Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hriston" data-source="post: 6681707" data-attributes="member: 6787503">I agree with others that the Assassin's player should go ahead and make the attack anyway since that's what was declared and is the reason initiative was rolled. But I also agree that the rules allow players to change their minds about what they do on their turn, or at least with Speed Factor to opt out of following through on declared actions, so the player is well within her rights to do so. If the player decides to resume the attack, however, hoping for another chance to win the initiative roll, there is nothing to stop the DM from using the values from the previous roll. That initiative order was never used after all.That's what I'd do, anyways. I suppose it depends on what the initiative roll represents to you in the fiction. Is it a reaction to an immediate stimulus, like combat beginning? In that case I'd assume that as combat enters later rounds differences in reaction time would tend to even out, with that initial roll having less of an impact.Or maybe it's a race to see who gets to go first, but then why isn't there a similar race every round? If you do speed factor I suppose this could be the narrative.The way I see it, initiative is a measure of your reaction time that is in effect for the duration. In that way it's a lot like a passive score, and you could use a passive initiative score like the DMG suggests as a variant. For me that wouldn't be as much fun as rolling because then everyone always has the same initiative, but the concept is the same. You measure &quot;initiative&quot; at the beginning of combat to see how a creature's reaction time compares to other participants at that time. If the assassin decides to delay the attack, only to try again in a moment, what has changed in the situation to justify a new initiative roll?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hriston, post: 6681707, member: 6787503"] I agree with others that the Assassin's player should go ahead and make the attack anyway since that's what was declared and is the reason initiative was rolled. But I also agree that the rules allow players to change their minds about what they do on their turn, or at least with Speed Factor to opt out of following through on declared actions, so the player is well within her rights to do so. If the player decides to resume the attack, however, hoping for another chance to win the initiative roll, there is nothing to stop the DM from using the values from the previous roll. That initiative order was never used after all. That's what I'd do, anyways. I suppose it depends on what the initiative roll represents to you in the fiction. Is it a reaction to an immediate stimulus, like combat beginning? In that case I'd assume that as combat enters later rounds differences in reaction time would tend to even out, with that initial roll having less of an impact. Or maybe it's a race to see who gets to go first, but then why isn't there a similar race every round? If you do speed factor I suppose this could be the narrative. The way I see it, initiative is a measure of your reaction time that is in effect for the duration. In that way it's a lot like a passive score, and you could use a passive initiative score like the DMG suggests as a variant. For me that wouldn't be as much fun as rolling because then everyone always has the same initiative, but the concept is the same. You measure "initiative" at the beginning of combat to see how a creature's reaction time compares to other participants at that time. If the assassin decides to delay the attack, only to try again in a moment, what has changed in the situation to justify a new initiative roll? [/QUOTE]

Verification