D&D 5E When to Roll Initiative

[redrick]

We had a ton of issues with this in 5E -- more than any other edition, and I've been playing with at least a couple of these folks since 1E. Here's what I finally wrote up to add as much clarity as I could:

Much better stated than what I tried to say.

The only thing I would do differently is, if the triggering action is taken by a successfully hidden character (who remains hidden through til the completion of the action), it could constitute a full action. The main reason for this is to avoid giving an extra free attack at the beginning of combat. (eg Rogue snipes enemies. Combat begins. Initiative is rolled. Enemies are surprised. Rogue and allies all act again, but enemies cannot act on their turns.) No double-dipping on surprise.

 

[Water Bob]

... by which I mean when do you begin a combat encounter?

What works best for me, and the way I've always done it, is to throw initiative when the first aggressive action is made. The goal is to stay out of combat rounds for as long as possible. Keep the game in "scenes". Because, once you're in combat, playing the game slows exponentially. So, even if the words are heated, I keep characters in "scenes" until someone says something like, "I pull my sword and chop at him!" Or, "I let my knocked arrow fly!"

At that point, nish is rolled, scenes end, and combat begins.





I know that we're talking about 5E, but I want to mention how 3E "officially" did it, because it was such a big change from what I was used to (and I didn't think the 3E way worked at all). Many people ignored it, or didn't notice it, but in 3E, initiative was supposed to be thrown as soon as an enemy is perceived (usually seen). There's even an example in the DMG where the initiative count is kept through a closed door with orcs on the other side. In my game, I would wait further, until an actual attack was made. But, in 3E, if you read the rules, says to throw initiative when enemies are sighted. For me, this is wrong because it assumes every encounter will be a combat encounter. Players shouldn't have to fight every orc, every goblin. But, I guess that method served the wargaming-esque roots of 3E (encouraged to use miniatures and maps).

 

[Mercule]

Much better stated than what I tried to say.

The only thing I would do differently is, if the triggering action is taken by a successfully hidden character (who remains hidden through til the completion of the action), it could constitute a full action. The main reason for this is to avoid giving an extra free attack at the beginning of combat. (eg Rogue snipes enemies. Combat begins. Initiative is rolled. Enemies are surprised. Rogue and allies all act again, but enemies cannot act on their turns.) No double-dipping on surprise.

Keeping in mind that my target audience was my players, so it wasn't intended to be something that had to be perfect, here's my intent:

Absolutely, positively, never-ever can an attack occur outside of combat. If the monsters got that on the PCs, they'd scream bloody murder, and rightly so. In your example, the triggering action would be the rogue starting the attack -- it's not really an "action", but it's close enough for the intent. As soon as he decides to attack, initiative is rolled. If the enemies can't see him to know that an attack is imminent, then the PCs have surprise and the rogue's attack gets all the benefits of such. If none of the other PCs can see the rogue or have any way to know that he intended to attack at that point, I might rule that they were surprised, as well (I've had some groups where it wouldn't be out of the question for the rogue to do something to screw over the rest of the PCs). Really, though, I'd probably give the group the benefit of the doubt on having a signal set for starting combat so that everyone could just roll initiative and it made narrative sense (to an extent) that the fighter might actually beat the rogue to the punch (i.e. roll higher).

Now, something like quaffing a potion, casting a buff spell, etc. could certainly occur outside of combat, depending on circumstances. I might even let the PCs trigger a trap on their enemies outside of initiative, if it could conceivably be perceived as not suspicious enough to trigger combat stances -- the enemy would probably be on general guard enough to negate any chance for surprise during that "scene", though.

The "triggering event" for writing up that little blurb was when the PCs, who are generally stealthy except for the cleric, were trying to surprise a guard behind a door. The rogue had managed to sneak a peek into the room without breaking stealth, and closed the door again. Everyone gathered outside the door with great expectations. The cleric rolled a "1" on his stealth, but wasn't actually planning on doing anything on the first round, due to space constraints. The "1" was low enough that, even through a door, I felt compelled to say the guard had cause to be aware someone was out there. It could be argued that a solid door would have stopped the sound, but 2:00 AM in a monastery dormitory (PoA) is relatively quiet when a bodyguard is standing watch over their master, so I stand by that for purposes of organizing five PCs including multiple explanations to a cleric who just wasn't understanding "the plan". There were three separate, but important things that caused confusion:

First, many of the players kept wanting to apply the 3E concept of "flat footed", despite numerous clarifications that it doesn't exist in 5E. After the ensuing discussion, this is now crystal clear in everyone's mind.

Second, I didn't call for any stealth rolls until the PCs were in position and wanting to attack. This was my mistake. I should have called for the stealth rolls when they were moving into position. The "1" would have been obvious to everyone else. Even if I'd rolled for the PCs behind the screen, they would have at least been cognizant of the chance of alerting the guard. That stealth failure would have happened outside combat, and negated the opportunity for surprise. In this case, the guard would have held his post, rather than move to investigate, so no need to roll initiative (no engagement), but it could have been the "triggering event".

Third, the players thought they needed to hold initiative to wait on the rogue opening the door (thinking that the rogue opening it stealthily would be what gave them surprise). They were very, very concerned by the potential logical problem of an unsurprised guard winning initiative and having his own attack prepared for when they opened the door -- that just broke any suspension of disbelief. In my defense, that's not how I planned to handle initiative, but I didn't have anything resembling the formal notion of a "triggering event" to explain to them; it was conceptually there, but not full enough to avoid the chaos of the first two issues.

Anyway, the end result was a bit of thoughtful DM time and that blurb. There are an almost infinite number of permutations around how combat can start. That's probably why WotC punted on the whole thing in 5E. They should have given more of a framework, IMO. So far, I'm happy with my ruling. It's been in place for a little over a month (verbalized before being written), so we'll see when a curve ball happens.

 

[redrick]

Keeping in mind that my target audience was my players, so it wasn't intended to be something that had to be perfect, here's my intent:

Absolutely, positively, never-ever can an attack occur outside of combat. If the monsters got that on the PCs, they'd scream bloody murder, and rightly so. In your example, the triggering action would be the rogue starting the attack -- it's not really an "action", but it's close enough for the intent. As soon as he decides to attack, initiative is rolled. If the enemies can't see him to know that an attack is imminent, then the PCs have surprise and the rogue's attack gets all the benefits of such. If none of the other PCs can see the rogue or have any way to know that he intended to attack at that point, I might rule that they were surprised, as well (I've had some groups where it wouldn't be out of the question for the rogue to do something to screw over the rest of the PCs). Really, though, I'd probably give the group the benefit of the doubt on having a signal set for starting combat so that everyone could just roll initiative and it made narrative sense (to an extent) that the fighter might actually beat the rogue to the punch (i.e. roll higher).

Now, something like quaffing a potion, casting a buff spell, etc. could certainly occur outside of combat, depending on circumstances. I might even let the PCs trigger a trap on their enemies outside of initiative, if it could conceivably be perceived as not suspicious enough to trigger combat stances -- the enemy would probably be on general guard enough to negate any chance for surprise during that "scene", though.

The "triggering event" for writing up that little blurb was when the PCs, who are generally stealthy except for the cleric, were trying to surprise a guard behind a door. The rogue had managed to sneak a peek into the room without breaking stealth, and closed the door again. Everyone gathered outside the door with great expectations. The cleric rolled a "1" on his stealth, but wasn't actually planning on doing anything on the first round, due to space constraints. The "1" was low enough that, even through a door, I felt compelled to say the guard had cause to be aware someone was out there. It could be argued that a solid door would have stopped the sound, but 2:00 AM in a monastery dormitory (PoA) is relatively quiet when a bodyguard is standing watch over their master, so I stand by that for purposes of organizing five PCs including multiple explanations to a cleric who just wasn't understanding "the plan". There were three separate, but important things that caused confusion:

First, many of the players kept wanting to apply the 3E concept of "flat footed", despite numerous clarifications that it doesn't exist in 5E. After the ensuing discussion, this is now crystal clear in everyone's mind.

Second, I didn't call for any stealth rolls until the PCs were in position and wanting to attack. This was my mistake. I should have called for the stealth rolls when they were moving into position. The "1" would have been obvious to everyone else. Even if I'd rolled for the PCs behind the screen, they would have at least been cognizant of the chance of alerting the guard. That stealth failure would have happened outside combat, and negated the opportunity for surprise. In this case, the guard would have held his post, rather than move to investigate, so no need to roll initiative (no engagement), but it could have been the "triggering event".

Third, the players thought they needed to hold initiative to wait on the rogue opening the door (thinking that the rogue opening it stealthily would be what gave them surprise). They were very, very concerned by the potential logical problem of an unsurprised guard winning initiative and having his own attack prepared for when they opened the door -- that just broke any suspension of disbelief. In my defense, that's not how I planned to handle initiative, but I didn't have anything resembling the formal notion of a "triggering event" to explain to them; it was conceptually there, but not full enough to avoid the chaos of the first two issues.

Anyway, the end result was a bit of thoughtful DM time and that blurb. There are an almost infinite number of permutations around how combat can start. That's probably why WotC punted on the whole thing in 5E. They should have given more of a framework, IMO. So far, I'm happy with my ruling. It's been in place for a little over a month (verbalized before being written), so we'll see when a curve ball happens.

Yep, makes sense to me.

If your party, in that situation, had decided to kick down the door (instead of open it stealthily), that would be an example of an Action that becomes a triggering event for combat. ie, party forms up stealthily aside the door. At a hand signal, the fighter kicks down the door, and the rest of the party storms in. The door coming down would be the first thing to happen in this combat, and then the rest of the actions would proceed in initiative order. Though the fighter didn't roll initiative to kick down the door, it would still constitute his action for the turn. (Though he could still charge in, or action surge, or use a bonus action to take second wind, or whatever. I'd have him do that on his normal initiative, I guess.) If the party had been successfully stealthy in lining up behind the door, the bodyguard would still probably be surprised.

One of my 5e groups loved playing SWAT team. The downside is, when you do alert the guys on the other side that you're coming, the first thing through that door might be a whole bunch of arrows. And you might end up getting in a lot of fights that you could have easily avoided.

 

[Mercule]

Yep, makes sense to me.

If your party, in that situation, had decided to kick down the door (instead of open it stealthily), that would be an example of an Action that becomes a triggering event for combat. ie, party forms up stealthily aside the door. At a hand signal, the fighter kicks down the door, and the rest of the party storms in. The door coming down would be the first thing to happen in this combat, and then the rest of the actions would proceed in initiative order. Though the fighter didn't roll initiative to kick down the door, it would still constitute his action for the turn. (Though he could still charge in, or action surge, or use a bonus action to take second wind, or whatever. I'd have him do that on his normal initiative, I guess.) If the party had been successfully stealthy in lining up behind the door, the bodyguard would still probably be surprised.

One of my 5e groups loved playing SWAT team. The downside is, when you do alert the guys on the other side that you're coming, the first thing through that door might be a whole bunch of arrows. And you might end up getting in a lot of fights that you could have easily avoided.

I don't have a problem with your ruling, but it does differ from mine. Equally explicit to "attacks only occur inside combat" is that the triggering event is always outside combat/before initiative is rolled. No one has to hold their action for the Fighter nor does he get an automatic 20 (30, just to ensure he goes before very dexterous foes?).

Kicking in the door is before combat begins. Well, the first attempt to do so -- he still needs to make a strength check, rather than the rogue making the stealth check (I actually didn't make the rogue roll stealth for the door). That means that the fighter could, conceivably, roll the highest initiative and charge right through the door and the ogre on the other side. That's incredibly dramatic and cool, but not unbalanced (IMO).

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

Third, the players thought they needed to hold initiative to wait on the rogue opening the door (thinking that the rogue opening it stealthily would be what gave them surprise). They were very, very concerned by the potential logical problem of an unsurprised guard winning initiative and having his own attack prepared for when they opened the door -- that just broke any suspension of disbelief. In my defense, that's not how I planned to handle initiative, but I didn't have anything resembling the formal notion of a "triggering event" to explain to them; it was conceptually there, but not full enough to avoid the chaos of the first two issues.

My take on this would be to remind the players that you can open a door as part of your turn during a combat round. In reality, when a SWAT team wants to take down a bad guy by surprise, they don't open doors stealthily, they open them suddenly, and that's good enough. (BTW "surprise" in this case includes not just 5E "surprise" but also things like the bad guys not having ready access to their weapons, not wearing armor, etc.) Opening a door "stealthily" is necessary only when you want to enter a room without beginning immediate combat.

 

[Lanefan]

Rulings are better than rules, and role playing is better than roll playing. The most important thing is to be consistent and fair so everyone has a good time, and that means that the mechanics of the game need to makes sense to the DM. The most important "RAW" is that the rules aren't in charge of the game, DM is.

This.

I use initiative (or an equivalent) any time I need to resolve the timing of a sequence of independent events. Combat is of course the most common, but it also comes into play if the party is split (a very common occurrence) and I need to know who gets where or does what first; or if things are happening that the party is unaware of and I need to know how far they've progressed by the time the party arrives, if ever.

I also reroll combat initiative every round as I despise with a passion any sort of lock-step turn sequence in what should be a chaotic and unpredictable situation - the "fog of war".

Lan-"in the FoG since 1981"-efan

 

[Mercule]

My take on this would be to remind the players that you can open a door as part of your turn during a combat round. In reality, when a SWAT team wants to take down a bad guy by surprise, they don't open doors stealthily, they open them suddenly, and that's good enough. (BTW "surprise" in this case includes not just 5E "surprise" but also things like the bad guys not having ready access to their weapons, not wearing armor, etc.) Opening a door "stealthily" is necessary only when you want to enter a room without beginning immediate combat.

It depends on your resources. If your group looks more like three snipers, a heavily armored medic, and whatever the modern equivalent of a duelist is, it might actually work better to pick the lock and push it open. The intent was to unleash some serious wizardry into the room and they didn't have a battering ram.

These guys are mostly elves and halflings, man. I'd say they were planning appropriately.

 

[redrick]

I don't have a problem with your ruling, but it does differ from mine. Equally explicit to "attacks only occur inside combat" is that the triggering event is always outside combat/before initiative is rolled. No one has to hold their action for the Fighter nor does he get an automatic 20 (30, just to ensure he goes before very dexterous foes?).

Kicking in the door is before combat begins. Well, the first attempt to do so -- he still needs to make a strength check, rather than the rogue making the stealth check (I actually didn't make the rogue roll stealth for the door). That means that the fighter could, conceivably, roll the highest initiative and charge right through the door and the ogre on the other side. That's incredibly dramatic and cool, but not unbalanced (IMO).

The distinction is mainly an issue of surprise. As I rule it, surprise, in game terms, is all about what is happening during the first round of combat. If a character is aware of you before combat begins, they aren't surprised (eg they can act on their turn). (Though, depending on what they were doing, they might have other issues beyond being able to take actions.) So characters can kick down the door, give a second for the dust to clear, and then all charge in (including the kicker), but that same moment of adjustment would allow the enemy combatant to regain some sense of composure and act normally. (Albeit maybe acting normally means standing up and buckling on a shield.) Or one character can kick down the door while the other characters stream in, keeping the element of surprise. The door-kick action happens first, because it is the trigger. Nobody is trying to "beat" the door guy. But, since all the other actions are happening immediately afterwards, he can't take an action on that turn.

We also declare actions and re-roll initiative every round, so it's basically just an issue of not asking the door-kicker to roll initiative because there's no question of when his action would take place in the sequence. On the other hand, if he wanted to continue moving through the door after he smashed it down, I might ask him to roll initiative and resolve the remainder of his turn in initiative order. (Especially if somebody in the room was not surprised, as the door-kicker's ability to rush into the room and set up a block could change some outcomes. But it also might matter for opportunity attacks — if the door-kicker is trying to sprint past some mooks in front of the door to get to a juicy wizard in the back, those mooks deserve a chance to make their initiative, regain their reaction, and make an opportunity attack.)

Anyway, obviously, just how I do it. It all feels very internally consistent to me, which is, I think, what matters. Your way makes plenty of sense too. It's all just about what kind of personal logic you extrapolate to resolve corner cases.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

It depends on your resources. If your group looks more like three snipers, a heavily armored medic, and whatever the modern equivalent of a duelist is, it might actually work better to pick the lock and push it open. The intent was to unleash some serious wizardry into the room and they didn't have a battering ram.

These guys are mostly elves and halflings, man. I'd say they were planning appropriately.

So was it "stealthily opening" the door that was the problem, or "stealthily bypassing the lock"? I had the impression you were talking about an unlocked door, and they had to roll against Stealth to see how quietly they could open it. From your paragraph above though it sounds like the real problem may have been getting past the lock, requiring either a Thieves Tools roll or knocking the door down. In either case that's no longer something you can do in a single Use An Item interaction, so doing it stealthily makes more sense than if it were an unlocked door--because you are trying to delay combat until the lock is picked/bypassed.