Hey I have some questions regarding Surprise. There's two rogues in the party I DM for, and one of them has the Assassin subclass, so they attempt to attack from surprise a lot.
As far as I can tell, rules as written in both Basic Rules and the PHB, when a combatant is surprised (say, the Stealth check was stupid high and the target blows their Perception roll) their first turn in the first combat round is to be "Surprised" - after that is over, they can act normally after their initiative count. Unlike in previous editions, there is no such thing as a "surprise round."
Due to the mercurial nature of using a d20 roll for initiative, it is quite likely that the ambushed can still have their turn (which again is "I am surprised") before the ambushers reveal themselves by firing a shot, thus negating the usefulness of Surprise.
Am I reading this right?
While I want to be fair to my players, I also don't want them to get away with murder all that often.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I am a Canadian Dungeon Master, which means I reflexively apologize when the monsters score a critical hit on the players' characters.
Think of it as rolling high on initiative means they've reacted faster to the threat.
Scenario - two rogues are sneaking down the corridor to ambush a couple of guards.
For the purpose of this example, both guards generate initiative separately and we get:
Guard 1 : 20
Player rogue A: 18
Player rogue B: 15
Guard 2: 7
DM: "You both sneak down the corridor towards the guards and they don't seem to have seen you. You move forwards, prepared to strike, but at the last moment, one of the guards turns towards you, his eyes grow wide and he takes a step backwards, fumbling to draw his weapon. Ok, that's his go - Guard 1 is no longer surprised, but because he WAS surprised, that is his entire action for this round. Guard 2 is still surprised and hasn't reacted yet. Player A - your go."
It's one of the odd things about initiative in combat. You could have a situation where a party member says, "I pull out my mace and hit the guy" so you get everyone to roll initiative, but the party member that declared he was doing that rolls lowest.... that's up to the DM to adjudicate and you could easily decide that for the first round only, the character that initiates the action goes first, but that's not how RAW works.
Due to the mercurial nature of using a d20 roll for initiative, it is quite likely that the ambushed can still have their turn (which again is "I am surprised") before the ambushers reveal themselves by firing a shot, thus negating the usefulness of Surprise.
The usefulness of surprise hasn't been negated in that case. The alternative would've been for the ambushed creature to do something useful with its turn, like fight back.
It's one of the odd things about initiative in combat. You could have a situation where a party member says, "I pull out my mace and hit the guy" so you get everyone to roll initiative, but the party member that declared he was doing that rolls lowest.... that's up to the DM to adjudicate and you could easily decide that for the first round only, the character that initiates the action goes first, but that's not how RAW works.
This came up in a session I ran recently, where one of the players (the bard) wanted to initiate combat with a sleep spell. I made the party roll initiative, and the bard ended up right at the bottom of the initiative order. But it wasn't an issue - the other players simply readied actions (to fire bows once the spell had hit), and the enemies were surprised as the party was hidden, so couldn't act on their turn. It effectively resulted in the bard making the first attack as they wanted - but kept it within RAW. For narrative, it helps to remember that all of the actions in a round are happening simultaneously.
In another instance, the players were in a heated argument with a group of bandits. The fighter wanted to initiate combat by suddenly attacking. He wanted surprise for his 'sudden' action, and was very upset when I didn't give it, as creatures that can see each other cannot be surprised. He was even more upset when I made everyone roll initiative, and he ended up at the bottom of the order, protesting that 'But I wanted to initiate combat by attacking!'
But I see this a lot: players not realising that initiative isn't just a random number that assigns the order of turns. It's how quickly you acted, when everyone is acting at almost exactly the same time. Sure, the fighter might have wanted to strike first - but his place in the initiative order meant that when he went to attack, everyone was quicker to the draw. After his complaints, I explained that if I'd reversed it, and said that the bandit 'suddenly lunges forward and stabs you for *roll* 8 damage... now roll initiative', it'd be completely unfair.
If players are allowed to decide who strikes first, they get an overwhelming advantage. An entire round where the enemy can't do anything? That's what surprise is for - and that's only for hidden characters, that have made the effort (and the rolls) to get into the advantageous situation.
It does kind of sucks for assassin's specifically more so than other classes.
I haven't encountered that problem in my games so far (no assassins), but I've seen at least one other DM have a simple house rule: The assassination works in the first round if the target started that round surprised.
I think it's a pretty elegant solution - still doesn't help against Alert individuals (unless they're asleep), and similar, as it shouldn't, but it prevents the disappointment of losing a heavy chunk of your very rare damage boost to a bad initiative roll.
Another thing that's worth remembering is, the initiative order is when you managed to actually achieve what you wanted in that round.
Say the fighter wants to initiate combat and rolls low on their initiative, thus the enemy get to strike the fighter first.
That's easily explained as the fighter drawing their weapon and swinging, but the enemy see it coming and are just that bit quicker and doing the same.
players not realising that initiative isn't just a random number that assigns the order of turns. It's how quickly you acted, when everyone is acting at almost exactly the same time.
I explain it that the initiative roll determines when your action is completed, not started. It is the timing of the determination of effects of actions, not the start of those actions.
The bard starts casting a spell first, true, but the guards are just a bit quicker and have time to act before the bard finishes and their actions take effect.
Features like assassinate are powerful, so they require you to both surprise your foe and determine the effects of your action before your foe.
I explain it that the initiative roll determines when your action is completed, not started. It is the timing of the determination of effects of actions, not the start of those actions.
The bard starts casting a spell first, true, but the guards are just a bit quicker and have time to act before the bard finishes and their actions take effect.
Features like assassinate are powerful, so they require you to both surprise your foe and determine the effects of your action before your foe.
That's a good way of explaining it. And I agree - assassinate is powerful - it should be exciting when you pull it off. Not an 'every encounter without fail' type of deal.
From a narrative point of view, I usually ensure that I get the point across that everyone's actions are happening at roughly the same time, or at least within a 6-second frame. e.g:
P1: 'With a mighty roar, I'll run up and swing at the first gnoll - the one that's shouting orders at the others - with my greataxe.'
DM: 'Alright, *rolls are made* You quickly cover the distance, your shout echoing across the cavern, bringing your axe over your head, and cutting a great gash across the gnoll leader's face. He snarls in reply, a blood-lined grin revealing his sharp teeth. P2?'
P2: 'I'll cast firebolt on that gnoll as well!'
DM: 'Very good *rolls are made*. As you seen Cecil charge across the cave, you begin the incantation; flinging a bolt of fire that follows your fighter companion into the fray. As P1 strikes with a mighty axe blow, the gnoll's snarling reply is cut short by your spell, that slams into his torso. He yelps, staggered from the impact, and patting out the flames.'
the players were in a heated argument with a group of bandits. The fighter wanted to initiate combat by suddenly attacking. He wanted surprise for his 'sudden' action, and was very upset when I didn't give it, as creatures that can see each other cannot be surprised. He was even more upset when I made everyone roll initiative, and he ended up at the bottom of the order, protesting that 'But I wanted to initiate combat by attacking!'
I usually explain this to players as:
Although you can't actually 'ready' actions outside of combat, let's say you could... then everyone in this heated argument would certainly have readied actions, which I would need to resolve in some sort of order... like initiative order. Maybe think of this first combat round as kinda like that.
As for stealthy assassins: I dunno... what's to stop them from skulking away after a bad init roll, the enemy none-the-wiser?
So when the group of PCs are walking down the hall and they come to a door and the fighter says I want to listen at the door and the then the rogue says I want to try to pick the lock and then the cleric says I am watching our backs to make sure no sneaks up behind us do you make everyone roll initiative? Noooo! Of course not and why not? Seriously why not? Okay...okay...okay here is a totally different situation....your PCs are in the tavern sitting around the table making plans about how they are heading off the save the dragon from the evil princess...do you have them roll initiative? Noooo! Of course not! Seriously why not?
My none to subtle point is all of this could be avoided if you just get rid of initiative. I mean you don't use it any other time you need to adjudicate actions. Throw it out you will find your games flow better and make more sense. And besides it really helps when you so-called "story gamers" are doing that pretentious "theater of the mind" stuff that us old timers call playing D&D.
Now to quote Mr. Socko...."Have a nice day!"
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
...My none to subtle point is all of this could be avoided if you just get rid of initiative. I mean you don't use it any other time you need to adjudicate actions. Throw it out you will find your games flow better and make more sense...
Do you mean get rid of combat, or do you mean fight combats without turns and rounds somehow, or do you mean use some other method to decide who goes first and how the turn order progresses in a combat? I have no specific attachment to the Rolling Initiative process (I use team initiative to simplify it), but you can't really advise people to throw it out without indicating how to fill that gap in the rules.
To be fair, it's not particularly rare in our table to use initiative out of combat when people want to do conflicting things at the same time. Not with the entire rules baggage, but to resolve simultaneous actions.
"I open the door." "I stop him!"
or
"I grab the jewel and throw it to the sea." "I sleight of hand the jewel to my pocket, replacing it with the opal I have."
So when the group of PCs are walking down the hall and they come to a door and the fighter says I want to listen at the door and the then the rogue says I want to try to pick the lock and then the cleric says I am watching our backs to make sure no sneaks up behind us do you make everyone roll initiative? Noooo! Of course not and why not? Seriously why not?
Because timing doesn't matter.
Initiative is for when the timing of actions is important.
No, initiative is a mechanic for keeping track of whose turn it is. However, as DMs we adjudicate actions where timing is important all the time without rolling initiative. In Onyx's examples timing is important and while Onyx did say his group would roll initiative, many groups I have watched would not. The DM would decide based on player descriptions, as in the first of Onyx's examples..."I open the door"..."I stop him"...the DM asks the second player to describe how he intends to stop him and then decides what happens based on the answer. In the second example..."I grab the jewel and toss it"...."I try to palm said jewel...." again the DM could very easily ask player one to roll a "to hit" to see if he grabs the jewel or perhaps roll a contested dexterity check...with the second PC getting to add their sleight of hand skill.
All of this highlights my point that initiative rolls create an atmosphere where combat is expected because they are almost exclusively used in combat situations. By removing initiative and letting players go in an order that makes sense given the current situation it would eliminate situations that are frustrating, such as having the element of surprise but not being able to capitalize on it because you rolled low.
Now to explicitly address Regent's question...throw out initiative and resolve any combat exactly like you would resolve any other situation where players are trying to do multiple things at once, say like everyone trying to talk to the king or whatever. Now, if you happen to be someone that uses initiative to resolve that then fine your players are already used to that and probably do not automatically assume that a call for initiative means combat. If you don't like my method then that is fine, you are going to be stuck with certain incongruities caused by the system as it is presented.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
All of this highlights my point that initiative rolls create an atmosphere where combat is expected because they are almost exclusively used in combat situations.
It's not like you can't just say "since both of you are trying to act at the same time and the order matters, roll initiative to see who's faster" with no implication of combat.
By removing initiative and letting players go in an order that makes sense given the current situation it would eliminate situations that are frustrating, such as having the element of surprise but not being able to capitalize on it because you rolled low.
I don't understand what you mean by this. A surprised creature can't do anything useful on its first turn so no matter how low you roll, you're still getting a turn before they can take actions.
The whole point of initiative checks is to account for the fact that some people are able to react faster than others. The guy with 20 DEX should have a higher chance of acting before the guy with 8 DEX.
All of this highlights my point that initiative rolls create an atmosphere where combat is expected because they are almost exclusively used in combat situations.
It's not like you can't just say "since both of you are trying to act at the same time and the order matters, roll initiative to see who's faster" with no implication of combat.
True, but you can also, just as easily let the player with the higher Dexterity score win or you could resolve the actions in the order they were presented. Both of which interrupt the flow of the game less than a roll and both of which if applied consistently are much more fair than leaving it up to a random die result. If you are a big fan of player agency, and who isn't, then allowing the character with the higher applicable score win would make much more sense. Why you ask? Because a player's decisions should matter and those include the decisions made at the time of character creation. To be honest I would use the highest modifier, that way if an applicable proficiency comes into play it can be added, again because player choices matter.
By removing initiative and letting players go in an order that makes sense given the current situation it would eliminate situations that are frustrating, such as having the element of surprise but not being able to capitalize on it because you rolled low.
I don't understand what you mean by this. A surprised creature can't do anything useful on its first turn so no matter how low you roll, you're still getting a turn before they can take actions.
The whole point of initiative checks is to account for the fact that some people are able to react faster than others. The guy with 20 DEX should have a higher chance of acting before the guy with 8 DEX.
See, this is where you are wrong...a surprised creature cannot take an action on its turn. However, the surprised condition ends at the end of the creature's turn, so if a creature could use a reaction or possibly a bonus action. Since the assassin would gain a critical hit if the creature was still surprised having the surprise end before the assassin turn begins is a huge negative to the character. Now I am not saying we should cater to the players, however, if we can implement some common sense approaches that make the game make more sense, flow better and produce a more narrative result then why wouldn't we? After all RPGs are the one instance where the rules were meant to be broken!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
True, but you can also, just as easily let the player with the higher Dexterity score win or you could resolve the actions in the order they were presented.
Or I could use the official rule for resolving these situations, which was playtested and is already familiar to players.
Neither of those solutions work well. The former will have the most dexterous person win 100% of the time. The latter makes it impossible to interfere with another creature's actions and enables players to snipe actions.
If you are a big fan of player agency, and who isn't, then allowing the character with the higher applicable score win would make much more sense. Why you ask? Because a player's decisions should matter and those include the decisions made at the time of character creation.
If one player insists on toucing the magical orb in the dangerous dungeon and the other is adamant about not touching it, ruling in favor of the high DEX character does the complete opposite of what you're saying. Ruling in favor of the one that talked first is completely arbitrary and will always invalidate one player's choice. So no, neither of those approaches make much more sense to me.
See, this is where you are wrong...a surprised creature cannot take an action on its turn. However, the surprised condition ends at the end of the creature's turn, so if a creature could use a reaction or possibly a bonus action.
You can't take a bonus action if it's not your turn. If you roll high enough initiative, you should be entitled to a reaction. That's the whole point of feats like Alert and class features like Tactical Wit - they make it more likely you'll respond in time to danger.
Since the assassin would gain a critical hit if the creature was still surprised having the surprise end before the assassin turn begins is a huge negative to the character.
Assassinate's crit feature is extremely powerful and balanced around the fact that you're not going to be able to 100% reliably get the drop on someone. That's working as intended. The game has rules and rolls so you can't just say "I kill that guy." Sometimes, the wizard will see the assassin just in time to cast Shield.
As for stealthy assassins: I dunno... what's to stop them from skulking away after a bad init roll, the enemy none-the-wiser?
Is there actually anything that prevents this? If you are hidden it sounds perfectly ok according to RAW (that I know of). It does sound like easy rule abuse though, if the intent is to go back and forth between encounters until you get a good initiative roll. No doubt the DM would stop this, but I am wondering if RAW has anything to say on the matter?
As for stealthy assassins: I dunno... what's to stop them from skulking away after a bad init roll, the enemy none-the-wiser?
Is there actually anything that prevents this? If you are hidden it sounds perfectly ok according to RAW (that I know of). It does sound like easy rule abuse though, if the intent is to go back and forth between encounters until you get a good initiative roll. No doubt the DM would stop this, but I am wondering if RAW has anything to say on the matter?
I'm not sure how the enemy would remain 'non-the-wiser', depending on how initiative is called for. Initiative rolls should only be called when a player declares a turn-based action (usually a combat action) - or a creature does. It's not a hypothetical - initiative determines who completed their action first.
I don't then allow them to recall their action if they don't like their initiative roll, because technically they've already made their action - it's just not happened in the game yet. While players have to take turns to declare what they're doing, it's actually all happening to their characters simultaneously.
If a rogue declares 'I want to fire my bow at the bugbear guard', and everyone rolls initiative, then he'll be firing at the bugbear guard - regardless of where he comes in the initiative order. The initiative order just determines at what point his action resolves, when everyone is acting almost at exactly the same time.
If a rogue declares 'I want to fire my bow at the bugbear guard', and everyone rolls initiative, then he'll be firing at the bugbear guard - regardless of where he comes in the initiative order. The initiative order just determines at what point his action resolves, when everyone is acting almost at exactly the same time.
That makes sense. But D&D encounters aren't resolved that way though. First you roll initiative and then you decide on your actions (which could be to run away). Am I wrong? Ideally it would make sense that you take your actions independently of initiative order and others' planned actions, but that would be difficult to implement in a system with rules for everything. Of course it is up to the discretion of the individual DM though
Hey I have some questions regarding Surprise. There's two rogues in the party I DM for, and one of them has the Assassin subclass, so they attempt to attack from surprise a lot.
As far as I can tell, rules as written in both Basic Rules and the PHB, when a combatant is surprised (say, the Stealth check was stupid high and the target blows their Perception roll) their first turn in the first combat round is to be "Surprised" - after that is over, they can act normally after their initiative count. Unlike in previous editions, there is no such thing as a "surprise round."
Due to the mercurial nature of using a d20 roll for initiative, it is quite likely that the ambushed can still have their turn (which again is "I am surprised") before the ambushers reveal themselves by firing a shot, thus negating the usefulness of Surprise.
Am I reading this right?
While I want to be fair to my players, I also don't want them to get away with murder all that often.
I am a Canadian Dungeon Master, which means I reflexively apologize when the monsters score a critical hit on the players' characters.
Yes, you're reading it right.
Think of it as rolling high on initiative means they've reacted faster to the threat.
Scenario - two rogues are sneaking down the corridor to ambush a couple of guards.
For the purpose of this example, both guards generate initiative separately and we get:
DM: "You both sneak down the corridor towards the guards and they don't seem to have seen you. You move forwards, prepared to strike, but at the last moment, one of the guards turns towards you, his eyes grow wide and he takes a step backwards, fumbling to draw his weapon. Ok, that's his go - Guard 1 is no longer surprised, but because he WAS surprised, that is his entire action for this round. Guard 2 is still surprised and hasn't reacted yet. Player A - your go."
It's one of the odd things about initiative in combat. You could have a situation where a party member says, "I pull out my mace and hit the guy" so you get everyone to roll initiative, but the party member that declared he was doing that rolls lowest.... that's up to the DM to adjudicate and you could easily decide that for the first round only, the character that initiates the action goes first, but that's not how RAW works.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
The usefulness of surprise hasn't been negated in that case. The alternative would've been for the ambushed creature to do something useful with its turn, like fight back.
This came up in a session I ran recently, where one of the players (the bard) wanted to initiate combat with a sleep spell. I made the party roll initiative, and the bard ended up right at the bottom of the initiative order. But it wasn't an issue - the other players simply readied actions (to fire bows once the spell had hit), and the enemies were surprised as the party was hidden, so couldn't act on their turn. It effectively resulted in the bard making the first attack as they wanted - but kept it within RAW. For narrative, it helps to remember that all of the actions in a round are happening simultaneously.
In another instance, the players were in a heated argument with a group of bandits. The fighter wanted to initiate combat by suddenly attacking. He wanted surprise for his 'sudden' action, and was very upset when I didn't give it, as creatures that can see each other cannot be surprised. He was even more upset when I made everyone roll initiative, and he ended up at the bottom of the order, protesting that 'But I wanted to initiate combat by attacking!'
But I see this a lot: players not realising that initiative isn't just a random number that assigns the order of turns. It's how quickly you acted, when everyone is acting at almost exactly the same time. Sure, the fighter might have wanted to strike first - but his place in the initiative order meant that when he went to attack, everyone was quicker to the draw. After his complaints, I explained that if I'd reversed it, and said that the bandit 'suddenly lunges forward and stabs you for *roll* 8 damage... now roll initiative', it'd be completely unfair.
If players are allowed to decide who strikes first, they get an overwhelming advantage. An entire round where the enemy can't do anything? That's what surprise is for - and that's only for hidden characters, that have made the effort (and the rolls) to get into the advantageous situation.
It does kind of sucks for assassin's specifically more so than other classes.
I haven't encountered that problem in my games so far (no assassins), but I've seen at least one other DM have a simple house rule: The assassination works in the first round if the target started that round surprised.
I think it's a pretty elegant solution - still doesn't help against Alert individuals (unless they're asleep), and similar, as it shouldn't, but it prevents the disappointment of losing a heavy chunk of your very rare damage boost to a bad initiative roll.
Another thing that's worth remembering is, the initiative order is when you managed to actually achieve what you wanted in that round.
Say the fighter wants to initiate combat and rolls low on their initiative, thus the enemy get to strike the fighter first.
That's easily explained as the fighter drawing their weapon and swinging, but the enemy see it coming and are just that bit quicker and doing the same.
Pun-loving nerd | She/Her/Hers | Profile art by Becca Golins
If you need help with homebrew, please post on the homebrew forums, where multiple staff and moderators can read your post and help you!
"We got this, no problem! I'll take the twenty on the left - you guys handle the one on the right!"🔊
I explain it that the initiative roll determines when your action is completed, not started. It is the timing of the determination of effects of actions, not the start of those actions.
The bard starts casting a spell first, true, but the guards are just a bit quicker and have time to act before the bard finishes and their actions take effect.
Features like assassinate are powerful, so they require you to both surprise your foe and determine the effects of your action before your foe.
That's a good way of explaining it. And I agree - assassinate is powerful - it should be exciting when you pull it off. Not an 'every encounter without fail' type of deal.
From a narrative point of view, I usually ensure that I get the point across that everyone's actions are happening at roughly the same time, or at least within a 6-second frame. e.g:
P1: 'With a mighty roar, I'll run up and swing at the first gnoll - the one that's shouting orders at the others - with my greataxe.'
DM: 'Alright, *rolls are made* You quickly cover the distance, your shout echoing across the cavern, bringing your axe over your head, and cutting a great gash across the gnoll leader's face. He snarls in reply, a blood-lined grin revealing his sharp teeth. P2?'
P2: 'I'll cast firebolt on that gnoll as well!'
DM: 'Very good *rolls are made*. As you seen Cecil charge across the cave, you begin the incantation; flinging a bolt of fire that follows your fighter companion into the fray. As P1 strikes with a mighty axe blow, the gnoll's snarling reply is cut short by your spell, that slams into his torso. He yelps, staggered from the impact, and patting out the flames.'
I usually explain this to players as:
Although you can't actually 'ready' actions outside of combat, let's say you could... then everyone in this heated argument would certainly have readied actions, which I would need to resolve in some sort of order... like initiative order. Maybe think of this first combat round as kinda like that.
As for stealthy assassins: I dunno... what's to stop them from skulking away after a bad init roll, the enemy none-the-wiser?
So when the group of PCs are walking down the hall and they come to a door and the fighter says I want to listen at the door and the then the rogue says I want to try to pick the lock and then the cleric says I am watching our backs to make sure no sneaks up behind us do you make everyone roll initiative? Noooo! Of course not and why not? Seriously why not? Okay...okay...okay here is a totally different situation....your PCs are in the tavern sitting around the table making plans about how they are heading off the save the dragon from the evil princess...do you have them roll initiative? Noooo! Of course not! Seriously why not?
My none to subtle point is all of this could be avoided if you just get rid of initiative. I mean you don't use it any other time you need to adjudicate actions. Throw it out you will find your games flow better and make more sense. And besides it really helps when you so-called "story gamers" are doing that pretentious "theater of the mind" stuff that us old timers call playing D&D.
Now to quote Mr. Socko...."Have a nice day!"
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
Do you mean get rid of combat, or do you mean fight combats without turns and rounds somehow, or do you mean use some other method to decide who goes first and how the turn order progresses in a combat? I have no specific attachment to the Rolling Initiative process (I use team initiative to simplify it), but you can't really advise people to throw it out without indicating how to fill that gap in the rules.
To be fair, it's not particularly rare in our table to use initiative out of combat when people want to do conflicting things at the same time. Not with the entire rules baggage, but to resolve simultaneous actions.
"I open the door."
"I stop him!"
or
"I grab the jewel and throw it to the sea."
"I sleight of hand the jewel to my pocket, replacing it with the opal I have."
"Okay, you two roll initiative."
Because timing doesn't matter.
Initiative is for when the timing of actions is important.
No, initiative is a mechanic for keeping track of whose turn it is. However, as DMs we adjudicate actions where timing is important all the time without rolling initiative. In Onyx's examples timing is important and while Onyx did say his group would roll initiative, many groups I have watched would not. The DM would decide based on player descriptions, as in the first of Onyx's examples..."I open the door"..."I stop him"...the DM asks the second player to describe how he intends to stop him and then decides what happens based on the answer. In the second example..."I grab the jewel and toss it"...."I try to palm said jewel...." again the DM could very easily ask player one to roll a "to hit" to see if he grabs the jewel or perhaps roll a contested dexterity check...with the second PC getting to add their sleight of hand skill.
All of this highlights my point that initiative rolls create an atmosphere where combat is expected because they are almost exclusively used in combat situations. By removing initiative and letting players go in an order that makes sense given the current situation it would eliminate situations that are frustrating, such as having the element of surprise but not being able to capitalize on it because you rolled low.
Now to explicitly address Regent's question...throw out initiative and resolve any combat exactly like you would resolve any other situation where players are trying to do multiple things at once, say like everyone trying to talk to the king or whatever. Now, if you happen to be someone that uses initiative to resolve that then fine your players are already used to that and probably do not automatically assume that a call for initiative means combat. If you don't like my method then that is fine, you are going to be stuck with certain incongruities caused by the system as it is presented.
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
It's not like you can't just say "since both of you are trying to act at the same time and the order matters, roll initiative to see who's faster" with no implication of combat.
I don't understand what you mean by this. A surprised creature can't do anything useful on its first turn so no matter how low you roll, you're still getting a turn before they can take actions.
The whole point of initiative checks is to account for the fact that some people are able to react faster than others. The guy with 20 DEX should have a higher chance of acting before the guy with 8 DEX.
True, but you can also, just as easily let the player with the higher Dexterity score win or you could resolve the actions in the order they were presented. Both of which interrupt the flow of the game less than a roll and both of which if applied consistently are much more fair than leaving it up to a random die result. If you are a big fan of player agency, and who isn't, then allowing the character with the higher applicable score win would make much more sense. Why you ask? Because a player's decisions should matter and those include the decisions made at the time of character creation. To be honest I would use the highest modifier, that way if an applicable proficiency comes into play it can be added, again because player choices matter.
See, this is where you are wrong...a surprised creature cannot take an action on its turn. However, the surprised condition ends at the end of the creature's turn, so if a creature could use a reaction or possibly a bonus action. Since the assassin would gain a critical hit if the creature was still surprised having the surprise end before the assassin turn begins is a huge negative to the character. Now I am not saying we should cater to the players, however, if we can implement some common sense approaches that make the game make more sense, flow better and produce a more narrative result then why wouldn't we? After all RPGs are the one instance where the rules were meant to be broken!
As for me, I choose to believe that an extinct thunder lizard is running a game of Dungeons & Dragons via Twitter!
Or I could use the official rule for resolving these situations, which was playtested and is already familiar to players.
Neither of those solutions work well. The former will have the most dexterous person win 100% of the time. The latter makes it impossible to interfere with another creature's actions and enables players to snipe actions.
If one player insists on toucing the magical orb in the dangerous dungeon and the other is adamant about not touching it, ruling in favor of the high DEX character does the complete opposite of what you're saying. Ruling in favor of the one that talked first is completely arbitrary and will always invalidate one player's choice. So no, neither of those approaches make much more sense to me.
You can't take a bonus action if it's not your turn. If you roll high enough initiative, you should be entitled to a reaction. That's the whole point of feats like Alert and class features like Tactical Wit - they make it more likely you'll respond in time to danger.
Assassinate's crit feature is extremely powerful and balanced around the fact that you're not going to be able to 100% reliably get the drop on someone. That's working as intended. The game has rules and rolls so you can't just say "I kill that guy." Sometimes, the wizard will see the assassin just in time to cast Shield.
Is there actually anything that prevents this? If you are hidden it sounds perfectly ok according to RAW (that I know of). It does sound like easy rule abuse though, if the intent is to go back and forth between encounters until you get a good initiative roll. No doubt the DM would stop this, but I am wondering if RAW has anything to say on the matter?
I'm not sure how the enemy would remain 'non-the-wiser', depending on how initiative is called for. Initiative rolls should only be called when a player declares a turn-based action (usually a combat action) - or a creature does. It's not a hypothetical - initiative determines who completed their action first.
I don't then allow them to recall their action if they don't like their initiative roll, because technically they've already made their action - it's just not happened in the game yet. While players have to take turns to declare what they're doing, it's actually all happening to their characters simultaneously.
If a rogue declares 'I want to fire my bow at the bugbear guard', and everyone rolls initiative, then he'll be firing at the bugbear guard - regardless of where he comes in the initiative order. The initiative order just determines at what point his action resolves, when everyone is acting almost at exactly the same time.
That makes sense. But D&D encounters aren't resolved that way though. First you roll initiative and then you decide on your actions (which could be to run away). Am I wrong?
Ideally it would make sense that you take your actions independently of initiative order and others' planned actions, but that would be difficult to implement in a system with rules for everything. Of course it is up to the discretion of the individual DM though