Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hriston" data-source="post: 6686732" data-attributes="member: 6787503">I don't think the difference between is surprised and was surprised is significant here when you consider that the state of being surprised can mean that you are currently being shocked or startled by something unexpected, or that you continue to feel shocked even though the moment of surprise has passed. You seem to be stressing the past tense in both of the above examples in order to distance the state of surprise from the mechanical inability to act, but in doing this do you mean to say that at that point the PCs are no longer surprised?Oh okay. I'd forgotten that in this case we differ not about whether a creature that is past its first turn can be auto-critted, but rather about when that creature's first turn occurs. Sorry to have asked a leading question that doesn't apply to the position you've expressed. There're quite a few combinations of opinions on this thread for me to keep everyone's straight.This isn't what I was referring to as "my interpretation". I'm certainly not arguing for this in this thread. I expressed in the initiative thread that I do things this way, following after what my understanding of the intent was in earlier editions and without any clear guidelines in the rules about what constitutes "a combat" as opposed to "an encounter". My reading of earlier editions had led me to conflate the two terms, and I then applied that assumption to the 5E rules. I don't expect you to have read every post I made in that thread, but I was quite convinced by some of the responses that the rules of combat, especially with regard to surprise, might indeed run smoother if I instead held off beginning combat until someone declared an action that would be opposed or resisted by the other party. I think my understanding of earlier editions may have been off in this respect as well. For example, it appears that in first edition AD&D, surprise is only determined once both parties are aware of one another, a nuance that escaped me upon earlier readings, and that seems to contrast with the way it is presented in 5E.Where my question was directed was at the notion that the inability to act until the end of the first turn constituted something different than what is meant by "surprised". I was asking how that was restrictive of the narrative. Perhaps you agree that at that point the creature is no longer surprised, in which case it makes sense for you to revert to the earlier argument about when the creature's first turn actually takes place. I believe that our difference here isn't about respect for the narrative, but about allowing the assassin to make his attack out of initiative order. The reason I say this is because I believe that rolling initiative does not represent an event in the narrative, but is a means for resolving narrative events in order.Let's say I call for an initiative roll in response to the assassin declaring his attack. What is to prevent the surprised target from having a lightning quick response to the attack that allows him to avoid the worst part of the attack? How is that more restrictive of the narrative than granting the assassin an automatic success? Keep in mind that if there is some narrative reason that the target is unable to have such a response that you, as the DM, are free to dictate any initiative order you wish as a forgone conclusion unworthy of random determination.</blockquote>

Verification