Am I Being a Jerk DM?

[D'karr]

Actually the DMG specifically calls this type of action out as totally available to the DM (See DMG pg. 38 Roll Initiative Section). Monsters can ready within their turn without shifting their order in the initiative. So two monsters with the same initiative number can move and ready to attack when they are flanking.

I wouldn't do this for mindless creatures as such, but creatures that would naturally understand tactics should use them.

 

[bganon]

If your players are surviving, it's not a dick move, and it's totally legal. I have minions do this all the time (but then, those are minions). I actually would even have wolves do this; real wolves are definitely smart enough to hold off an attack until their packmates surround the target.

To be fair, though, you might want to cut the PCs some slack when allowing them to develop their own strategies and use ready actions. It's harder for the players; they have to get each other to agree on what to do. Maybe let them work some tricks out in advance, and provide some combats for them to show off their stuff?

 

[keterys]

Why do people keep saying wolves wouldn't be smart enough to do it? It's practically the definition of how wolves fight.

Stupid skeletons? Sure, I'm with you.

Anyhow, it's a good idea to do it. It's a good idea for PCs to do it. Well, until folks then realize they can stuff actions like that by using their own powers to move out of the flank, prevent an enemy from approaching, shift away when one attacks or moves adjacent, etc.

 

[keterys]

It's also worth note that in most cases, it's not that one person is standing, twiddling thumbs, while the other moves up, then the other stands, twiddling thumbs, til his buddy moves into position...

They're both moving up at the same time, splitting up and making their target pay attention to both, but unable to keep both in sight.

The mechanics of how initiative work are just mechanics. Try to envision how it would actually play out in real time

 

[ahayford]

In my opinion, it all comes down to player expectations. If your players are expecting a tactically challenging game, with fights that come down to the wire and death is a common occurrence, then I'd say make it as brutal as possible. But if they are looking for a more story driven game, I'd say ease up a bit.

There is some difference of opion on this, but one thing that its easy for DM's to forget is that DnD isn't DM vs Players. If you catch yourself getting into that mindset, I'd step back and ask what it is everyone at the table hopes to get out of the game you are playing.

 

[Dausuul]

Why do people keep saying wolves wouldn't be smart enough to do it? It's practically the definition of how wolves fight.

Yeah, this. The whole strategy of a hunting wolf pack is to flank their prey and attack from all sides, each wolf striking when the prey turns away from it. Their tactics for doing this should be highly optimized--not because wolves are geniuses, but because they've spent millions of years of evolution refining the maneuver. (Or, depending on your cosmology, because it's what the gods made them to do.)

 

[Unwise]

In my games I strongly discourage regular holding of actions, I don't mind delaying intiative in the first round though. As such I would not do this, I don't want to have players thinking of delaying actions every turn. It just slows things down way too much.

I don't want people always waiting for the Scout to knock a guy prone, or the bard to debuff a guy before they attack. It just overly complicates everything and in fringe cases can be used to abuse the rules.

I do use the holding action rules, but ask people to only do it if it really fits the scene and is of vital importance.

I am all for using enemies as tactically as possible when appropriate, however not at the expense of alienating players who are not well versed in the system, or slowing the game down.

On a side note, I actually play wolves etc as better tactical combatants than most humans. A wolf pack just knows what to do and has done it a hundred times before. They are a bit hive-mind-ish. A bunch of humans however will often miscommunicate and get in each others way.

 

[Jhaelen]

To the OP: Of course you are!
However using that kind of tactics doesn't have anything to do with it

Keep in mind, once you demonstrate the tactic to your players they're (hopefully) going to learn it and use it against you.

This.
I wouldn't necessarily recommend to use it in every combat, since varying tactics depending on the kind of opponents the party is facing helps to emphasize the differences between otherwise similar encounters. Variety is fun!

 

[S'mon]

Actually the DMG specifically calls this type of action out as totally available to the DM (See DMG pg. 38 Roll Initiative Section). Monsters can ready within their turn without shifting their order in the initiative. So two monsters with the same initiative number can move and ready to attack when they are flanking.

I wouldn't do this for mindless creatures as such, but creatures that would naturally understand tactics should use them.

Yes, it's explicitly called out in the DMG as a valid option for DMs to do. IMO it should be standard practice for any coordinated pack hunters, certainly including wolf packs. I would tend to only not use it if I wanted to show that a monster group was mindless or poorly coordinated, eg a mob of human rabble as compared to a gang of thieves, or a mob of mindless zombies as compared to a ghoul pack.

 

[S'mon]

In my opinion, it all comes down to player expectations. If your players are expecting a tactically challenging game, with fights that come down to the wire and death is a common occurrence, then I'd say make it as brutal as possible. But if they are looking for a more story driven game, I'd say ease up a bit.

Much better to play the monsters realistically (ie, use tactics) but use lower ELs, IMO. The worst sort of encounter GMing I see is the GM who uses ridiculously over-powered encounters, but then nerfs them in play to avoid killing the PCs.

If your players are not radically optimised and don't want tough fights, use EL-1 or EL -2 to EL +1 encounters, in particular use mostly monsters lower level than the PCs, but still play the monsters mean. It's a lot more fun for everyone, and it makes for more satisfying battles.