Flat-Footed

[JamesonCourage]

The One Action To End All Surprises!

Speak
In general, speaking is a free action that you can perform even when it isn’t your turn. Speaking more than few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action.

I take an action! I am no longer flat-footed!

But all kidding aside, this is from the SRD:

Flat-Footed
At the start of a battle, before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order), you are flat-footed.

As far as I can tell, in between the person who acted before your first regular turn and your first turn, you are no longer flat-footed.

By choosing to delay, you take no action and then act normally on whatever initiative count you decide to act.

So, using the Delay Action is a no action:

The Combat Round
When a character’s turn comes up in the initiative sequence, that character performs his entire round’s worth of actions.

...

Not an Action
Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don’t take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else.

It doesn't look like "no actions" can be used before your first initiative count, as far as I can tell. To that end, I think you would cease to be flat-footed the moment before your first turn. You can then take a no action to Delay Action, but you may not do this before your turn (as "Not an Action" is a type of action, and actions must be done on your initiative).

In fact, If we look closely at the wording of "Not an Action" we won't find it saying that it is, in fact, not an action. It's only saying that it is not even considered a free action. It is still found, oddly enough, under "Action Types" in both the d20 SRD and the 3.5 PHB (page 138-139).

To that end, I think taking a "no action" is a type of action.

The only rebuttal I see possible is that the "you take no actions" wording in the Delay Action section is somehow different from "Not an Action." If that's the case, I'm not sure how else you would determine when you get to use it other than by initiative order (as it's a combat action, and initiative determines when you can make decisions).

As we noted earlier, you are flat-footed "before you have had a chance to act (specifically, before your first regular turn in the initiative order)" and that Delay Action lowers your initiative. The problem I see there is that you've had to reach your first initiative once in order to choose to delay, and you are no longer flat-footed moments before that first initiative count.

Anyways, just my thoughts on it. Not that this really matters that much to me, personally. As always, play what you like

 

[irdeggman]

Except that you can act and delay. For example, when my turn comes up in the initiative order, I can drop my longspear (free action), quick draw my longsword (free action), shout at my enemy,"Come and get me, craven coward!!" (free action) and delay. When I finally do act, my initiative is set at whatever count I act on for the rest of the combat, unless I take any other delay or ready actions.

You can't take free actions if you delay unless they specifically state that they can be done anytime (like speaking does), drop an item or quick draw do not say you can do them anytime - so you must do them on your turn in the initiative order (which by delaying has now changed).

Rules Compendium pg 43

"By choosing to delay, you take no action on your regular turn, then act normally on whatever initiaitive count you decide. You voluntarily change your initiative for the rest of the combat. You can specify this new initiative count, or you can just wait until a certain time and act then."

RC defines delay as a "no action" which is why you can perform it. Technically a 5 ft step is also a no action, so I guess you could take a 5 ft step and delay also (doesn't mean I would run it that way only that the rules seem to allow it).

 

[irdeggman]

I would use the Ready action and state your trigger so that John knows what he has to do to enable it. If John doesn't get the hint and do it, then you have my permisison to beat him with a wet noodle.

That is of course metagaming.

 

[irdeggman]

Why delay is not metagaming.

RC pg 43 (excerpts)

"Those who hesitate, win

Some say that battles are wn or lost on initiative, but that's not always true. SOmetimes it's best to keep your options open and choose your moment, rather than leting it choose you.

Delay is a cleric's best friend. Someone's going to get hurt badly this round, but you don't know who. Your attack options just aren't going to cut for this fight, and you know from past experience tht keeping the barbarian or wizard up and causing mass destruction is more efective than a smack or two from your mace, If you delay, you can be at a wounded or downed ally's side, cast a healing spell, and have him up and fighting again withour a wasted round between."

This is probably the most commonly used delay option in our games.

Others involve waiting to see how the battle field plays out in order to choose the correct spell.

Now maybe we have different meanings for what metagaming is.

I define it as using out of game knowledge for in game advantage.

 

[anest1s]

But if they read my interpretation of the rules...and they agreed with it...then you would be upset? Correct?

Maybe yes, maybe not...but I won't go back to edit everything I wrote so far and make it more biased.

That's a big deal if you're a rogue or a high dex character. Especially when the RAW say you lose your ENTIRE dex bonus...regardless of what it is. But if you have a Dex of 10, you get away scott free. Pray tell me how does that makes sense in terms of balance?

Well, John almost always will play last. Rob will almost always play first. John sucks against touch attacks, Rob against being flat footed.
So Rob should trie to hit the caster in his turn to save John, and John should help Rob to flank.

Dude, you're preaching to the choir. The problem is not with being FF...it's with the NO DEX BONUS. If it were just a flat tax...it wouldn't be so egregous to high dex characters who lose Init.

But again, statistically, you are least likely to be caught flat footed...so maybe that's why the game shrugged on the nastyness of no dex bonus...and subsequently being FF'd

I don't think anyone minds sucking because the dice said so...but sucking because the DM said so is wwaaaay different situation.

So wait...you think it's unfair to make you choose between being good at one or the other?

If I don't delay I won't be able to flank for sure...however I will have to risk some AoOs, and be kinda lucky to flank, even if I delay. Likewise I can still get hit many times when not flatfooted too.

So I don't really get something good if I accept something bad for my character. Instead I have to guess what hurts me less.

Grass is always greener on the other side, isn't it? I'm sure the fighter would LOVE Uncanny Dodge...which you can't get as a pure Fighter. Several dice of Sneak Attack damage would be pretty snazzy too.

Honestly, all the classes can't be balanced. It's not possible. What you hope for is that you each class has meaningful purpose.

That would justify houseruling ''all spellcasters are immortal in my world'' to you?

So saying, "I ready an action to flank anyone the fighter attacks within my 30' radius" is in voilation of someone's sense of decorum?

It hurts their sense of ''standard action''.

Not sure I understand the question?

What is that, that makes the Delay so different when used on the first round and when used on second or third round? I mean, if you say that it is unacceptable to not be flat footed, and thats a balance between Delay and Ready Action....and since Ready Action is the same no matter if it is first round or not...why the ''balance'' has to change after the first round?

Just out of raw curiosity, after your DM lets you delay your action....what is your Iniatitive in the next round? Do you still keep your 28 and get to decide if you want to Delay all over again?

You play after the guy you waited to play after.

I would use the Ready action and state your trigger so that John knows what he has to do to enable it. If John doesn't get the hint and do it, then you have my permisison to beat him with a wet noodle.

John thinks he shouldn't metagame and actually choses an other target on purpose. DM gives exp penalty for out of game comments. And Rob wouldn't ask for help in-game even if we was about to die. True story.

In the meantime, can you make TWF not suck in the hands of a pure Ranger?

Well actually there are many ways to do this. He should take combat reflexes,then draw his weapons while moving for a single attack. (The rapid shot ranger has to get bow out and throw an arrow)

He then hits with two weapons every time he can full attack, or he gets an AoO and a normal attack every time he can't full attack. Combat reflexes may even give more attacks.

And then he can have a flank party with the rogue, to counter the -2 for two weapon fighting...something that with a bow would have to take 2 feats to counter.

Poor ranged ranger has to run away when someone comes next to him though...and probably gets disarmed rather quickly.

Really, the ranger with TWF is a strange example to prove weakness...

 

[SolitonMan]

You can't take free actions if you delay unless they specifically state that they can be done anytime (like speaking does), drop an item or quick draw do not say you can do them anytime - so you must do them on your turn in the initiative order (which by delaying has now changed).

Rules Compendium pg 43

"By choosing to delay, you take no action on your regular turn, then act normally on whatever initiaitive count you decide. You voluntarily change your initiative for the rest of the combat. You can specify this new initiative count, or you can just wait until a certain time and act then."

RC defines delay as a "no action" which is why you can perform it. Technically a 5 ft step is also a no action, so I guess you could take a 5 ft step and delay also (doesn't mean I would run it that way only that the rules seem to allow it).

Whatever. My example is how we've played it since 2003.

 

[Arrowhawk]

As far as I can tell, in between the person who acted before your first regular turn and your first turn, you are no longer flat-footed.

It seems the point of confusion here is what it means to "voluntarily lower your initiative result." This is plain English and I'm at a loss why this is so obscure to people.

If the game wanted to talk about your character waiting round, they would have simply used plaing English to say something like, "Your character waits around to take an action."

Instead, the rule specifically talks about the the metagame...your initiative "result" (= what you rolled + modifiers was) and what you technically changed it to.

So, using the Delay Action is a no action

The rule says "you take no action." The rule does not say that a Delay is a "no action." Nor does the game define an action called "no action." The WotC is simply trying to tell people that some things that can happen don't fit into the "Action" category, so you don't need to account for them as an "Action" within the frame work of free, standarad, move, etc." Blinking your eyes is an action. But that does not register on the "Action" detector so the game says it's not considered an action...in terms of the game counter.

It doesn't look like "no actions" can be used before your first initiative count, as far as I can tell.

Technically, you're character is frozen in time (with the exception that you can face any direction you want and block an infinite number of attacks) until his/her Initiative. Guess what happens when you Delay? You substitute your original "result" for a lower "result." So you are still frozen in time until your Init comes up.

To that end, I think you would cease to be flat-footed the moment before your first turn.

That's right.

You can then take a no action to Delay Action, but you may not do this before your turn

That's not what the rule says. The rule specifically does not tell you when you can decide to "voluntarily lower your initiative result." Under the RAW, after everyone rolls Init, but before the first person takes any action, I can tell the DM to lower my Init to 1. I don't have to wait until it's my turn to make that declaration...because it's a metagame decision. Alternatively, I can wait until the right moment and tell the DM I want to act NOW. This can be a huge advantage. Thus, if you roll a high Init, you have options than if you roll a low Init.

(as "Not an Action" is a type of action, and actions must be done on your initiative).

I submit, you're misreading the text. "Not an action" is not a "type" of action. It's saying that some actions are not tracked within the context of Actions. It's like if the rules defined these things as Weapons...and has a heading called "Not a Weapon." Not a Weapon is not a category of weapons. It's category of things that are not weapons...in the context of the game.

To that end, I think taking a "no action" is a type of action.

You can...not act. Or you can take a Standard Action to prepare yourself to act later...or, you can "voluntarily lower your initative result" and gain the benefit of acting later in the round...but you can't take a "no action" action. You simply choose not to act ..and foregoe any action on your initiative. You would no longer be flat footed...and you would no longer be able to act until your next turn.

The only rebuttal I see possible is that the "you take no actions" wording in the Delay Action section is somehow different from "Not an Action."

Plain English for "teh" win!

If that's the case, I'm not sure how else you would determine when you get to use it other than by initiative order (as it's a combat action, and initiative determines when you can make decisions).

I don't follow. The RAW says you can make that determination at any point...if you don't elect to change your Init "result" then you have to act on your original roll. It's not that complicated.

The problem I see there is that you've had to reach your first initiative once in order to choose to delay

Show me where in the RAW is says you have to wait till your Init turn to choose to Delay? You have to wait until your Init to choose Ready...not Delay. What is true is that the last point at which you can choose to Delay is the original Init result.

Anyways, just my thoughts on it. Not that this really matters that much to me, personally. As always, play what you like

Ditto.

 

[Arrowhawk]

Why delay is not metagaming. ***

Now maybe we have different meanings for what metagaming is.

I define it as using out of game knowledge for in game advantage.

That's the gist of it, though the term is a little broader in application. Your hang up is a result of your not understanding what I'm referring to. Lowering your init "result" is the metagame decision in a Delay action. Acting on the information you gain from your metagame decision is not metagaming.

Hanging out and doing nothing to see what happens is not metagaming, assuming we ignore the plausability that the guy who acts last would have the perfect knowlege of the decisions and results of an infinfite number of combatants who went before him.

The Ready action is not metagaming. Going last and acting on the info you observe, because your Init "result" is the lowest, is not metagaming. If you go back an read what I typed, that should be evident to you. If you are predisposed to interpreting my statements in a way that you can argue against them....then I can see how it's easy to convince yourself that this is what I was saying.

 

[Arrowhawk]

I don't think anyone minds sucking because the dice said so...but sucking because the DM said so is wwaaaay different situation.

So if the DM says I have a rule whereby you roll the dice and if you get the lowest roll, you suck...that's okay? Because essentially that's what the No Dex rule says.

If I don't delay I won't be able to flank for sure

That's not true. The Ready action gives you the same option to flank...you just have identify the situation which triggers your flanking action.

So I don't really get something good if I accept something bad for my character. Instead I have to guess what hurts me less.

If you act first...you kill first and avoid retaliation. If you act last, you can die first...but you may be in a better position to retaliate. It's a trade off.

That would justify houseruling ''all spellcasters are immortal in my world'' to you?

First off, I'm talking about moderate imbalance, not cosmic. If spellcaster can't be killed, what would be the point of them playing with other adventurers. So your house rule has made all other characters obsolete. The other classes no longer serve a purpose. Gross imbalances in classes or in the rules can make other classes unnecessary. But in a PnP game, the adventures are supposed to be tailored to the party, so minor differences...like damage dealt by TWF first S&B...are minimized if even noticable. The problem arises in video games where stats are easily maintained and the majority of advancement comes from straight combat. In PnP, perfect, or even decent balance between classes is not mandatory. Purpose...is always mandatory.

It hurts their sense of ''standard action''.

Which is the WotC explicitly saying we're not going to give you something for free. If you want to take advantage of a tactical situation...while retaining your other beneifts, there's a cost.

What is that, that makes the Delay so different when used on the first round and when used on second or third round?

The FF rule. Because that is what you're complaining about. You don't want to be caught FF'd. But you want to be able to act last with a Full Actoin. In the first round, those two are mutually exclusive. Why wouldn't WotC want to preserve the impact of the FF rule in the first round? Leting high dex characters not only avoid being FF and simultaneously get the full benefit of acting last...was something they obviously didn't want to allow. Kind of like making Rangers lose 1d8 of hit points at first level...then charging them for TWF...forcing them to wear light armore to get benefits...and a host of other things they did to the class. It's their art. They think the game is better because of it.

I mean, if you say that it is unacceptable to not be flat footed, and thats a balance between Delay and Ready Action....and since Ready Action is the same no matter if it is first round or not...why the ''balance'' has to change after the first round?

So it seems odd that Delay only has this penatly of remaining FF in the first round because Ready doesn't suffer any additional penalty in the first round?

My response is that what Delay and Ready do are independent of each other. They operate on two different completely different mechanics, so if one suffers or seems to have variable benefits...it's not relevant to the other. Ready is an "in-game" action. Delay is "I want a lower Initiative result." The may allow the same tactical outcomes...but that is coincidental. Remember, the Ready action allows you to "interrupt" someone elses actions. a Ready can stop a spellcaster from casting. You can't do that with Delay. They are designed for two different goals...even though there is overlap in how they can be used.

If your'e asking why shouldn't Delay be the same benefit regardless....I don't have an answer. I still haven't seen an explanation why no Dex Bonus is better for the game the way it works now. I mean, the game could have said you roll for Init every round. The game could have said every round, you start FF because you don't know what's going to happen next. <shrug>

John thinks he shouldn't metagame and actually choses an other target on purpose.

John is probably metagaming all over the place and just being arbitrary about what metagaming is acceptable and what is not. Is it in-character for a Fighter in the party to not recognize the benefit of helping his teammate flank? Deciding not to metagame and specifically picking a target you can't flank as a result....is metagaming.

Really, the ranger with TWF is a strange example to prove weakness...

Except that every credible statistical analysis I have seen involving TWF in a pure ranger shows it's weaker than any other combat oriented option. You can certainly create extreme cases where it holds its one...but Feat for Feat...it's weaker than S&B and THF. So you stick Rangers with a Combat style that does weaker damage on average and lowers their AC by as much as half a dozen against traditional S&B. Wait...why were Rangers even given TWF to begin with? Is Legolas is more representative of the class than Aragorn? Whatever.

 

[Arrowhawk]

For those of you wanting to not be FF at all...here is the solution:

Immediate Action

An immediate action is very similar to a swift action, but can be performed at any time — even if it's not your turn.
​

So since everyone has an option to take an Immediate action...no one is ever FF because he "may" have acted. Problem solved Bob. Don't you just love rules in RPG's?