About initiative

[Jacen]

I think you forget why people use doors (except for keeping out the cold): They want to keep unwanted visitors away.

I think that you are thinking about the lock. ;-) Well that is my opinion. Door are there to give some protection from weather, keeping unwanted accidental eyes out, muffle the sounds, give some privace etc. Lock on the door is to control who uses the door. But like I said - my opinion only. Door without a lock only invites NPCs in. Locked doors invites the PC by challenging then by being locked. Besided lock means that there are something worth of protecting.

So the unwanted visitors (in the following called PCs) need to be careful or change tactics to get through the door without any disadvantages that were carefully intended and expected by the builders of the door.

True. That is the reason for the open lock skill.

 

[KarinsDad]

There are problems on your theory too. Let's think that there is that door and PCs have heard noices that speak goblin. OK, so the buff themselfs and then start the combat. NPCs doesn't know about PCs. As a surprise round the first opens the door. Well, tries because it was locked. Thief tries to pic it as his surprise std action and fails. So the don't get into the room. NPCs didn't notice a thing so they are still unaware of the PCs. Acording the rule the combat is now going because the surprise round is over. So now what? Roll for initiative because the surprise round is over? So now PCs have lost all possibilites to surprise the enemy even though they still don't know about PCs. And if NPC roll high for initiative they even aren't flatfooted anymore. Even they still don't know that they are in combat.

First off, picking a lock is a full round action and cannot be done with a Standard Action within a Surprise round.

This is what I am talking about. Following the rules, not making new ones up. You are viewing this from a plausibility POV, not a rules POV. This is a rules forum. Let's discuss the rules, not what you think the rules should allow.

Second, you are mixing apples and oranges here. We were discussing opening the door pre-combat with the examples I gave. Your "problem set" here is discussing opening the door as part of a surprise round (as per what the DM adjudicated for the OP's first post).

This problem that you are talking about does not exist in the examples I gave because the door was opened in that example before combat started and hence, none of these problems you mention here are pertinent to that. All of these actions are pre-combat as well.

One topic at a time please. If you want to go back to the other discussion, fine. But the post of mine that you were responding to did not have these problems you are mentioning.

This is another reason why I am having difficulties communicating with you. You are not discussing the rules and then are bouncing back and forth outside the discussion that we are making at the moment. Please try to stay on track and please try to discuss the rules and how they apply to what you would do, not just what you would do.

Again you are putting word to my mouth. Like I tried to tell it depends about the door and how it is opened. If PCs know that there are NPCs inside and try to surprise them then by default they open door fast to surprise thoes inside. If they try to sneak in then checks. Sneaking is not the surprise. Surprise is what they do after the sneak. If they manage to sneak...

I am not putting words in your mouth. I gave the two examples. You agreed. If the door is opened pre-combat with your POV, the enemies are automatically surprised. That is what the second example stated. That is what you agreed to.

Are you stating that you no longer agree to that? If so, what are you saying and how does what you are saying apply to the rules in the pre-combat open the door scenario?

And I don't understand how you can start combat without the enemy.

Because the DMG says so. It might not make sense to you, but that is the rule.

If one side is aware of the other, the DM can allow that side to initiate combat (based on how the DM wants to handle it). It does NOT state that the side aware of the other has to see them (other rules might require sight such as Line of Sight rules, but that has nothing to do with whether combat starts).

You are adding sight as a requirement for the start of combat as a house rule, but that is not the rule in the DMG. The rule is awareness to start combat, not sight.

This appears to be the crux of our disagreement. The DMG states awareness, but you are requiring sight.

What is the DC to notice the combat started?

First, NPCs do not roll checks to notice if a combat starts. They roll checks to notice the PCs. One does not make rolls to notice metagaming concepts. Again, this goes back to the rules discussion. You seem to mix character concepts with metagaming concepts back and forth in your statements which makes it difficult to follow what you write.

Second, the DC to notice the PCs is whatever the DM states it is. If the PCs open the door and are standing there, the DM might state a DC 10 Spot roll for all of the creatures in the room to be looking in the direction of the door at that particular moment.

Or, the DM might state that it is a DC 15 Spot roll. Or, the DM might state that they are all playing dice and it is a DC 20 Spot roll except for the one NPC facing the direction of the door who gets a DC 15 Spot check.

It does not matter what the DM decides. It's just up to the DM to decide.


And, the DM might also decide that even though the NPC sees the PCs, the NPC might still not take a standard action in the surprise round. The NPC might be confused as to why strangers are standing there and might not immediately think combat. That is a motivation of the NPC decided upon by the DM.

Just because an NPC makes a Spot or Listen check and the DM even rolls initiative for the NPC in the Surprise round does not mean that the NPC will do something. If the NPC rolls an early initiative, it might delay or it might do a non-combat action (like moving). It might not actually think it is in combat. If it rolls a late initiative and a PC attacks an ally, it might instead think combat.

But, that creature is not surprised if it made the DC check.

If the door opens as planned then it is automatic. That was the plan. That is the tactical advantage they were looking for. To open the door so that enemy inside is surprised.

This is the rules point you are missing. No action by the PCs give automatic surprise. Please point out in the rules (not the examples) where automatic surprise occurs. It doesn't.

If the action changes the environment and the NPCs can notice that change, they have a chance to not be surprised.

This is not something the PCs automatically get (regardless of that one bad example in the DMG that does not follow rules).

But it does follow the rules. Door opens and combat starts. Did they know about the PCs before that? If no then it is surprise. PC decided to try a surprise -> opening the door faster than normal.

This is not the rule. The rule is not awareness before combat. The rule is awareness at the start of combat.

This is your mistake. You think the rule is awareness pre-combat and not awareness at start of combat. The start of combat is when initiative dice are rolled.

At the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check.

SURPRISE
When a combat starts, if you are not aware of your opponents and they are aware of you, you’re surprised.

When the DM states "roll initiative" is when combat officially starts.

If the door opens pre-combat, combat has not yet started.

If the door opens as part of the surprise round (if the DM states that this is allowable), then the one side IS totally surprised. This scenario allows the problems you stated above and you as DM might not allow it in your game because of that, but the rules do not disallow it. The rules allow the DM to have one side that is aware of the other to initiate combat. That is a DM decision, but regardless of some DMs not doing that, it is allowed by the rules because the rules state awareness, not sight.

So in you POV lone PC can't get any benefit from surprising the enemy? Openig the door must be the surprise round action. Only way a lone PC can get any benefit is that he opens the dor normaly and hopes that anyone didn't notice. Or start the combat and open the door as a surprise. Then situation is the same than without the surprise. Only that after the surprisee round unaware attendants roll for initiative. So because the surprise you didn't get any benefits only some "punishment". So what is the point of surprise then? To lose tactical advantade?

You hit the nail on the head here. This is the rules.

A lone PC can at best open the door pre-combat and hope nobody notices him.

That is the rules. If he opens it as part of his surprise round (with DM permission post-combat started in the surprise round), the only other advantages he gets are that he can take a 5' step into the room, he can perform free actions, and he can perform one swift or immediate action. In this case, he does get some slight advantages over the NPCs because they were surprised. But, he does not get an additional standard action over the standard action he used as a move action to open the door.

Yup. That's the rules. You not liking the fact that the PC does not gain more of an advantage does not change the rules.

If the PC was out in the woods hiding, saw the NPCs and they did not see him, he could fire his bow (if he had it ready) and get an attack in. In this case, he does not have to open a door, hence, he does not lose his action opening the door (using a post-combat started scenario).

If you hear someone behind the door you almost except the door being opened. If you don't exept it to open that will surprise you. Give me a rule that tells that combat starts when the players want it to start.

Nope. DM decides when combats start. DM decides which of these two scenarios he wants to use (open door pre-combat, or open door in surprise round).

The "open the door during the surprise round" option is a DM option. The DM of the OP chose that option. It is a valid option per the rules. If you do not like it, you as DM do not have to use it. But, it is a legal rules option.

In my POV it follows the rules IMHO. The main difference in our POVs is that what triggeres the combat.

No. We can use the same trigger (opening the door in a pre-combat scenario).

The difference in our POVs is that as per the DMG, I give the NPCs a check to see if they notice that action (or ANY action they can see or hear pre-combat) whereas you automatically have them surprised if they did not notice the PCs before the door was opened.

The act of opening the door does not give them a Listen or Spot check in your scenario whereas it does in the DMG and my scenario.

When you decide that is it possible for either side to become aware of the other, use Spot checks, Listen checks, sight ranges and so on to determine which of the above cases comes into play. Although it's good to give characters some chance to detect a coming encounter, ultimately it's you who decides when the first round begins and where each side is when it does.

This is the pertinent quote from the DMG. Note: actual rules quote, not what I want the DMG to state.


What does this mean? It means the DM decides when combat occurs.

Let's take the three scenarios we have:

1) The DM decides that combat occurs before the PCs open the door and their action of opening the door is a surprise round action:

Surprise Round:

PC 1 delays
PC 2 opens door
PC 1 steps in and attacks

This is legal. The DM decided that one side was aware of the other and a surprise round started.


2) The DM decides that combat occurs after the PCs open the door with my interpretation.

As per the rule I quoted here, it is pre-combat. It is possible for the NPCs to become aware of the PCs, hence, they get checks to notice the PCs.

This is legal. The DM decided is was possible for both sides to be aware of each other if checks are made by the previously unaware side (as per sentence one in the quote above) and a surprise round started if some of the NPCs failed the check, otherwise, there is no surprise round and normal combat starts.


3) The DM decides that combat occurs after the PCs open the door with your interpretation.

As per the rule I quoted here, it is pre-combat. It is possible for the NPCs to become aware of the PCs.

However, as DM, you are ignoring the first sentence of this quote and going with the second sentence of this quote. You are stating that you are NOT going to give the NPCs a chance to detect an incoming encounter, even though the DMG suggests that you do so.

This too is legal. According to this text from the DMG, you are allowed to screw over the NPCs and not give them a check if that is what you want to do as DM.

However, I think my interpretation is more RAW because it does not ignore the first sentence and it uses the suggestion in the second sentence. Yours does not.

Your POV is legal, it just ignores what is written in the DMG and effectively uses rule zero to do what the DM wants to occur.

 

[Jacen]

Hmmm... I still think that you are putting some words to my mouth. Giving them a meaning that I didn't mean and are not wanting to understand some things I have wroten. So I think that this is not getting us anywhere, but let's try one more time.

First off, picking a lock is a full round action and cannot be done with a Standard Action within a Surprise round.

Splitting the hair. My point was that it can be that your surprise round "fails". Door doesn't open and NPCs still aren't aware of PC even it is time for them to roll initiative. So you just awoided the main point.

This is what I am talking about. Following the rules, not making new ones up. You are viewing this from a plausibility POV, not a rules POV. This is a rules forum. Let's discuss the rules, not what you think the rules should allow.

No I am not.

Second, you are mixing apples and oranges here. We were discussing opening the door pre-combat with the examples I gave. Your "problem set" here is discussing opening the door as part of a surprise round (as per what the DM adjudicated for the OP's first post).

Yes. That is problem how you were doing that. By RAW I don't see the problem how I would do that. By RAW how you would do it is correct too, but it has some BIG problems too.

One topic at a time please. If you want to go back to the other discussion, fine. But the post of mine that you were responding to did not have these problems you are mentioning.

No it didn't, but the way you would do that would have those broblems. Mine wouldn't. And the thing I talked was part of the original topic of discussion. So I was more getting back to the original discussion.

This is another reason why I am having difficulties communicating with you. You are not discussing the rules and then are bouncing back and forth outside the discussion that we are making at the moment. Please try to stay on track and please try to discuss the rules and how they apply to what you would do, not just what you would do.

I was thinking that I was speaking about rules and how to use them.

I am not putting words in your mouth. I gave the two examples. You agreed.

Yes, but I didn't agree how you aplied them little bit differently afterwards.

If the door is opened pre-combat with your POV, the enemies are automatically surprised. That is what the second example stated. That is what you agreed to.

Unless they hear that spellcasting or armor noises etc before the they open the door. If they are unaware when they open the door they are surprised.

Are you stating that you no longer agree to that? If so, what are you saying and how does what you are saying apply to the rules in the pre-combat open the door scenario?

It applies just RAW. Opening the door starts the combat. Those inside didn't know PCs and were surprised. How that is not RAW?

Because the DMG says so. It might not make sense to you, but that is the rule.

How my doing is not RAW?

If one side is aware of the other, the DM can allow that side to initiate combat (based on how the DM wants to handle it).

And I am not alowing it to start, because it can lead to situation where there is combat and no enemies.

You are adding sight as a requirement for the start of combat as a house rule, but that is not the rule in the DMG. The rule is awareness to start combat, not sight.

NPCs doesn't need to see them. The door is kicked in and the combat starts then. They can't attack or cast attac or area effect spells through the door. So the combat doesn't start.

This appears to be the crux of our disagreement. The DMG states awareness, but you are requiring sight.

sight was the easiest thing to say. They open the door and see the enemy if it is not invinsible. Anyway it is the first situation they can attack it. And now it is time for the surprise.

First, NPCs do not roll checks to notice if a combat starts. They roll checks to notice the PCs. One does not make rolls to notice metagaming concepts. Again, this goes back to the rules discussion. You seem to mix character concepts with metagaming concepts back and forth in your statements which makes it difficult to follow what you write.

Well the NPCs notice to door kicked. So there is not anything more to notice. It is a combat then. I know that I have a mind with twist to sarcasm and that is really hard art.

Second, the DC to notice the PCs is whatever the DM states it is. If the PCs open the door and are standing there, the DM might state a DC 10 Spot roll for all of the creatures in the room to be looking in the direction of the door at that particular moment.

Yes. They get the spot check, unless the PCs have stated that they surprise those inside. Then no save.

And, the DM might also decide that even though the NPC sees the PCs, the NPC might still not take a standard action in the surprise round. The NPC might be confused as to why strangers are standing there and might not immediately think combat. That is a motivation of the NPC decided upon by the DM.

Well, surprise. You just told what the surprise is.

Just because an NPC makes a Spot or Listen check and the DM even rolls initiative for the NPC in the Surprise round does not mean that the NPC will do something. If the NPC rolls an early initiative, it might delay or it might do a non-combat action (like moving). It might not actually think it is in combat. If it rolls a late initiative and a PC attacks an ally, it might instead think combat.

Yes, but what does that to do what I said before? If you said that I jump to other things out of the one under discussion - you are doing that now.

But, that creature is not surprised if it made the DC check.

Yes if it managed it listen check.

This is the rules point you are missing. No action by the PCs give automatic surprise. Please point out in the rules (not the examples) where automatic surprise occurs. It doesn't.

It isn't automatic. There are DCs for the NPCs to beat and avoid the surprise - before the door is opened.

If the action changes the environment and the NPCs can notice that change, they have a chance to not be surprised.

Sigh. You are not getting my point. Or you just don't want to.

This is not something the PCs automatically get (regardless of that one bad example in the DMG that does not follow rules).

So because example is bad in your mind it makes that invalid? Not to mind that it is not corrected or pointed wrong in official FAQs and erratas? After all that is an example in official rule book.

The rule is not awareness before combat. The rule is awareness at the start of combat.

This is your mistake. You think the rule is awareness pre-combat and not awareness at start of combat. The start of combat is when initiative dice are rolled.

And rules state that surprise round happens before surprised rolls for initiative. Splitting the hairs I have to admit.

If the door opens pre-combat, combat has not yet started.

Opening the door is roll for initiative if PCs have stated we surprise those inside.

If the door opens as part of the surprise round (if the DM states that this is allowable), then the one side IS totally surprised. This scenario allows the problems you stated above and you as DM might not allow it in your game because of that, but the rules do not disallow it. The rules allow the DM to have one side that is aware of the other to initiate combat. That is a DM decision, but regardless of some DMs not doing that, it is allowed by the rules because the rules state awareness, not sight.

And RAW doesn't say that it can't be done the way I would.

You hit the nail on the head here. This is the rules.

A lone PC can at best open the door pre-combat and hope nobody notices him.

And that punishes him. But What says that he can't kick the door in and surprise those inside? As far I don't know anything from rules preventing that.

That is the rules. If he opens it as part of his surprise round (with DM permission post-combat started in the surprise round), the only other advantages he gets are that he can take a 5' step into the room, he can perform free actions, and he can perform one swift or immediate action.

Swift and immediate actions aren't RAW. They are extra rules given in "advanced options rulebooks". But that is splitting the hair here.

In this case, he does get some slight advantages over the NPCs because they were surprised. But, he does not get an additional standard action over the standard action he used as a move action to open the door.

And without your way of surprise he would have a move action and free actions. So he changed move action to 5 ft step.

Yup. That's the rules. You not liking the fact that the PC does not gain more of an advantage does not change the rules.

And that way or doing is different from the exampe. That example is still in official rule book given how to carry that situation. Even if you think it is bad that is still official.

If the PC was out in the woods hiding, saw the NPCs and they did not see him, he could fire his bow (if he had it ready) and get an attack in. In this case, he does not have to open a door, hence, he does not lose his action opening the door (using a post-combat started scenario).

And in my example the combat starts when arrow is shot. Then he gets the surprise std action.

DM decides when combats start. DM decides which of these two scenarios he wants to use (open door pre-combat, or open door in surprise round).

Now we are getting somewhere. My way of doing gives some bonus from surprise and some meaning to really put some ranks on listen and spot.

The "open the door during the surprise round" option is a DM option. The DM of the OP chose that option. It is a valid option per the rules. If you do not like it, you as DM do not have to use it. But, it is a legal rules option.

Except that example just states otherwise. And that way even makes more sense to me.

The difference in our POVs is that as per the DMG, I give the NPCs a check to see if they notice that action (or ANY action they can see or hear pre-combat) whereas you automatically have them surprised if they did not notice the PCs before the door was opened.

Do they notice the door being opened. Definetly. It is being kickd in for the surprise.

When you decide that is it possible for either side to become aware of the other, use Spot checks, Listen checks, sight ranges and so on to determine which of the above cases comes into play. Although it's good to give characters some chance to detect a coming encounter, ultimately it's you who decides when the first round begins and where each side is when it does.

This is the pertinent quote from the DMG. Note: actual rules quote, not what I want the DMG to state.

And I am giving them changes. Noise from armor, spellcasting etc. AND like I in previous posts already said: in some cases even checks from the opening the door. Exampes: rusty hings that prevents the door opened quickly. Heavy door that has to pushed in etc.

2) The DM decides that combat occurs after the PCs open the door with my interpretation.

As per the rule I quoted here, it is pre-combat. It is possible for the NPCs to become aware of the PCs, hence, they get checks to notice the PCs.

This is legal. The DM decided is was possible for both sides to be aware of each other if checks are made by the previously unaware side (as per sentence one in the quote above) and a surprise round started if some of the NPCs failed the check, otherwise, there is no surprise round and normal combat starts.

3) The DM decides that combat occurs after the PCs open the door with your interpretation.

As per the rule I quoted here, it is pre-combat. It is possible for the NPCs to become aware of the PCs.

However, as DM, you are ignoring the first sentence of this quote and going with the second sentence of this quote. You are stating that you are NOT going to give the NPCs a chance to detect an incoming encounter, even though the DMG suggests that you do so.

This too is legal. According to this text from the DMG, you are allowed to screw over the NPCs and not give them a check if that is what you want to do as DM.

However, I think my interpretation is more RAW because it does not ignore the first sentence and it uses the suggestion in the second sentence. Yours does not.

Everything that happens before opening the door gives change for the check. Opening (kicking in) the door doesn't give check, because like I already told it is noticed. It after all surprises the NPCs. Everything that precedes that surprise can foil that surprise, but not that surprise itself.

Your POV is legal, it just ignores what is written in the DMG and effectively uses rule zero to do what the DM wants to occur.

I have to agree that because I don't have DMGs here and can't check them I have to agree by stands of SRD that it could be done like that by RAW. But that I disagee that my implementaiton needs to use rule zero.

Anyway, I think that discussing more about this doesn't get us anywhere. By the way I think and that example given in book, I am doing things as inteneded and written in rules. And that can be done other way while reading the rules too.

Over and out.

 

[KarinsDad]

Yes. That is problem how you were doing that. By RAW I don't see the problem how I would do that. By RAW how you would do it is correct too, but it has some BIG problems too.

Actually, the problems do not really have to exist. They exist for you, but might not for a different DM.

With the OP's scenario (i.e. open door as surprise round action), it does not matter if the PCs are unable to get the door open or not. The DM can play it out as a surprise round and he can just keep ticking off initiatives. Attacks do not have to occur for initiative to be occurring (although that is the standard practice). An example is on page 25 of the DMG.

Additionally, I think a DM who would have problems with doing initiative this way would either not use it, or only use it when he knows it will not create a problem (e.g. when the door is not locked). But it is legal and it does not have to create problems.

I have to agree that because I don't have DMGs here and can't check them I have to agree by stands of SRD that it could be done like that by RAW. But that I disagee that my implementaiton needs to use rule zero.

Anyway, I think that discussing more about this doesn't get us anywhere. By the way I think and that example given in book, I am doing things as inteneded and written in rules. And that can be done other way while reading the rules too.

I am saying that your ruling is like using rule zero because it ignores the quoted suggestions of "it's good to give characters some chance to detect a coming encounter" and "When you decide that is it possible for either side to become aware of the other".

If you did this to the PCs (NPCs rush in through a closed door), they might complain.

Something similar to this happened in our game (with a different DM). Combat was basically over two weeks ago but two of the PCs were dominated and the other PCs did not know it.

So, the DM said: "Fred runs across the room and out the door. Barney follows him."

So I stated: "The door was closed. Fred only gets to move to it and open it before I have chance to react.".

The DM was not pleased with that, but that is the basic rule. And literally according to the DMG on page 25 in "Combat Actions out of Combat" section, I could even have asked the DM for initiatives at that point before he even moved (there was a Demon behind that door to our knowledge). The DM might not have requested it, but that is the rule for interrupting a fellow PCs actions.


If the example in the DMG was the intention, then the rules I quoted do not support it. They support the opposite intention. They support giving characters (PCs or NPCs) an opportunity to notice pre-combat actions.

The only thing that supports your POV is that one example and that example does not follow the text that precedes it.

If that example is the intent, they should have written rules to support it, not rules that suggest to give characters a check when it is possible for them to notice the opposition. If a door opening scenario is an exception to that, WotC should have stated it.

As is, it is a bad example that does not appear to follow the suggested text.

And as written, an interpretation that allows a character to both open the door (move action) and attack (standard action) within a surprise round is not a good interpretation. That is the equivalent of what your auto-surprise is doing.

Either opening the door is pre-combat-start and pre-initiatives (and everyone gets a chance to notice it because it is not within combat), or it is a surprise round action post-combat-start and post-initiatives.

Anything else is difficult to adjudicate because when similar situations come up, the players will (rightfully) be entitled to ask why they cannot do the same thing in other circumstances. The problem with your interpretation is that it is not consistent for all circumstances.

PC: "Why is opening a closed door an action pre-combat that automatically surprises the NPCs, but moving into the room through an open door (or casting a spell from outside the room) an action pre-combat that gives them a check?"

DM: "Because I say so, shut up."

 

[Jacen]

Actually, the problems do not really have to exist. They exist for you, but might not for a different DM.

To that I have to agree. There are so many things that are problem to me but not every one and vice versa.

I am saying that your ruling is like using rule zero because it ignores the quoted suggestions of "it's good to give characters some chance to detect a coming encounter" and "When you decide that is it possible for either side to become aware of the other".

Maybe I am trying to do that too much as it would happen IRL. But the rules and that example supporsts it as I see the thing. And I am giving them change to detect that. There are checks that precedes that kicking in the door.

If you did this to the PCs (NPCs rush in through a closed door), they might complain.

Like they would flying and teleport at will wizard with greater invisibility.

Something similar to this happened in our game (with a different DM). Combat was basically over two weeks ago but two of the PCs were dominated and the other PCs did not know it.

So, the DM said: "Fred runs across the room and out the door. Barney follows him."

So I stated: "The door was closed. Fred only gets to move to it and open it before I have chance to react.".

The DM was not pleased with that, but that is the basic rule. And literally according to the DMG on page 25 in "Combat Actions out of Combat" section, I could even have asked the DM for initiatives at that point before he even moved (there was a Demon behind that door to our knowledge). The DM might not have requested it, but that is the rule for interrupting a fellow PCs actions.

Well I would have done that almost same way. BUT for different reasons. Those two starts running and others are surprised. They have standard action which one of them uses to open the door. And because the possession I could have started the "combat mode" even. But because I don't recall all the possession rules that is not for sure.

If the example in the DMG was the intention, then the rules I quoted do not support it. They support the opposite intention. They support giving characters (PCs or NPCs) an opportunity to notice pre-combat actions.

And once more I have to say that they would get that opportinity, excepet for the kicking in the door. With the assumption that it goes smootly as planned.

The only thing that supports your POV is that one example and that example does not follow the text that precedes it.

Well it depends that at which initiates the combat. At least as I see it.

And as written, an interpretation that allows a character to both open the door (move action) and attack (standard action) within a surprise round is not a good interpretation. That is the equivalent of what your auto-surprise is doing.

That is what to rules support WITHOUT the surprise. Let's take this example. PC's hear the NPC. There is a closed door. PCs buff themself and makes sure that door is not locked etc. The NPCs fails the given checks. Now the combat starts. PCs roll for initiative like the NPCs does. Because the NPCs aren't aware of the PCs they do nothing in their turn if their initiative is higher than PCs. PCs delay untill everyone of then are on the same initiative. Or if you prefer they readyes an action that when that door is opened and the opening PC steps inside (or attacks what ever they had agreed on). (Actually readying makes more sense explaining that later.) One PC open the door -> move action and he still has the standard action left. All of the others have FULL ROUND action. And all acording the rules. The NPCs can act after the PCs and all acording the rules to the letter. And if the action readied was when that one PC steps in (or attacks or anything that was defined beforehand) the others acts before that stepping in (or attack or anything) So they may attack now. So they have standard action like in surprise round. And all just from the rules to the letter WITHOUT the surprise round rules. And best part is that of course the one with lowest initiative opens the door so those PCs with readied action might even act again before the NPCs inside. Only thing is that the NPCs aren't flatfooted anymore, because they are in combat even though they doidn't know that they were in combat.

Wasn't that almost like the surprise I was descriping and without surprise? (without the flatfooted thing) So tell me why I would want to screw over my players just because they stated that they use tactical manouver called surprise? That surprise just makes sure that NPCs can do the same thing for PCs. That is because metagaming - when the PCs roll for the initiative they start acting -> they are ready or readies an action or something. Even if they don't know what is going on because of faild checks. So now the gaming concept surprise give an benefit by stating that unaware combat attendants are flatfooted. just like an tactical things should do and how logic says.

The problem with your interpretation is that it is not consistent for all circumstances.

If you read the above examples you see that everything are consistent. That even works with the example you gave.

PC: "Why is opening a closed door an action pre-combat that automatically surprises the NPCs, but moving into the room through an open door (or casting a spell from outside the room) an action pre-combat that gives them a check?"

Because casting of the spell takes standard action or maybe even one round. Hearing someone speak 3 secs kinda takes and edge out of surprise. Besides that no door case my works even better without the surprise with the way of working I gave before. The more I have to think this the more confident I am in my way of thinking.

 

[KarinsDad]

Well I would have done that almost same way. BUT for different reasons. Those two starts running and others are surprised. They have standard action which one of them uses to open the door. And because the possession I could have started the "combat mode" even. But because I don't recall all the possession rules that is not for sure.

Rules, my friend, rules. Even if you give them auto-surprise (you appear to like to do that) to run to the door, we then roll initiatives (DMG page 25) to see if I get a spell off before they actually open it. They can only get 3 actions before my PC (move to door, open door, move through door) if they beat my initiative.

As it turned out for this example, the DM still had us in initiatives because an enemy caster was controlling the PCs, we just did not know that he still had us in initiatives (we kind of suspected). So, the PCs got to move and open the door. End of their turn (the one further away actually went first, so he only got to move up to the door, the distance was not within his normal 30 feet). I then cast a Wall of Force in front of them so that they could not leave on my turn.

That is what to rules support WITHOUT the surprise. Let's take this example. PC's hear the NPC. There is a closed door. PCs buff themself and makes sure that door is not locked etc. The NPCs fails the given checks. Now the combat starts. PCs roll for initiative like the NPCs does. Because the NPCs aren't aware of the PCs they do nothing in their turn if their initiative is higher than PCs. PCs delay untill everyone of then are on the same initiative. Or if you prefer they readyes an action that when that door is opened and the opening PC steps inside (or attacks what ever they had agreed on). (Actually readying makes more sense explaining that later.) One PC open the door -> move action and he still has the standard action left. All of the others have FULL ROUND action. And all acording the rules.

Nope. You are not following the rules.

The rules state that if one side is unaware, the other side gets a surprise round. The DM does not roll initiatives for the unaware side.

You made all of this up out of whole cloth. It does not follow the rules.

Again, rules my friend, rules. You weaken your other arguments by grasping at invalid straws like this.

If you read the above examples you see that everything are consistent.

Consistently breaking the rules, sure.

Because casting of the spell takes standard action or maybe even one round. Hearing someone speak 3 secs kinda takes and edge out of surprise. Besides that no door case my works even better without the surprise with the way of working I gave before. The more I have to think this the more confident I am in my way of thinking.

I'm glad somebody is confident of your thinking.


Let me ask you one simple question:

Two sides: PCs and NPCs.

NPCs are aware of PCs. PCs are not aware of NPCs. NPCs plan on ambusing the PCs.

An NPC pre-combat does an action that might alert the PCs (e.g. casting a spell, talking, opening a door, lighting a torch, etc.).

Do the PCs get a check to notice that the NPC did that action if the action is in hearing and/or sight range of the PCs?

This entire argument boils down to this one simple question.

 

[Jacen]

Rules, my friend, rules. Even if you give them auto-surprise (you appear to like to do that) to run to the door, we then roll initiatives (DMG page 25) to see if I get a spell off before they actually open it. They can only get 3 actions before my PC (move to door, open door, move through door) if they beat my initiative.

If i am auto-surprise then you are auto-nullifying the surprise. Even now they would have been better without the surprise. Just delaying.

As it turned out for this example, the DM still had us in initiatives because an enemy caster was controlling the PCs, we just did not know that he still had us in initiatives (we kind of suspected). So, the PCs got to move and open the door. End of their turn (the one further away actually went first, so he only got to move up to the door, the distance was not within his normal 30 feet). I then cast a Wall of Force in front of them so that they could not leave on my turn.

So even surprise as I do that wouldn't have allowed then to escape. Same results.

Nope. You are not following the rules.

The rules state that if one side is unaware, the other side gets a surprise round. The DM does not roll initiatives for the unaware side.

You wan't them to get the surprise. Well OK. They can delay as a surprise attack too. Or ready an action. And now we are up to the point. The surprise makes the situation worse for those who does the surprise. If surprise passed they fare better. Is that the point of surprise? Now the just delay that surprise attack and situtation is the same again. "If some but not all of the combatants are aware of their opponents, a surprise round happens before regular rounds begin." OK all PCs delay or readies an action that doesn't trigger on surprise round. Surprise round CHECK. After that regular rounds begin. "At the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check" Is surprise over? Check. Regular rounds starts? Check. Roll for initiative for combatants that were surprised. Check. Now players act at the same initiative because that delay or readied action. And now the situation is the same than in my example.

So if you state that NPCs aren't combatants and becaues that it doesn't work. OR that you can't roll for initiative for them. If they can't be rolled an initiative because they aren't in combat then how did that surprise round happen? Surprise preceds an combat, so if players aren't in combat, they can't have an surprise round.

So what is wrong with that? Besides you just saying that I am not following the rules.

You made all of this up out of whole cloth. It does not follow the rules.

Tell me what rule that is not following. Tell me and don't avoid the question. So long than you are avoiding that I see that as a prove that you can't.

Again, rules my friend, rules. You weaken your other arguments by grasping at invalid straws like this.

Invalid straws like that rule as you play it weakens the players situation even that it should give a tactical benefit. Invalid straws that you just say breaks the rules?

Consistently breaking the rules, sure.

Consistently ignoring the point. And I am not laughing. My plane takes of from treadmill.

Two sides: PCs and NPCs.

NPCs are aware of PCs. PCs are not aware of NPCs. NPCs plan on ambusing the PCs.

An NPC pre-combat does an action that might alert the PCs (e.g. casting a spell, talking, opening a door, lighting a torch, etc.).

Do the PCs get a check to notice that the NPC did that action if the action is in hearing and/or sight range of the PCs?

This entire argument boils down to this one simple question.

If the NPCs kick the door in and PCs failed to notice things that happened before, then PCs are surprised. Casting the spell gives the listen check - unless that is one word activated etc. Why do you even ask this? Of course the rules are the same for both side. No faforisim and it is not the players against the dm or the dm with the players. There are rules you know. Rules NOT favores.

But I think that I have to leave it here. Your answers will be just like earlier. You are breaking the rules. You are not following the rules. Others might not have that problem. Or just ignoring the point.

But I have a feeling that this is starting to get a personal and I am getting too sarcastic and I am just getting bored from repeating myself when trying you to get understand why I think like I do. You just mock me with that auto-surprise which used like that by itself states that I am wrong.

 

[Nail]

FWIW:

Opening the door must be an action during the surprise round. Whoever opens the door has just used up his/her/its surprise round. That's just how the RAW works. (Incidentally, that models RL pretty well too, but that's completely beside the point.)

Bottom Line: KD is right.

 

[KarinsDad]

If the NPCs kick the door in and PCs failed to notice things that happened before, then PCs are surprised.

Why is kicking the door down an action that does auto-surprise when other actions do not?

What is so special and mystical about opening a door that it has different rules (rules, not example) than other noticable actions?

When you can answer these questions from a rules perspective (which rule supports a special case of the "open a door action"), then you will have ammunition for your POV.

Otherwise, you are just being inconsistent as a DM: opening a door is a special action that auto-surprises, casting a spell is not.

 

[Neverwill]

Opening the door must be an action during the surprise round. Whoever opens the door has just used up his/her/its surprise round. That's just how the RAW works. (Incidentally, that models RL pretty well too, but that's completely beside the point.

What if the fighter kicking down the door was replaced by a wizard teleporting a party into the room? Would the casting be during the surprise round as well?