D&D 5E Declarations that start combat vs. initiative

[Maxperson]

There are a few things at play here:

1) Does GSG actually know of the threat 30'+ away?
- If he doesn't, then sure, he has no chance of getting to DG before DG can throw the dagger - done.

2) But if he does, say someone yells a warning AS the guy is going for his dagger -
- There are ALL sorts of ways to justify simple initiative.
- For ex. DG is drawing but is spooked when a warned GSG does a full on charge brandishing a very large weapon. He hesitates and is beaten to the punch by GSG. There, justifies losing initiative within the fiction; But also

3. This is a game. DG suspects GSG, even if warned, can only cover 30ft so he throws from 40' away (which has consequences but nevermind) and he'll get the throw off before getting attacked by GSG.

I prefer to just resolve with game mechanics, when possible, as opposed to fiat winning initiative. The initial situation, and the offshoots so far in the thread, haven't shown a reason to do otherwise, IMO of course.

RE #2. He's not going for his dagger. He had it in his hand the entire time. If he has to go for his dagger, then yes normal initiative would apply. In my example literally all he has to do is throw it.

I get your preference. Fiat, though, is just a tool like any other in my opinion. If used impartially and fairly, it's a wonderful thing.

 

[Irlo]

There has to be. Something has to trigger the initiative roll when you have groups and no combat. Someone has to declare something hostile.

If you have a tax collector and his 4 guards trying to collect taxes from the PCs, there's no combat. It's all social. Until one of the PCs says, "I draw my sword and cut the tax collector down." At that point we stop and roll initiative.

I see what you are saying, but again the potion drinking was situational, requiring it to be in hand. He's not going to be grabbing a potion out of a pouch and drinking it before that dagger is away, either. This is how I see it going down.

Player: "I'm tired of talking. I throw the dagger that I have in my hand at the fighter with the greatsword."
DM: "Okay. Since you had it in hand and there's no way anyone is going to be able to react before you, you go first and then initiative rolls will determine the order of everyone else."

OR

DM: "Okay. However, since the fighter had a potion in his hand and is alert, he will be the only one you have to roll against since he's the only other person here who is ready to act. If you beat him you go first, then the fighter, then initiative rolls for everyone else."

So the fighter has to declare an action after the thrower’s declaration but before resolution? What about everyone else who might chose to do something quick? What if a guard shoves the tax collector out of the way?

I mean, if it works for you, good for you!

 

[Mort]

RE #2. He's not going for his dagger. He had it in his hand the entire time. If he has to go for his dagger, then yes normal initiative would apply. In my example literally all he has to do is throw it.

Eh, maybe it slips when he's spooked by the charging GSW. But I get your point.

I get your preference. Fiat, though, is just a tool like any other in my opinion. If used impartially and fairly, it's a wonderful thing.

Sure, there are many, many situations where the DM just has to make a call and go with it. No argument from me.

 

[Bill Zebub]

RE #2. He's not going for his dagger. He had it in his hand the entire time. If he has to go for his dagger, then yes normal initiative would apply. In my example literally all he has to do is throw it.

Two things about this:

1. This leads to players always having weapons out and ready, so they can take advantage of First Strike.
2. If the PCs have their weapons out, I would have the NPCs also pull their weapons out, and be on high alert, negating the PCs advantage.

You are welcome, of course, to adjudicate it however you see fit.

I get your preference. Fiat, though, is just a tool like any other in my opinion. If used impartially and fairly, it's a wonderful thing.

This is like the truism that all drivers think they are in the upper 50%. I'm sure all DMs think they are impartial and fair.

Anyway, what I really came back to post was that I had more thoughts on risk/reward mechanics. I wouldn't myself go this route, as I see regular initiative working just fine, but I like to think about mechanics. Here are two ideas for when a player wants to declare a sudden attack:

Variant 1: Roll initiative with advantage. However, regardless of where you end up in the initiative order, the only action you may take, before any movement, is the declared one (basically like Hold Action). If that is not possible you may not take any other actions on your turn.

Variant 2: Roll initiative as usual. If you go before your target you get Advantage on the attack. If you end up going after your target you roll with Disadvantage.

EDIT: Or the two options could be combined, but it gets a little fiddly.

 

[Bill Zebub]

Sure, there are many, many situations where the DM just has to make a call and go with it. No argument from me.

Yes. And....why unnecessarily create more of those situations?

 

[Mort]

Yes. And....why unnecessarily create more of those situations?

If you read my prior posts that's basically what I'm saying. And why I've been saying regular initiative is just fine for everything I've seen so far in this thread.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If you read my prior posts that's basically what I'm saying. And why I've been saying regular initiative is just fine for everything I've seen so far in this thread.

Yeah, sorry, I was saying that with a knowing/agreeing nod. I should have added "Right? RIGHT?" to the end.

 

[Maxperson]

Two things about this:

1. This leads to players always having weapons out and ready, so they can take advantage of First Strike.

Sure, which leads to situations where they get in trouble for walking around with weapons out, and other times where a group might have talked with them but since the party is clearly hostile(weapons out) combat happens. Sometimes it works out for them and sometimes it doesn't.

2. If the PCs have their weapons out, I would have the NPCs also pull their weapons out, and be on high alert, negating the PCs advantage.

Possibly negating the advantage. In my example, even if the fighter had his greatsword out, he isn't covering 30 feet before that dagger is in flight.

This is like the truism that all drivers think they are in the upper 50%. I'm sure all DMs think they are impartial and fair.

I don't pay any attention to the player or PC when I make a ruling. I look only at the situation. You can never get rid of bias entirely, but you can minimize to the point where you are being fair and not give a specific player or PC an advantage he shouldn't have.

Anyway, what I really came back to post was that I had more thoughts on risk/reward mechanics. I wouldn't myself go this route, as I see regular initiative working just fine, but I like to think about mechanics. Here are two ideas for when a player wants to declare a sudden attack:

Variant 1: Roll initiative with advantage. However, regardless of where you end up in the initiative order, the only action you may take, before any movement, is the declared one (basically like Hold Action). If that is not possible you may not take any other actions on your turn.

I like that one. I still think that auto success should be on the table under some circumstances, but advantage seems like a better way to go a lot of the time.

Variant 2: Roll initiative as usual. If you go before your target you get Advantage on the attack. If you end up going after your target you roll with Disadvantage.

This one I'm not so fond of. It would seem like a surprise round should grant that same advantage if you go before the other side, which seems like too much advantage. I mean, if the part is surprised by a decently large number of lower CR creatures, advantage could wreck the the group. Especially if it's goblins with short bows!

 

[GMMichael]

As a slight tangent, I really think that six seconds is too short. I mean, for bardic inspiration, are they playing a tiny snippet of a song, or declaring two lines of a poem in six seconds?

One of the earlier conceits of the game when a round was longer, is that on your turn in a round, there's a bunch of stuff happening - jockeying for position, feinting, pulling out spell components, etc., with your single action being the distillation of all that into the one act that ends up mattering.

They should've included "resting" in the during-round description. I mean, boxers spend three minutes fighting and one minute resting, and they're still exhausted in round three. Just think if they were wearing more than shorts.

Six seconds of my favorite song is all it takes to get me excited. AC/DC knows about this. If a bard with quasi-magical abilities were performing, I think that would do the trick.

 

[Bill Zebub]

This one I'm not so fond of. It would seem like a surprise round should grant that same advantage if you go before the other side, which seems like too much advantage. I mean, if the part is surprised by a decently large number of lower CR creatures, advantage could wreck the the group. Especially if it's goblins with short bows!

Not sure I'm following. If the goblins are ambushing the players, and everybody is making attribute checks, then there are rules for that. The rule I'm proposing only applies to the one character (PC or NPC) that tries to act suddenly when both parties are aware of each other.