I agree combat actions occur in combat rounds, it's also the intended way according to the rules and the Devs as heard in Dragon Talk Sage Advice podcast for those who remembe the almond croissant analogy ;)
Imo combat flows better when the player just calls it at 0. Sure, it helps the DM narrate a little if they know the intent from the start, but players constantly saying “I attack nonlethally” is pointless and imo more disruptive to the flow.
You don't need to declare it continually, you only need to declare it at some point while fighting (or before fighting) the target; this is just basic communication of goals. Again, that's a basic component of the game rules, you're supposed to tell the DM what you're trying to do, the game mechanics are to support the actual doing of it.
I don't mean to get too far off of the original topic but it's my understanding that this is supposed to never be a thing in 5e. Any declaration of an aggressive action results in a roll for initiative before such action is resolved. People should feel free to correct me if I'm wrong on that. I do understand that out-of-combat attacks are common practice in a lot of games, but I'm pretty sure the rules do not support that.
Actions, aggressive or otherwise, still exist outside of combat, just because some things are grouped under the combat section for convenience doesn't mean they can't occur outside of combat, otherwise it would be impossible to cast spells, or take damage without rolling Initiative first.
Again, the most basic rules of D&D is you tell the DM what you want to do, and they tell you if and how you can do it. It's a game where you can literally attempt to do anything you want, the rest is just a toolkit for your DM to draw upon to enable you to make the attempt.
The other way of looking at it is that outside of combat there is only one action "tell your DM what you want to do", though this is also an action in combat as improvising an action in combat is a thing (it's below Use an Object in the rules), so it might be more accurate to say combat actions are convenient sample actions for the stuff you need to do most often in combat.
And ability checks exist specifically to handle cases of actions the players might take that have a chance of failing, it's a perfectly reasonable way to handle a knock out situation in RAW, especially if you want to allow a quick knock-out without the need to waste time on rolling Initiative and then grinding down a creature's entire pool of HP first.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
However, my position is that you should announce in advance that you are taking a non-lethal approach. It cannot succeed (or at least makes no difference) until the creature reaches 0 hps, but still feel that announcing in advance makes much more sense and thus is much less immersion breaking.
As for the written procedure being immersion breaking -- I think that it doesn't have to be if the DM is careful. Practically speaking, I think that a lot of DMs in a lot of games are just too quick to describe the fatal consequences of an attack and then it feels like a retcon to go back and knock the creature out instead. But it probably shouldn't be that way. I think that the designers imagine the game flow to be something like this:
DM: Player's Character, there's a goblin standing in front of you that looks a bit worse for wear but nevertheless is growling menacingly at you.
Player: I attack it.
DM: Roll
Player: 16
DM: It hits!
Player: 6 damage
(The important part) DM: It's enough! And the goblin goes down! Player, how does this look when you are delivering this final blow?
(Option 1) Player: I do a cartwheel in front of the goblin to avoid his meager attempts at fighting back and while upside down I jam my longsword through his heart.
DM: The goblin cries out in pain as blood erupts from his chest and he crumples to the ground, completely and obviously dead.
(Or, Option 2) Player: While carefully avoiding the goblin's blade, I step in close and hit the goblin in the head with the pommel of my sword, attempting to knock him out with non-lethal damage. knocking him out.
DM: The goblin is caught off guard by your movement and is hit squarely in the head -- he falls limply to the ground, unconscious but stable.
This is one of the areas in which the player is empowered to not ask permission. Just like you don't say "I attempt to use Extra Attack to make a second attack." That's just something you can do, by the rules.
But yes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I agree combat actions occur in combat rounds, it's also the intended way according to the rules and the Devs as heard in Dragon Talk Sage Advice podcast for those who remembe the almond croissant analogy ;)
You don't need to declare it continually, you only need to declare it at some point while fighting (or before fighting) the target; this is just basic communication of goals. Again, that's a basic component of the game rules, you're supposed to tell the DM what you're trying to do, the game mechanics are to support the actual doing of it.
Actions, aggressive or otherwise, still exist outside of combat, just because some things are grouped under the combat section for convenience doesn't mean they can't occur outside of combat, otherwise it would be impossible to cast spells, or take damage without rolling Initiative first.
Again, the most basic rules of D&D is you tell the DM what you want to do, and they tell you if and how you can do it. It's a game where you can literally attempt to do anything you want, the rest is just a toolkit for your DM to draw upon to enable you to make the attempt.
The other way of looking at it is that outside of combat there is only one action "tell your DM what you want to do", though this is also an action in combat as improvising an action in combat is a thing (it's below Use an Object in the rules), so it might be more accurate to say combat actions are convenient sample actions for the stuff you need to do most often in combat.
And ability checks exist specifically to handle cases of actions the players might take that have a chance of failing, it's a perfectly reasonable way to handle a knock out situation in RAW, especially if you want to allow a quick knock-out without the need to waste time on rolling Initiative and then grinding down a creature's entire pool of HP first.
Former D&D Beyond Customer of six years: With the axing of piecemeal purchasing, lack of meaningful development, and toxic moderation the site isn't worth paying for anymore. I remain a free user only until my groups are done migrating from DDB, and if necessary D&D, after which I'm done. There are better systems owned by better companies out there.
I have unsubscribed from all topics and will not reply to messages. My homebrew is now 100% unsupported.
This is one of the areas in which the player is empowered to not ask permission. Just like you don't say "I attempt to use Extra Attack to make a second attack." That's just something you can do, by the rules.
But yes.