Combat actions before combat?

[Nytmare]

...the front lines are taking full defense, and the second line has readied ranged attacks at various targets.

Taking full defense does not, in real time, give you a +2 to your AC, stop for a fraction of a second, and then continue to give you a +2 to your AC till the next round starts.

You get a plus 2 to your AC for some arbitrary amount of time, and then you don't, and then you do, completely disengaged from any kind of pacing resembling rounds.

When combat starts, real time stops, and round time begins.

Everyone who rolls higher than the first attack who decide to defend are the people who were in the process of defending when the fight breaks out.

 

[Amaroq]

Spot on, Kingreaper.

That's exactly what I'd do for the situation where two parties seem to be in harmony but somebody wants to begin combat: for example, the classic, "on my signal, everybody at the banquet table draws their swords and attacks" betrayal, or the classic "we sign the peace treaty, then as the other side drops their guard, we attack" back-stab.

For the situation Ferghis described, though, I don't think there's any chance of Surprise in that situation, by RAW. Since both sides are aware of each other and ready for hostile action, there is no Surprise round. Simply roll for normal Initiative when somebody declares "I open fire."

This is pretty much the equivalent of the classic "Gunslinger" scene: it doesn't matter which one of them says "I draw and fire!" first at the tabletop, it matters who rolls a higher initiative. The winner gets the drop.

Tying that back to our "Total Defense" example, think of it like this: the front-liner who wins initiative gets to enter Total Defense if he wants to, and thus be in Total Defense when the archer actually lets fly .. (or, if you prefer, by the time the arrow arrives - arrows, unlike bullets, have visible flight time.) The front-liner who lost initiative had had his concentration wander for a moment, was looking at the wrong archer, blinked, coughed, whatever, just enough that he wasn't in the benefit of Total Defense at the moment the battle started.

And getting all the way back to our "Busting through the door" example, where the crossbowman has tried to ready an action on "seeing a target on the other side of the door", Initiative determines how quickly he is able to spot the target, recognize it as a hostile / not-hostage, aim at it, and fire.

Likewise, Initiative determines how quickly our door-opening fighter is able to go from shouldering the door open back into his fighting crouch with shield and sword interposed between himself and the room.

Whether they're in a Surprise round, or a normal round.

. . . .

I think you can sum up my position by stating it thus:

When multiple creatures are ready for combat to break out, Initiative is the RAW means of determining which one reacts to the trigger that starts combat most quickly.

I think any other interpretation winds up with a bunch of Initiative-number-collisions, e.g., in my archers-ambushing example, would all of the archers act on the same initiative because the trigger that started the combat occurred at the same instant for each of them? That just seems .. ridiculous .. to me.

 

[sev]

Amaroq, I agree with your reading of the "two groups at parley" situation, and the difference between a hostile parley vs. a planned betrayal at a peace treaty.

I just have a question regarding a detail:

I think any other interpretation winds up with a bunch of Initiative-number-collisions, e.g., in my archers-ambushing example, would all of the archers act on the same initiative because the trigger that started the combat occurred at the same instant for each of them? That just seems .. ridiculous .. to me.

what's wrong with Initiative number collisions? If A & B delay because they're waiting for C to get out of the way, and D & E ready for C to get in range, then when C moves, A, B, D, and E may clump up around C's initiative. I find this sort of thing happens often in the first few rounds of combat, as the combatants cope with terrain challenges, especially for ranged combatants.

If combat started four rounds ago, and your archers are all waiting for the same trigger to fire, don't they all go on the same initiative then? Should it be any different, first round of combat?

(I will note that, as a DM, "all the archers fire at the same time" can be a terrible thing to do to a party, if you have enough archers and want to hit one party-member per round...or accidentally kill them, if you roll a couple of crits. I speak from experience, and I apologized to the players afterward...)

 

[Amaroq]

Hmm. My aversion to initiative-number collisions came after running a wolf-pack-vs-party combat which almost resulted in a TPK because the wolves, weak by themselves, would all attack on the same initiative; the first attack would knock somebody prone and all the other wolves would savage the prone person.

Though arguably "good tactics" from the wolves' perspective, it felt less than "fun", and certainly far from tactical or cinematic as the other heroes didn't have a chance to jump in and rescue or protect their fallen comrade.

Since that experience, I've decided to roll one initiative for all "Minions", but give each "real monster" its own initiative die.

So, regardless of whether the PC's are the ambusher or the ambushee, I'd rather have the archers roll separate initiatives. I think the "Surprise round" alone conveys the feel of the "volley of arrows", it prevents the "gamist" feel of combat (my whole team goes, your whole team goes).

From a RAW perspective, I'd say it follows the RAW instruction that "Before the first round of combat, you roll initiative." (PHB 267); and also, that there's a difference between "readying for the start of combat on X trigger", and "delaying a standard action on X trigger".

From a fluff perspective, I imagine it as the classic movie scene where a volley of arrows comes in - but each arrow falls at a distinct slice of time, as though they were launched at different times or with different strength of draw (and thus different velocity). If they all got to act in the Surprise round, and the ambushee didn't, it still feels like a volley, and the Initiative roll represents how quickly the archers react to the ongoing situation, notch their second arrow, etc.

That said, our group may be less initiative-mobile than yours; we do wind up with the occasional strategic use of "delay my inititative until" but for the most part we tend to just go on our initiative, monsters and PC's alike, unless there's nothing at all useful to do.

 

[Ferghis]

[Where perception has no role]... replace "Stealth V Perception" with "Bluff (the social equivalent of stealth) V Insight (the social equivalent of perception)" to decide who gets to act in the surprise round.
Then go into initiative order.

That's not crazy. And it may be the only reasonable way to resolve that issue. Thanks.

 

[Ferghis]

In case anyone still has fuel for this fire, I was wondering if a swordmage can use his or her Aegis power on someone outside of combat. I'm inclined to say yes, but that's not exactly coherent with my prior decision that you can't take combat actions out of combat.

Or maybe it is... Hmmm. Still, it feels more complicated than it should be.

 

[Saagael]

In case anyone still has fuel for this fire, I was wondering if a swordmage can use his or her Aegis power on someone outside of combat. I'm inclined to say yes, but that's not exactly coherent with my prior decision that you can't take combat actions out of combat.

Or maybe it is... Hmmm. Still, it feels more complicated than it should be.

RAW, I'd say no. Then again, it depends on what they're trying to do. If the player is trying to use it during the "negotiation" phase of an encounter, before the actual fight breaks out, I'd consider that a hostile action and thus the guy he just used the Aegis on attacks, perhaps getting a surprise round (Bluff vs Insight maybe).

If its inconsequential fluff, sure, why not. Remember it goes away after 5 minutes anyway.

 

[S'mon]

I'd typically allow it, but I wouldn't allow a Ready to be maintained for more than 5 minutes (by analogy w Encounter/Short Rest rules) without Endurance checks, or the PC becomes fatigued. Same for total defense, use of at-will attacks, etc.

 

[Kzach]

Where does it say in the rules that you can't take actions outside of combat rounds?

If this was the case, then nobody could ever use the thousand and one powers that are minor, standard, interrupt, immediate actions designed to be used outside of combat.

 

[the Jester]

Since it has either been ignored or overlooked, I'll repeat my earlier claim.

If you can ready actions or take total defense out of combat, ALL MONSTERS EVER ENCOUNTERED should start EVERY ENCOUNTER EVER with either a total defense bonus or a readied action.

Does that sound reasonable? Not to me.