There was an argument between the player and the GM regarding the surprise mechanics.
Description of the situation: During the night watch, the wizard approaching enemies and began to wake up his companions. Meanwhile, the GM attacked the bonfire with a web spell and the mage took damage from the unraveling spiderweb. After that, we all rolled the dice to determine the order of movement. The GM started the round first by casting another spell.
Player: He believes that the heroes were prepared to attack, so the opponent should not attack twice in a row. GM: I consider this an additional surprise round within the rules.
Generally, I read a bit on reddit and it can be concluded that it shouldn't work like that in 5e, but yesterday I saw an identical situation in one of the campaigns on YT, so I lost my mind. The next session is on Saturday, so we would like to clarify this.
Any offensive action (Web would qualify if cast in the players' spaces) begins initiative, and can only be cast on the caster's turn in initiative, not before. Then any creatures who are Surprised (determined by attacker's Stealth and defenders' Passive Perception) don't get to act in the first round.
That's how it actually works. To put it in steps for how it should have happened:
Attackers (GM) roll Stealth on all units
Stealth rolls are compared to Passive Perceptions of all in the defending party
If any member of the attacking party roll lower than all defenders' Passive Perceptions, then Surprise is negated
Anyone whose Passive Perception is as high as or higher than the lowest Stealth roll of the attackers is not Surprised
Any members still asleep during the roll are Unconscious and are unaware of their surroundings
Initiative is rolled
The first round begins
This is when Web should have been cast
Anyone Surprised can't take actions or move on their turn, and they can't take a reaction until after their turn goes by in that round
Any offensive action (Web would qualify if cast in the players' spaces) begins initiative
While I generally agree that it should work this way, the rules don't actually define it like that; it's pretty much entirely up to the DM when a combat has initiated and thus the order of combat begins.
It's entirely possible for example for web to be cast without initiating combat, and and traps or even ambushes don't need to be resolved as combats as an opening attack could just be a warning to trigger a social encounter or similar.
However in this case I would personally say that the players are more in the right as the way the web is used feels very much like an opening attack rather than something outside of combat; the DM is technically in the clear since they choose when combat begins, but it's a thin defence for what sounds like it should have been a combat from the start.
Pretty much the whole point of rolling for surprise is to determine whether enemies get to act first or not, whether the player characters hear or see something that warns them just in time so they can react etc. This edition's surprise rules aren't the best, but this is good example of when they should have been used, as the enemies are hoping for surprise to give them the opportunity to trigger the web when it will have the best impact, rather than the players having a chance to scatter.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
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.
Any offensive action (Web would qualify if cast in the players' spaces) begins initiative
While I generally agree that it should work this way, the rules don't actually define it like that; it's pretty much entirely up to the DM when a combat has initiated and thus the order of combat begins.
It's entirely possible for example for web to be cast without initiating combat, and and traps or even ambushes don't need to be resolved as combats as an opening attack could just be a warning to trigger a social encounter or similar.
However in this case I would personally say that the players are more in the right as the way the web is used feels very much like an opening attack rather than something outside of combat; the DM is technically in the clear since they choose when combat begins, but it's a thin defence for what sounds like it should have been a combat from the start.
Pretty much the whole point of rolling for surprise is to determine whether enemies get to act first or not, whether the player characters hear or see something that warns them just in time so they can react etc. This edition's surprise rules aren't the best, but this is good example of when they should have been used, as the enemies are hoping for surprise to give them the opportunity to trigger the web when it will have the best impact, rather than the players having a chance to scatter.
The part you're quoting is only the order of events once combat actually begins, but my point was that when combat starts is entirely up to the DM; there's no rule that an "aggressive" action means combat must now be declared, the DM chooses whether to do so, then goes through the steps to determine surprise (if applicable) etc.
It means that technically the DM can simply have something happen, and then decide that combat begins afterwards, in which case they're not resolving surprise until after that initial web has occurred, so an effectively second surprise round could end up occurring.
This means that in the strictest possible terms, where the DM always decides when to switch to and from combat, the DM could be "correct" in the general sense that something can happen before the surprise round. But it's highly unlikely that's how the rules are intended to be applied in a case like this; the purpose of DMs deciding when combat actually begins is more for weird situations where combat may not even be necessary, or necessary yet, rather than a clearer case of being ambushed etc.
But from the OP's description the Wizard didn't fail to spot approaching enemies, and was trying to warn their allies, so I'd debate whether a surprise check is even necessary, either that or their check for keeping watch should be used as their side of the surprise check (i.e- only the Wizard could avoid surprise, as their allies were asleep) and after that other players can start to act.
It's also worth noting that surprise isn't the only way to disadvantage ambushed players; if the player characters are actually asleep, then there's no guarantee they'll wake up just because they're no longer surprised, even very loud noises are no guarantee they'll wake up and be ready to act immediately etc. So a DM doesn't need to use surprise to handle such things, you can simply have players unable to take a turn until they pass some roll to wake up/realise they're in a fight.
Also it's not as if they aren't already at a disadvantage; if they were asleep then they wouldn't be wearing any armour, they may not have any defensive spells active, they'll need to re-arm themselves after starting from prone etc., all of which limits their ability to respond quickly, meanwhile the Wizard is vulnerable on their own, and this all makes the ambush much more challenging then a straight up fight between the groups. This is why certain protective spells like alarm and faithful hound become much more valuable as they can ensure whoever is on which is alerted sooner and the party awake and ready to fight before the enemy is on top of their position.
On this basis I'm more on the side of players being right that there should have been only a single surprise round, as spotting the enemy and them trying to make an opening attack should been handled within the surprise round, and there are other (better) ways to handle other player characters having to then respond to being attacked.
Of course, DMs have to make their judgements in the moment so you can't always stop and think about all of this at the time, a night time ambush might not have originally been planned etc., so it's hard to ever say a DM was definitely wrong to do something the way that they did, but I think it's fair to say it could be handled in a way that's more fun for the players in future.
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.
I have played this both ways, though as I have spent more time DMing, I tend to want to call for initiative as soon as something with hostile intent kicks off rather than letting players get a free shot in before the dice fall. Players may think they are getting the drop on an enemy, but the quickness of their draw, so to speak, is what initiative is for. I'll assign surprise if the situation warrants it, and I'll also let a player roll initiative with advantage if I feel like it's an in-between situation. Initiative is an ability check, after all.
I vote Players, no Surprise here since it normally rely on Stealth and the party was aware of the enemies and they cast a spell so it appears they were not hidden.
Many DM still allow attacks and spells to occur before initiative is rolled, despite what the rules and the Dev suggest, or call Surprise round even if they don't exist.
Surprise occur when determined being the case and combatants act on the first turn they can.
I always put the emphasis one side is 'signaling intention to act prior to initiative, rather than resolve action before it.
Regardless of the specifics of initiative, I question the idea that a wizard actively on guard duty who notes approaching enemies and begins to wake up his companions is somehow surprised. To me, that sounds like the opposite of surprised. Surprise would be if the enemies snuck up without the wizard noticing them and revealed themselves by casting Web on the bonfire. What is the point of posting a watch if enemies that you observe still get to walk right up to you and attack with surprise?
As DM i would most likely handle the situation like this based on the information provided:
DM: Wizard, it's your turn on night watch, doing anything in particular?
Player: I explore the area close to camp while the party is asleep.
DM: Ok you walk a short distance when you spot hidden creatures nearby (after secretly comparing Passive Perception to their Dexterity (Stealth) check) What would you like to do?
Player: I will go back to camp and wake up the party.
DM: As you're about to do this, (DM determine if any sleeping characters are surprised and establish positions) roll initiative everyone.
The exact action or spell the Wizard or the enemies will do remains to be determined as they take turns by rounds. Things may change based on what happen next.
Post #2 is definitely the best way to run it. Combat activity should be happening in combat.
When watching various groups play online, there is often a slippery slope that happens when there is some sort of social encounter happening and a player blurts out "I attack!" Then, he argues that either he should get to resolve that attack before combat begins, OR that he has "surprised" the enemy with his action because it was a "surprising" thing to do. In my opinion, the best way to run it is neither of those ways. Situationally, I do like this solution posted earlier:
and I'll also let a player roll initiative with advantage if I feel like it's an in-between situation. Initiative is an ability check, after all.
This can give a small edge to an individual combatant if a situation warrants it without going all the way to awarding the Surprise mechanic. Surprise is very powerful and can unbalance an encounter if applied incorrectly.
Any offensive action (Web would qualify if cast in the players' spaces) begins initiative
While I generally agree that it should work this way, the rules don't actually define it like that; it's pretty much entirely up to the DM when a combat has initiated and thus the order of combat begins.
This is technically correct. It's a bit unfortunate as well because I think that this is something that an inexperienced DM is unlikely to "get right" as there is little to no guidance on this within the PHB or the DMG. The developers have definitely said that as a rule of thumb combat activity should occur within combat, but players new to the game might have no way of knowing this. I definitely agree with this advice in general.
There can be some weird edge cases too. Like, PCs walk along a trail. Monsters successfully hide and set up an ambush from behind the bushes. The DM starts combat. PCs are surprised and cannot act in the first round. Then, inexplicably, the monsters do nothing in the first round for whatever reason. What happens now? It's round 2 for the PCs, what can they do? Should they even know that they are actually in a combat? Should they be "forced" to continue walking along the trail even though meta tells the players that something is up? This might be a case where the DM started combat too soon, for example. But who knows -- every situation is a little different, which is probably why the rules are left a bit open ended on this -- they leave it up to the DM to make such determinations.
It means that technically the DM can simply have something happen, and then decide that combat begins afterwards, in which case they're not resolving surprise until after that initial web has occurred, so an effectively second surprise round could end up occurring.
This feels wrong to me although I get what you're saying. It's hard to imagine how something like a web spell hitting the party's camp wouldn't put the party on high alert in order to avoid a subsequent surprise. At the very least perhaps a DM could rule that their passive perception should have advantage or something?
This should come down to whether or not the web spell going off would fall under a category such as "automatically notice each other" or "notice a threat" for the purposes of becoming impossible to surprise. Or, do those clauses only apply to the "threat" created by the actual monster? So, something gets dropped into camp, everyone looks around on high alert but the monster stealth rolls were so high that we still can't find them. And now they surprise the party. I'm really not a fan of any interpretation like that, but it might be one way to run it.
In addition, the Web spell might be a bad example since it has a somatic component. So, not only is the effect likely to be noticed, but the casting of the spell is probably also noticeable. But to get back to your point -- suppose another spell is cast quietly and has an effect that is not obviously and immediately noticeable? Maybe in that situation it becomes more reasonable to allow for the possibility of subsequent surprise. So yeah, it sounds like more DM Rulings are required for whatever the specific situation is.
But from the OP's description the Wizard didn't fail to spot approaching enemies, and was trying to warn their allies, so I'd debate whether a surprise check is even necessary, either that or their check for keeping watch should be used as their side of the surprise check (i.e- only the Wizard could avoid surprise, as their allies were asleep) and after that other players can start to act.
These are two drastically different solutions in terms of how they affect the outcome of the battle. I am actually extremely curious how people generally run this in terms of the overall question of:
--> Mechanically, what is actually gained from standing watch?
Should actively watching allow that character to make an active perception check with the chance to beat their own passive perception score? Or even perception with advantage? Should environmental factors such as lighting affect this perception check when specifically actively watching (and listening)? Under what circumstances should the character on watch be able to shout a warning to their sleeping party members (for example, can they not do this while surprised?) and what is the timing of the consequences of that as we simultaneously enter combat? Does "waking up" require an action? And so on.
It's also worth noting that surprise isn't the only way to disadvantage ambushed players; if the player characters are actually asleep, then there's no guarantee they'll wake up just because they're no longer surprised, even very loud noises are no guarantee they'll wake up and be ready to act immediately etc.
Xanathar's has some optional guidelines that suggest a few thresholds of noise that can wake up a naturally sleeping creature. For example, as a rule of thumb, yelling out a warning is meant to automatically wake up nearby naturally sleeping creatures. But it's again largely up to the DM. Personally, I think that we should try pretty hard to not be harsh about this -- as you've mentioned, the side that was asleep is already entering this combat at a pretty big disadvantage.
Also it's not as if they aren't already at a disadvantage; if they were asleep then they wouldn't be wearing any armour,
This is totally optional as to whether or not a DM wants to impose any restrictions like this in their games. Similarly, the impact of having or lacking such things as bedrolls, tents, the ability to start a fire and so on are mechanically optional in general -- these are invitations for DMs to create homebrew systems that incorporate such things.
Xanathar's does suggest some optional guidelines with respect to sleeping in armor. This IS allowed under that system, but such a creature would be intentionally incurring some penalties to the benefits of their long rest for the privilege of sleeping with this extra protection.
I vote Players, no Surprise here since it normally rely on Stealth and the party was aware of the enemies and they cast a spell so it appears they were not hidden.
Yes -- as I mentioned above, I'd love to hear a lot more thoughts from people on this. What is the mechanical advantage of setting a watch in your games? How exactly do you handle what happens when someone yells out a warning? (Allowed before combat? During combat?) and so on.
To put it in steps for how it should have happened:
Attackers (GM) roll Stealth on all units
Lastly, I want to draw attention to this step. Exactly how a DM executes this step is a bit inconsistent throughout the sourcebooks and might be open to DM interpretation depending on the situation.
For example, maybe a group who positions themselves ahead of time while out of sight and then remains still and lies in wait to make a coordinated attack as an ambush from a predetermined position should have a higher chance of success than a group that attempts to move silently through the woods in the dark while also remaining unseen during movement in an effort to sneak up on and surprise a group of creatures in their own homes or camps or lairs. The manner in which the DM rolls these stealth checks can influence this chance for success.
The way it's written here is pretty much in line with how it is stated in the Chapter 9 section on surprise, which says:
This seems to mean that every individual monster is supposed to roll their own stealth roll. However, the DM should be aware that once we get beyond very small groups, the mathematics of this approach dictate that the chances for success as a group quickly become unreasonably low for a lot of situations.
There's another possibility of how to do this presented in Chapter 7 -> Ability Checks -> Working Together -> Group Checks:
When a number of individuals are trying to accomplish something as a group, the DM might ask for a group ability check. In such a situation, the characters who are skilled at a particular task help cover those who aren't.
To make a group ability check, everyone in the group makes the ability check. If at least half the group succeeds, the whole group succeeds.
Otherwise, the group fails. Group checks don't come up very often, and they're most useful when all the characters succeed or fail as a group.
Upon careful reading, however, it doesn't seem like this quite applies to group stealth. The determination for Surprise is technically a Contest, whereas the concept of "success" on a check refers to the comparison to a set DC for that check. Similar, but technically different.
Some DMs might modify the above procedure slightly by asking everyone to roll for Stealth and then using the "average" or "median" roll to determine the group's stealth. This is technically a homebrew solution, but it might not be too unreasonable for certain situations.
There is also the concept of "passive Stealth" which I disagree with pretty strongly.
There is also the possibility of granting advantage on Stealth checks -- which obviously should be used very sparingly and only in very unusual situations which might cause this possibility.
Finally, there is another method that I cannot find support for within the source books, but is the recommended method mentioned in the original 5e Starter Set Adventure. This general rule of thumb would be for the DM to make one single stealth roll for an entire group of monsters of the same "type". I believe the idea is that if there happens to be a mixed group of different types of monsters trying to be stealthy together then a roll is made for each monster type within the group -- so like if a group has multiple Bugbears and multiple Goblins then the DM makes one roll for the Bugbears and one roll for the Goblins (two rolls total) and these determine this group's stealth. I've seen this method mentioned enough times that I feel like it must be written somewhere in the source books, but I can't find it.
In the starter set, there are these recommendations:
Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check for the goblins: roll one d20 for all of them
(Double standard)
Have each character who moves ahead make a Dexterity (Stealth) check contested by the goblins’ passive Wisdom (Perception) score
and so on. There are several more examples which all work this way in this Adventure.
--------------------
So, anyway, there seems to be quite a bit of wiggle room given to the DM about how exactly he wants to run these types of situations.
There's a lot of replies since I posted. I'm just gonna reply to a few things. If I don't reply to something, just know it's because we seem largely in agreement here anyway.
The part you're quoting is only the order of events once combat actually begins, but my point was that when combat starts is entirely up to the DM; there's no rule that an "aggressive" action means combat must now be declared, the DM chooses whether to do so, then goes through the steps to determine surprise (if applicable) etc.
It means that technically the DM can simply have something happen, and then decide that combat begins afterwards, in which case they're not resolving surprise until after that initial web has occurred, so an effectively second surprise round could end up occurring.
You're technically correct, but only technically, and I don't trust any DM who runs it that way once they have any amount of experience as a DM. It's a beginner's folly if they're new, but feels like cheating once they're experienced.
Regardless of the specifics of initiative, I question the idea that a wizard actively on guard duty who notes approaching enemies and begins to wake up his companions is somehow surprised. To me, that sounds like the opposite of surprised. Surprise would be if the enemies snuck up without the wizard noticing them and revealed themselves by casting Web on the bonfire. What is the point of posting a watch if enemies that you observe still get to walk right up to you and attack with surprise?
Just calling this out as one of the best points in the thread.
There can be some weird edge cases too. Like, PCs walk along a trail. Monsters successfully hide and set up an ambush from behind the bushes. The DM starts combat. PCs are surprised and cannot act in the first round. Then, inexplicably, the monsters do nothing in the first round for whatever reason. What happens now? It's round 2 for the PCs, what can they do? Should they even know that they are actually in a combat? Should they be "forced" to continue walking along the trail even though meta tells the players that something is up? This might be a case where the DM started combat too soon, for example. But who knows -- every situation is a little different, which is probably why the rules are left a bit open ended on this -- they leave it up to the DM to make such determinations.
Gonna be replying to your stuff a few times, just because your post is long.
For this, I just have a possible way to run it as a DM, no real argument to the statement. Initiative can be pre-rolled (either with or without the knowledge that the roll is initiative) and have players moving in initiative order ahead of combat, with the order falling into the same place when combat starts. Alternately, only have the players roll initiative the moment the ambush is supposed to happen. If their passives beat the Stealth of the opposing group, they see it ahead of time and nobody's surprised.
In addition, the Web spell might be a bad example since it has a somatic component. So, not only is the effect likely to be noticed, but the casting of the spell is probably also noticeable. But to get back to your point -- suppose another spell is cast quietly and has an effect that is not obviously and immediately noticeable? Maybe in that situation it becomes more reasonable to allow for the possibility of subsequent surprise. So yeah, it sounds like more DM Rulings are required for whatever the specific situation is.
I was going to say, Subtle Spell Metamagic might be useful for something like this. That, like you said, is where the DM needs to make a call.
(My note: Numbering these questions)
--> 1. Mechanically, what is actually gained from standing watch?
2. Should actively watching allow that character to make an active perception check with the chance to beat their own passive perception score? 3. Or even perception with advantage? 4. Should environmental factors such as lighting affect this perception check when specifically actively watching (and listening)? 5. Under what circumstances should the character on watch be able to shout a warning to their sleeping party members (for example, can they not do this while surprised?) and what is the timing of the consequences of that as we simultaneously enter combat? 6. Does "waking up" require an action? And so on.
Whoever's on watch isn't Unconscious (the condition)
Only if something potentially alerts them ahead of time
Not on its own
Yes, and disadvantage/advantage has effects on passives (-5/+5 respectively), that's part of the Passive Checks rule
I'd personally rule being "on watch" and doing nothing else for that time would mean the character's effectively holding an action to call out once they're sure something's out of the ordinary
I'd say no, it's more just the application of a condition and the way it breaks (you talked about noise thresholds later, this could be applied)
Upon careful reading, however, it doesn't seem like this quite applies to group stealth. The determination for Surprise is technically a Contest, whereas the concept of "success" on a check refers to the comparison to a set DC for that check. Similar, but technically different.
Some DMs might modify the above procedure slightly by asking everyone to roll for Stealth and then using the "average" or "median" roll to determine the group's stealth. This is technically a homebrew solution, but it might not be too unreasonable for certain situations.
I would actually argue that the solution isn't homebrew, based on the following:
The Stealth check is being performed as a group (group Stealth check)
The DC of the check is the Passive Perceptions of the opposing creatures
Each creature has a different DC
It feels to me like the actual solution is to do a group Stealth check and run successes/failures against each Passive, and the Stealth only succeeds against each creature that half or more succeed on.
And on the note of the adventure, I don't deal with premade adventures, no comment there.
1) As mentioned, I question that the wizard or anyone they managed to wake up has any reason to be surprised. Certainly, the wizard noticing an approaching enemy can't be surprised. Note that although a creature may not be aware of all the opponents, if they are aware of at least one then they aren't surprised.
2) I tend to start initiative for any encounter that might involve timing, a situation where I want to ensure every player gets an equal opportunity to take a turn, or when an action that might cause a fight to start might happen. In my opinion, initiative is for resolving turns and actions in order, and combat is only one of the situations when this is useful.
3) In cases of surprise where the party is unaware of anything going on and they are all effectively surprised, then I'll roll for initiative as usual but the first turn will occur with the action by whichever creature started the encounter. RAW, using the surprise rules, creatures with higher initiative will be able to use reactions but will not have a turn. There may be rare occasions where I might not allow reactions before the creature that starts the encounter takes their action but usually it isn't an issue.
In the example of the OP, any party members that are still asleep would certainly be surprised (unless they had the Alert feat ... which gives them a 6th sense for danger :) ). The wizard would not be surprised but the only creatures they are aware of would be the ones they have noticed. In addition, if these creatures have not taken an hostile action then the wizard will have to carefully decide what action to take since the wizard won't know whether the creatures sneaking up on the camp are actually hostile (though that would seem likely it may not be the case).
Anyway, in this case, I don't think the DM ran it correctly. It sounds like the DM wanted to have a surprise ambush on the camp while the characters were sleeping but the wizard noticed. At this point, the DM should let the situation play out naturally rather than trying to force some outcome by manipulating the rules since all it does is start an argument (unless the DM wasn't really aware of how they should run an encounter with a mix of surprised and not surprised characters - in which case it is a learning experience for everyone :) ).
Note that although a creature may not be aware of all the opponents, if they are aware of at least one then they aren't surprised.
So even in this scenario I guess we're supposed to run it such that a PC in camp must actually become aware of one of the monsters to avoid surprise? In other words, if and when the PC who is on watch shouts out a warning to the rest of the party -- this CAN wake up the other party members but it CANNOT cause other party members to avoid surprise? For whatever that's worth . . .
I guess I have always felt like the act of setting a watch should yield more benefits mechanically than it actually does. It really seems like in 5e it makes almost no difference if you set a watch. Like, THAT person has a chance to not be surprised . . . doesn't that feel a bit like it defeats the purpose? And yet, it seems like the majority of folks run it like this -- which admittedly does seem to be in accordance with the written rules. I just don't really like it for the flavor of the game.
How about this as a compromise? Typically a sleeping creature is considered to be unconscious and unaware of its surroundings. This means that their passive perception is effectively 0 for the purposes of "noticing hidden threats". If the creature on watch wins his perception contest and spots the stealthy enemies -- can he yell a warning to wake up his party AND the party instantly regains the use of perception and gets a chance to also spot the enemies before combat erupts? Does anyone do anything like this?
----------
Ok, next, let me expand on this question and see if anyone else has any thoughts on this:
4. Should environmental factors such as lighting affect this perception check when specifically actively watching (and listening)?
4. Yes, and disadvantage/advantage has effects on passives (-5/+5 respectively), that's part of the Passive Checks rule
Ok, so, for example, the party puts out their campfire and goes to sleep in darkness. A PC with no special vision is on watch.
Rules for Vision and Light mention:
In a lightly obscured area, such as dim light . . . creatures have disadvantage on Wisdom (Perception) checks that rely on sight.
A heavily obscured area--such as darkness . . . --blocks vision entirely. A creature effectively suffers from the blinded condition when trying to see something in that area.
Blinded
A blinded creature can't see and automatically fails any ability check that requires sight. . . .
So, in this case, while keeping watch we are intentionally watching AND listening.
Do people interpret these above clauses to mean that dim light, for example, causes disadvantage on Perception checks that rely ONLY on sight? Or, on Perception checks that rely IN ANY WAY on sight? In other words, if we can hear perfectly but our vision is hindered -- and we make a Perception check that relies on sight AND hearing -- do we get disadvantage? How are people interpreting this?
Because automatically failing perception checks while on watch would be pretty bad!
So even in this scenario I guess we're supposed to run it such that a PC in camp must actually become aware of one of the monsters to avoid surprise? In other words, if and when the PC who is on watch shouts out a warning to the rest of the party -- this CAN wake up the other party members but it CANNOT cause other party members to avoid surprise? For whatever that's worth . . .
I guess I have always felt like the act of setting a watch should yield more benefits mechanically than it actually does. It really seems like in 5e it makes almost no difference if you set a watch. Like, THAT person has a chance to not be surprised . . . doesn't that feel a bit like it defeats the purpose? And yet, it seems like the majority of folks run it like this -- which admittedly does seem to be in accordance with the written rules. I just don't really like it for the flavor of the game.
How about this as a compromise? Typically a sleeping creature is considered to be unconscious and unaware of its surroundings. This means that their passive perception is effectively 0 for the purposes of "noticing hidden threats". If the creature on watch wins his perception contest and spots the stealthy enemies -- can he yell a warning to wake up his party AND the party instantly regains the use of perception and gets a chance to also spot the enemies before combat erupts? Does anyone do anything like this?
This is similar to what I was trying to express. Someone Unconscious doesn't perceive their surroundings. In this instance, the only person who the Stealth has to beat is the one on watch. (There's edge case exceptions, such as a Warforged with their ability to remain alert but inert.)
Once they notice something and alert the party with a loud noise, the entire party is now using their Passive Perceptions automatically.
So in my instance, it's a two-step process. The guard matters, but with most of the party asleep, the Stealth has an easier time getting in.
So, in this case, while keeping watch we are intentionally watching AND listening.
Do people interpret these above clauses to mean that dim light, for example, causes disadvantage on Perception checks that rely ONLY on sight? Or, on Perception checks that rely IN ANY WAY on sight? In other words, if we can hear perfectly but our vision is hindered -- and we make a Perception check that relies on sight AND hearing -- do we get disadvantage? How are people interpreting this?
Because automatically failing perception checks while on watch would be pretty bad!
In this instance, I take that into account. A person can hear a threat coming without seeing it. At that point, they're alerted to the presence, but the Unseen Attackers rule can still have an effect. Still gives a chance to alert the party, but may be at a disadvantage until the attackers show their position better.
As a note, they can still attack the area they heard the noise from, but they have disadvantage on attacks due to not seeing their target and just firing into an area.
While we're at it, do you apply any additional rules for this situation if the sleeping party members are inside a tent or in their bedroll or both? Does it take longer to get up and out into the battlefield, even if it's just "difficult terrain" for the first step? Perhaps the tent is facing a certain direction and they have to exit in that direction before continuing movement? How about cover? If an enemy attacks "through" a tent, does the target get no cover, half cover, three-quarters cover or full cover? I assume they are an unseen target? Does the fabric of a tent create a barrier to the "clear path" for spells to be able to target creatures located inside the tent?
Also, how do you run this situation when the PC on watch IS surprised? Do the sleeping PCs automatically wake up when combat begins? When the first noisy hostile action is resolved? Do they stay asleep until the PC on guard duty gets a chance to yell a warning on his turn? (As an aside, I am confident that even if surprised the PC on guard duty CAN yell a warning on his first turn -- surprise restricts actions and movement, but not "other activity" such as flourishes, brief communication and an item interaction such as drawing a sword) Obviously I would assume that even if they wake up they are surprised on Round 1 (and only Round 1, regardless of when they wake up).
-I just consider them Prone. -When using a battlemap, the direction of the tent matters for movement, but I'll typically just decide the direction they're approaching from randomly unless it's a group that's been stalking the party. -Full cover, but I use the rules in the DMG for AC and HP of an item. Cloth is 11 AC, and I'd consider it resilient, given it has to stand up to weather, so 27 HP before it's destroyed and unusable. -Definitely an unseen target, but that changes if they aren't using the Hide action while exiting the tent. The enemy will see them exit. -The fabric blocks sight, but not a clear path for AoE or "known target" casting. An example of a spell that would still work this way would be Hypnotic Pattern. It just has to be in range, so if you know the general area (if the enemy isn't in Stealth, I rule they can generally figure the distance out based on sound) then it's still valid because the tent front is open.
Granted, some of these are just my own rulings, because the book doesn't cover every case in situations such as these. Hiding and Surprise are both poorly-fleshed-out mechanics in 5e.
The part you're quoting is only the order of events once combat actually begins, but my point was that when combat starts is entirely up to the DM; there's no rule that an "aggressive" action means combat must now be declared, the DM chooses whether to do so, then goes through the steps to determine surprise (if applicable) etc.
It means that technically the DM can simply have something happen, and then decide that combat begins afterwards, in which case they're not resolving surprise until after that initial web has occurred, so an effectively second surprise round could end up occurring.
You're technically correct, but only technically, and I don't trust any DM who runs it that way once they have any amount of experience as a DM. It's a beginner's folly if they're new, but feels like cheating once they're experienced.
Technically correct is sufficient for Rules As Written sadly. 😉
I should have been clearer though that delaying combat start is not how I'd personally run a situation like this, or advise someone to do so, I was just pointing out that the combat rules don't actually tells us when to start combat. Usually it's obvious, but there are definitely cases where we've got tools but not the guidelines/examples/advice we need. Always been a bit of a problem in the 5e rules, like with stealth/hiding, exploration and so-on.
But from the OP's description the Wizard didn't fail to spot approaching enemies, and was trying to warn their allies, so I'd debate whether a surprise check is even necessary, either that or their check for keeping watch should be used as their side of the surprise check (i.e- only the Wizard could avoid surprise, as their allies were asleep) and after that other players can start to act.
These are two drastically different solutions in terms of how they affect the outcome of the battle.
Sure, but they're highly dependent on context.
I think in general I'd go with the "rolling to keep watch is rolling for surprise" option as my default because you don't usually want to reveal to players that you're rolling for surprise, and if the others are asleep it's fair that they don't get a chance to spot the enemies.
In that case the advantage of keeping watch is that you have someone able to spot enemies at all, and depending upon how you set up your camp and watcher(s), you can minimise the penalty of being surprised even if you don't fully avoid it triggering.
For example, if your watcher is by the fire in the middle of a camp setup inside a small forest clearing, then even if they roll well for keeping watch the enemy is probably right on top of the party (at the edge of the clearing), so the difference is only whether you're all surprised, or if the watcher(s) can at least do something to try to protect the others when they're vulnerable.
Alternatively, if your party is camped in the back of a reasonably deep cave, with the watcher at the cave mouth looking out across a mostly open expanse of hillside, then while the sleeping party members might still be surprised, it doesn't really matter because the enemies may be so far away when they're spotted that they can't do anything to capitalise upon that. In this case the benefit the watcher gets is extra time to get inside the cave, wake everyone and maybe even a turn or two to setup some surprises for their would be ambushers (who may not realise they were spotted if the watcher can avoid making it obvious they saw them).
Also it's not as if they aren't already at a disadvantage; if they were asleep then they wouldn't be wearing any armour,
This is totally optional as to whether or not a DM wants to impose any restrictions like this in their games. Similarly, the impact of having or lacking such things as bedrolls, tents, the ability to start a fire and so on are mechanically optional in general -- these are invitations for DMs to create homebrew systems that incorporate such things.
Xanathar's Guide to Everything includes rules for some of these, and adds the emphasis that medium and heavy armour aren't something you should be comfortable sleeping in (you only recover a quarter of the hit dice and no levels of exhaustion).
But to clarify, my point was more intended to be that if the goal of the DM in this situation is to represent the danger of the party being caught ill prepared then these are some of the other options for adding to the threat, rather than trying to use surprise to do it, as players not getting to do anything generally sucks. The watcher not being surprised is still a benefit, and they may alert others in time to minimise the effect of surprise, but they party is still in a dangerous situation. I should have also mentioned that simply having the long rest interrupted is dangerous for the party as it means that characters who might have been running on fumes at the end of a hard adventuring day are in real trouble (low on hit-points, low on spell slots etc.), so even without optional rules this can be a challenging situation.
In terms of creating interesting/challenging situations for players to deal with, having them all be awake and at 100% fighting strength in a single round (or less) risks making an ambush feel pointless if the party are no worse off than if they'd met the enemy group in the open at an appointed time – as a DM you want encounters to feel varied and to challenge players in different ways, plus if you want things like wilderness exploration and survival to feel important then there needs to be downsides for doing it poorly or benefits to doing well (even if that's just a lack of downsides). But my general point really is that I prefer to impose other hardships on players to create challenge, rather than have them miss more turns at the start of a combat, as missed turns as turns where a player feels like they aren't getting to do anything. But it's all about context, the goals of the DM, how much preparation the players made vs. just having someone on watch and hoping for the best etc. etc.
Doesn't help that this is yet another area where the 5e rules have a woeful lack of guidance; even adventure modules that feature ambush encounters rarely tell you how you're actually intended to be run, they usually just tell you what the party could end up fighting and what the terrain is like. It'd be nice if we had more good examples of how we're expected to actually run half the rules in the game! 😂
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.
A DM can determine characters alseep or suddently awaken be possibly surprised with Perception auto-fail or disadvantage to it. One way or another they would be prone.
I'd usually try to bring the party up to fight automatically waking up to noise and shout or with a successful Perception if i judge noice distance has a chance of failure.
There was an argument between the player and the GM regarding the surprise mechanics.
Description of the situation: During the night watch, the wizard approaching enemies and began to wake up his companions. Meanwhile, the GM attacked the bonfire with a web spell and the mage took damage from the unraveling spiderweb. After that, we all rolled the dice to determine the order of movement. The GM started the round first by casting another spell.
Player: He believes that the heroes were prepared to attack, so the opponent should not attack twice in a row. GM: I consider this an additional surprise round within the rules.
Generally, I read a bit on reddit and it can be concluded that it shouldn't work like that in 5e, but yesterday I saw an identical situation in one of the campaigns on YT, so I lost my mind. The next session is on Saturday, so we would like to clarify this.
It is entirely possible for wizard to have two rounds of Actions before some of the PC's can act. It depends on the Init rolls.
Say the Wizard rolls a 19 on Init, while a player B who is sleeping, rolls a 17.
The process:
DM adjudicates who is Surprised (ALL the sleeping PC's).
Round 1 starts, Everyone rolls for Init, with rolls as above.
Wizard casts Web.
Player B's turn comes up, but due to the Surprised condition, can take no Action, AND was Incapacitated, due to being asleep.
Round 2 starts.
Wizard goes again, due to the 19 versus 17.
Player B then goes.
That is RAW. And frankly, if I was DM'ing, I would ensure that the PC's were Prone, not in Medium or heavier armour, and had only ONE Object Interaction in Round 2 and all subsequent rounds. Player B wants to pick up a quiver of Arrows and a Bow, or a Shield and Sword, that takes up Object Interactions in Rounds 2 and 3, assuming the PC is awakened and not webbed. Most DM's (and players) want to handwave that set of rules away.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
There was an argument between the player and the GM regarding the surprise mechanics.
Description of the situation: During the night watch, the wizard approaching enemies and began to wake up his companions. Meanwhile, the GM attacked the bonfire with a web spell and the mage took damage from the unraveling spiderweb. After that, we all rolled the dice to determine the order of movement. The GM started the round first by casting another spell.
Player: He believes that the heroes were prepared to attack, so the opponent should not attack twice in a row.
GM: I consider this an additional surprise round within the rules.
Generally, I read a bit on reddit and it can be concluded that it shouldn't work like that in 5e, but yesterday I saw an identical situation in one of the campaigns on YT, so I lost my mind. The next session is on Saturday, so we would like to clarify this.
Any offensive action (Web would qualify if cast in the players' spaces) begins initiative, and can only be cast on the caster's turn in initiative, not before. Then any creatures who are Surprised (determined by attacker's Stealth and defenders' Passive Perception) don't get to act in the first round.
That's how it actually works. To put it in steps for how it should have happened:
While I generally agree that it should work this way, the rules don't actually define it like that; it's pretty much entirely up to the DM when a combat has initiated and thus the order of combat begins.
It's entirely possible for example for web to be cast without initiating combat, and and traps or even ambushes don't need to be resolved as combats as an opening attack could just be a warning to trigger a social encounter or similar.
However in this case I would personally say that the players are more in the right as the way the web is used feels very much like an opening attack rather than something outside of combat; the DM is technically in the clear since they choose when combat begins, but it's a thin defence for what sounds like it should have been a combat from the start.
Pretty much the whole point of rolling for surprise is to determine whether enemies get to act first or not, whether the player characters hear or see something that warns them just in time so they can react etc. This edition's surprise rules aren't the best, but this is good example of when they should have been used, as the enemies are hoping for surprise to give them the opportunity to trigger the web when it will have the best impact, rather than the players having a chance to scatter.
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.
The part you're quoting is only the order of events once combat actually begins, but my point was that when combat starts is entirely up to the DM; there's no rule that an "aggressive" action means combat must now be declared, the DM chooses whether to do so, then goes through the steps to determine surprise (if applicable) etc.
It means that technically the DM can simply have something happen, and then decide that combat begins afterwards, in which case they're not resolving surprise until after that initial web has occurred, so an effectively second surprise round could end up occurring.
This means that in the strictest possible terms, where the DM always decides when to switch to and from combat, the DM could be "correct" in the general sense that something can happen before the surprise round. But it's highly unlikely that's how the rules are intended to be applied in a case like this; the purpose of DMs deciding when combat actually begins is more for weird situations where combat may not even be necessary, or necessary yet, rather than a clearer case of being ambushed etc.
But from the OP's description the Wizard didn't fail to spot approaching enemies, and was trying to warn their allies, so I'd debate whether a surprise check is even necessary, either that or their check for keeping watch should be used as their side of the surprise check (i.e- only the Wizard could avoid surprise, as their allies were asleep) and after that other players can start to act.
It's also worth noting that surprise isn't the only way to disadvantage ambushed players; if the player characters are actually asleep, then there's no guarantee they'll wake up just because they're no longer surprised, even very loud noises are no guarantee they'll wake up and be ready to act immediately etc. So a DM doesn't need to use surprise to handle such things, you can simply have players unable to take a turn until they pass some roll to wake up/realise they're in a fight.
Also it's not as if they aren't already at a disadvantage; if they were asleep then they wouldn't be wearing any armour, they may not have any defensive spells active, they'll need to re-arm themselves after starting from prone etc., all of which limits their ability to respond quickly, meanwhile the Wizard is vulnerable on their own, and this all makes the ambush much more challenging then a straight up fight between the groups. This is why certain protective spells like alarm and faithful hound become much more valuable as they can ensure whoever is on which is alerted sooner and the party awake and ready to fight before the enemy is on top of their position.
On this basis I'm more on the side of players being right that there should have been only a single surprise round, as spotting the enemy and them trying to make an opening attack should been handled within the surprise round, and there are other (better) ways to handle other player characters having to then respond to being attacked.
Of course, DMs have to make their judgements in the moment so you can't always stop and think about all of this at the time, a night time ambush might not have originally been planned etc., so it's hard to ever say a DM was definitely wrong to do something the way that they did, but I think it's fair to say it could be handled in a way that's more fun for the players in future.
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.
I have played this both ways, though as I have spent more time DMing, I tend to want to call for initiative as soon as something with hostile intent kicks off rather than letting players get a free shot in before the dice fall. Players may think they are getting the drop on an enemy, but the quickness of their draw, so to speak, is what initiative is for. I'll assign surprise if the situation warrants it, and I'll also let a player roll initiative with advantage if I feel like it's an in-between situation. Initiative is an ability check, after all.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
I vote Players, no Surprise here since it normally rely on Stealth and the party was aware of the enemies and they cast a spell so it appears they were not hidden.
Many DM still allow attacks and spells to occur before initiative is rolled, despite what the rules and the Dev suggest, or call Surprise round even if they don't exist.
Surprise occur when determined being the case and combatants act on the first turn they can.
I always put the emphasis one side is 'signaling intention to act prior to initiative, rather than resolve action before it.
Regardless of the specifics of initiative, I question the idea that a wizard actively on guard duty who notes approaching enemies and begins to wake up his companions is somehow surprised. To me, that sounds like the opposite of surprised. Surprise would be if the enemies snuck up without the wizard noticing them and revealed themselves by casting Web on the bonfire. What is the point of posting a watch if enemies that you observe still get to walk right up to you and attack with surprise?
As DM i would most likely handle the situation like this based on the information provided:
DM: Wizard, it's your turn on night watch, doing anything in particular?
Player: I explore the area close to camp while the party is asleep.
DM: Ok you walk a short distance when you spot hidden creatures nearby (after secretly comparing Passive Perception to their Dexterity (Stealth) check) What would you like to do?
Player: I will go back to camp and wake up the party.
DM: As you're about to do this, (DM determine if any sleeping characters are surprised and establish positions) roll initiative everyone.
The exact action or spell the Wizard or the enemies will do remains to be determined as they take turns by rounds. Things may change based on what happen next.
Great topic.
Post #2 is definitely the best way to run it. Combat activity should be happening in combat.
When watching various groups play online, there is often a slippery slope that happens when there is some sort of social encounter happening and a player blurts out "I attack!" Then, he argues that either he should get to resolve that attack before combat begins, OR that he has "surprised" the enemy with his action because it was a "surprising" thing to do. In my opinion, the best way to run it is neither of those ways. Situationally, I do like this solution posted earlier:
This can give a small edge to an individual combatant if a situation warrants it without going all the way to awarding the Surprise mechanic. Surprise is very powerful and can unbalance an encounter if applied incorrectly.
This is technically correct. It's a bit unfortunate as well because I think that this is something that an inexperienced DM is unlikely to "get right" as there is little to no guidance on this within the PHB or the DMG. The developers have definitely said that as a rule of thumb combat activity should occur within combat, but players new to the game might have no way of knowing this. I definitely agree with this advice in general.
There can be some weird edge cases too. Like, PCs walk along a trail. Monsters successfully hide and set up an ambush from behind the bushes. The DM starts combat. PCs are surprised and cannot act in the first round. Then, inexplicably, the monsters do nothing in the first round for whatever reason. What happens now? It's round 2 for the PCs, what can they do? Should they even know that they are actually in a combat? Should they be "forced" to continue walking along the trail even though meta tells the players that something is up? This might be a case where the DM started combat too soon, for example. But who knows -- every situation is a little different, which is probably why the rules are left a bit open ended on this -- they leave it up to the DM to make such determinations.
This feels wrong to me although I get what you're saying. It's hard to imagine how something like a web spell hitting the party's camp wouldn't put the party on high alert in order to avoid a subsequent surprise. At the very least perhaps a DM could rule that their passive perception should have advantage or something?
This should come down to whether or not the web spell going off would fall under a category such as "automatically notice each other" or "notice a threat" for the purposes of becoming impossible to surprise. Or, do those clauses only apply to the "threat" created by the actual monster? So, something gets dropped into camp, everyone looks around on high alert but the monster stealth rolls were so high that we still can't find them. And now they surprise the party. I'm really not a fan of any interpretation like that, but it might be one way to run it.
In addition, the Web spell might be a bad example since it has a somatic component. So, not only is the effect likely to be noticed, but the casting of the spell is probably also noticeable. But to get back to your point -- suppose another spell is cast quietly and has an effect that is not obviously and immediately noticeable? Maybe in that situation it becomes more reasonable to allow for the possibility of subsequent surprise. So yeah, it sounds like more DM Rulings are required for whatever the specific situation is.
These are two drastically different solutions in terms of how they affect the outcome of the battle. I am actually extremely curious how people generally run this in terms of the overall question of:
--> Mechanically, what is actually gained from standing watch?
Should actively watching allow that character to make an active perception check with the chance to beat their own passive perception score? Or even perception with advantage? Should environmental factors such as lighting affect this perception check when specifically actively watching (and listening)? Under what circumstances should the character on watch be able to shout a warning to their sleeping party members (for example, can they not do this while surprised?) and what is the timing of the consequences of that as we simultaneously enter combat? Does "waking up" require an action? And so on.
Xanathar's has some optional guidelines that suggest a few thresholds of noise that can wake up a naturally sleeping creature. For example, as a rule of thumb, yelling out a warning is meant to automatically wake up nearby naturally sleeping creatures. But it's again largely up to the DM. Personally, I think that we should try pretty hard to not be harsh about this -- as you've mentioned, the side that was asleep is already entering this combat at a pretty big disadvantage.
This is totally optional as to whether or not a DM wants to impose any restrictions like this in their games. Similarly, the impact of having or lacking such things as bedrolls, tents, the ability to start a fire and so on are mechanically optional in general -- these are invitations for DMs to create homebrew systems that incorporate such things.
Xanathar's does suggest some optional guidelines with respect to sleeping in armor. This IS allowed under that system, but such a creature would be intentionally incurring some penalties to the benefits of their long rest for the privilege of sleeping with this extra protection.
I definitely agree with this.
Yes -- as I mentioned above, I'd love to hear a lot more thoughts from people on this. What is the mechanical advantage of setting a watch in your games? How exactly do you handle what happens when someone yells out a warning? (Allowed before combat? During combat?) and so on.
---------------------
Lastly, I want to draw attention to this step. Exactly how a DM executes this step is a bit inconsistent throughout the sourcebooks and might be open to DM interpretation depending on the situation.
For example, maybe a group who positions themselves ahead of time while out of sight and then remains still and lies in wait to make a coordinated attack as an ambush from a predetermined position should have a higher chance of success than a group that attempts to move silently through the woods in the dark while also remaining unseen during movement in an effort to sneak up on and surprise a group of creatures in their own homes or camps or lairs. The manner in which the DM rolls these stealth checks can influence this chance for success.
The way it's written here is pretty much in line with how it is stated in the Chapter 9 section on surprise, which says:
This seems to mean that every individual monster is supposed to roll their own stealth roll. However, the DM should be aware that once we get beyond very small groups, the mathematics of this approach dictate that the chances for success as a group quickly become unreasonably low for a lot of situations.
There's another possibility of how to do this presented in Chapter 7 -> Ability Checks -> Working Together -> Group Checks:
Upon careful reading, however, it doesn't seem like this quite applies to group stealth. The determination for Surprise is technically a Contest, whereas the concept of "success" on a check refers to the comparison to a set DC for that check. Similar, but technically different.
Some DMs might modify the above procedure slightly by asking everyone to roll for Stealth and then using the "average" or "median" roll to determine the group's stealth. This is technically a homebrew solution, but it might not be too unreasonable for certain situations.
There is also the concept of "passive Stealth" which I disagree with pretty strongly.
There is also the possibility of granting advantage on Stealth checks -- which obviously should be used very sparingly and only in very unusual situations which might cause this possibility.
Finally, there is another method that I cannot find support for within the source books, but is the recommended method mentioned in the original 5e Starter Set Adventure. This general rule of thumb would be for the DM to make one single stealth roll for an entire group of monsters of the same "type". I believe the idea is that if there happens to be a mixed group of different types of monsters trying to be stealthy together then a roll is made for each monster type within the group -- so like if a group has multiple Bugbears and multiple Goblins then the DM makes one roll for the Bugbears and one roll for the Goblins (two rolls total) and these determine this group's stealth. I've seen this method mentioned enough times that I feel like it must be written somewhere in the source books, but I can't find it.
In the starter set, there are these recommendations:
(Double standard)
and so on. There are several more examples which all work this way in this Adventure.
--------------------
So, anyway, there seems to be quite a bit of wiggle room given to the DM about how exactly he wants to run these types of situations.
There's a lot of replies since I posted. I'm just gonna reply to a few things. If I don't reply to something, just know it's because we seem largely in agreement here anyway.
You're technically correct, but only technically, and I don't trust any DM who runs it that way once they have any amount of experience as a DM. It's a beginner's folly if they're new, but feels like cheating once they're experienced.
Just calling this out as one of the best points in the thread.
Gonna be replying to your stuff a few times, just because your post is long.
For this, I just have a possible way to run it as a DM, no real argument to the statement. Initiative can be pre-rolled (either with or without the knowledge that the roll is initiative) and have players moving in initiative order ahead of combat, with the order falling into the same place when combat starts. Alternately, only have the players roll initiative the moment the ambush is supposed to happen. If their passives beat the Stealth of the opposing group, they see it ahead of time and nobody's surprised.
I was going to say, Subtle Spell Metamagic might be useful for something like this. That, like you said, is where the DM needs to make a call.
I would actually argue that the solution isn't homebrew, based on the following:
It feels to me like the actual solution is to do a group Stealth check and run successes/failures against each Passive, and the Stealth only succeeds against each creature that half or more succeed on.
And on the note of the adventure, I don't deal with premade adventures, no comment there.
Good comments. Just a couple more :)
1) As mentioned, I question that the wizard or anyone they managed to wake up has any reason to be surprised. Certainly, the wizard noticing an approaching enemy can't be surprised. Note that although a creature may not be aware of all the opponents, if they are aware of at least one then they aren't surprised.
2) I tend to start initiative for any encounter that might involve timing, a situation where I want to ensure every player gets an equal opportunity to take a turn, or when an action that might cause a fight to start might happen. In my opinion, initiative is for resolving turns and actions in order, and combat is only one of the situations when this is useful.
3) In cases of surprise where the party is unaware of anything going on and they are all effectively surprised, then I'll roll for initiative as usual but the first turn will occur with the action by whichever creature started the encounter. RAW, using the surprise rules, creatures with higher initiative will be able to use reactions but will not have a turn. There may be rare occasions where I might not allow reactions before the creature that starts the encounter takes their action but usually it isn't an issue.
In the example of the OP, any party members that are still asleep would certainly be surprised (unless they had the Alert feat ... which gives them a 6th sense for danger :) ). The wizard would not be surprised but the only creatures they are aware of would be the ones they have noticed. In addition, if these creatures have not taken an hostile action then the wizard will have to carefully decide what action to take since the wizard won't know whether the creatures sneaking up on the camp are actually hostile (though that would seem likely it may not be the case).
Anyway, in this case, I don't think the DM ran it correctly. It sounds like the DM wanted to have a surprise ambush on the camp while the characters were sleeping but the wizard noticed. At this point, the DM should let the situation play out naturally rather than trying to force some outcome by manipulating the rules since all it does is start an argument (unless the DM wasn't really aware of how they should run an encounter with a mix of surprised and not surprised characters - in which case it is a learning experience for everyone :) ).
So even in this scenario I guess we're supposed to run it such that a PC in camp must actually become aware of one of the monsters to avoid surprise? In other words, if and when the PC who is on watch shouts out a warning to the rest of the party -- this CAN wake up the other party members but it CANNOT cause other party members to avoid surprise? For whatever that's worth . . .
I guess I have always felt like the act of setting a watch should yield more benefits mechanically than it actually does. It really seems like in 5e it makes almost no difference if you set a watch. Like, THAT person has a chance to not be surprised . . . doesn't that feel a bit like it defeats the purpose? And yet, it seems like the majority of folks run it like this -- which admittedly does seem to be in accordance with the written rules. I just don't really like it for the flavor of the game.
How about this as a compromise? Typically a sleeping creature is considered to be unconscious and unaware of its surroundings. This means that their passive perception is effectively 0 for the purposes of "noticing hidden threats". If the creature on watch wins his perception contest and spots the stealthy enemies -- can he yell a warning to wake up his party AND the party instantly regains the use of perception and gets a chance to also spot the enemies before combat erupts? Does anyone do anything like this?
----------
Ok, next, let me expand on this question and see if anyone else has any thoughts on this:
4. Should environmental factors such as lighting affect this perception check when specifically actively watching (and listening)?
Ok, so, for example, the party puts out their campfire and goes to sleep in darkness. A PC with no special vision is on watch.
Rules for Vision and Light mention:
So, in this case, while keeping watch we are intentionally watching AND listening.
Do people interpret these above clauses to mean that dim light, for example, causes disadvantage on Perception checks that rely ONLY on sight? Or, on Perception checks that rely IN ANY WAY on sight? In other words, if we can hear perfectly but our vision is hindered -- and we make a Perception check that relies on sight AND hearing -- do we get disadvantage? How are people interpreting this?
Because automatically failing perception checks while on watch would be pretty bad!
This is similar to what I was trying to express. Someone Unconscious doesn't perceive their surroundings. In this instance, the only person who the Stealth has to beat is the one on watch. (There's edge case exceptions, such as a Warforged with their ability to remain alert but inert.)
Once they notice something and alert the party with a loud noise, the entire party is now using their Passive Perceptions automatically.
So in my instance, it's a two-step process. The guard matters, but with most of the party asleep, the Stealth has an easier time getting in.
In this instance, I take that into account. A person can hear a threat coming without seeing it. At that point, they're alerted to the presence, but the Unseen Attackers rule can still have an effect. Still gives a chance to alert the party, but may be at a disadvantage until the attackers show their position better.
As a note, they can still attack the area they heard the noise from, but they have disadvantage on attacks due to not seeing their target and just firing into an area.
I like all of those Rulings.
While we're at it, do you apply any additional rules for this situation if the sleeping party members are inside a tent or in their bedroll or both? Does it take longer to get up and out into the battlefield, even if it's just "difficult terrain" for the first step? Perhaps the tent is facing a certain direction and they have to exit in that direction before continuing movement? How about cover? If an enemy attacks "through" a tent, does the target get no cover, half cover, three-quarters cover or full cover? I assume they are an unseen target? Does the fabric of a tent create a barrier to the "clear path" for spells to be able to target creatures located inside the tent?
Also, how do you run this situation when the PC on watch IS surprised? Do the sleeping PCs automatically wake up when combat begins? When the first noisy hostile action is resolved? Do they stay asleep until the PC on guard duty gets a chance to yell a warning on his turn? (As an aside, I am confident that even if surprised the PC on guard duty CAN yell a warning on his first turn -- surprise restricts actions and movement, but not "other activity" such as flourishes, brief communication and an item interaction such as drawing a sword) Obviously I would assume that even if they wake up they are surprised on Round 1 (and only Round 1, regardless of when they wake up).
I'm down to give answers to that.
-I just consider them Prone.
-When using a battlemap, the direction of the tent matters for movement, but I'll typically just decide the direction they're approaching from randomly unless it's a group that's been stalking the party.
-Full cover, but I use the rules in the DMG for AC and HP of an item. Cloth is 11 AC, and I'd consider it resilient, given it has to stand up to weather, so 27 HP before it's destroyed and unusable.
-Definitely an unseen target, but that changes if they aren't using the Hide action while exiting the tent. The enemy will see them exit.
-The fabric blocks sight, but not a clear path for AoE or "known target" casting. An example of a spell that would still work this way would be Hypnotic Pattern. It just has to be in range, so if you know the general area (if the enemy isn't in Stealth, I rule they can generally figure the distance out based on sound) then it's still valid because the tent front is open.
Granted, some of these are just my own rulings, because the book doesn't cover every case in situations such as these. Hiding and Surprise are both poorly-fleshed-out mechanics in 5e.
Technically correct is sufficient for Rules As Written sadly. 😉
I should have been clearer though that delaying combat start is not how I'd personally run a situation like this, or advise someone to do so, I was just pointing out that the combat rules don't actually tells us when to start combat. Usually it's obvious, but there are definitely cases where we've got tools but not the guidelines/examples/advice we need. Always been a bit of a problem in the 5e rules, like with stealth/hiding, exploration and so-on.
Sure, but they're highly dependent on context.
I think in general I'd go with the "rolling to keep watch is rolling for surprise" option as my default because you don't usually want to reveal to players that you're rolling for surprise, and if the others are asleep it's fair that they don't get a chance to spot the enemies.
In that case the advantage of keeping watch is that you have someone able to spot enemies at all, and depending upon how you set up your camp and watcher(s), you can minimise the penalty of being surprised even if you don't fully avoid it triggering.
For example, if your watcher is by the fire in the middle of a camp setup inside a small forest clearing, then even if they roll well for keeping watch the enemy is probably right on top of the party (at the edge of the clearing), so the difference is only whether you're all surprised, or if the watcher(s) can at least do something to try to protect the others when they're vulnerable.
Alternatively, if your party is camped in the back of a reasonably deep cave, with the watcher at the cave mouth looking out across a mostly open expanse of hillside, then while the sleeping party members might still be surprised, it doesn't really matter because the enemies may be so far away when they're spotted that they can't do anything to capitalise upon that. In this case the benefit the watcher gets is extra time to get inside the cave, wake everyone and maybe even a turn or two to setup some surprises for their would be ambushers (who may not realise they were spotted if the watcher can avoid making it obvious they saw them).
Xanathar's Guide to Everything includes rules for some of these, and adds the emphasis that medium and heavy armour aren't something you should be comfortable sleeping in (you only recover a quarter of the hit dice and no levels of exhaustion).
But to clarify, my point was more intended to be that if the goal of the DM in this situation is to represent the danger of the party being caught ill prepared then these are some of the other options for adding to the threat, rather than trying to use surprise to do it, as players not getting to do anything generally sucks. The watcher not being surprised is still a benefit, and they may alert others in time to minimise the effect of surprise, but they party is still in a dangerous situation. I should have also mentioned that simply having the long rest interrupted is dangerous for the party as it means that characters who might have been running on fumes at the end of a hard adventuring day are in real trouble (low on hit-points, low on spell slots etc.), so even without optional rules this can be a challenging situation.
In terms of creating interesting/challenging situations for players to deal with, having them all be awake and at 100% fighting strength in a single round (or less) risks making an ambush feel pointless if the party are no worse off than if they'd met the enemy group in the open at an appointed time – as a DM you want encounters to feel varied and to challenge players in different ways, plus if you want things like wilderness exploration and survival to feel important then there needs to be downsides for doing it poorly or benefits to doing well (even if that's just a lack of downsides). But my general point really is that I prefer to impose other hardships on players to create challenge, rather than have them miss more turns at the start of a combat, as missed turns as turns where a player feels like they aren't getting to do anything. But it's all about context, the goals of the DM, how much preparation the players made vs. just having someone on watch and hoping for the best etc. etc.
Doesn't help that this is yet another area where the 5e rules have a woeful lack of guidance; even adventure modules that feature ambush encounters rarely tell you how you're actually intended to be run, they usually just tell you what the party could end up fighting and what the terrain is like. It'd be nice if we had more good examples of how we're expected to actually run half the rules in the game! 😂
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.
A DM can determine characters alseep or suddently awaken be possibly surprised with Perception auto-fail or disadvantage to it. One way or another they would be prone.
I'd usually try to bring the party up to fight automatically waking up to noise and shout or with a successful Perception if i judge noice distance has a chance of failure.
It is entirely possible for wizard to have two rounds of Actions before some of the PC's can act. It depends on the Init rolls.
Say the Wizard rolls a 19 on Init, while a player B who is sleeping, rolls a 17.
The process:
DM adjudicates who is Surprised (ALL the sleeping PC's).
Round 1 starts, Everyone rolls for Init, with rolls as above.
Wizard casts Web.
Player B's turn comes up, but due to the Surprised condition, can take no Action, AND was Incapacitated, due to being asleep.
Round 2 starts.
Wizard goes again, due to the 19 versus 17.
Player B then goes.
That is RAW. And frankly, if I was DM'ing, I would ensure that the PC's were Prone, not in Medium or heavier armour, and had only ONE Object Interaction in Round 2 and all subsequent rounds. Player B wants to pick up a quiver of Arrows and a Bow, or a Shield and Sword, that takes up Object Interactions in Rounds 2 and 3, assuming the PC is awakened and not webbed. Most DM's (and players) want to handwave that set of rules away.