Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Assassinate
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 6697149" data-attributes="member: 71699"><p>We want to avoid the fallacy of begging the question, i.e. we don't want to say that it must be that way <em>solely </em>because the desired interpretation of assassinate requires it. So we need a reason for a surprise that has two modes. (One mode for <em>delaying</em> first reaction until the <strong>end </strong>of a combatant's first turn, and a second mode for <em>delaying</em> first action until the <strong>start </strong>of a combatant's second turn.) One advantage with <em>prevents </em>is it only envisions one mode. And if there is no other difference between them, Occam's Razor would seem to prefer <em>prevents</em>.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Since we are thinking about game mechanics we can concentrate on what the rules allow, and then construct the narrative. One of the interesting aspects of the wording of <strong>Assassinate</strong> is the use of "<em>In addition</em>". That causes me to challenge my earlier idea that the two effects of assassinate are separable. We know that a rogue must beat a target's initiative in order to apply the advantage effect. For the sake of argument, let's temporarily accept the proposal that surprise ends at the end of a combatant's first turn. That would mean that the only time a rogue gets their crit is when it is <strong>in addition</strong> to having advantage.</p><p></p><p>We could then come back to the narrative construction in the obvious way, and everything would click together very nicely. Against that, I think a reasonable test for a version of surprise that runs past the end of a combatant's first turn, is to ask if working that way serves any purpose in the game <em>other</em> than allowing a rogue with the assassinate feature to get their crit in the absence of having advantage? Do you see what I mean? If it does have some other consequence - then that would offer a motive for the RAW needing to work that way. As a strawman, I suggest that it has <em>no other consequence</em>. Can we knock that one down?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="clearstream, post: 6697149, member: 71699"] We want to avoid the fallacy of begging the question, i.e. we don't want to say that it must be that way [I]solely [/I]because the desired interpretation of assassinate requires it. So we need a reason for a surprise that has two modes. (One mode for [I]delaying[/I] first reaction until the [B]end [/B]of a combatant's first turn, and a second mode for [I]delaying[/I] first action until the [B]start [/B]of a combatant's second turn.) One advantage with [I]prevents [/I]is it only envisions one mode. And if there is no other difference between them, Occam's Razor would seem to prefer [I]prevents[/I]. Since we are thinking about game mechanics we can concentrate on what the rules allow, and then construct the narrative. One of the interesting aspects of the wording of [B]Assassinate[/B] is the use of "[I]In addition[/I]". That causes me to challenge my earlier idea that the two effects of assassinate are separable. We know that a rogue must beat a target's initiative in order to apply the advantage effect. For the sake of argument, let's temporarily accept the proposal that surprise ends at the end of a combatant's first turn. That would mean that the only time a rogue gets their crit is when it is [B]in addition[/B] to having advantage. We could then come back to the narrative construction in the obvious way, and everything would click together very nicely. Against that, I think a reasonable test for a version of surprise that runs past the end of a combatant's first turn, is to ask if working that way serves any purpose in the game [I]other[/I] than allowing a rogue with the assassinate feature to get their crit in the absence of having advantage? Do you see what I mean? If it does have some other consequence - then that would offer a motive for the RAW needing to work that way. As a strawman, I suggest that it has [I]no other consequence[/I]. Can we knock that one down? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Assassinate
Top