• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D 5E Assassinate

...
If you're so sure of what the designers' intent behind Assassinate is, then why did they tie both of its benefits to the assassin acting with initiative?

They didn't. It is only your interpretation of the rule that ties Assassinate to initiative order, regardless of surprise. Clearly (to me) the intent was to give the Assassin an auto-crit if he has surprise OR higher initiative, not to tie it exclusively to initiative.

If there is no combat in an encounter, it is bloody well not a combat encounter. There are plenty of times when I've rolled initiative to see who went first when there was no threat, no weapons drawn, not even a dirty look. Initiative does not equal combat.

Your apparent enthusiasm for nerfing Assassinate with a sketchy reinterpretation of "RAW" is baseless.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Mearls has already agreed with Hriston's interpretation. The game designers intended for assassinate to not function if you lose initiative. They intended it to not function save for the first attack in the surprise round if you win initiative. Mearls ruling weakened Assassinate substantially. I would advise against taking the archetype over Arcane Trickster. Extremely limited abilities like Assassinate will not equal spell use. You're better off going with casting.
 

Mearls has already agreed with Hriston's interpretation.

Is there a tweet or email from Mearls on the subject?

I'm assuming most tables would have the assassin execute the attack on your step 3 ("You attack. Surprise occurs.") before initiative is even rolled, though I wouldn't allow a second Assassination attack if the attacker also won the subsequent initiative and was able to take another round of actions before the victim could respond.
 

You can use it every round of combat where an opponent has NOT YET TAKEN ANY ACTION in that combat.

So, you sneak in through the skylight and SURPRISE! Assassinate an enemy. Then, everyone rolls initiative. You beat everyone and go first. You can assassinate AGAIN!

Your team's Wizard goes right after you and casts Haste on you, giving you two actions on your next turn.

Right after the Wizard, your team's Bard goes, and casts Command on an enemy and commands him to HALT. The description of the "Halt" command specifies that the target "doesn't move and takes no actions," which means that when it comes back around to you again, you can ASSASSINATE HIM.

But after your Bard goes, it's your Warlock's turn, who casts Hold Monster on an enemy, which inflicts the Paralyzed and Incapacitated conditions on the target. Incapacitated specifies that the target "can take no actions or reactions," meaning when it's your turn, after you assassinate the guy your Bard Commanded, you can assassinate this guy too.

Every one of the attacks I described would have Advantage. But only the attacks made before the enemies roll initiative (ie are aware of the combat) is an auto-crit.
 

Paraxis Post #76 includes a link to a Mearls tweet confirming Hriston's interpretation of the rule. Only person that can change it after that officially is Crawford.

Assassinate is good for one attack if you win initiative. All parts of it. If you win initiative, you get one attack with advantage that is an auto-crit if it hits. If you lose initiative, no component of Assassinate works. You don't get advantage. You don't get auto-crit. It's an all or nothing ability that one lucky roll by the target or unlucky roll by you on initiative can cause to fail on top of missing on your attack.

The advantage against a person that hasn't taken their turn is mostly useless given you'll most likely have advantage due to Unseen Attacker rule in conjunction with Stealth.
 

Paraxis Post #76 includes a link to a Mearls tweet confirming Hriston's interpretation of the rule. Only person that can change it after that officially is Crawford.

Ah, missed that somehow. Thanks.

While I agree that there isn't a surprise round...

EDIT: Now that I've reread the Assassin ability, it's hard to argue with that interpretation in the context of general combat. The confusion and dissent, IMO, relates more to when you roll initiative, which could vary from table to table, and could even vary greatly at the same table depending on the context of the encounter. I don't call for an initiative roll from my players if they're unexpectedly attacked by unseen foes until after the first attack is resolved. Likewise, if they get the drop on some unsuspecting enemies, I don't roll initiative for the enemies until after the first attack is resolved by the players.
 
Last edited:


I much prefer how 3E handled surprise. 5E surprise makes little sense. I really hope Pathfinder puts out a new streamlined edition of their game at some point. Some of things in 5E are annoying such as their version of surprise not really being surprise unless you win initiative even though they don't know you're there...except somehow they do know you're there before you attack because they won initiative. Yet you get advantage for using stealth because Unseen Attacker, but not in the surprise round because they know you're there and shouldn't give you advantage. And the ridiculousness of this ruling and how it interacts with Stealth just continues on. This is definitely one of those things Mearls and company did not imagine very well and it disrupts a key class ability that is hard to use in a party environment to begin with.

The fiction this ruling encourages just makes my head hurt.

1. Roll Stealth.

2. Target fails to beat your stealth. He does not know you're there.

3. You attack. Surprise occurs.

4. You and target roll initiative. Target beats on you initiative.

5. Target takes his turn doing nothing but talking about the unseen person that surprised him that he still can't see, but he got to take a turn because that is what the RAW says.

6. Assassin shoots with advantage because Unseen Attacker from using Stealth. Or does he get this? I don't know. The target won initiative, so he must know you're there. But the RAW says unseen attacker from Stealthing. But he won initiative.

7. Target uses reaction to cast a spell if he's a caster, but do nothing if he isn't. Gets hit with advantage for sneak attack damage, but not crit. Sneak attack because rogue gained advantage because target was unaware of his location, but somehow avoided Assassinate because he already acted allowing him to avoid the worst of the blow, even though he didn't know he was there.

It's just ridiculous. It's like having your cake and eating it too. You get to know the Assassin was there if you win initiative, but the Assassin still gets advantage form you not knowing he is there, but you still get to act after your turn as though you know he is there. It's making my head hurt.

Not quite.

You certainly don't learn of a hidden character's location just because your turn has come up. Until that character has done something to reveal his or her position, or you have taken an action to search for that character (which you can't do on your turn if you are surprised), the character remains hidden. So, in your scenario above, as you outline it, the assassin would still have advantage, because the assassin is hidden. So sneak attack, but no auto-critical hit. That's all very clear in the RAW.

Now, as to the specific case of:

1. Assassin is perfectly hidden
2. Target is unaware
3. Allies of assassin are either far away or also perfectly hidden, waiting for the assassin to take a shot
4. Assassin fires at the target

Here, one of the core rules of 5e, common sense has to come into play. When everybody agrees that something should happen a certain way, that is how it should happen. Those are, in effect, the rules. In the situation above, the question is all about when does combat start.

I would say, combat starts, in this case, when the arrow hits the target. Until that point, there have been no hostile actions. So there is no initiative roll, because, until that arrow punched through the back of his neck, that target hasn't had any reason to do anything.

Now, once the target gets hit (and is surprised, so advantage, sneak attack, auto-crit), combat begins. Everybody rolls initiative. The target isn't surprised anymore (if he's still alive), because the attacking assassin has revealed him or herself before the upcoming combat round. Combat proceeds as normal, and the allies of the assassin can now take actions, in initiative order, along with everybody else.

Remember that, in general, a combat turn includes not just an attack impact, but some degree of movement leading up to that impact. On most cases that surprise comes up at my table, a lot of things happen during that first round of combat other than actual weapon impacts. Characters charge out of hiding. Swords are raised above the head (in order to be lowered onto unhappy victims). Information is exchanged. All of this can happen, but, if the targets were unaware before the start of combat, they can still be surprised. Usually, the party would sneak up to within 25 feet of their targets (or let their targets get within 25 feet of them), and then CHARGE! At this point, the targets know the party is there. But, they're still surprised, so they aren't able to take full actions. They're caught off guard. However, if they are sufficiently quick on their feet (luck and natural initiative bonus), they might be able to at least react before their flat-footed ambushers can act fully. Hence the initiative roll. (And yeah, the potential nerfing of a 3rd level power for the assassin that can be used every combat without any need to short rest, that yields 6d6 of damage, and scales as the assassin levels up.)

Now, all of that feels very complicated as I write it out, and maybe it is. The point is that I started with two things. The rules and common sense. I applied the rules and common sense to situations (at my table), and the above is what I came up with. You might come up with something different. So my ruling, and therefore my interpretation of the rules, is based on my base rule, whatever happens at the table has to make sense. The rules aren't there to override that. They are there to support that and provide consistency to that.
 

The advantage against a person that hasn't taken their turn is mostly useless given you'll most likely have advantage due to Unseen Attacker rule in conjunction with Stealth.

The advantage against a person who hasn't yet taken a turn is still useful for assassins attacking in melee. Both of the assassins I've seen dual wielded short swords. What "Assassinate" allowed them to do was jump into melee with an opponent and attack with their short sword. Even though they'd revealed their position and thereby lost advantage and sneak attack from being hidden, Assassinate granted advantage (and thereby sneak attack), so long as they beat their target's initiative. If their attack was successful, they would get that sweet 6d6 damage. If their first attack was unsuccessful, they could choose to use their bonus action and attack with their offhand weapon. Since the target still hadn't taken their turn, the target was still surprised, and still subject to all the sneak attacking auto-critical glory of Assassinate. (Obviously, there are a lot of risks involved in a rogue charging into combat and not using Cunning Action to get back out of combat, so Assassins could be a bit of a Boom and Splat kind of build. I wouldn't recommend dual-wielding assassins charge into rooms with more than one opponent. But against a lone sentry, it's a great way to guarantee a fatal blow and hopefully not raise an alarm.)
 

Mearls has already agreed with Hriston's interpretation. The game designers intended for assassinate to not function if you lose initiative. They intended it to not function save for the first attack in the surprise round if you win initiative. Mearls ruling weakened Assassinate substantially. I would advise against taking the archetype over Arcane Trickster. Extremely limited abilities like Assassinate will not equal spell use. You're better off going with casting.

Not at my table.

If you take away Assassinate, the Assassin is just a gimped rogue that can make poison instead of having to buy it, and is able to make disguises. Those disguises aren't worth much in combat, though, because even if your guard disguise gets you right up next to a guard, you've wasted your time if he rolls well for initiative. Never mind that combat literally begins with the assassin's strike and not a moment before--the guard "took a turn in combat" before combat began, so screw the assassin, right?

That's a load of manure. If it is what the designers intended (which I doubt,) it is stupid and makes the Assassin worthless, so it ain't the rule at my table.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top