D&D 5E Some slightly fiddly combat rules questions

[ad_hoc]

The problem with this is the guy that fired the crossbow 'Outside of combat' wins initiative he then shoots you again before you get a chance to act.

Just narrate to your players what it is that initiates combat then roll initiative and determine surprise and then resolve actions in turn order:

I am not sure what you are getting at. This is what I am advocating.

 

[Ovinomancer]

The assassinate ability triggers off of winning initiative.

If you allow them to win initiative automatically then yes you are overpowering them.

This is like saying that you are denying a spellcaster their spell if an enemy makes their saving throw.

No, it relies on surprising the target, then winning initiative, then rolling a hit. That's two successful opposed checks and an attack roll just to get their signature ability. I don't think skipping the initiative bit overpowers them much, especially in a game where the alert feat or a weapon of warning completely neuters their signature ability.

 

[corwyn77]

No, it relies on surprising the target, then winning initiative, then rolling a hit. That's two successful opposed checks and an attack roll just to get their signature ability. I don't think skipping the initiative bit overpowers them much, especially in a game where the alert feat or a weapon of warning completely neuters their signature ability.

Those are two different abilities with two different requirements, aren't they. I didn't think they needed to win init to get the auto-crit, just the Advantage on anyone who hasn't acted yet. When does someone stop being surprised? When they get their reaction? At the end of the first round? The PHB doesn't say.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

I don't think skipping the initiative bit overpowers them much, especially in a game where the alert feat or a weapon of warning completely neuters their signature ability.

If you allow attacks before initiative, then the following can occur.

Let's say an 8th level Assassin Rogue is stalking the party. She closes on them at night, where she can see the character on watch, silhouetted against the low fire. She is a skilled archer, with an excellent DEX score and the Sharshooter feat. From 300 feet away, she aims her light crossbow at the on-watch character and fires (at least +8 Attack Bonus, at advantage). If she hits, she does 2d8+8d6+5 damage (average 47). If that hasn't killed the on-watch character, she can slip away with repeated uses of Dash.

Not very fair on the players. Player, "Don't I get a roll?" GM, "No, because she fires first, before initiative."

Rolling initiative before any attacks are resolved gives the players a chance. Perhaps their character heard the twang of the bow. Perhaps they saw the incoming bolt. Perhaps they had a hunch or a feeling. Perhaps they just got lucky.

 

[FrogReaver]

Those are two different abilities with two different requirements, aren't they. I didn't think they needed to win init to get the auto-crit, just the Advantage on anyone who hasn't acted yet. When does someone stop being surprised? When they get their reaction? At the end of the first round? The PHB doesn't say.

They never do!!!!!!

 

[ad_hoc]

Those are two different abilities with two different requirements, aren't they. I didn't think they needed to win init to get the auto-crit, just the Advantage on anyone who hasn't acted yet. When does someone stop being surprised? When they get their reaction? At the end of the first round? The PHB doesn't say.

No, they are the same ability. Assassinate.

The PHB does say when they stop being affected by surprise. If you aren't suffering from a condition do you have that condition?

That is the only reasonable way to interpret it. Otherwise once you have been surprised in one combat you are just surprised indefinitely.

No, you stop being surprised when you stop being subject to the consequences of surprise. Which is after you take your first turn.

This is also congruent with the way assassinate is designed. You gain advantage if you win initiative. If that was all it did then people would be upset because you wouldn't get any benefit from being an unseen attacker. So it also gives you autocrit if the enemy is surprised. This covers many cases where you have surprised the opponents.

 

[FrogReaver]

No, they are the same ability. Assassinate.

The PHB does say when they stop being affected by surprise. If you aren't suffering from a condition do you have that condition?

That is the only reasonable way to interpret it. Otherwise once you have been surprised in one combat you are just surprised indefinitely.

No, you stop being surprised when you stop being subject to the consequences of surprise. Which is after you take your first turn.

This is also congruent with the way assassinate is designed. You gain advantage if you win initiative. If that was all it did then people would be upset because you wouldn't get any benefit from being an unseen attacker. So it also gives you autocrit if the enemy is surprised. This covers many cases where you have surprised the opponents.

The rules don't say but I think most would rule as you

 

[ad_hoc]

The rules don't say but I think most would rule as you

I mean, they do though.

If you are deafened and you can hear again, are you still deafened?
If you are blinded and you gain sight, are you still blinded?

Can you be deafened and hear?
Can you be blinded and see?

These are contradictions. You can't be surprised and also not subject to the consequences of surprise.

 

[FrogReaver]

I mean, they do though.

If you are deafened and you can hear again, are you still deafened?
If you are blinded and you gain sight, are you still blinded?

Can you be deafened and hear?
Can you be blinded and see?

These are contradictions. You can't be surprised and also not subject to the consequences of surprise.

No, that is you trying to make an inference about how it should work. That's also likely the reason most DM's will rule as you do as well. That doesn't mean it's in the PHB as a rule though.

 

[ad_hoc]

No, that is you trying to make an inference about how it should work. That's also likely the reason most DM's will rule as you do as well. That doesn't mean it's in the PHB as a rule though.

So you are saying that a creature could both see and be blinded at the same time?

These are the rules. They're clear cut.

You can't be one thing and not that thing. It is the law of identity.