Initiative doesn't necessarily need any aggressive or hostile action first. Like i said, we frequently go by initiative order when two groups of creatures simply encounter each other, to determine who does what, and in which order.
While slightly off-topic but casting Prestigitation would not necessarily trigger Initiative if the caster was to make some wind blow on the back of the prisoner's neck to create a distraction?
When to roll initiative may sometimes be unclear, but the sooner you do, the faster you can start tracking turns, movement and actions for all sides.
If you're going to cast any spell at enemies; to me it begs for initiative. If you aren't sure it should, ask yourself if NPCs trying the same on characters would want initiave before spellcasting...
I either would have rolled initiative before this point just to have some order to actions to let everyone who wanted to act a chance to OR I would have let the Sorcerer cast Misty Step and do Shocking Grasp outside of combat- and roll initiative after that point.
When to roll initiative may sometimes be unclear, but the sooner you do, the faster you can start tracking turns, movement and actions for all sides.
If you're going to cast any spell at enemies; to me it begs for initiative. If you aren't sure it should, ask yourself if NPCs trying the same on characters would want initiave before spellcasting...
This is probably the best answer. Any combat action, PC or NPC, is the trigger. So if a guard is threatening a prisoner with a weapon, sounds like a readied action, and therefore start the roll. Some non-combat actions might be a trigger too...like a failed stealth roll by a player, that causes a hostile action.
In the end, it will ensure everyone had a chance to do something, vs. talking over each other on something that is probably timing sensitive.
Casting Misty Step is not an aggressive or hostile action.
In the OPs stated example of a prison break/hostage situation, it absolutely would be an aggressive/hostile action though (thus the added language in bold) because the situation and relationship is already hostile. In your example, the situation and relationship would probably not be considered hostile, but it is quite likely someone unprepared or unknowing of the wizards capabilities or actions would be shocked into some sort of action, which could be treated as initiative, even if it resolves without any sort of violence. Initiative is not solely the realm of combat, after all.
Where else is initiative used? And, could you elaborate why you believe teleporting yourself is somehow a hostile action? I can't see how it causes harm to anyone.
I use initiative anytime where time is of the essence at a scale relevant to 6 second intervals. A building collapses on an NPC and the players need to rush, uncover them, and heal them before they expire? Initiative.
Teleporting is not a hostile act in a vacuum. Casting a spell (any spell) is in the specific situation presented in the OP. The casting is the hostile act, not the spell effect.
Hmm. I just thought for a moment I had overlooked some rules which called for initiative in non-combat situations. But, that doesn't seem to be what you're describing. I had hoped you had a rule you were referencing, I wasn't asking about your homebrew optional rules. Not that that isn't a bad one, it makes perfect sense to do what you're describing.
I know "Complex Traps" from the DMG use initiative, because, as the book suggests they are "something more like a combat encounter." And also "Chases" use initiative too. But I'm fairly certain that's it.
You might look into running the "falling tower" a bit more like a "complex trap" situation. It seems to sorta be what you're doing already.
Anyway, Teleporting yourself is never a hostile action. It can be mistaken for one, yes, it can be perceived as one, yes, or even be facilitating follow-up actions that will indeed be hostile. But it, itself, is not. It only affects the caster. TLDR: Combat rules need not be invoked every time someone wants to misty step. But, they probably should each time you try to attack someone.
it’s the act of casting a spell that is the hostile action. In a world where magic is commonplace it may be no big deal if you cast a spell in a social venue, but at the same time where casting a spell could be the death of one or many in an instant, casting a spell around people can be seen as a threat (hostile). How many people at your royal gala can tell if you are simply teleporting home or unleashing a fireball?
Edit: knives are a very commonplace item IRL, I cut my food with a knife. But if I’m in a public area and pull out a knife don’t you think some people might consider that hostile?
Ah okay, I see what's going on. You are seeing "hostile action" and thinking "what someone might interpret as hostile enough to respond with hostile actions of their own". But. That isn't what is being said. Teleporting yourself doesn't cause damage to anyone, it isn't an attack or force creatures to make saves or anything of the sort. It is not a hostile action.
I hate to say this, but hostile action is entirely in the eye of the beholder, and the situation of course matters. If i take a step, that isn't hostile by itself, but if I took a step towards that prisoner, he might see it that way. You don't get to interpret an action outside of its context, because your players/monsters don't. In the context of the OP, there is very little action that woudn't be considered hostile, and certainly spellcasting would be seen that way, as there is not a way to know what is being cast. Its not about the spell effect, its about the casting of a spell in general. Further, in this situation, the relationships between the sorcerer and the prisoner is already hostile by default. So the threshold of "hostile" is extraordinarily low, and likely includes actions and events that might not be considered hostile in a vacuum. Heck, a loud noise from somewhere else in the prison might be enough to set off initiative
Hostile vs perceived-as-hostile. You can perceive anything as hostile. Perceiving it as such doesn't make it so. This feels like a devolution into semantics, though, and not really worth going back and forth about. The point: start initiative at the moment when one or both parties intends to cause harm to the other side. Ie. It becomes a combat. Until such a time as people are combatting one another, it is not a combat. Because no one is, you know, fighting.
Pulling a knife, itself, isn't a hostile action. As you've said, you pull a knife to cut your sandwich. Unless you're a sandwich that's not hostile whatsoever. Why are you pulling out the knife? What you're actually doing here matters for the context. People could pull out knives in public all the time, and not spark panic, if the situation seems appropriate. Are they cooking? Are they working on something and have other tools out too? How panic-inducing the presence of the knife is will depend entirely on people's perception of you and your intent. Now, if you're going to start stabbing people, that is your intent, then, this seems exactly like a deception v insight type situation. (If you're masking that intent. If not, and you're powerwalking right at people white knuckling a knife with a crazed look on your face, that's a very different situation)
So in the OP situation, which is what we are supposed to be discussing, which is a hostage/prison riot, you think casting a spell (note that I don't care what spell, since the inmate doesn't know) would not be considered hostile by the prisoner literally holding a knife to the throat of a guard?
Again, "considered" hostile vs being hostile. Yes, of course it would "be considered hostile" and the guard/prisoner/bystanders would react to it as if it were going to be a fireball even, they don't know what is about to happen and they're going to try to stop it, with force if necessary. Of course it'll be perceived as hostile. But the misty step isn't what triggers combat.
Combat is triggered by the response to him trying to cast a spell. If the NPCs will respond to it with force, and I believe at least some of them would in the OP's scenario, their response, to fight, would be what starts initiative.
So initiative is rolled prior to misty step being completed. As the PC starting to cast would cause NPCs to decide it is time to fight. Their decision to fight would require initiative.
We're not fundamentally disagreeing on anything here, I don't think. I'm just saying the spell isn't what starts the combat, the NPC response to the spell is what starts the combat. But, that is up to the DM. He might not have them react to the spell at all. I'm hard-pressed to imagine a cast of character traits that would cause a bunch of prisoners and guards to all be gun-shy in the face of a possible magical assailant, but, again, the NPC response, or lack thereof, falls into his purview. If any of them would respond with violence to a spell being cast: initiative immediately. If not: Initiative immediately before his own spell attack.
When to roll initiative may sometimes be unclear, but the sooner you do, the faster you can start tracking turns, movement and actions for all sides.
If you're going to cast any spell at enemies; to me it begs for initiative. If you aren't sure it should, ask yourself if NPCs trying the same on characters would want initiave before spellcasting...
It is possible to start it too soon, too. And, it causes weirdness. From my experience DMing, if you call for initiative the players are going to go into kill-mode. Even if nothing, narratively, would justify it. I've seen groups bicker about who started a fight afterwards and then looking back realized it was them. Because initiative was rolled they assumed the 'enemies' were hostile, or that a fight is inevitable at that point.
I've learned from that, that the timing should be right, so you don't subtly influence the group into taking the encounter into combat, unless they want it to go that way. (Or the NPCs do)
This is why you should only call for initiative when hostile actions are declared. Either when an NPC would respond to the PCs with hostility or the PCs are trying to start the fight. Calling for initiative before then is you, the DM, putting your hand on the scales and potentially steering the encounter into a bloodier end than it might have otherwise had.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Rav, I've just reread the rules on initiative and there is nothing in the rules that determines when combat actually starts, nor is there anything requiring a "hostile" act to start a combat. So a DM can pretty much rule as they please about what "starts" combat. For me, that would be any creature taking an action that another creature might perceive as a threat (especially in a high-strung, intense situation like the OPs). For you, it might be the reaction to such an action. (this is beside the point that the teleportation in the OP is clearly intended to be hostile, since it is an attempt to position themselves for an attack, the same way that standard running towards the prisoner holding the hostage would be)
You've asked me to cite rules, so I would kindly ask you to do the same. It's quite possible I've missed something.
And regarding initiative in non-combat situations; All initiative is is a Dex check to determine an order of turns. It is essential in combat, but you yourself admit that there are other formal uses of initiative that aren't strictly combat. Chases and Complex Traps have similarities to combat, but so does my falling building scenario (specifically, there is an order of interaction and movement required to locate, extract, and heal a creature making death saves. Speaking of, in a non-combat situation where a PC or NPC drops to 0 hitpoints (say they fall), how do you handle the concept of death saves and actions to heal if not some form of turn order decided by initiative?
It is possible to start it too soon, too. And, it causes weirdness. From my experience DMing, if you call for initiative the players are going to go into kill-mode. Even if nothing, narratively, would justify it. I've seen groups bicker about who started a fight afterwards and then looking back realized it was them. Because initiative was rolled they assumed the 'enemies' were hostile, or that a fight is inevitable at that point.
I've learned from that, that the timing should be right, so you don't subtly influence the group into taking the encounter into combat, unless they want it to go that way. (Or the NPCs do)
This is why you should only call for initiative when hostile actions are declared. Either when an NPC would respond to the PCs with hostility or the PCs are trying to start the fight. Calling for initiative before then is you, the DM, putting your hand on the scales and potentially steering the encounter into a bloodier end than it might have otherwise had.
From my experience DMing, initiative doesn't prompt combat all the time, it prompt turn order. Many times it's for combat yes, but also for chase, traps and special encounter where time is of the essence. If one side doesn't want to fight, it can always flee on it's turn, duck for cover, surrender, parlay etc.
Also, not all spellcasting necessarily prompt initiative, being at the local temple and having the NPC priest casting a spell on the party doesn't necessarily take everyone into initiative order.
But in a critical situation like the above scenario where a prisoner is taking a guard hostage in a prison hall, threatening the guard’s life if not freed while the other prisoners in the mess hall are looking for an opportunity to rush them to start a prison break. And one party member intend to cast a spell? It would be for me the time to call for initiative to determine turn order, considering many creatures are involved (PCs, guards, prisoners) which may each also intend to do something too. Other DMs can come to different ruling and it's fine.
Misty step has a verbal component and verbal components have to be in a loud voice. A dM might allow you to try and deceive the prisoner that you are actually going to cast mending because you have just noticed a small tear in your cloak but if I was DMing I wouldn't allow it, being able ot cast a charisma check (something a sorcerer is very good at) to get the effect of a metamagic is justthe sort of thing that means subtle spell is rarely taken.
Really? I was not sure about that so I looked it up in the PHB to see and the text reads as followed.
Most spells require the chanting of mystic words. The words themselves aren't the source of the spell's power; rather, the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion. Thus, a character who is gagged or in an area of silence, such as one created by the silence spell, can't cast a spell with a verbal component.
Now, the only reason I'm checking is that in relation to my post that verbal component utterance is important in determining this discussed 'surprise'. As I framed the room there is a lot of commotion going on with the prisoners and guards, enough so that it may be hard to hear the sorcerer casting Misty Step but if what you are saying is true the vocal at a loud volume could have been heard and that could change the dynamics of the situation.
As far as I know the "vocal at a high volume" is a house rule. The rules don't actually state how loud the verbal components to spells need to be - only that they are "the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion". Some DMs decide that this means the verbal components must be obvious and loud. Others think a normal speaking voice volume would suffice and still others might allow the caster to vocalize in a loud whisper as long as the pitch and resonance stay the same.
It is entirely a DM call. Personally, in a room with a lot of background noise and commotion going on, I would usually rule that the verbal component to a spell is unlikely to be noticed or to stand out unless the listener was very close to the caster.
So I was covering the Initiative RAW and what has been discussed here with the player/Sorcerer who raised the issue. In the scenario described the Sorcerer asked since others got to go first why is he committed to the action (Misty Step) that gets the option to do something different. It was explained since Inititiative was triggered by his casting the spell there is where the committing of the action takes place it's just that others were faster than him in reacting. I also gave Sorcerer an explanation that it was possible the prisoner noticed the mage robes and say player muttering his verbal component to the spell or the other players, right next to the plays heard the spell being cast and reacted accordingly.
The player outlined
1) Players and the DM choose their actions when it is their turn in the initiative. 2) They make these choices based on the state of the game at the start of their turn not the start of the round/combat.
Since 5e is built on an action economy he feels losing an action is a big deal since the trigger, Misty Step, started the initiative. I've given a possible 'house rules' option-- by allowing the Sorcerer to expel his reaction (maybe with a DC) change up your action. (I could not find if there is something RAW like that and based on going over what JC said in the video Plaguescarred posted a while back action triggers initiative and roll may be random for order.) He did not seem receptive on that one.
To close the Sorcerer feels that feel mistakes were made all around that had an impact on how that encounter played out. That's fair I'm not infallible as a DM. He just wants us to learn from them. Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions.
So I was covering the Initiative RAW and what has been discussed here with the player/Sorcerer who raised the issue. In the scenario described the Sorcerer asked since others got to go first why is he committed to the action (Misty Step) that gets the option to do something different. It was explained since Inititiative was triggered by his casting the spell there is where the committing of the action takes place it's just that others were faster than him in reacting. I also gave Sorcerer an explanation that it was possible the prisoner noticed the mage robes and say player muttering his verbal component to the spell or the other players, right next to the plays heard the spell being cast and reacted accordingly.
The player outlined
1) Players and the DM choose their actions when it is their turn in the initiative. 2) They make these choices based on the state of the game at the start of their turn not the start of the round/combat.
Since 5e is built on an action economy he feels losing an action is a big deal since the trigger, Misty Step, started the initiative. I've given a possible 'house rules' option-- by allowing the Sorcerer to expel his reaction (maybe with a DC) change up your action. (I could not find if there is something RAW like that and based on going over what JC said in the video Plaguescarred posted a while back action triggers initiative and roll may be random for order.) He did not seem receptive on that one.
To close the Sorcerer feels that feel mistakes were made all around that had an impact on how that encounter played out. That's fair I'm not infallible as a DM. He just wants us to learn from them. Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions.
Two comments ...
1) Either the misty step triggered the initiative so the sorcerer's turn gets to be resolved first.
OR
2)Everyone rolls initiative and the turns are resolved in order with the character deciding their actions at the start of their turn.
RAW, each character decides their actions at the start of their turn. In this case, something the sorcerer did could have telegraphed that they might cast a spell but it hasn't happened until the sorcerer's turn comes up. When the sorcerer's turn arrives they get to choose their action. This is RAW since each character DOES choose their action at the start of their turn based on the state of the game at the start of their turn. That is the way combat and initiative works even if it is supposed to represent simultaneous events during a 6 second turn.
No characters have to decide their action at the start of the round and are then forced to execute that action even if it no longer makes sense when their turn arrives. Combat doesn't work that way. However, this does mean, that if you use the stated action of a character as a trigger for initiative and then everyone assumes they are immediately in combat then the stated action that you used to trigger the initiative roll may never happen. That is just how the game works.
Did the sorcerer do something to telegraph that they might cast a spell - does EVERYONE in the entire room notice? - are they reacting to the sorcerer raising their hands? Blinking? Starting to say something? How can any of these PCs and NPCs know that the sorcerer is planning to cast a spell let alone what spell it might be? Depending on how the DM rules, it will be meta gaming on the part of any PC that does anything except just stand around during that 6 second time window since unless they know (somehow) exactly what the sorcerer intends to do, there is no reason for them to do anything except continue to stand around or do whatever they were doing.
----
Anyway, if you are going to play it RAW, with everyone rolling initiative, thinking combat has started even though no one has done anything, and allow them to take whatever actions then also RAW, the sorcerer can do whatever they like on their turn since that is when they decide their action in response to the state of the game at the start of their turn. So in this case the planned action that resulted in the DM calling for initiative will not actually happen.
"On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first."
No decisions are made until your turn in the intiative order arrives. So the sorcerer should not have been forced to cast their spell or proceed with any part of the action they intended to take at that point.
"Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions."
Honestly, in the context, I completely agree with your player. In this case, he came up with a cool idea but because of the method you decided to resolve the event (everyone using meta knowledge that something was about to happen - both the DM and the other players), he was unable to take the action because everyone else had done something first. Consider this, if everyone had been in initiative from the beginning of the tense encounter, going around the table taking turns saying things to the prisoners, guards or other PCs THEN when the sorcerer's turn came around he said he was casting misty step and a cantrip, would you have had any issue with it?
The entire encounter could be considered a combat encounter from the very beginning because it involves conflict - attack is only one of the many actions that can be chosen on a turn -
"The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. For instance, the DM could reasonably expect you to use an action to open a stuck door or turn a crank to lower a drawbridge."
A character can do anything they want on their turn - so ANY conflict whether verbal, armed or any other type - can be resolved in initiative order. In this case, the sorcerer was prevented from doing something cool because they didn't roll high on initiative despite their intended action being the reason for the DM deciding to roll initiative.
By not telling the DM what they intend to do until their turn, the character ensures that they get a chance to take their intended action (this is how combat in initiative order is resolved anyway - normally the DM doesn't know what the character is going to do until their turn) - so honestly - unless you come up with a good way to resolve the situation, I think the player could be making the right call if they want to have an opportunity to actually play out their cool ideas (in the current situation, the action they intended to take made no sense when their turn actually arrived so they are forced to do something else). If they ask the DM if the current conflict and player actions can be resolved in initiative order since it IS a combat even if no one has swung a weapon yet - then when their turn comes around they can actually take the action they have in mind and it all works out.
This is why I usually just start the initiative with the character taking the action that required the initiative to be rolled in the first place since prior to that character taking their action there is no reason for either the PCs or NPCs to do anything other than they currently are. There are ways to get the same result without straying from RAW using the rules for surprise or just stating that the PCs and NPCs can't use metagame knowledge to decide on actions that don't make sense until AFTER the sorcerer has done whatever they planned to do that triggered initiative in the first place.
So I was covering the Initiative RAW and what has been discussed here with the player/Sorcerer who raised the issue. In the scenario described the Sorcerer asked since others got to go first why is he committed to the action (Misty Step) that gets the option to do something different. It was explained since Inititiative was triggered by his casting the spell there is where the committing of the action takes place it's just that others were faster than him in reacting. I also gave Sorcerer an explanation that it was possible the prisoner noticed the mage robes and say player muttering his verbal component to the spell or the other players, right next to the plays heard the spell being cast and reacted accordingly.
The player outlined
1) Players and the DM choose their actions when it is their turn in the initiative. 2) They make these choices based on the state of the game at the start of their turn not the start of the round/combat.
Since 5e is built on an action economy he feels losing an action is a big deal since the trigger, Misty Step, started the initiative. I've given a possible 'house rules' option-- by allowing the Sorcerer to expel his reaction (maybe with a DC) change up your action. (I could not find if there is something RAW like that and based on going over what JC said in the video Plaguescarred posted a while back action triggers initiative and roll may be random for order.) He did not seem receptive on that one.
To close the Sorcerer feels that feel mistakes were made all around that had an impact on how that encounter played out. That's fair I'm not infallible as a DM. He just wants us to learn from them. Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions.
1) Either the misty step triggered the initiative so the sorcerer's turn gets to be resolved first.
Bear with me here...I'm trying to understand
So if Misty Step bonus action triggers the initiative occurs...THEN...at that point, everyone rolls for the initiative which combat order is followed from that point on? Or am I giving a free action/attack to the Sorcerer against the prisoner then the initiative is rolled?
This may all seem elementary but I want to work this out so I'm not setting any precedent for future games.
So I was covering the Initiative RAW and what has been discussed here with the player/Sorcerer who raised the issue. In the scenario described the Sorcerer asked since others got to go first why is he committed to the action (Misty Step) that gets the option to do something different. It was explained since Inititiative was triggered by his casting the spell there is where the committing of the action takes place it's just that others were faster than him in reacting. I also gave Sorcerer an explanation that it was possible the prisoner noticed the mage robes and say player muttering his verbal component to the spell or the other players, right next to the plays heard the spell being cast and reacted accordingly.
The player outlined
1) Players and the DM choose their actions when it is their turn in the initiative. 2) They make these choices based on the state of the game at the start of their turn not the start of the round/combat.
Since 5e is built on an action economy he feels losing an action is a big deal since the trigger, Misty Step, started the initiative. I've given a possible 'house rules' option-- by allowing the Sorcerer to expel his reaction (maybe with a DC) change up your action. (I could not find if there is something RAW like that and based on going over what JC said in the video Plaguescarred posted a while back action triggers initiative and roll may be random for order.) He did not seem receptive on that one.
To close the Sorcerer feels that feel mistakes were made all around that had an impact on how that encounter played out. That's fair I'm not infallible as a DM. He just wants us to learn from them. Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions.
Two comments ...
1) Either the misty step triggered the initiative so the sorcerer's turn gets to be resolved first.
OR
2)Everyone rolls initiative and the turns are resolved in order with the character deciding their actions at the start of their turn.
RAW, each character decides their actions at the start of their turn. In this case, something the sorcerer did could have telegraphed that they might cast a spell but it hasn't happened until the sorcerer's turn comes up. When the sorcerer's turn arrives they get to choose their action. This is RAW since each character DOES choose their action at the start of their turn based on the state of the game at the start of their turn. That is the way combat and initiative works even if it is supposed to represent simultaneous events during a 6 second turn.
No characters have to decide their action at the start of the round and are then forced to execute that action even if it no longer makes sense when their turn arrives. Combat doesn't work that way. However, this does mean, that if you use the stated action of a character as a trigger for initiative and then everyone assumes they are immediately in combat then the stated action that you used to trigger the initiative roll may never happen. That is just how the game works.
Did the sorcerer do something to telegraph that they might cast a spell - does EVERYONE in the entire room notice? - are they reacting to the sorcerer raising their hands? Blinking? Starting to say something? How can any of these PCs and NPCs know that the sorcerer is planning to cast a spell let alone what spell it might be? Depending on how the DM rules, it will be meta gaming on the part of any PC that does anything except just stand around during that 6 second time window since unless they know (somehow) exactly what the sorcerer intends to do, there is no reason for them to do anything except continue to stand around or do whatever they were doing.
----
Anyway, if you are going to play it RAW, with everyone rolling initiative, thinking combat has started even though no one has done anything, and allow them to take whatever actions then also RAW, the sorcerer can do whatever they like on their turn since that is when they decide their action in response to the state of the game at the start of their turn. So in this case the planned action that resulted in the DM calling for initiative will not actually happen.
"On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first."
No decisions are made until your turn in the intiative order arrives. So the sorcerer should not have been forced to cast their spell or proceed with any part of the action they intended to take at that point.
"Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions."
Honestly, in the context, I completely agree with your player. In this case, he came up with a cool idea but because of the method you decided to resolve the event (everyone using meta knowledge that something was about to happen - both the DM and the other players), he was unable to take the action because everyone else had done something first. Consider this, if everyone had been in initiative from the beginning of the tense encounter, going around the table taking turns saying things to the prisoners, guards or other PCs THEN when the sorcerer's turn came around he said he was casting misty step and a cantrip, would you have had any issue with it?
The entire encounter could be considered a combat encounter from the very beginning because it involves conflict - attack is only one of the many actions that can be chosen on a turn -
"The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. For instance, the DM could reasonably expect you to use an action to open a stuck door or turn a crank to lower a drawbridge."
A character can do anything they want on their turn - so ANY conflict whether verbal, armed or any other type - can be resolved in initiative order. In this case, the sorcerer was prevented from doing something cool because they didn't roll high on initiative despite their intended action being the reason for the DM deciding to roll initiative.
By not telling the DM what they intend to do until their turn, the character ensures that they get a chance to take their intended action (this is how combat in initiative order is resolved anyway - normally the DM doesn't know what the character is going to do until their turn) - so honestly - unless you come up with a good way to resolve the situation, I think the player could be making the right call if they want to have an opportunity to actually play out their cool ideas (in the current situation, the action they intended to take made no sense when their turn actually arrived so they are forced to do something else). If they ask the DM if the current conflict and player actions can be resolved in initiative order since it IS a combat even if no one has swung a weapon yet - then when their turn comes around they can actually take the action they have in mind and it all works out.
This is why I usually just start the initiative with the character taking the action that required the initiative to be rolled in the first place since prior to that character taking their action there is no reason for either the PCs or NPCs to do anything other than they currently are. There are ways to get the same result without straying from RAW using the rules for surprise or just stating that the PCs and NPCs can't use metagame knowledge to decide on actions that don't make sense until AFTER the sorcerer has done whatever they planned to do that triggered initiative in the first place.
There is a lot of good stuff here even after the three pages of discussion you've made me rethink what to do. As I've said before I want to work this out so I'm not setting any precedent for future games.
Consider this, if everyone had been in initiative from the beginning of the tense encounter, going around the table taking turns saying things to the prisoners, guards or other PCs THEN when the sorcerer's turn came around he said he was casting misty step and a cantrip, would you have had any issue with it?
Fair question and the answer would be no I would not have had any issue with it. That tells me I missed the mark on the opportunity to set initiative.
I want to follow RAW and you are right I should allow the player to change their action on their turn even if their stated action, that triggered initiative/combat, would no longer be valid. I considered applying a pseudo-surprise to the players that went before the Sorcerer but I felt that was giving a free attack action outside of an initiative rolled combat.
And I've dropped into paralysis by analysis, which is my problem.
At the moment when it matters who goes first -- before anyone gets to do the thing they're racing for -- you roll initiative.
I could see an argument for the idea that the teleportation doesn't start the initiative, the intent to use Shocking Grasp does -- presumably the target intends not to get hit, so it matters who goes first. If that's the case, though, then the Sorcerer gets his whole turn on his turn -- not just his action, but his bonus action too. I don't love this, because it introduces a risk of getting stabbed between Misty Step and Shocking Grasp that wouldn't exist if fighting was already happening, but I guess if you communicate the stakes before the course of action is locked in, it's fair.
The counterpoint would be that the whole turn happens in the same time frame -- we know this isn't true because Alice can cast Hold Person on Bob and then walk away, incurring no attack of opportunity from Bob, or she can walk away from Bob and then cast Hold Person, and she might get hit. But in the game's oddball handling of time, we're meant to accept that it's true. All the things you do on your turn are happening basically at the same time. And everything else done in that round by other characters is also happening at the same time. And if that's the case, then you should roll initiative before he casts Misty Step.
So I was covering the Initiative RAW and what has been discussed here with the player/Sorcerer who raised the issue. In the scenario described the Sorcerer asked since others got to go first why is he committed to the action (Misty Step) that gets the option to do something different. It was explained since Inititiative was triggered by his casting the spell there is where the committing of the action takes place it's just that others were faster than him in reacting. I also gave Sorcerer an explanation that it was possible the prisoner noticed the mage robes and say player muttering his verbal component to the spell or the other players, right next to the plays heard the spell being cast and reacted accordingly.
The player outlined
1) Players and the DM choose their actions when it is their turn in the initiative. 2) They make these choices based on the state of the game at the start of their turn not the start of the round/combat.
Since 5e is built on an action economy he feels losing an action is a big deal since the trigger, Misty Step, started the initiative. I've given a possible 'house rules' option-- by allowing the Sorcerer to expel his reaction (maybe with a DC) change up your action. (I could not find if there is something RAW like that and based on going over what JC said in the video Plaguescarred posted a while back action triggers initiative and roll may be random for order.) He did not seem receptive on that one.
To close the Sorcerer feels that feel mistakes were made all around that had an impact on how that encounter played out. That's fair I'm not infallible as a DM. He just wants us to learn from them. Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions.
1) Either the misty step triggered the initiative so the sorcerer's turn gets to be resolved first.
Bear with me here...I'm trying to understand
So if Misty Step bonus action triggers the initiative occurs...THEN...at that point, everyone rolls for the initiative which combat order is followed from that point on? Or am I giving a free action/attack to the Sorcerer against the prisoner then the initiative is rolled?
This may all seem elementary but I want to work this out so I'm not setting any precedent for future games.
How to run it is up to you. I'll admit how I run it is either part house rule or stretching RAW in terms of what surprise means and how it is determined.
When I am running things - ANY situation which might involve combat or in which the timing of character actions make a difference or when there is a time limit in play - I will run it using initiative - in some cases just to make sure every player gets a turn. My players know that rolling initiative doesn't necessarily mean that ATTACKS will result - more that it could result depending on the character actions.
I try to avoid rolling initiative too early since it is overhead you don't need during roleplay unless one or more players are having trouble making themselves heard (which I usually handle by paying attention, noticing, and asking them what they want to do specifically to make sure their voice is heard if they want to say something).
Anyway - in the encounter you originally posted I would run it one of two ways ...
a) If the chances of combat are good and things are happening quickly, I'd roll it into initiative before hostile actions are taken just to avoid the type of situation you described.
b) However, you never know what your players are going to say and one says something that WILL start an encounter that will likely require initiative then I have everyone roll initiative at that point.
Combat rounds are 6 seconds, no one else had said they are doing something so everyone (PCs and NPCs) with initiative higher than the one who is taking the action that started the encounter continues to do whatever they were doing - they do not get an action until after the character taking the action that started the whole thing gets to take their planned action. In your situation, the prisoner continues to threaten the guard, the other PCs continue to do whatever they were doing since they did NOT indicate that they were doing something else before the sorcerer stated their intended action that required initiative be rolled. This is equivalent to saying that everyone before the sorcerer is surprised because they do not yet know that something is happening - the sorcerer hasn't done anything yet.
e.g.
Initiatives
18 PC1 (surprised - no action - continues doing whatever they were doing)
17 NPC1 (surprised - no action - continues doing whatever they were doing)
15 NPC2 (surprised - no action - continues doing whatever they were doing)
10 PC2 (surprised - no action - continues doing whatever they were doing)
8 Sorcerer (PC3) (takes the action that they stated they were going to take for which initiative was rolled)
5 NPC3 (not surprised - takes turn and action as normal)
2 PC4 (not surprised - takes turn and action as normal)
Return to top of initiative order to continue - no one surprised any longer.
Since no one before the sorcerer can take an action other than what they were already doing since they don't know what the sorcerer will do they don't get a turn in the first round and the first round effectively starts with the sorcerer taking the action that they said they would take which triggered initiative in the first place. The sorcerer doesn't get a turn before the action starts since they have already rolled initiative and everyone else will get a turn before the sorcerer gets another one.
That is how I tend to resolve situations like the one you describe or any other situation where there is a particular action that triggers the need for initiative. In order to maintain a logical narrative, I have that action take place first, in initiative order, except starting at the initiative of the character taking the action. The action can be things like opening a door, taking an action that triggers a trap, taking an action like the sorcerer in your example which triggers initiative.
I will also use it in combat when a hidden party has decided that one character will take the first shot. Everyone waits for that character to attack to start the fight (though if the characters are NOT hidden because they failed their stealth vs passive perception then the opponents can take actions as normal - as soon as the PCs realize that they aren't hidden then they can change their mind about waiting for the particular character to start things).
I don't find it makes sense that most of the time the party can't choose a specific character to attack first unless everyone before them initiative decides to take a ready action - and what about the opposing NPCs with higher initiative who can't see the hidden opponents, don't know where they are, but are supposed to do something about it including randomly attacking bushes (assuming the characters are successfully hidden). Makes no sense to me so I just start running the initiative from the character that starts the encounter.
I find it works well. Players get to take the actions they say they take. Characters do not get an extra turn out of initiative order. I don't have to come up with barely logical explanations that the characters somehow regularly telegraph what they are about to do so that everyone else somehow gets a turn first and then the character can't even take the action that was supposed to start the encounter in the first place. The lack of logic in that process is something that bothers me so, unless there is some reason that everyone does become aware of the character's intentions (which will be situation specific), I will simply say everyone before the character taking the action has the surprised "state" until after the character takes their action.
I find this avoids the logical inconsistency of the action that started the initiative process never happening and the frustration of the player having a good idea that they don't get to use because everyone else does something first since they rolled a higher initiative, invalidating what they planned to do.
The thing with letting people cast spells before initiative is that you eventually end up with PCs fireballing your encounter before it even starts! ☺
We often see this happen when people try to act while the DM is describing a scene or Read Alout text.
Signaling intent – as the Devs call it – is not necessarily taking action.
Agreed. Determining the order of resolving actions is up to the DM.
Personally, I don't allow casting of spells before a combat that has already started - meaning if both sides are aware of each other and aware that combat is imminent - then everyone rolls initiative and combat is resolved as described in the PHB.
I also don't generally allow combat spells (i.e. ones with a duration of 1 minute or less) to be cast out of initiative. Even if characters are pre-casting something before an encounter that they know is coming - I will have everyone roll initiative and they can cast any spells they want to prior to alerting the opponents to their presence but everything is still done in initiative order.
The only time I might advance the initiative order occurs when there is a specific character taking a specific action that is the trigger for initiative being required. This also prevents the character casting a spell out of initiative. The problem with casting an attack spell before initiative is rolled is that the character could end up with multiple turns before another character gets to take an action. I don't really care if the hidden wizard gets to cast a fireball on my poor NPCs that didn't notice him - I do care that all of the other players get their turn before the wizard comes up again. So the wizard may be the first one to act in the encounter but they won't get any additional turns.
Keep in mind that this is not the same as the DM describing a combat situation - "you walk into a room filled with 10 bugbears and some goblins who leap to attack" - wizard yells "I cast fireball" and I tell everyone to roll initiative and resolve their action on their turn. Just because the wizard stated before anyone else what they planned to do on their turn in a situation where everyone is aware and combat has started doesn't affect that the wizard has to wait for their initiative to resolve it.
However, lets say the party is hidden and a patrol of bugbears and goblins come into sight. In addition, the party agreed before hand that if an enemy showed up then the wizard would try to fireball them. In this case, I'd have everyone roll initiative but would usually start the encounter with the wizard casting fireball since they are hidden and the party had decided he would act first.
----
Anyway, it isn't a perfect approach - I just like to use it because I find it improves logical continuity and prevents players from getting frustrated when they don't get to use their cool idea because it doesn't make sense when their turn comes around when they don't roll a high initiative. It is a small subset of initiative cases where I use it but I find it works well for those cases.
However, it does require tweaking the definition of the "first round of combat" in order to not impact other abilities like those for a gloomstalker ranger or assassin rogue that are only active in the first round of combat.
I'll also add that I don't use it when running AL games since it is likely too much of a house rule for most folks. In that case, strict RAW has everyone roll initiative and everyone decides their actions on their turn so that the planned action that required the roll for initiative may never happen. I find that if this type of situation comes up too often, it usually means that initiative should have been rolled earlier in the encounter even if it had not progressed to actual attacking yet.
Rav, I've just reread the rules on initiative and there is nothing in the rules that determines when combat actually starts, nor is there anything requiring a "hostile" act to start a combat. So a DM can pretty much rule as they please about what "starts" combat. For me, that would be any creature taking an action that another creature might perceive as a threat (especially in a high-strung, intense situation like the OPs). For you, it might be the reaction to such an action. (this is beside the point that the teleportation in the OP is clearly intended to be hostile, since it is an attempt to position themselves for an attack, the same way that standard running towards the prisoner holding the hostage would be)
You've asked me to cite rules, so I would kindly ask you to do the same. It's quite possible I've missed something.
Again, you're focused on semantics, "taking perceived-as-hostile action vs reacting to it" is the same moment,initiative is what determines the timeline. The trigger is whenever someone wants to fight. Otherwise is isn't... combat. The wanting-to-fight bit is required by at least 1 party. Otherwise no one is fighting, and, it isn't a fight. This is tautological at this point. And, again, why I say your argument is entirely semantics: We fundamentally agree when in the timeline the combat starts so going back and forth about it is pointless.
If you want to know where in the rules it talks about when to start combat, I'd suggest Chapter 9: Combat. It is in the player's handbook. It is fairly integral to the game's rules.
Unless I am mistaken, you don't fundamentally disagree, either. There is no point in starting combat before at least one party actually wants to start fighting. You don't roll initiative when the PCs negotiate the rate for the local tavern. You don't roll initiative when the PC travel through town square every time they pass a new villager. Initiative is for starting "Combat" and combat is a fight. So, until at least one person present wants to fight, there isn't one. This ain't a hot take.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Again, you're focused on semantics, "taking perceived-as-hostile action vs reacting to it" is the same moment,initiative is what determines the timeline. The trigger is whenever someone wants to fight. Otherwise is isn't... combat. The wanting-to-fight bit is required by at least 1 party. Otherwise no one is fighting, and, it isn't a fight. This is tautological at this point. And, again, why I say your argument is entirely semantics: We fundamentally agree when in the timeline the combat starts so going back and forth about it is pointless.
But do we? My guess is that the back and forth is still going largely because it still seems to be a disagreement on the timing.
Your insistence on the casting of Misty Step NOT being what prompts initiative seems to indicate that the Misty Step would have already taken place when initiative is rolled. But you've said "So initiative is rolled prior to misty step being completed." which would indicate that it hadn't. So exactly when does the teleportation take place in your opinion? And does it have to take place at all?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Initiative doesn't necessarily need any aggressive or hostile action first. Like i said, we frequently go by initiative order when two groups of creatures simply encounter each other, to determine who does what, and in which order.
While slightly off-topic but casting Prestigitation would not necessarily trigger Initiative if the caster was to make some wind blow on the back of the prisoner's neck to create a distraction?
When to roll initiative may sometimes be unclear, but the sooner you do, the faster you can start tracking turns, movement and actions for all sides.
If you're going to cast any spell at enemies; to me it begs for initiative. If you aren't sure it should, ask yourself if NPCs trying the same on characters would want initiave before spellcasting...
I either would have rolled initiative before this point just to have some order to actions to let everyone who wanted to act a chance to
OR
I would have let the Sorcerer cast Misty Step and do Shocking Grasp outside of combat- and roll initiative after that point.
This is probably the best answer. Any combat action, PC or NPC, is the trigger. So if a guard is threatening a prisoner with a weapon, sounds like a readied action, and therefore start the roll. Some non-combat actions might be a trigger too...like a failed stealth roll by a player, that causes a hostile action.
In the end, it will ensure everyone had a chance to do something, vs. talking over each other on something that is probably timing sensitive.
Hmm. I just thought for a moment I had overlooked some rules which called for initiative in non-combat situations. But, that doesn't seem to be what you're describing. I had hoped you had a rule you were referencing, I wasn't asking about your homebrew optional rules. Not that that isn't a bad one, it makes perfect sense to do what you're describing.
I know "Complex Traps" from the DMG use initiative, because, as the book suggests they are "something more like a combat encounter." And also "Chases" use initiative too. But I'm fairly certain that's it.
You might look into running the "falling tower" a bit more like a "complex trap" situation. It seems to sorta be what you're doing already.
Anyway, Teleporting yourself is never a hostile action. It can be mistaken for one, yes, it can be perceived as one, yes, or even be facilitating follow-up actions that will indeed be hostile. But it, itself, is not. It only affects the caster. TLDR: Combat rules need not be invoked every time someone wants to misty step. But, they probably should each time you try to attack someone.
Hostile vs perceived-as-hostile. You can perceive anything as hostile. Perceiving it as such doesn't make it so. This feels like a devolution into semantics, though, and not really worth going back and forth about. The point: start initiative at the moment when one or both parties intends to cause harm to the other side. Ie. It becomes a combat. Until such a time as people are combatting one another, it is not a combat. Because no one is, you know, fighting.
Again, "considered" hostile vs being hostile. Yes, of course it would "be considered hostile" and the guard/prisoner/bystanders would react to it as if it were going to be a fireball even, they don't know what is about to happen and they're going to try to stop it, with force if necessary. Of course it'll be perceived as hostile. But the misty step isn't what triggers combat.
Combat is triggered by the response to him trying to cast a spell. If the NPCs will respond to it with force, and I believe at least some of them would in the OP's scenario, their response, to fight, would be what starts initiative.
So initiative is rolled prior to misty step being completed. As the PC starting to cast would cause NPCs to decide it is time to fight. Their decision to fight would require initiative.
We're not fundamentally disagreeing on anything here, I don't think. I'm just saying the spell isn't what starts the combat, the NPC response to the spell is what starts the combat. But, that is up to the DM. He might not have them react to the spell at all. I'm hard-pressed to imagine a cast of character traits that would cause a bunch of prisoners and guards to all be gun-shy in the face of a possible magical assailant, but, again, the NPC response, or lack thereof, falls into his purview. If any of them would respond with violence to a spell being cast: initiative immediately. If not: Initiative immediately before his own spell attack.
It is possible to start it too soon, too. And, it causes weirdness. From my experience DMing, if you call for initiative the players are going to go into kill-mode. Even if nothing, narratively, would justify it. I've seen groups bicker about who started a fight afterwards and then looking back realized it was them. Because initiative was rolled they assumed the 'enemies' were hostile, or that a fight is inevitable at that point.
I've learned from that, that the timing should be right, so you don't subtly influence the group into taking the encounter into combat, unless they want it to go that way. (Or the NPCs do)
This is why you should only call for initiative when hostile actions are declared. Either when an NPC would respond to the PCs with hostility or the PCs are trying to start the fight. Calling for initiative before then is you, the DM, putting your hand on the scales and potentially steering the encounter into a bloodier end than it might have otherwise had.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
Rav, I've just reread the rules on initiative and there is nothing in the rules that determines when combat actually starts, nor is there anything requiring a "hostile" act to start a combat. So a DM can pretty much rule as they please about what "starts" combat. For me, that would be any creature taking an action that another creature might perceive as a threat (especially in a high-strung, intense situation like the OPs). For you, it might be the reaction to such an action. (this is beside the point that the teleportation in the OP is clearly intended to be hostile, since it is an attempt to position themselves for an attack, the same way that standard running towards the prisoner holding the hostage would be)
You've asked me to cite rules, so I would kindly ask you to do the same. It's quite possible I've missed something.
And regarding initiative in non-combat situations; All initiative is is a Dex check to determine an order of turns. It is essential in combat, but you yourself admit that there are other formal uses of initiative that aren't strictly combat. Chases and Complex Traps have similarities to combat, but so does my falling building scenario (specifically, there is an order of interaction and movement required to locate, extract, and heal a creature making death saves. Speaking of, in a non-combat situation where a PC or NPC drops to 0 hitpoints (say they fall), how do you handle the concept of death saves and actions to heal if not some form of turn order decided by initiative?
That is something that I should communicate to my group saying just because I call for the initiative does not mean combat is starting.
Once again, this has been a great conversation so I appreciate all the opinions.
From my experience DMing, initiative doesn't prompt combat all the time, it prompt turn order. Many times it's for combat yes, but also for chase, traps and special encounter where time is of the essence. If one side doesn't want to fight, it can always flee on it's turn, duck for cover, surrender, parlay etc.
Also, not all spellcasting necessarily prompt initiative, being at the local temple and having the NPC priest casting a spell on the party doesn't necessarily take everyone into initiative order.
But in a critical situation like the above scenario where a prisoner is taking a guard hostage in a prison hall, threatening the guard’s life if not freed while the other prisoners in the mess hall are looking for an opportunity to rush them to start a prison break. And one party member intend to cast a spell? It would be for me the time to call for initiative to determine turn order, considering many creatures are involved (PCs, guards, prisoners) which may each also intend to do something too. Other DMs can come to different ruling and it's fine.
As far as I know the "vocal at a high volume" is a house rule. The rules don't actually state how loud the verbal components to spells need to be - only that they are "the particular combination of sounds, with specific pitch and resonance, sets the threads of magic in motion". Some DMs decide that this means the verbal components must be obvious and loud. Others think a normal speaking voice volume would suffice and still others might allow the caster to vocalize in a loud whisper as long as the pitch and resonance stay the same.
It is entirely a DM call. Personally, in a room with a lot of background noise and commotion going on, I would usually rule that the verbal component to a spell is unlikely to be noticed or to stand out unless the listener was very close to the caster.
So I was covering the Initiative RAW and what has been discussed here with the player/Sorcerer who raised the issue. In the scenario described the Sorcerer asked since others got to go first why is he committed to the action (Misty Step) that gets the option to do something different. It was explained since Inititiative was triggered by his casting the spell there is where the committing of the action takes place it's just that others were faster than him in reacting. I also gave Sorcerer an explanation that it was possible the prisoner noticed the mage robes and say player muttering his verbal component to the spell or the other players, right next to the plays heard the spell being cast and reacted accordingly.
The player outlined
1) Players and the DM choose their actions when it is their turn in the initiative.
2) They make these choices based on the state of the game at the start of their turn not the start of the round/combat.
Since 5e is built on an action economy he feels losing an action is a big deal since the trigger, Misty Step, started the initiative. I've given a possible 'house rules' option-- by allowing the Sorcerer to expel his reaction (maybe with a DC) change up your action. (I could not find if there is something RAW like that and based on going over what JC said in the video Plaguescarred posted a while back action triggers initiative and roll may be random for order.) He did not seem receptive on that one.
To close the Sorcerer feels that feel mistakes were made all around that had an impact on how that encounter played out. That's fair I'm not infallible as a DM. He just wants us to learn from them. Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions.
Two comments ...
1) Either the misty step triggered the initiative so the sorcerer's turn gets to be resolved first.
OR
2)Everyone rolls initiative and the turns are resolved in order with the character deciding their actions at the start of their turn.
RAW, each character decides their actions at the start of their turn. In this case, something the sorcerer did could have telegraphed that they might cast a spell but it hasn't happened until the sorcerer's turn comes up. When the sorcerer's turn arrives they get to choose their action. This is RAW since each character DOES choose their action at the start of their turn based on the state of the game at the start of their turn. That is the way combat and initiative works even if it is supposed to represent simultaneous events during a 6 second turn.
No characters have to decide their action at the start of the round and are then forced to execute that action even if it no longer makes sense when their turn arrives. Combat doesn't work that way. However, this does mean, that if you use the stated action of a character as a trigger for initiative and then everyone assumes they are immediately in combat then the stated action that you used to trigger the initiative roll may never happen. That is just how the game works.
Did the sorcerer do something to telegraph that they might cast a spell - does EVERYONE in the entire room notice? - are they reacting to the sorcerer raising their hands? Blinking? Starting to say something? How can any of these PCs and NPCs know that the sorcerer is planning to cast a spell let alone what spell it might be? Depending on how the DM rules, it will be meta gaming on the part of any PC that does anything except just stand around during that 6 second time window since unless they know (somehow) exactly what the sorcerer intends to do, there is no reason for them to do anything except continue to stand around or do whatever they were doing.
----
Anyway, if you are going to play it RAW, with everyone rolling initiative, thinking combat has started even though no one has done anything, and allow them to take whatever actions then also RAW, the sorcerer can do whatever they like on their turn since that is when they decide their action in response to the state of the game at the start of their turn. So in this case the planned action that resulted in the DM calling for initiative will not actually happen.
"On your turn, you can move a distance up to your speed and take one action. You decide whether to move first or take your action first."
No decisions are made until your turn in the intiative order arrives. So the sorcerer should not have been forced to cast their spell or proceed with any part of the action they intended to take at that point.
"Right now the lesson he's feeling is not to announce what he wants to do before it's his turn and if we are not in combat and he feels the action would cause an initiative roll to ask for that before saying what I might do. I think he is still missing something here and does not need to play so close to the vest with his actions."
Honestly, in the context, I completely agree with your player. In this case, he came up with a cool idea but because of the method you decided to resolve the event (everyone using meta knowledge that something was about to happen - both the DM and the other players), he was unable to take the action because everyone else had done something first. Consider this, if everyone had been in initiative from the beginning of the tense encounter, going around the table taking turns saying things to the prisoners, guards or other PCs THEN when the sorcerer's turn came around he said he was casting misty step and a cantrip, would you have had any issue with it?
The entire encounter could be considered a combat encounter from the very beginning because it involves conflict - attack is only one of the many actions that can be chosen on a turn -
"The DM might require you to use an action for any of these activities when it needs special care or when it presents an unusual obstacle. For instance, the DM could reasonably expect you to use an action to open a stuck door or turn a crank to lower a drawbridge."
A character can do anything they want on their turn - so ANY conflict whether verbal, armed or any other type - can be resolved in initiative order. In this case, the sorcerer was prevented from doing something cool because they didn't roll high on initiative despite their intended action being the reason for the DM deciding to roll initiative.
By not telling the DM what they intend to do until their turn, the character ensures that they get a chance to take their intended action (this is how combat in initiative order is resolved anyway - normally the DM doesn't know what the character is going to do until their turn) - so honestly - unless you come up with a good way to resolve the situation, I think the player could be making the right call if they want to have an opportunity to actually play out their cool ideas (in the current situation, the action they intended to take made no sense when their turn actually arrived so they are forced to do something else). If they ask the DM if the current conflict and player actions can be resolved in initiative order since it IS a combat even if no one has swung a weapon yet - then when their turn comes around they can actually take the action they have in mind and it all works out.
This is why I usually just start the initiative with the character taking the action that required the initiative to be rolled in the first place since prior to that character taking their action there is no reason for either the PCs or NPCs to do anything other than they currently are. There are ways to get the same result without straying from RAW using the rules for surprise or just stating that the PCs and NPCs can't use metagame knowledge to decide on actions that don't make sense until AFTER the sorcerer has done whatever they planned to do that triggered initiative in the first place.
Bear with me here...I'm trying to understand
So if Misty Step bonus action triggers the initiative occurs...THEN...at that point, everyone rolls for the initiative which combat order is followed from that point on? Or am I giving a free action/attack to the Sorcerer against the prisoner then the initiative is rolled?
This may all seem elementary but I want to work this out so I'm not setting any precedent for future games.
There is a lot of good stuff here even after the three pages of discussion you've made me rethink what to do. As I've said before I want to work this out so I'm not setting any precedent for future games.
Fair question and the answer would be no I would not have had any issue with it. That tells me I missed the mark on the opportunity to set initiative.
I want to follow RAW and you are right I should allow the player to change their action on their turn even if their stated action, that triggered initiative/combat, would no longer be valid. I considered applying a pseudo-surprise to the players that went before the Sorcerer but I felt that was giving a free attack action outside of an initiative rolled combat.
And I've dropped into paralysis by analysis, which is my problem.
At the moment when it matters who goes first -- before anyone gets to do the thing they're racing for -- you roll initiative.
I could see an argument for the idea that the teleportation doesn't start the initiative, the intent to use Shocking Grasp does -- presumably the target intends not to get hit, so it matters who goes first. If that's the case, though, then the Sorcerer gets his whole turn on his turn -- not just his action, but his bonus action too. I don't love this, because it introduces a risk of getting stabbed between Misty Step and Shocking Grasp that wouldn't exist if fighting was already happening, but I guess if you communicate the stakes before the course of action is locked in, it's fair.
The counterpoint would be that the whole turn happens in the same time frame -- we know this isn't true because Alice can cast Hold Person on Bob and then walk away, incurring no attack of opportunity from Bob, or she can walk away from Bob and then cast Hold Person, and she might get hit. But in the game's oddball handling of time, we're meant to accept that it's true. All the things you do on your turn are happening basically at the same time. And everything else done in that round by other characters is also happening at the same time. And if that's the case, then you should roll initiative before he casts Misty Step.
How to run it is up to you. I'll admit how I run it is either part house rule or stretching RAW in terms of what surprise means and how it is determined.
When I am running things - ANY situation which might involve combat or in which the timing of character actions make a difference or when there is a time limit in play - I will run it using initiative - in some cases just to make sure every player gets a turn. My players know that rolling initiative doesn't necessarily mean that ATTACKS will result - more that it could result depending on the character actions.
I try to avoid rolling initiative too early since it is overhead you don't need during roleplay unless one or more players are having trouble making themselves heard (which I usually handle by paying attention, noticing, and asking them what they want to do specifically to make sure their voice is heard if they want to say something).
Anyway - in the encounter you originally posted I would run it one of two ways ...
a) If the chances of combat are good and things are happening quickly, I'd roll it into initiative before hostile actions are taken just to avoid the type of situation you described.
b) However, you never know what your players are going to say and one says something that WILL start an encounter that will likely require initiative then I have everyone roll initiative at that point.
Combat rounds are 6 seconds, no one else had said they are doing something so everyone (PCs and NPCs) with initiative higher than the one who is taking the action that started the encounter continues to do whatever they were doing - they do not get an action until after the character taking the action that started the whole thing gets to take their planned action. In your situation, the prisoner continues to threaten the guard, the other PCs continue to do whatever they were doing since they did NOT indicate that they were doing something else before the sorcerer stated their intended action that required initiative be rolled. This is equivalent to saying that everyone before the sorcerer is surprised because they do not yet know that something is happening - the sorcerer hasn't done anything yet.
e.g.
Initiatives
18 PC1 (surprised - no action - continues doing whatever they were doing)
17 NPC1 (surprised - no action - continues doing whatever they were doing)
15 NPC2 (surprised - no action - continues doing whatever they were doing)
10 PC2 (surprised - no action - continues doing whatever they were doing)
8 Sorcerer (PC3) (takes the action that they stated they were going to take for which initiative was rolled)
5 NPC3 (not surprised - takes turn and action as normal)
2 PC4 (not surprised - takes turn and action as normal)
Return to top of initiative order to continue - no one surprised any longer.
Since no one before the sorcerer can take an action other than what they were already doing since they don't know what the sorcerer will do they don't get a turn in the first round and the first round effectively starts with the sorcerer taking the action that they said they would take which triggered initiative in the first place. The sorcerer doesn't get a turn before the action starts since they have already rolled initiative and everyone else will get a turn before the sorcerer gets another one.
That is how I tend to resolve situations like the one you describe or any other situation where there is a particular action that triggers the need for initiative. In order to maintain a logical narrative, I have that action take place first, in initiative order, except starting at the initiative of the character taking the action. The action can be things like opening a door, taking an action that triggers a trap, taking an action like the sorcerer in your example which triggers initiative.
I will also use it in combat when a hidden party has decided that one character will take the first shot. Everyone waits for that character to attack to start the fight (though if the characters are NOT hidden because they failed their stealth vs passive perception then the opponents can take actions as normal - as soon as the PCs realize that they aren't hidden then they can change their mind about waiting for the particular character to start things).
I don't find it makes sense that most of the time the party can't choose a specific character to attack first unless everyone before them initiative decides to take a ready action - and what about the opposing NPCs with higher initiative who can't see the hidden opponents, don't know where they are, but are supposed to do something about it including randomly attacking bushes (assuming the characters are successfully hidden). Makes no sense to me so I just start running the initiative from the character that starts the encounter.
I find it works well. Players get to take the actions they say they take. Characters do not get an extra turn out of initiative order. I don't have to come up with barely logical explanations that the characters somehow regularly telegraph what they are about to do so that everyone else somehow gets a turn first and then the character can't even take the action that was supposed to start the encounter in the first place. The lack of logic in that process is something that bothers me so, unless there is some reason that everyone does become aware of the character's intentions (which will be situation specific), I will simply say everyone before the character taking the action has the surprised "state" until after the character takes their action.
I find this avoids the logical inconsistency of the action that started the initiative process never happening and the frustration of the player having a good idea that they don't get to use because everyone else does something first since they rolled a higher initiative, invalidating what they planned to do.
The thing with letting people cast spells before initiative is that you eventually end up with PCs fireballing your encounter before it even starts! ☺
We often see this happen when people try to act while the DM is describing a scene or Read Alout text.
Signaling intent – as the Devs call it – is not necessarily taking action.
Agreed. Determining the order of resolving actions is up to the DM.
Personally, I don't allow casting of spells before a combat that has already started - meaning if both sides are aware of each other and aware that combat is imminent - then everyone rolls initiative and combat is resolved as described in the PHB.
I also don't generally allow combat spells (i.e. ones with a duration of 1 minute or less) to be cast out of initiative. Even if characters are pre-casting something before an encounter that they know is coming - I will have everyone roll initiative and they can cast any spells they want to prior to alerting the opponents to their presence but everything is still done in initiative order.
The only time I might advance the initiative order occurs when there is a specific character taking a specific action that is the trigger for initiative being required. This also prevents the character casting a spell out of initiative. The problem with casting an attack spell before initiative is rolled is that the character could end up with multiple turns before another character gets to take an action. I don't really care if the hidden wizard gets to cast a fireball on my poor NPCs that didn't notice him - I do care that all of the other players get their turn before the wizard comes up again. So the wizard may be the first one to act in the encounter but they won't get any additional turns.
Keep in mind that this is not the same as the DM describing a combat situation - "you walk into a room filled with 10 bugbears and some goblins who leap to attack" - wizard yells "I cast fireball" and I tell everyone to roll initiative and resolve their action on their turn. Just because the wizard stated before anyone else what they planned to do on their turn in a situation where everyone is aware and combat has started doesn't affect that the wizard has to wait for their initiative to resolve it.
However, lets say the party is hidden and a patrol of bugbears and goblins come into sight. In addition, the party agreed before hand that if an enemy showed up then the wizard would try to fireball them. In this case, I'd have everyone roll initiative but would usually start the encounter with the wizard casting fireball since they are hidden and the party had decided he would act first.
----
Anyway, it isn't a perfect approach - I just like to use it because I find it improves logical continuity and prevents players from getting frustrated when they don't get to use their cool idea because it doesn't make sense when their turn comes around when they don't roll a high initiative. It is a small subset of initiative cases where I use it but I find it works well for those cases.
However, it does require tweaking the definition of the "first round of combat" in order to not impact other abilities like those for a gloomstalker ranger or assassin rogue that are only active in the first round of combat.
I'll also add that I don't use it when running AL games since it is likely too much of a house rule for most folks. In that case, strict RAW has everyone roll initiative and everyone decides their actions on their turn so that the planned action that required the roll for initiative may never happen. I find that if this type of situation comes up too often, it usually means that initiative should have been rolled earlier in the encounter even if it had not progressed to actual attacking yet.
Again, you're focused on semantics, "taking perceived-as-hostile action vs reacting to it" is the same moment, initiative is what determines the timeline. The trigger is whenever someone wants to fight. Otherwise is isn't... combat. The wanting-to-fight bit is required by at least 1 party. Otherwise no one is fighting, and, it isn't a fight. This is tautological at this point. And, again, why I say your argument is entirely semantics: We fundamentally agree when in the timeline the combat starts so going back and forth about it is pointless.
If you want to know where in the rules it talks about when to start combat, I'd suggest Chapter 9: Combat. It is in the player's handbook. It is fairly integral to the game's rules.
Unless I am mistaken, you don't fundamentally disagree, either. There is no point in starting combat before at least one party actually wants to start fighting. You don't roll initiative when the PCs negotiate the rate for the local tavern. You don't roll initiative when the PC travel through town square every time they pass a new villager. Initiative is for starting "Combat" and combat is a fight. So, until at least one person present wants to fight, there isn't one. This ain't a hot take.
I'm probably laughing.
It is apparently so hard to program Aberrant Mind and Clockwork Soul spell-swapping into dndbeyond they had to remake the game without it rather than implement it.
But do we? My guess is that the back and forth is still going largely because it still seems to be a disagreement on the timing.
Your insistence on the casting of Misty Step NOT being what prompts initiative seems to indicate that the Misty Step would have already taken place when initiative is rolled. But you've said "So initiative is rolled prior to misty step being completed." which would indicate that it hadn't. So exactly when does the teleportation take place in your opinion? And does it have to take place at all?