D&D 5E Non-stealth surprise

[Caliban]

Who would want to decorate their church with statues that are indistinguishable from actual monsters?! They would be a pretty good deterrent against intruders since they would expect the statues to attack at any moment, though.

You know that the D&D gargoyle is based on the real-world church statues, and not the other way around, right?

In my game, the default assumption is that most people are not aware that gargoyles are actual creatures, they are just a common statue that decorate certain types of architecture - maybe for a mystical reason, maybe for tradition. (Maybe to act as camouflage for the real gargoyles they use as guardians.)

The default assumption in your game may be different. And of course, adventurer's are not "most people", but I don't assume they have special knowledge of uncommon monsters until they are higher level, or are playing a character that has a reason to know such things off-hand (monster hunter, wizard who studies rare monsters for use in alchemy or taxidermy, etc.)

[Edit] Just want to add, the situation in which you encounter the gargoyle would of course make a big difference. If you are on church grounds (and are not currently expecting danger) and there are gargoyle statues on all the eves, you probably wouldn't suspect anything and could easily be surprised.

Encountering an (apparent) gargoyle statue (or a statue of any kind) in a dungeon complex, evil cultist temple, or other dangerous area would merit suspicion whether or not you know about gargoyles as monsters.

 

[Satyrn]

Encountering an (apparent) gargoyle statue (or a statue of any kind) in a dungeon complex, evil cultist temple, or other dangerous area would merit suspicion whether or not you know about gargoyles as monsters.

"Heads up, guys. There's a basilisk nearby. Or a medusa."


Sat - "And maybe some of these ugly birdmen that haven't yet been turned to stone" - yrn.

 

[Flamestrike]

That assumes he's successful.

What? We'll never bloody know, because you use dont even let him check.

You deprive him of his class features and ability to defend himself totally arbitrarily.

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.

What extra rules are you talking about dude? The rules are:

1) Roll initiative D20+Dex
2) Resolve turns in initiative order. Surprised creatures do nothing.

If thats too much work for you, stop DMing immediately. Really mate, thats not hard or extra work. Its one more dice roll than you have at present (initiative) and it presents combats in a unified, cohesive manner for your players.

Someone declares a hostile action (DM or Player)? Then we now switch from narrative time to combat time, and that action is resolved in initiative order within a turn by turn based sequencing. Everybody: Roll initiative.

Its a better way of resolving it for a ton of reasons man. In addition to not arbitrarily depriving people of their possible reactions during round one when surprised, it also is consistent and provides a line of demarcation between narrative interaction and turn based combat.

Im all for tinkering with the rules. But if your only reason for tinkering with this one is 'I cant be bothered' then thats not really a good enough reason for mine.

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.

What do you have to resolve exactly mate? The other combatants are surprised. Their turns go like this:

Do nothing.

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.

If you're going to arbitrarily change the rules for (your only reason above) 'I dont have time to run the game according to the rules' then yeah, walking sounds good.

 

[Sunseeker]

What? We'll never bloody know, because you use dont even let him check.

You deprive him of his class features and ability to defend himself totally arbitrarily.

AGAIN the knight is an NPC. He has no class features. He has no ability to defend himself beyond what I give him.

You really need to stop acting like how I run my table is a personal slight against you. It's very tiresome.

 

[Flamestrike]

AGAIN the knight is an NPC. He has no class features. He has no ability to defend himself beyond what I give him.

What of one of the PCs wants to intervene to stop the Barbarian? And the 'Knights' I was referring to do have an ability to use reactions. Specifically they have the parry reaction.

And even if they are just generic mooks, they have attacks of opportunity as reactions. Everyone gets those. If our barbarian wanted to move past a NPC to get to his target, or attack one and then run away, whether our surprised mooks go first on round one or the barbarian does becomes extremely important.

And its also relevant for other things like certain class features and abilities (such as if any of the PCs have the assassinate ability or other things that only work when a creature is surprised). A creature is only surprised on round one before its initiative count comes around and it takes its first turn (even though it cant act on that turn).

I mean yeah, sure; if there is literally no reactions to worry about from either side (including attacks of opportunity), whether the NPC is surprised or not doesnt matter for any other reason like assasinate or similar features, and the barbarian is all but assured of killing the NPC in one attack meaning initiative wont need to be rolled after the attack in any event, and the combat wont be extending beyond a single round, then it makes sense not to roll initiative before the attack.

Of course in that case, why are you even rolling an attack? If you're only not rolling initiative because the prospect of combat breaking out after the surprise attack is next to zero, why even roll anything?

You really need to stop acting like how I run my table is a personal slight against you. It's very tiresome.

I'm just trying to throw some advice your way brother. If you want to run your games freeform with no dice at all go nuts.

Im just saying that you really should be rolling initiative before any combat actions are resolved. Its a pretty fundamental rule, that a lot of other rules, class features and abilities key off it, and its not exactly a complex or time consuming one either.

My second point wasn't directed at you personally. Its just I've had bad experiences with DMs screwing up surprise in 5E and would personally walk from a game where it happened again. Screwing it up is generally a sign of a DM who doesnt understand the rules, and I dont have room in my leisure time to waste it with those three kinds of games. I like my DMs being knowledgeable of the rules, and applying them evenly, consistently and fairly. I dont mind houserules, even extensive houserules, as long as I know what they are, and they exist for a reason I can get on board with.

 

[Caliban]

I'm just trying to throw some advice your way brother. If you want to run your games freeform with no dice at all go nuts.

Ah yes. Unsolicited, condescending advice - that is the best kind of advice!

 

[Flamestrike]

Ah yes. Unsolicited, condescending advice - that is the best kind of advice!

The condescending bit is probably due to a poor state of mind. Shattered both my heel bones the other day jumping off a 5' ledge.

In Rolemaster terms I downrolled 3 times, delivered myself a D Crush critical on the fumble chart, and rolled a 66 on the crit.

 

[Arial Black]

You can take every other action, even cast a spell, but not attack?

Yes, exactly.

Why?

Because combat in 5E is resolved in Combat Rounds in Initiative order.

Therefore, the only way an attack can take place outside of Combat Rounds/Initiative is if 'axing someone in the head' doesn't count as 'combat'!

And since it literally is 'combat', then it cannot take place outside of combat.

 

[Caliban]

Yes, exactly.

Why?

Because combat in 5E is resolved in Combat Rounds in Initiative order.

Therefore, the only way an attack can take place outside of Combat Rounds/Initiative is if 'axing someone in the head' doesn't count as 'combat'!

And since it literally is 'combat', then it cannot take place outside of combat.

I don't know, I think this is a still a DM call.

I let my players attack objects all the time without going into "Combat mode". They may be hacking apart a chain, breaking a door (with your weapon instead of a Str check), shooting a rope, etc.

On the other hand, I sometimes have them roll initiative even if combat isn't happening - usually because they are all trying to interact with the same object or something similar, and it's an expedient way to determine who does their thing first.

The DM could also decide that this particular NPC is a mook with no importance to the story and just say "Fine, you cut the guard down with a single stroke of your axe, but the other guards are attempting to raise the alarm. Roll initiative." If it's a situation where the DM knows the guards have no real chance against the PC's (especially if the barbarian is right next to the guard, so there is no need to move and possibly generate Opp Attacks), and if the guard has no reaction spells or abilities that trigger on an attack, why waste the time? Say it happens and move on to the real fight.

If you don't like doing it that way....then don't. It's a tool in the DM's bag, but nothing says you have to use it.

 

[Ancalagon]

Wow, guards sure do have a large support group in this thread.

Not all guards are hyper-vigilant and paranoid. Maybe a beloved King's personal guard are...but every day Joes on guard duty? Nah. It's just a job.

But it's not an every day occurrence is it? This isn't "oh look, it's Bob the egg-farmer here *again* to complain to the king about the church of the wailing shrieks spooking his chickens". This is a group of armed strangers that want to see their king.

The barbarian would have to do a deception vs insight check at the very least to hide his violent intentions...