D&D 5E Non-stealth surprise

[Caliban]

Because it reduces the game to meaninglessness.

[Removed example that has no resemblance to anything being discussed]

It may be fun, but it's not D&D.

So, you have no understanding of what "Occasionally" means then?

Because you seem to be under the impression that it means "Every single time, without exception".



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using EN World mobile app

 

[guachi]

Huh. It struck me as odd the number of responses that appear to me to redefine the guards' mental state from that posited by the OP. I didn't think he was asking about how we thought guards "ought" to act. I thought he was asking whether/how a particular game mechanic would apply to a situation he had already defined. I guess people read things differently. Interesting.

There is no redefining the guards' mental state. This is their mental state as defined by the OP - they do not suspect the party to be hostile.

Not suspecting you of being hostile doesn't mean they aren't on guard. It's right there in their job description. Being Guards who are neutral towards you would consider you a potential threat.

Therefore, they can't be surprised unless the guards have some other characteristic, like laziness or incompetence, that isn't mentioned. Though by leaving the party armed, or at least the barbarian, I'd not be surprised to if they were lazy and incompetent guards.

 

[Caliban]

Not suspecting you of being hostile doesn't mean they aren't on guard. It's right there in their job description. Being Guards who are neutral towards you would consider you a potential threat.

I think you are redefining what "neutral" means here.

Or at least, you are assigning a meaning to the word "neutral" that I wouldn't have considered.

And does being a Guard really mean you are on guard at all times, just because it's your job title?

Does being a Neutral Fighter mean I can't be surprised because I'm ready to fight at all times? (It's right there in the class description!)

How about a Wizard? They must ready to Wiz at all times, right?

In all seriousness though - you do have a good point about the party still being armed. Perhaps they hadn't reached the checkpoint where they would be relieved of their weapons yet, and that is why the barbarian chose that moment to attack. Or perhaps that's just wishful thinking on my part.

There's a lot of assumptions being made about the situation, on all sides of the discussion, because so much about it was left unstated.

 

[Satyrn]

Because it reduces the game to meaninglessness.

"I slaughter the army of orcs singlehanded."

Well, yeah, if you let the player resolve his own actions.

I'm talking about a DM - let's say the DM in the OP's situation - who responds to the barbarian's attempted suprise attack by saying "The bored guards are caught completely unaware. Your axe cleaves trough your target's skull, killing him outright. The others, shocked, reflexively draw their swords, too stunned for the moment to even shout a call for help."

I think making such a call would be fun - the barbarian's played gets exactly what he was after, and the characters are still in exactly the same predicament, storywise, had I instead called for initiative or turned to any other rule.

I'm never gonna reverse such a call so that a player is killed outright like that guard.

And I don't think the way I handle it makes it not-D&D, or even less-D&D.

 

[BoldItalic]

Well, yeah, if you let the player resolve his own actions.

I'm talking about a DM - let's say the DM in the OP's situation - who responds to the barbarian's attempted suprise attack by saying "The bored guards are caught completely unaware. Your axe cleaves trough your target's skull, killing him outright. The others, shocked, reflexively draw their swords, too stunned for the moment to even shout a call for help."

I think making such a call would be fun - the barbarian's played gets exactly what he was after, and the characters are still in exactly the same predicament, storywise, had I instead called for initiative or turned to any other rule.

I'm never gonna reverse such a call so that a player is killed outright like that guard.

And I don't think the way I handle it makes it not-D&D, or even less-D&D.

Okay, so you allow attack actions outside of combat, before initiative is rolled. Fair enough. Your table, your house rules. No problem.

 

[Yunru]

You mean you don't?
You can take every other action, even cast a spell, but not attack?

 

[Sunseeker]

How are you not seeing that as a meaningful distinction? Your barbarian rolls 15 for initiative. The surprised knight rolls 16 for initiative.

The surprised knight can now use his parry reaction on round one when he is surprised. He has his turn on initiative count 16 of round 1, can't take any actions or movement, and then his turn ends. Next goes the barbarian who attacks him on initiative count 15, and our knight parries his attack.

If the surprised Knight had rolled a 14 or less for initiative, he could not parry the barbarians attack on round one when he is surprised.

That assumes he's successful. First on that A: he rolls higher and B: the Barbarian hits and C: the NPC Knight successful parries.

If A is false then your whole argument goes out the window as it doesn't matter. If B is false then A doesn't matter because there's no need. If C is false then we just went through the whole situation for exactly nothing except to make the only player in the situation, the Barbarian, drag out his action and force the DM to go through a bunch of extra steps to arrive at the same conclusion.

I don't like doing extra work just because the rules say I should. I have enough work on my plate. It's IMO, faster, easier and more exciting to let the Barbarian have his lucky shot and the move on.

You are arbitrarily and for absolutely no reason depriving characters of their ability to take reactions.

Bolded and snipped because this is the only point that matters: I'm not depriving anyone except myself (since the Knight is an NPC and therefore under my control) of anything. So I'd appreciate it if you take the outrage down a notch because I'm not burning a player's sheet and it certainly isn't you at the table. So chill man.

And I mean it's not like you're saving any time because you're going to have everyone roll initiative after the attack anyway.

I'm saving time by not having to resolve potentially an entire party of turns before the Barbarian gets his surprise. There's not a 100% chance of a fight anyway.

I mean it's bad enough in this example that you would even let the barbarian attack with surprise. If I was escorting some NPC Prisoners out of a dungeon and you had them attack me with surprise, I would leave your game.

Great, bye! Works fine for me and the people I play with.

I mean I just sit there and get attacked while you grin at me over the dungeon master screen and there is not a thing I can do about it.

This happens sometimes. I've been on both sides of this. If you're going to walk 'cause 30 seconds of the game makes you unhappy, by all means, WALK. I haven't the time or patience for that sort of behavior.

But, we're not playing together, so seriously you should take how I DM my table less personally. Since you are not at my table and you are not playing with me, the idea that you would "walk from game" is frankly meaningless grandstanding.

 

[Satyrn]

Okay, so you allow attack actions outside of combat, before initiative is rolled. Fair enough. Your table, your house rules. No problem.

Well, this little stretch of conversation went nowhere.

 

[Caliban]

Well, this little stretch of conversation went nowhere.

He also doesn't seem to understand what "fun" means, in addition to "occasionally".

For some people D&D is a tactical combat game before anything else, and having things happen because they sound fun and/or make narrative sense is an alien concept.

 

[Sorcerers Apprentice]

The PHB only covers how surprise can happen if combatants are hiding at the start of combat, but it is easy to adapt the rules for that to also cover unexpected violence in social settings, simply by rolling deception vs insight instead of stealth vs perception.

As a DM, the rules are your tool, you decide how to use them in your game.

In the current situation, if the guards are on the ball they will always expect violence and so can't be surprised. If they have grown lax and simply view escorting the characters as a formality, then they are perhaps ripe for an unexpected axe to the neck. The DM decides!