That can't happen because surprised creatures can't move or take actions. The initiative order does determine how quickly they can react, however.
D&D 5E When to Roll Initiative
That can't happen because surprised creatures can't move or take actions. The initiative order does determine how quickly they can react, however.
Hriston
Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
Right, and I'm not saying that anyone who plays 1E differently is doing it "wrong", but I don't see how someone can read the passage you quoted from the DMG and think the intent was for the surprise roll to determine awareness. A lack of awareness is clearly being presented as a prerequisite to the roll. EGG straight up says that perception of a threat makes surprise impossible, but if one side is unaware of the other, then they might be surprised. The roll determines whether the sudden appearance of something that they were formerly unaware of catches them off-guard sufficiently for them to be considered surprised compared to their opponents, so it's a different definition of surprise than we're working with in 5E.
I've never played 3rd or 4th either. Taking a quick look at the SRD v3.5 tells me that in 3E, you are surprised when you begin combat unaware of your opponents, so in that way it's the same as 5E. The main difference is that the consequence is invariable and not tied to initiative. There is a Surprise Round in which surprised creatures do not roll initiative, and can do nothing. This "round", however, is not a full round. The unsurprised participants can either move or act by taking either a "standard action" or a "move action", but not both, and they cannot take any "full-round" actions which would be necessary to make more than a single attack. So while not mitigated by an initiative roll, surprise in 3.5E isn't nearly as punitive as giving the surprising party a full round of actions.
Hriston
Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
Okay, to be honest the third possibility of might be aware hadn't occurred to me due to the way Gygax lists certain factors as inevitably leading to the negation of surprise, i.e. making one side aware of the other. Apart from magical detection, he mentions noise and light as giving away the presence of a party, rendering a surprise roll for the monster, or vice versa, unnecessary. The implication seems to be that if the party, or the monster, is not trying to be stealthy, then there is no need to determine surprise, because the parties are assumed to be otherwise aware of each other. In this case the surprise roll is very much like the 5E determination of surprise, using Stealth v. Perception. The difference is that the surprise roll has nothing to do with anyone's skill at sneaking. Thieves, for example, as far as I know, don't have the ability to directly affect a surprise roll, I assume because we're talking about entire sides being surprised. Rangers and elves, however, are less likely to be surprised, and rangers in particular translate that ability to the rest of the group. So, just working through this, it seems like the surprise roll is more like a Perception check that both sides are making against a fixed DC, rather than anyone rolling for Stealth. The DM's decision, then, seems to be between certainty that a side was already aware of another (no roll) and uncertainty whether they were aware or unaware (surprise roll). I can see how that's the same as the roll in fact determining whether one side is aware of the other in spite of the other side's attempt to be stealthy, but at the same time it suggests to me that awareness is binary. Either you are aware or it is uncertain is pretty much the same as you are aware or you are unaware. If the surprise roll is determining level of awareness out of uncertainty it seems strange that it is determining how unaware, and that it would be expressed as a higher or lower degree of unreadiness, i.e. a shorter or longer period of surprise. Another thing to consider is the effect of the Dexterity Reaction bonus or penalty.
This is where I had a problem with your blanket statement that all potentially hostile encounters begin with a surprise roll, because this would seem to fall under Gygax's calling out noise as a factor that would negate the possibility of surprise. Of course, this is also the same in 5E; if no one is trying to be stealthy, no one will be surprised.
Point taken.
I see your point, but in that case part of the function of an initiative roll after surprise has been determined should be seen as the equivalent of the ability of the Dexterity Reaction modifier to mitigate surprise.
I'm not sure how this can happen since surprised creatures are unable to move or act until the end of their turn, at which point although they can take reactions, any other activity must wait until the next round. The similarity of this mechanic to the function of the Dexterity bonus is striking, however. What's unclear from the 1E DMG to my mind is what happens when, for example, a character is surprised for two segments according to the surprise roll, but has a Dexterity Reaction bonus (let's say +3) that offsets the surprise segments. Is that character then able to act during the surprise round, or are her opponents simply unable to attack her? From the text it seems unclear except that obviously her side still loses initiative.
Just out of curiosity, what kind of issues do you see with 1E initiative? Is it side initiative, breaking up multiple attack routines, or something else? It seems pretty straight forward to me, but I'm interested to know why you wouldn't recommend it.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
I'm not a fan of what you call 'side initiative' and far prefer everyone involved to have their own and flat-out insist on it being rerolled each round. Breaking up multi-attack routines is excellent.
But, when you take all the assorted variables into account - whether one is casting, shooting, meleeing or doing something else; whether one has one action/attack or multi; spells using a 10-segment round and everything else using 6 segments; weapon speed modifiers; dexterity adjustments, etc. etc. - it gets messy in a hurry.
I don't have it handy but I've seen a document someone put together explaining all the intricacies of 1e initiative. It's 18 pages long...which in my view is about 17 pages longer than we really need.
I long ago went to a very rudimentary simplified initiative system using unmodified d6 rolls; it's served me very well.
Lan-"one thing 1e initiative should be commended for, however, is that it allows things to happen simultaneously; which 3e and 4e (and 5e I think) do not"-efan
Actually 1e had an obsession with breaking ties too. I don't know why. I allow ties to stand and resolve those effects simultaneously. That simplifies the system greatly and makes weapon speed factors practically pointless.
Tyranthraxus
Explorer
When do I use initiative? Not till combat starts. I like interaction to flow freely and Ill go round the table.. sometimes starting on the persion to my left or the right when its a tense situation and see what everyone wants to do. I often run a 7 player table so I find it the best way to not bog down the game with init rounds until combat starts. Combat could start by a character failing a 'interaction' roll or simply by attacking the npc.
I think it also comes down to the situation too. I find players are less likely to want to start combat when they out outnumbered.
I think it also comes down to the situation too. I find players are less likely to want to start combat when they out outnumbered.
I used to do this, back in my AD&D days, but I learned, especially with 3E, that it doesn't work well because of movement (in my opinion, of course!). A PC fires an arrow at a pickpocket, who is 30 feet away. Then the Pickpocket goes, running his fullest, moving 120 feet. Next round, the Pickpocket rolls initiative first, moves another 120 feet, for a total of 240, before the PC can loose another arrow. That's kinda crazy.
Plus, taking the die roll out (one die roll for every PC and NPC is A LOT) really speeds up combat.
I roll initiative once for each person, as written in the rules, and the game gets this "swing" to it--this rhythm that really flows.
FormerlyHemlock
Hero
You usually don't need to roll that die every round. I have players roll initiative to determine e.g. if the bad guys hits you before you Disengage, or if you heal Bob up to 1 HP before the ghouls crit and kill him. In a normal round though, only action declarations and resolutions matter, and initiative is not rolled.
Hriston
Dungeon Master of Middle-earth
Yeah, side initiative seems like it would be kinda swingy. I've never tried it myself. I guess it's a holdover from the wargame roots.
I'm planning on trying out rolling initiative each round to mix things up. It sounds fun.
My house rule for Action Surge is the second action happens at initiative minus 10 in imitation of the 17th level thief ability. It hasn't come up yet though because the fighter I'm DMing is still level 1.
Yeah, I just noticed that ranged attacks add a dex bonus to initiative while melee does not. It looks like it could get pretty messy. It's funny that Gygax warned against moving away from side initiative, considering all the other complications he built into the system. I haven't been able to find the six segment round, though. Presumably the other four segments are for resolving actions (like casting spells) that were started on the first six initiative counts?
Unless the tie is between weapon attacks, in which case speed factor decides it. But, yeah, I like to have things resolve simultaneously if possible. 5E breaks ties by DM fiat, or random d20 roll.
Similar Threads
