D&D 5E Declarations that start combat vs. initiative

[Lyxen]

Climbing a wall takes time, and others thus have time to stop the climber if they want to. Throwing a dagger is immediate, and the odds of someone being able to stop that action are slim at best.

Not necessarily, climbing the wall could be just jumping and scambling up a 3 foot wall to escape an enraged beast. For me, the speed of the action is barely relevant (unless it takes a really long time not relevant to combat).

A wall can be difficult enough to climb that a DM is within her rights to declare it's an auto-fail. Throwing a dagger invokes a different set of rules - to wit, combat - wherein a DM does not have the right to declare an auto-fail without a roll but must instead at the very least allow a roll to hit...quite possibly against a surprised target, if the action was unexpected.

But there is a roll, it's called initiative, and it's called whenever someone declares an intention that triggers the fight, not when that action resolves.

And to the point of the thread: if the throwing of the dagger is the trigger that starts the combat and thus off which everything else is timed, the pouncing killer simply shouldn't be able to cover the distance before the dagger is away.

Which is why the trigger is NOT the throwing of the dagger, but the declaration of intention that a dagger should be thrown. And for me that's the right way of conducting things.

NPCs get the same break: the PCs would get a surprise roll to determine if they saw the dagger coming (in my game if you're surprised you don't have your active defenses up, which can make a big difference to your AC) but the dagger would still be thrown before anything else could happen.

Of course, it's symmetrical, but see above, my trigger is earlier than yours.

In the case of a player declaring an unexpected and sudden action such as whipping out a dagger and throwing it in an otherwise peaceful situation, I don't see a valid reason to not allow that action to happen and resolve.

You see no reason in your paradigm of the game, but this is not the way the game is described, and the way it's described is absolutely right for me, considering the genre that I've read/watched and my LARP approach to this. It's just a matter of preferences.

That being said, again, there are cases in which I would make a local ruling like yours, in particular if the action starting the fight has no reason to be observed by anyone. But then, the surprise rules (with a local ruling) would take care of that for me.

 

[Lyxen]

In my example the PC isn't even whipping out a dagger. I stated very specifically that it was already in hand.

And therefore, all the other people present, who are not idiots and are generally aware of danger where watching him particularly, so that when he started to raise his hand, the fighter 30 feat away jumped at him so quickly and suddenly, drawing his sword, that he hesitated until he was struck and killed, that's what you deserve for thinking yourself clever and sneaky.

After that, it's only, once more, your personal preferences and you telling other DMs that they are idiots for not saying how absurd a situation is. Stop it.

Edit: 5e is a rulings over rules edition that repeatedly tell the DM that the rules serve him, not the other way around. If there's a situation where something utterly absurd would happen if the rules are followed, then it's good DMing to override that. In this example, though, it's not even outside the rules for the DM to state that the thrower automatically wins initiative. It follows RAW exactly.

And me who was thinking naively that, in discussions of RAW, you ignore the rule 0 of "rulings over rules", otherwise it's pointless to discuss the rules which were actually written, as they can always be superseded. I'm pretty sure you wrote something of the kind to me about this in the past, but I'm too lazy to check. Anyway, good luck trying to explain to anyone that this is how you read the RAW with the reasoning above...

 

[Lanefan]

Yes, I have, the SYSTEM (the initiative roll) has shown that the PC has lost the initiative.

Which in this case is a flat-out flaw in the system, in that the PC in this case shouldn't be able to lose initiative...

So it is my DUTY as the DM to

...overrule the initiative rules and declare that the triggering action happens first.

side note: one way I've handled this in the past is to have the triggering action occur as if it's in its own little mini-round; after which initiative is rolled as normal. Yes this means there's a small chance the triggering character gets to act twice before anyone else does anything, but so what? Fortune favours the brave...

Again, I'm absolutely fine with it, but the ways I've seen it derailed is players STILL TRYING TO EXPLAIN WHY THEY SHOULD HAVE SUCCEEDED, which is basically what you are trying to do with your "but I had the dagger already in hand, why did I get jumped by that guy 30 feet away". And that is NOT an acceptable way to play collaboratively, if you attempt that, you will not even have the time to derail the discussion with player agency, you will be shown the door for derailing the game.

I've had this argument in the past as a player, and while I've not left a game over it I've never come away satisfied. But yes, I'd argue it all night long and if it disrupts the game the DM has no-one to blame but himself. My argument here wouldn't be that I should have succeeded, but that my triggering action should have happened before anything else whether successful or not.

My classic example comes from 3e when during a combat two characters wanted to move using some temporary fog for cover, holding hands so they wouldn't get separated; the higher initiative PC delayed to match the lower, but due to turn-based initiative that doesn't allow for simultaneous actions the DM said we couldn't do that and had to move separately, and of course we lost each other in the fog. The resulting argument went on for hours.

If the DM narrates or forces results that simply don't make sense in the fiction the DM can rightly expect to be called on it.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Thinking more about this, the only way I would implement anything other than rolling initiative as normal is with some kind of risk/reward mechanic. That is, the players (or the NPCs!) could attempt to get the drop on their opponents, but it would involve a risk of being strictly worse off than just rolling initiative normally.

But I do think the initiative system handles these situations just fine. If you win initiative it means you caught them off guard. If you don't win initiative it means your plan didn't work.

My opinion on this comes from the experience of seeing two things:
1) Players rushing into combat, both to try to get this advantage and to prevent the NPCs from doing the same
2) Dissatisfaction on the part of the players about the DMs arbitration of whether the surprise succeeds. (Which is what can happen when you ditch the rules, but don't have clear new rules to replace them.)

 

[Maxperson]

And me who was thinking naively that, in discussions of RAW, you ignore the rule 0 of "rulings over rules", otherwise it's pointless to discuss the rules which were actually written, as they can always be superseded. I'm pretty sure you wrote something of the kind to me about this in the past, but I'm too lazy to check. Anyway, good luck trying to explain to anyone that this is how you read the RAW with the reasoning above...

Once again proving that you don't really pay attention to what I say. I said, "In this example, though, it's not even outside the rules for the DM to state that the thrower automatically wins initiative. It follows RAW exactly."

 

[Bill Zebub]

One could throw that back at the player, I suppose. “So, Bob, you lost initiative. Care to explain how that happened?”

Yeah, that's exactly how I would handle it. I don't agree with @Maxperson's overall stance on this issue, but I do think there are ways to accomplish what you are describing without taking the strings of the marionette, as it were.

 

[Lyxen]

Once again proving that you don't really pay attention to what I say. I said, "In this example, though, it's not even outside the rules for the DM to state that the thrower automatically wins initiative. It follows RAW exactly."

Well, as you usual, I will ask you to prove that there is such a case in the RAW, and as usual, as it's not in there, you will fail.

 

[Dausuul]

After thinking on this for a while... my inclination is to give the instigator a partial turn, which allows one of the following:

1. Make one attack (without moving).
2. Move up to half your speed.
3. Cast a cantrip.
4. Interact with an object.
5. Perform an action which the enemy can't identify as threatening until complete. (Example: Casting with Subtle Spell.)

Then roll initiative and proceed normally.

It's be a house rule, obviously, but it avoids the weirdness of declaring an action which doesn't actually happen, while also not giving the party spellslinger a free turn to fireball. Unless they took Subtle Spell, in which case the ability to end negotiations with an unexpected boom is a perk of the metamagic.

 

[Lyxen]

Which in this case is a flat-out flaw in the system, in that the PC in this case shouldn't be able to lose initiative...

And yet, maybe other characters in the room where more alert, more prepared, more insightful, faster than you were, and they were watching you and you never noticed...

...overrule the initiative rules and declare that the triggering action happens first.

If it's what you feel is better for your table, please roll with it with my blessing.

side note: one way I've handled this in the past is to have the triggering action occur as if it's in its own little mini-round; after which initiative is rolled as normal. Yes this means there's a small chance the triggering character gets to act twice before anyone else does anything, but so what? Fortune favours the brave...

And that's another way to make a local ruling, why not if that works for you. But again, it's an edge case, 5e initiative works as written in most cases, and even that one would not be an edge case in most circumstances.

I've had this argument in the past as a player, and while I've not left a game over it I've never come away satisfied. But yes, I'd argue it all night long and if it disrupts the game the DM has no-one to blame but himself. My argument here wouldn't be that I should have succeeded, but that my triggering action should have happened before anything else whether successful or not.

Well, we are different players then, I trust my DM, he is always right during the game, I don't argue with him, and if something did not work I may address it with him AFTER the game. So many ways of playing...

My classic example comes from 3e when during a combat two characters wanted to move using some temporary fog for cover, holding hands so they wouldn't get separated; the higher initiative PC delayed to match the lower, but due to turn-based initiative that doesn't allow for simultaneous actions the DM said we couldn't do that and had to move separately, and of course we lost each other in the fog. The resulting argument went on for hours.

Ah, 3e and its players-centric induced rules-lawyering. What can I say, there have been idiots playing the game in every edition...

If the DM narrates or forces results that simply don't make sense in the fiction the DM can rightly expect to be called on it.

No, not "rightly", "respectfully", first because there might be a lot of things that players don't even know about happening in the background, second because the DM is not an idiot in general and he has good reasons for his rulings, thirdly because he is entitled by the rules (RAW and most table rules) to make any ruling he chooses and players agreed to abide by them, fourthly because it's simple politeness towards the DM and other players not to disrupt the game, and finally because if, after all that, this is not a life and death situation for the player and a little understanding, forgiveness, compassion, empathy has never really harmed a game.

 

[Maxperson]

Well, as you usual, I will ask you to prove that there is such a case in the RAW, and as usual, as it's not in there, you will fail.

Step 1: "The DM calls for an ability check when a character or monster attempts an action (other than an attack) that has a chance of failure. When the outcome is uncertain, the dice determine the results." - PHB page 174

Step 2: "When combat starts, every participant makes a Dexterity check to determine their place in the initiative order." - PHB page 189

Since initiative is an ability check and is not an attack, it falls under this rule. Since the outcome is not uncertain as it's impossible for the fighter to get to the dagger thrower before the throw happens, we don't have to concoct a ridiculous justification for how it's possible or have the DM roleplay the PC.

By RAW, the DM can(and in my opinion should) just tell the dagger thrower than he wins initiative and goes first without a roll. Then for the others, including the fighter, for whom the outcome is uncertain, a roll is called for.