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

[Lyxen]

Well, yes. That's why I've been saying that this is all very circumstantial. In some circumstances it will be appropriate for me to invoke the Rules as Written to give automatically successful initiative to a PC or NPC, and in others(most others) it won't be appropriate.

Since it's what I've been saying from the start, I'm happy with this, my point being that in most circumstances it works perfectly as written and after that, in 5e spirit, there are local rulings or interpretations.

I noticed you didn't respond to the proof you asked me for and I provided in post #100.

No, I did not since it's honestly a very bizarre reading that aas usual leads o contradictions as someone else has already pointed out and frankly I did not feel up debating on that. But since you insist, I will go and trounce it soundly.

A table at the tavern talking with a trusted employer, though. That could work for what @Lanefan is saying.

It might, but then it's such a standard tavern brawl thing that it would not be surprising, it would be expected.

Yes and no. There has to be an act(not action) that starts the combat. A declaration by itself does nothing, because literally nothing has happened. A barbarian says he charges at the orcs. In the game the charge(movement and attack) hasn't happened yet, but in the fiction the barbarian has started to yell, lower his body and take the first step forward(the act). This starts the combat and initiative is rolled. A rogue declares that he is reaching for his dagger to throw at the courier that he just detected is a vampire. In the game the action hasn't happened yet, but in the fiction the rogue's hand is suddenly moving towards his dagger(the act) and initiative is rolled. That act starts the combat.

If you try to trigger combat only off of a declaration and not an act, then in the fiction that barbarian is still non-offensively standing around and the rogue is just talking to the courier. There's literally nothing to trigger a combat and initiative roll.

So acts start the combat, but the declared combat actions themselves haven't happened yet.

And I don't need to add anything to show that your interpretation does not work, since the act/action itself (throwing a dagger) cannot both start the combat and having not happened yet. You have contradicted yourself once more, proving that it's the intent of the action that starts the fight (and possibly the premises of it, like putting your hand on a weapon, reaching inside your jacket, etc. or just taking a more agressive stance), but that the actual act/action only happens during combat after initiative has been rolled and is therefore subject to that order.

 

[Dausuul]

Suppose you simply roll initiative at the start of any tense situation where people are anticipating combat?

On your turn, if you don't want to throw down yet, you ready an action for "someone attacks or casts a spell," and then carry on the conversation. Then, when an attack is made or a spell is cast, all those readied actions fire immediately afterward (since a readied action happens after the trigger). The book doesn't specify how to handle multiple readied actions on the same trigger, but the obvious solution is to resolve them in initiative order.

So you've got:

1. Instigator attacks or casts a spell.
2. Everyone except instigator gets a readied action, in initiative order, subject to the usual limits on readied actions. (In particular: You only get one attack, and a readied spell must be held using concentration.)
3. Instigator takes the rest of their turn, then initiative proceeds from the instigator as normal.

It's more complicated than I'd like, but it resolves the whole question neatly within the existing rules framework. This was what led me to the idea of giving the instigator a "partial turn"--it's an attempt to roughly mimic the above outcome, without having to go through an entire round of mini-actions.

 

[Bill Zebub]

I guess I really don’t understand why anybody thinks there are special cases not covered by the rules. If we are talking about somebody taking preparations (having a dagger ready to throw, hiding with a crossbow, Han Solo unholstering his blaster etc.) then you simply decide what opposed check to make. Even if it’s a Cleric who is supposed to performing a ceremony but wants to flame strike the wedding party, it might be deception vs insight or arcana. If the attacker succeeds they have a surprise round, but you still roll initiative. And, of course, the DM is free to declare auto success/failure (but given the stakes I personally wouldn’t in most cases.)

If no stealthy preparations have been made, then you also roll initiative, but there’s no surprise round.

Does anybody have a scenario that does not fall into one of these two categories?

 

[Lyxen]

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

Direct conclusion: initiative is uncertain, because when combat start, there needs to be an initiative check, as absolutely explicit in the order of combat section.

Since initiative is an ability check and is not an attack, it falls under this rule. Since the outcome is not uncertain

I'll stop you right there, as demonstrated above, the game implies that initiative is uncertain, despite all what you are trying to prove (which is once more not based on RAW but only on your personal perspective about what is possible or impossible, which the RAW does not care about, and neither do most of the people around here).

So, as announced, you have failed to prove your claim, and actually demonstrated exactly the opposite.

 

[Maxperson]

(Bolding mine). That is where you are going wrong, IMNSHO. He absolutely is allowed to start moving before you start throwing, and if he wins initiative, he probably did.

For what reason? If I haven't so much as moved my arm yet, there is no combat or initiative. Why's the jerk starting combat?

 

[Maxperson]

Direct conclusion: initiative is uncertain, because when combat start, there needs to be an initiative check, as absolutely explicit in the order of combat section.

Initiative is subject to ALL rules that deal with ability checks. That's why the Bard's jack of all trades, an ability dealing with skills, also applies to the initiative rolls. The rule I quoted makes it RAW to rule that an initiative roll is certain(failure or success).

I'll stop you right there, as demonstrated above, the game implies that initiative is uncertain

No. Don't stop me with your incorrect demonstrations. Initiative in combat is usually going to be uncertain, but by RAW it can be ruled certain as it is an ability check, and therefore any rule dealing with ability checks also applies to it without exception. Without an explicit exemption from the rule I quoted, you are not correct here.

, despite all what you are trying to prove (which is once more not based on RAW but only on your personal perspective about what is possible or impossible, which the RAW does not care about, and neither do most of the people around here).

The only one getting RAW wrong here is you. You want your ASSUMED implication to overrule a hard written rule that applies to all ability checks. That ain't happening.

 

[Lyxen]

Does anybody have a scenario that does not fall into one of these two categories?

From what I've seen, it all hinges about the edge cases when combattants are aware of each other and in plain sight (so the surprise rule does not really apply) but where a player thinks he can be clever and get some edge by starting the fight himself.

For reasons of "realism" or "player empowerment", some of us think that this edge should be recognized one way or another, and people have proposed a number of interpretations or house rules to cover that.

In particular, your proposal of using "deception" checks is an interesting one, that I certainly support for some cases, but according to the RAW is does not give you surprise. It's a good idea to play it that way and I've hinted at it previously, I think it's one of the possible tools for the more complex edge cases.

 

[Maxperson]

And I don't need to add anything to show that your interpretation does not work, since the act/action itself (throwing a dagger) cannot both start the combat and having not happened yet. You have contradicted yourself once more, proving that it's the intent of the action that starts the fight (and possibly the premises of it, like putting your hand on a weapon, reaching inside your jacket, etc. or just taking a more agressive stance), but that the actual act/action only happens during combat after initiative has been rolled and is therefore subject to that order.

Try re-reading what I said. The act(beginning to move) is not the same as the action. They are two different things, you are conflating them above and it's causing you to misunderstand what I said.

Moving the hand to the weapon is not the intent. It's the act. You have moved your arm and hand to the weapon and are there for acting. Intent is purely in the mind. I am thinking about moving my hand to the weapon. That's intent to do something. That's why in court intent is often very hard to prove. You may have the act of a car hitting another car, but if you want to prove assault with a deadly weapon, you have to prove that the intent in the drivers mind was to deliberately smash his car into the other.

 

[Lyxen]

Initiative is subject to ALL rules that deal with ability checks. That's why the Bard's jack of all trades, an ability dealing with skills, also applies to the initiative rolls. The rule I quoted makes it RAW to rule that an initiative roll is certain(failure or success).

You are reading this completely the wrong way, it's not the result of the roll which is certain, it the OUTCOME of the roll that has to be UNCERTAIN for an ability check.

No. Don't stop me with your incorrect demonstrations. Initiative in combat is usually going to be uncertain

No, the RAW expresses clearly that the outcome of the check IS uncertain, since it's an ability check.

but by RAW it can be ruled certain as it is an ability check, and therefore any rule dealing with ability checks also applies to it without exception. Without an explicit exemption from the rule I quoted, you are not correct here.

And the "exception" that you are looking for is in the combat rules: They MANDATE an initiative check, so there HAS TO BE A ROLL, therefore the outcome IS UNCERTAIN.

The only one getting RAW wrong here is you. You want your ASSUMED implication to overrule a hard written rule that applies to all ability checks. That ain't happening.

And you once again forgot that specific beats general, the SPECIFIC rule of combat that MANDATES an ability check IMPOSE UNCERTAINTY on the result.

That is the only possible reading of the RAW.

 

[Bacon Bits]

In most cases for us, whomever takes the first aggressive action takes their action, and then initiative is rolled.

Usually person who made the first aggressive action then skips their first turn in initiative order.