. Throw in some plot lines that are developing and see if the players decide to follow up on any of them. Depending on the players and characters, the plot lines may need to be made more or less obvious or other motivations might need to be used to engage other characters. However, in the end, it is the player/characters that decide what they wish to do using the abilities that their characters possess to interact with the game world.
So from the OPs perspective, I don't think it should ever be NECESSARY to surprise a character with the Alert feat, it shouldn't be necessary to change the rules to make it happen (even if you are free to do that). Choosing this course means the DM wants to determine how the situation develops and if they want to do that they might as well just narrate it rather than pretend to give the characters the appearance of choice since as soon and folks can choose the odds of them doing something unexpected are really high and you are back to the point where the DM can't impose the outcome.
-----
Anyway, as far as the Alert feat goes. The character can't be surprised as long as they are conscious. So in this case the DM narrates the ambush, saying that the character with Alert sees it happening but it happens so fast that they don't have time to do anything before the party is encircled. However, since the goal of the attackers are prisoners, they may have weapons ready but might not be attacking. The entire party is surprised except the Alert character. Everyone rolls initiative BUT the encounter then starts with a social interaction with the ambushers demanding that the defenders drop their weapons and then take it from there. The characters can decide to surrender or not ... and if it comes to combat, only the character with Alert will get to attack in the first round. You don't need to defeat the Alert ability to not be surprised to run the encounter and the character with the feat will be pleased to find it useful.
For the love of god what a bunch of nonsense. The guy asked how can you surprise a character with the Alert feat, the answer is simple, your the DM, you just do it. The rules are not there to bind you in a way that you can't perform a scene. Alert is not a magical ability that makes it impossible for a person to ever be surprise again, its a bloody mechanic that can be ignored whenever the DM see's fit to do so as can any mechanic in the game.
My advice is stop fussing about with the bloody rules trying to run everything RAW, its a role-playing game, your the DM, just surprise him.
.. caveat of course, make sure you write that into the social contract, your the DM, you reserve the right to change the rules as you see fit and don't abuse it.
I agree that the DM can change whatever he likes in his game. That is the nature of D&D. However, there are a couple of provisos from my point of view.
1) The characters live in the world and they should KNOW that things generally work a certain way. If the DM is going to change it in general the characters should know that,. if the DM is going to create circumstances that break the general rule in one instance then the DM should give some indication of what is going on ... otherwise the players become frustrated and irritated. They spend rare and valuable resources on an ability for their character which, for some reason, doesn't work. Making this happen all the time leads to unhappy players.
2) The "world" is a shared narrative experience between the DM and the players. The DM provides the world context and adjudicates the interactions of the characters with the world and resolves the actions the characters choose to take in the given context. The DM should never need to surprise the characters. As soon as the DM requires this, he is essentially trying to dictate how the interaction of the characters with the world must turn out. They must be surprised or something won't work. From my perspective, neither the DM nor the players should really know how any encounter or interaction will turn out. The DM doesn't know what the characters will choose to do and the characters don't know all the details of the situation. It is immensely enjoyable when you set a scene, create the elements and then the players interact with it in completely unexpected ways leading to a memorable encounter that neither the DM nor the players envisaged.
An adventure should typically NOT be built as (in my opinion).
1) Encounter 1 - fight ->
2) Encounter 2 - talk or fight ->
3) Encounter 3 - explore ->
4 ) Encounter 4 - fight - defeat minor boss -> etc.
The characters could win/lose/avoid any of these encounters depending on their choices and motivations and instead might run into encounters 23, 47, and 12 before coming back to (4).
I guess I am pretty firmly in the sandbox side of world building. Create the environment, NPCs, politics, fill in some of the blanks of the world and let the players interact with it. Throw in some plot lines that are developing and see if the players decide to follow up on any of them. Depending on the players and characters, the plot lines may need to be made more or less obvious or other motivations might need to be used to engage other characters. However, in the end, it is the player/characters that decide what they wish to do using the abilities that their characters possess to interact with the game world.
So from the OPs perspective, I don't think it should ever be NECESSARY to surprise a character with the Alert feat, it shouldn't be necessary to change the rules to make it happen (even if you are free to do that). Choosing this course means the DM wants to determine how the situation develops and if they want to do that they might as well just narrate it rather than pretend to give the characters the appearance of choice since as soon and folks can choose the odds of them doing something unexpected are really high and you are back to the point where the DM can't impose the outcome.
-----
Anyway, as far as the Alert feat goes. The character can't be surprised as long as they are conscious. So in this case the DM narrates the ambush, saying that the character with Alert sees it happening but it happens so fast that they don't have time to do anything before the party is encircled. However, since the goal of the attackers are prisoners, they may have weapons ready but might not be attacking. The entire party is surprised except the Alert character. Everyone rolls initiative BUT the encounter then starts with a social interaction with the ambushers demanding that the defenders drop their weapons and then take it from there. The characters can decide to surrender or not ... and if it comes to combat, only the character with Alert will get to attack in the first round. You don't need to defeat the Alert ability to not be surprised to run the encounter and the character with the feat will be pleased to find it useful.
I don't disagree with you, its just that stupid rules like this that just completely ruin D&D and the RPG experience for me as both a player and DM. This is supposed to be sword and sorcery game, its a fantasy world, not a comic book world and this character has "Spidey Sense", the only thing that is missing is some tights and a cape. If your going to play a game like 5e with a metric ton of stupid rules like this and then try to have some semblance of a believable fantasy you have to as a DM establish that without notice you are going to on occasion have to break these rules otherwise its not a role-playing game, its a video game.
If you as a DM think that the Alert feat is ruining the experience, and permit the player to take the feat, there's a problem.
You need to honor the commitment the player made when choosing the feat. It represents a significant investment on their behalf.
That character has become immune to surprise and you will have to accept that.
If you think it ruins your campaign, talk to the player and ask them to change the feat to another or take the ASI, but don't handwave their investment into meaninglessness.
And if you already know the feat will derail your plans, don't let any player take it.
It's a matter of being fair to your players, the core responsibility of a DM.
Agreed. The PC that took Alert made a substantial investment to always be "conscious of a threat" the same way that real life military and police are constantly watching people's body language and hands, checking exits, keeping the door in front of them, etc. The feat is fine the way it is.
I really like this analogy between the alert feat and law enforcement and military.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Everyone is focused on the "Characters can't be surprised while conscious" part of the feat, which is what this thread is about.
The +5 to initiative and never giving advantage to unseen attackers justifies the feat, never mind the very infrequent Surprised condition.
As for the feat allowing a player to choose to Dodge instead of staying on task, that is a DM choice. Doing it either way doesn't constitute a houserule. There's nothing RAW that says they player is owed the Dodge action or not.
The player is absolutely allowed to take any action they wish on their turn in initiative order. That's not DM choice, that's RAW. The player is absolutely owed an action. Which action they take is up to them, of course.
Order of events:
I'm pretty sure that anything other than this is a houserule. That's neither good nor bad, just my interpretations of the RAW. If I'm missing something, feel free to let me know.
There's no RAW that says players/characters in initiative are owed ANY action they wish. If I'm wrong, feel free to quote/link the pertinent section of the published sourcebooks.
It is very much RAW that DM's adjudicate the scenario and present the situation for players to react to.
Source
Relevant copy/pasted text:
... Sometimes mediating the rules means setting limits. If a player tells you, “I want to run up and attack the orc,” but the character doesn’t have enough movement to reach the orc, you say, “It’s too far away to move up and still attack. What would you like to do instead?” The player takes the information and comes up with a different plan...
This argument between us is a DM style choice, and not a black and white RAW requirement.
As for my style, in the scenario outlined previously in this tread, the goblin would be considered under Total Cover, which means, per RAW, it can't be directly targeted at all. Only an AoE spell that flows around obstacles could hit it, if cast in the right place.
Total Cover
A target with total cover can't be targeted directly by an attack or a spell, although some spells can reach such a target by including it in an area of effect. A target has total cover if it is completely concealed by an obstacle.
The point of disagreement was whether or not the character with Alert knows there is a potential enemy nearby.
I've inferred that they do, indeed, know a potential is nearby when initiative is to be rolled. Again, I wouldn't say they know who it is or where they are, but they know something is out there. After all, how else would they not be surprised and not allow advantage on attacks by unseen attackers? And it is with this understanding that I would allow them any reasonable action they might want to take.
Anyway, that's how I would rule it at my table. I'm a proponent of allowing a feat, especially one as situational as Alert, to get the "benefit of the doubt", or what have you.
Otherwise, it is an assumption that the creature would be behind total cover. I mean, sure, they /could/ be, but that isn't an absolute, and would be reliant to where the creature is at the start of the round. If they are, then yeah,
can't be targetedit would be an auto miss.They still have the choice to make an attack, though. They would just waste their turn, after all. Only bad for the player.
Making an Attack states that they can, indeed, choose a location. So, they choose a direction in which to shoot their arrow. Even if they pick the right direction, it'll just miss, per total cover.
Agree to disagree then.
IMO, the Alert Feat doesn't allow a character to know there is an enemy nearby. It removes the possibility of an enemy causing a surprised condition, and it removes the ability of unseen attackers to gain advantage on attacks. And the rest of the time, it gives the character a big bump in initiative.
To me that means the character is fast... and *ahem* alert. They hear the thump of the bow releasing the arrow and react. Or they see the javelin sailing towards them. Or the spell effect building up. But only once the attack has happened because the enemy WON the stealth vs. perception contest.
At my table, if I made my players roll initiative without revealing any enemies and then my players say, "I attack that area..." I would rule that as metagaming and not allow it. If my players complained, then I would allow them to metagame, but I would introduce fake initiatives where they would blow ammo and spells only to discover that 'Oh, there's nothing there afterall..."
On a separate note, the player took the feat instead of an ASI, so don't try to force a surprise on them, regardless of what actions you allow/disallow, let them act.
More Interesting Lock Picking Rules
you literally cannot surprise him so I would suggest you find some way to knock him unconscious (maybe from a trap that is the beginning of the ambush?) and maybe getting the other characters to have to drag his body along. just a suggestion.
The Hammer of Enchantment
I would recomend just not sending foes after the party that require surprise. Antagonist could still find hiding places and attack from stealth, the P.C. with alert will never be under the surprise condtion while awake. Creating conditions where the party is forced to separate or take different paths in order to complete the objectives at hand or lose out on possible rewards to play it safe and stay as one group.
As a GM I would suggest not taking the stance of "I am the advisory" as opposed to "I am here to make a good story".
was just saying that you could if you had wanted to not that you should.
The Hammer of Enchantment
You don't, because the feat explicitly states that you can't.
I wouldn't make it to where their alert becomes useless because at that point what is the point in having it if you don't respect it. However I think I would somehow make it to where that player in particular isn't surprised but didn't have time to warn the other players and have them realise that they are surrounded by impossible odds and willingly get captured. Unless one of your players is like "I'm never going back to prison AAHH!!" lol
-Sol
FoxFire Inferno the player can't be surprised while they are conscious, if they are unconscious their feat does nothing, again not saying that you should so don't hate me.
The Hammer of Enchantment
The Alert feat says:
ALERT
Always on the lookout for danger, you gain the
following benefits:
• You gain a +5 bonus to initiative.
• You can't be surprised while you are conscious.
• Other creatures don’t gain advantage on attack rolls against you as a result of being unseen by you.
A character with the Alert feat can't be surprised and attackers do NOT get advantage on attack rolls due to being unseen by you. This is part of the Alert feat already. The character doesn't need to move or do anything else to prevent the advantage on the attack, they are so aware of their surroundings that even attacks from people that they can't see do NOT get advantage.
In addition, if the attacker is not actually HIDDEN, then the Ranger could make an attack against a target that they can't see but whose location they are aware of because they made a noise or left tracks. If the attacker is hidden, then the ranger could make an attack with disadvantage at a designated location. If that location is occupied and the attack hits with disadvantage then the ranger can hit the target even though they didn't know where it was, they guessed. If it is not where the ranger targeted they miss anyway. I've actually done this firing a crossbow into an apparently empty room, chose a location, hit with disadvantage and there happened to be something hiding in the webs. Of course, combat started at that point with no one being surprised.
P.S. To the OP, you may not be able to "surprise" a character with the Alert feat in the mechanical sense. However, the player will still be surprised as will the rest of the party. In the situation you described, after initiative is rolled, the surrounding creatures will be able to take their actions on the first round of combat as will the character with the Alert feat. The rest won't be able to do anything. In addition, how the characters/players react will come down to how you describe the scene. If you state that they are surrounded by so many opponents that are certain that they will die if they resist then the decision on what actions they will take is up to the party. If they still decide to fight then so be it though the Alert ranger will get a turn in which they could attack or possibly run while the rest of the party is surprised. Being alert and aware does not necessarily extend to having time to let the rest of the party know. It has to do with the character's own reaction time.
In response to this,
Well thought out and put, I believe the feat should be rewritten to be can’t be surprised when “conscious of a threat”. If, for the purpose of let’s say Assassinate in the Assassin Rogue subclass, that individual successfully puts themself in a position to not seem a viable threat to the character who has Alert, I believe that Alert would not go off because while the character is “conscious” it is not cognizant of the person in front of them preparing to stab them if they do not seem a viable threat.
A very specific instance, but one I’m sure many people are wondering about.
Also. Implied there with “conscious.”
if you wake up someone who is alert when they are sleeping. They are not going to be instantly prepared and “alert” for it then either.
Blank
"Conscious of a threat" is no different than any other character without the Alert feat, no?
I mean, to me, "conscious of a threat" is that you are aware there is certainly, definitely a threat nearby. If creatures are behind total cover or invisible, then you can't be conscious of that threat, thus nullifying the Alert feat - what it was specifically designed to do.
I understand what you're trying to do here, but if a player is going to spend a significant resource (use an ASI) to take the Alert feat, then why are people trying to negate it? It will hardly ever come up in game anyway, nor is it overpowered in any way.
If your campaign relies heavily on Surprise, then just disallow the taking of the Alert feat in the first place, I guess?
Either way, it definitely doesn't need to be worked around or re-written.
Agreed. The PC that took Alert made a substantial investment to always be "conscious of a threat" the same way that real life military and police are constantly watching people's body language and hands, checking exits, keeping the door in front of them, etc. The feat is fine the way it is.
That said, you can get around it by having the attack while the PC unconscious, or scouting ahead of the party, or after an enemy casts a control spell on them, or while they're taking a bath, and so on. You just have to get creative. But being inconvenient to a DM's "I wanna surprise the whole group" plans is not reason to rewrite a feat.
I agree that the DM can change whatever he likes in his game. That is the nature of D&D. However, there are a couple of provisos from my point of view.
1) The characters live in the world and they should KNOW that things generally work a certain way. If the DM is going to change it in general the characters should know that,. if the DM is going to create circumstances that break the general rule in one instance then the DM should give some indication of what is going on ... otherwise the players become frustrated and irritated. They spend rare and valuable resources on an ability for their character which, for some reason, doesn't work. Making this happen all the time leads to unhappy players.
2) The "world" is a shared narrative experience between the DM and the players. The DM provides the world context and adjudicates the interactions of the characters with the world and resolves the actions the characters choose to take in the given context. The DM should never need to surprise the characters. As soon as the DM requires this, he is essentially trying to dictate how the interaction of the characters with the world must turn out. They must be surprised or something won't work. From my perspective, neither the DM nor the players should really know how any encounter or interaction will turn out. The DM doesn't know what the characters will choose to do and the characters don't know all the details of the situation. It is immensely enjoyable when you set a scene, create the elements and then the players interact with it in completely unexpected ways leading to a memorable encounter that neither the DM nor the players envisaged.
An adventure should typically NOT be built as (in my opinion).
1) Encounter 1 - fight ->
2) Encounter 2 - talk or fight ->
3) Encounter 3 - explore ->
4 ) Encounter 4 - fight - defeat minor boss -> etc.
The characters could win/lose/avoid any of these encounters depending on their choices and motivations and instead might run into encounters 23, 47, and 12 before coming back to (4).
I guess I am pretty firmly in the sandbox side of world building. Create the environment, NPCs, politics, fill in some of the blanks of the world and let the players interact with it. Throw in some plot lines that are developing and see if the players decide to follow up on any of them. Depending on the players and characters, the plot lines may need to be made more or less obvious or other motivations might need to be used to engage other characters. However, in the end, it is the player/characters that decide what they wish to do using the abilities that their characters possess to interact with the game world.
So from the OPs perspective, I don't think it should ever be NECESSARY to surprise a character with the Alert feat, it shouldn't be necessary to change the rules to make it happen (even if you are free to do that). Choosing this course means the DM wants to determine how the situation develops and if they want to do that they might as well just narrate it rather than pretend to give the characters the appearance of choice since as soon and folks can choose the odds of them doing something unexpected are really high and you are back to the point where the DM can't impose the outcome.
-----
Anyway, as far as the Alert feat goes. The character can't be surprised as long as they are conscious. So in this case the DM narrates the ambush, saying that the character with Alert sees it happening but it happens so fast that they don't have time to do anything before the party is encircled. However, since the goal of the attackers are prisoners, they may have weapons ready but might not be attacking. The entire party is surprised except the Alert character. Everyone rolls initiative BUT the encounter then starts with a social interaction with the ambushers demanding that the defenders drop their weapons and then take it from there. The characters can decide to surrender or not ... and if it comes to combat, only the character with Alert will get to attack in the first round. You don't need to defeat the Alert ability to not be surprised to run the encounter and the character with the feat will be pleased to find it useful.
If you as a DM think that the Alert feat is ruining the experience, and permit the player to take the feat, there's a problem.
You need to honor the commitment the player made when choosing the feat. It represents a significant investment on their behalf.
That character has become immune to surprise and you will have to accept that.
If you think it ruins your campaign, talk to the player and ask them to change the feat to another or take the ASI, but don't handwave their investment into meaninglessness.
And if you already know the feat will derail your plans, don't let any player take it.
It's a matter of being fair to your players, the core responsibility of a DM.
More Interesting Lock Picking Rules
I really like this analogy between the alert feat and law enforcement and military.