D&D 5E Assassinate

[cmad1977]

I am not complaining about the rules, I am complaining about your assertions.
I can show the rule that says the DM is to determine which creatures are surprised. That is not an issue.

*YOU* have claimed that the rules say for the DM to determine when the creatures are no longer surprised.... so please present that rule. Or at least admit that you are making it up based on what you think 'makes sense'.
But in either case, stop pretending that your assertions are based on the rules.



So now you are saying that Surprise only lasts for the first attack. If the Bad guy is Surprised by 4 PCs, once the first one hits him, then he is does "notice a threat" and is no longer surprised....
Again, your assertions are not supported by the rules.

I would laugh gleefully if my DM allowed us to pile on surprise attacks after our rogue stuck the bad guy in the kidneys with a dagger. I'd also think that was ridiculous.

 

[Coredump]

I would laugh gleefully if my DM allowed us to pile on surprise attacks after our rogue stuck the bad guy in the kidneys with a dagger. I'd also think that was ridiculous.

Can you provide the rule stating that surprise ends after the first attack?

 

[cmad1977]

Can you provide the rule stating that surprise ends after the first attack?

Why?

 

[redrick]

It's fruitless to complain about the lack of DM-independent rules to determine when surprise ends when the rules for when surprise begins is equally dependent on the DM.

RAW, the DM determines whether anyone in the combat is surprised (PHB p189). This is the entire extent of the RAW on when surprise begins, so it can't come as a *ahem* surprise that the determination of when surprise ends is equally DM dependent.

How is the DM supposed to determine surprise, according to RAW? Although there is an example using Stealth/Perception, the actual rule is, 'Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter'.

It shouldn't take a genius to figure out that a character or creature is no longer surprised as soon as they do 'notice a threat'!

Initiative determines how fast you can react to things that you perceive (because you cannot react to things you haven't perceived), but it doesn't determine what you actually perceive; for that, you need your senses. In game terms, Perception or Insight might be appropriate depending on circumstances, but if the outcome is not uncertain then DM fiat is fine.

It's hard to argue that a creature taking an arrow to the chest is uncertain if he's in danger or not!

I quite disagree here. You seem to be equating surprise with the state of unawareness. Once you are aware, you are no longer surprised.

I would say the opposite. Surprise happens after you are aware of something. Before anybody has attacked you, you're not surprised. You're blissfully ignorant, possibly enjoying your last peaceful seconds of life. You are surprised by that arrow suddenly sticking out of your chest. Where did that arrow come from? Or maybe you are surprised by all of these men with swords jumping out from behind that rock. Here you thought you were peacefully picking lichen in the dungeon, and all these dudes with swords showed up. You know they're there. But you can't actually act, because you are surprised.

The question now is, how long does it take from learning something surprising to stop being surprised by it? (In the D&D sense of the word, of course.) And, personally, if I were to just stick with my sense of my game world and the characters in it, I would say, "I have no idea." That's where I look to a rule for guidance. And I think we have that rule, at least implicitly, which is that a character stops being surprised once their turn is over in initiative order. This is the point at which that character can now take actions again (reactions any time, and actions on his or her next turn.) So, without any suggestion to the contrary, this makes sense as when all the other effects of surprise end as well. Apparently, Mike Mearls, tweeting off the cuff, agrees with that assessment. On the other hand, so long as a DM is consistent in his or her application, I think any of the 4 measures I used above would work.

So, yeah, if I had multiple assassins in my party, you bet all of those assassins could assassinate the same creature in one round, so long as they all got the sufficient initiative. Julius Caesar that goblin.

 

[Arial Black]

I am not complaining about the rules, I am complaining about your assertions.
I can show the rule that says the DM is to determine which creatures are surprised. That is not an issue.

*YOU* have claimed that the rules say for the DM to determine when the creatures are no longer surprised.... so please present that rule. Or at least admit that you are making it up based on what you think 'makes sense'.
But in either case, stop pretending that your assertions are based on the rules.

Heh. It's the same rule!

If you are 'surprised', certain game mechanics are modified. But what if you are 'not surprised'? What special modifiers apply? None, because 'not surprised' is the default state of creatures in combat. The rules don't need to say, "When you are not surprised, don't use the 'surprised' modifiers"!

The upshot is that, RAW, you are either 'surprised' or not. The 'surprise' switch is either On or Off.

Therefore, the rule that says, "You are surprised if you do not notice a threat" is ALSO saying that if you do notice a threat then you are not surprised!

The DM determines if a creature is surprised. This, by definition, means that if he doesn't determine that you are surprised then he has effectively decided that you are not surprised. The DM determines this, and by default this means that he decides the period for which you are surprised, therefore deciding when that state ends for any creature.

And his determination is based on whether or not a creature notices a threat. The two things exist (or not) at the same time. If you don't notice an existing threat, then you are surprised. As soon as you notice a threat, you are not surprised.

This is the unavoidable consequence of the RAW statements of 'the DM determines if a character or monster is surprised' and 'a creature that doesn't notice a threat is surprised'.

So now you are saying that Surprise only lasts for the first attack. If the Bad guy is Surprised by 4 PCs, once the first one hits him, then he is does "notice a threat" and is no longer surprised....

The consequence of the RAW is that when you notice a threat you are not surprised. If you rule that being stabbed in the throat makes you aware that there is a threat...I'd agree.

Again, your assertions are not supported by the rules.

My assertions are a consequence of the rules.

 

[MG.0]

Therefore, the rule that says, "You are surprised if you do not notice a threat" is ALSO saying that if you do notice a threat then you are not surprised!

Sorry, but that does not follow logically. "If you do notice a threat then you are not surprised!" is the logical inverse of "You are surprised if you do not notice a threat." That means the two statements are logically independent. In other words, not noticing a threat is a sufficient condition for surprise to occur, but surprise may or may not exist otherwise.

From a practical stance, The rule is stating what is necessary to initiate a surprise condition. It actually isn't saying what ends it. Suggesting becoming aware of an attack is sufficient to end surprise is disputable. Imagine someone completely surprised by an arrow suddenly appearing in their chest. It is entirely believable that two or three more could hit the person before they had the presence of mind to react. This scene has been portraryed in movies countless times. In game, it would correspond to someone who was surprised and attacked by several people with higher initiative rolls.


Edit: I do think the Assassin's limited ability is further weakened by this, but I think the problem lies with the Assassin class, not with the surprise rules.

 

[Arial Black]

Sorry, but that does not follow logically. "If you do notice a threat then you are not surprised!" is the logical inverse of "You are surprised if you do not notice a threat." That means the two statements are logically independent. In other words, not noticing a threat is a sufficient condition for surprise to occur, but surprise may or may not exist otherwise.

There are two possibilities: the RAW statement "You are surprised if you do not notice a threat" EITHER means "If you do notice a threat then you are not surprised!" OR it means "If you notice a threat you may or may not be surprised".

There are some flaws with the second interpretation. First, it would mean that 'noticing a threat' is not what determines whether or not you are surprised, when the RAW statement shows that it is. Second, this is an exception-based rules set. You cannot do something unless you can.

For example, the rules say that a 1st level barbarian has the Rage class ability. But there is nowhere in the description of the 1st level wizard that says I don't have the Rage ability, so that means I can have it if I want, right? Of course not. You only have it if the rules say you do.

When it comes to surprise/noticing a threat (the same thing by RAW), you are only surprised when you don't notice a (existing) threat. As soon as you do, you are not surprised because the rules don't say that you are.

From a practical stance, The rule is stating what is necessary to initiate a surprise condition. It actually isn't saying what ends it.

Actually, that is exactly what it does mean! The rule isn't just saying what initiates the state of 'surprise', it's saying that while you do not notice a threat, that you are surprised. And therefore outside of that time period that you do not notice a threat (i.e. at any time when you do notice a threat) then you are not in the 'surprised' state.

 

[MG.0]

Actually, that is exactly what it does mean! The rule isn't just saying what initiates the state of 'surprise', it's saying that while you do not notice a threat, that you are surprised. And therefore outside of that time period that you do not notice a threat (i.e. at any time when you do notice a threat) then you are not in the 'surprised' state.

I disagree with your interpretation, but I will not argue 'rules as written' as I think it's a pointless waste of time. I simply pointed out your logical fallacy.

I am not arguing whether or not the rules support the following, suffice to say I have already made my opinion on that clear: From a believbility perspective, saying you are surprised until you notice a threat is silly. Are you surprised before an attack has taken place? I would think not. Can you be surprised after being hit by an attack long enough to be hit by another one? Absolutely. That's the way that makes intuitive sense to me and the way I play it.

 

[Hriston]

There are two possibilities: the RAW statement "You are surprised if you do not notice a threat" EITHER means "If you do notice a threat then you are not surprised!" OR it means "If you notice a threat you may or may not be surprised".

There are some flaws with the second interpretation. First, it would mean that 'noticing a threat' is not what determines whether or not you are surprised, when the RAW statement shows that it is. Second, this is an exception-based rules set. You cannot do something unless you can.

For example, the rules say that a 1st level barbarian has the Rage class ability. But there is nowhere in the description of the 1st level wizard that says I don't have the Rage ability, so that means I can have it if I want, right? Of course not. You only have it if the rules say you do.

When it comes to surprise/noticing a threat (the same thing by RAW), you are only surprised when you don't notice a (existing) threat. As soon as you do, you are not surprised because the rules don't say that you are.



Actually, that is exactly what it does mean! The rule isn't just saying what initiates the state of 'surprise', it's saying that while you do not notice a threat, that you are surprised. And therefore outside of that time period that you do not notice a threat (i.e. at any time when you do notice a threat) then you are not in the 'surprised' state.

You've stripped this phrase of its context. It only applies to the beginning of the encounter.

COMBAT STEP BY STEP

1. Determine surprise. The DM determines whether anyone involved in the combat encounter is surprised.

The DM determines surprise at the beginning of the encounter before a surprised creature has a chance to notice anything. Notice it doesn't say the DM determines when surprise begins or ends, just whether the encounter begins with someone being surprised.

Any character or monster that doesn’t notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter.

You've been leaving out the bolded part. It's important. If a creature notices a threat after the encounter has begun it has no bearing on whether they are surprised or not as that has already been determined.

 

[Arial Black]

I am not arguing whether or not the rules support the following, suffice to say I have already made my opinion on that clear: From a believbility perspective, saying you are surprised until you notice a threat is silly. Are you surprised before an attack has taken place? I would think not. Can you be surprised after being hit by an attack long enough to be hit by another one? Absolutely. That's the way that makes intuitive sense to me and the way I play it.

From a rules standpoint, 'surprised' only exists in the context of combat rounds. The two game effects of surprise are: vulnerability to auto-crits from the Assassinate class feature (and since this is keyed off an attack, it must take place in a combat round by RAW), and the inability to move or act in your first turn in combat and the inability to take reactions until after your first turn (which can only happen during a combat round).

Therefore, the game mechanic of 'surprised' does not exist outside of the combat round.

In that context, and remembering that, RAW, you are surprised if you do not notice a threat, it's hardly 'silly' to say that you are not surprised if you do notice a threat.