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

[Maxperson]

Do you let the dagger thrower throw multiple daggers in one turn?

If he has the extra attack feature, sure.

And do you make the heavy crossbow guy use several turns to reload?

I hadn't really thought about that since nobody has taken one in my game yet.

 

[amethal]

I use the "roll for initiative" method unless I have a good reason not to. I think almost everybody here does the same, but we disagree on what is a good enough reason.

Situation: There is a tense stand off. Player 1 is facing down Players 2 and 3. Player 1 has a dagger in his hand, but is holding it in a casual manner. Sensing the negotiations are going badly for him, Player 1 decides to throw the dagger at Player 2. (Everybody agrees there shouldn't be a surprise round.)

Option 1
DM: Roll for initiative

Option2
DM: Player 1 goes first, as he has a dagger in his hand, which he throws before anyone can react
Player 2: You never mentioned he had a dagger out
DM: You didn't see it, his Sleight of Hand is higher than your passive Perception
Player 2: It's a tense stand off. Why are you using passive Perception? We should get to roll our Perception checks
Player 1: Fair enough, but my Sleight of Hand is really good
Player 3: If it's already in his hand, surely it should be a Deception check?
DM: You're probably right. Okay, Perception vs Deception, only Player 3 spots the dagger
Player 3: I tell everybody else
Player 1: I throw it first
Player 3: It's quicker to say the word "dagger" than it is to throw a dagger
DM: OK, Player 3 yells "Dagger"
Player 1: OK, then I throw it at Player 2.
Player 3: Is that all I got to do on my turn? That's not fair
DM: No, that wasn't your turn, you can have a turn later once he has thrown the dagger
Player 3: But you don't know what I was going to do yet, it might be quicker than throwing a dagger
DM: So what were you going to do?
Player 3: I'm going to drink a potion
DM: You don't have a potion in your hand, so you can't do it in time
Player 3: You didn't ask us what we had in our hands. You only asked Player 1.
DM: So did you have a potion in your hand?
Player 3: Yes, I don't trust Player 1 so I had a potion ready in case he tried anything
Player 1: In that case, I throw my dagger at Player 3, not Player 2
Player 3: You can't change your action now that you know what mine is going to be
Player 1: I would have seen the potion you conveniently forgot to mention. Anyway, throwing a dagger is faster than drinking a potion
Player 3: I came prepared. The potion has been decanted into a beer mug. I can take a few swallows of beer, errr I mean potion, before a dagger can travel 30 feet. Actually, you don't even know it is a potion because its in the mug; you probably think it's beer
Player 1: I don't trust you either, so I'll know you were up to something
DM: Um, Insight vs Deception; no you don't know there's a potion in the mug
Player 1: I still don't trust him; I'm throwing the dagger at Player 3 anyway
DM: No, you failed the roll, you throw at Player 2.
Player 2: I dive behind the wall, out of the way, so he misses
Player 1: Does he get behind the wall before I can throw?
DM: It's a low wall, and he's right next to it, I guess it's an opposed Initiative check.
Player 1: If I lose the check, I'll throw at Player 3 instead
Player 3: Not if I drink my potion first! It's a potion of invisibility
DM: Okay, we'll have a 3 way Initiative check (dice are rolled) order is Player 1, then Player 2 then Player 3
(Player 1 throws dagger at Player 2, Player 2 drinks potion, Player 3 dives behind the wall)
DM: Okay, round 2, at last. Player 1, you're up first
Player 3: Hang on a minute, I had a loaded crossbow hidden behind the wall, in case things got rough. Surely I can fire it before Player 1 can do anything?
Player 1: You don't know what I was going to do yet ...

 

[Lyxen]

I have. I ran a whole series of 1v1 arena combats. I just compared Dex to determine who went first.

Fine, you were not applying the RAW, but it's a perfectly legitimate way of playing. It's just not what the RAW say, for those who are interested.

 

[Bacon Bits]

This is a bit genre specific, right? Take a western, the guy going for his weapon is certainly NOT the guy who's likely to get the first shot - not if there's a faster draw opposing.

Kind of, but most of those aren't a surprise attack. A lot of them are first-and-foremost a reflex comparison. Traditional initiative doesn't work well for a classic Western stand off at all.

This is not a surprise draw, and I don't know how I'd run it in D&D:


This is a surprise attack, and I have no problem allowing that attack before rolling initiative:

 

[Maxperson]

I use the "roll for initiative" method unless I have a good reason not to. I think almost everybody here does the same, but we disagree on what is a good enough reason.

Situation: There is a tense stand off. Player 1 is facing down Players 2 and 3. Player 1 has a dagger in his hand, but is holding it in a casual manner. Sensing the negotiations are going badly for him, Player 1 decides to throw the dagger at Player 2. (Everybody agrees there shouldn't be a surprise round.)

Option 1
DM: Roll for initiative

Option2
DM: Player 1 goes first, as he has a dagger in his hand, which he throws before anyone can react
Player 2: You never mentioned he had a dagger out
DM: You didn't see it, his Sleight of Hand is higher than your passive Perception
Player 2: It's a tense stand off. Why are you using passive Perception? We should get to roll our Perception checks
Player 1: Fair enough, but my Sleight of Hand is really good
Player 3: If it's already in his hand, surely it should be a Deception check?
DM: You're probably right. Okay, Perception vs Deception, only Player 3 spots the dagger
Player 3: I tell everybody else
Player 1: I throw it first
Player 3: It's quicker to say the word "dagger" than it is to throw a dagger
DM: OK, Player 3 yells "Dagger"
Player 1: OK, then I throw it at Player 2.
Player 3: Is that all I got to do on my turn? That's not fair
DM: No, that wasn't your turn, you can have a turn later once he has thrown the dagger
Player 3: But you don't know what I was going to do yet, it might be quicker than throwing a dagger
DM: So what were you going to do?
Player 3: I'm going to drink a potion
DM: You don't have a potion in your hand, so you can't do it in time
Player 3: You didn't ask us what we had in our hands. You only asked Player 1.
DM: So did you have a potion in your hand?
Player 3: Yes, I don't trust Player 1 so I had a potion ready in case he tried anything
Player 1: In that case, I throw my dagger at Player 3, not Player 2
Player 3: You can't change your action now that you know what mine is going to be
Player 1: I would have seen the potion you conveniently forgot to mention. Anyway, throwing a dagger is faster than drinking a potion
Player 3: I came prepared. The potion has been decanted into a beer mug. I can take a few swallows of beer, errr I mean potion, before a dagger can travel 30 feet. Actually, you don't even know it is a potion because its in the mug; you probably think it's beer
Player 1: I don't trust you either, so I'll know you were up to something
DM: Um, Insight vs Deception; no you don't know there's a potion in the mug
Player 1: I still don't trust him; I'm throwing the dagger at Player 3 anyway
DM: No, you failed the roll, you throw at Player 2.
Player 2: I dive behind the wall, out of the way, so he misses
Player 1: Does he get behind the wall before I can throw?
DM: It's a low wall, and he's right next to it, I guess it's an opposed Initiative check.
Player 1: If I lose the check, I'll throw at Player 3 instead
Player 3: Not if I drink my potion first! It's a potion of invisibility
DM: Okay, we'll have a 3 way Initiative check (dice are rolled) order is Player 1, then Player 2 then Player 3
(Player 1 throws dagger at Player 2, Player 2 drinks potion, Player 3 dives behind the wall)
DM: Okay, round 2, at last. Player 1, you're up first
Player 3: Hang on a minute, I had a loaded crossbow hidden behind the wall, in case things got rough. Surely I can fire it before Player 1 can do anything?
Player 1: You don't know what I was going to do yet ...

Why would the DM let it get out of hand like that? I made the ruling that he went first. If he was using sleight of hand to hide it, it would be sleight of hand and not deception which is purely social. End of story. If the players want to have a discussion about it after the game, they are welcome to, but disruptions like that should not be tolerated.

"Sleight of Hand. Whenever you attempt an act of legerdemain or manual trickery, such as planting something on someone else or concealing an object on your person,"

 

[Mort]

Kind of, but most of those aren't a surprise attack. A lot of them are first-and-foremost a reflex comparison. Traditional initiative doesn't work well for a classic Western stand off at all.

This is not a surprise draw, and I don't know how I'd run it in D&D:


This is a surprise attack, and I have no problem allowing that attack before rolling initiative:

If it's REALLY a surprise then that's covered adequately by the 5e surprise rules. The guy who has surprise will ACT first even if he didn't win initiative.

I was referring to when there is no surprise.

 

[Lyxen]

This is not a surprise draw, and I don't know how I'd run it in D&D:

I've used that one in a post above to justify readying actions before combat starts, as otherwise, with D&D, it's entirely random, with the only point being that blondie has the highest survival chance of all, since he knows that Tuco's revolver is empty and would therefore shoot at Sentenza first, so if Sentenza did not shoot first at Blondie, then Blondie would win. But if Blondie readies an action to shoot at Sentenza, he has a higher chance to win.

Actually, there is a very interesting logic puzzle with 3 shooters, one with 100% chance to kill at every shot, one with 80% and the last one with 50%. The assumption is that someone's turn to shoot will come in any order and he can pick his target, then he can only fire again once all others have fire once, etc. If you don't know who is going to shoot first, who has the highest chance of survival ?

Actually the last guy has more than 50% chance to survive...

This is a surprise attack, and I have no problem allowing that attack before rolling initiative:

For me, this falls in the area of 5e suprise, just slightly modified for not being aware that one of the guy is actually a combattant. So you run combat as usual, but the sheriff is surprised during the first round.

 

[Lyxen]

The same "mandate" language is also used for skill ability checks. How do you rationalize that away?

Very easily, the ability skill check tells you that, depending on circumstances, you can roll or not. The MORE SPECIFIC combat rule (which is only a subset of the ability check. just for one ability and in a specific circumstance) specifically tells you to roll. So you roll. It does not tell you to make a check, it tells you, SPECIFICALLY, to roll.

 

[Maxperson]

Very easily, the ability skill check tells you that, depending on circumstances, you can roll or not.

No it doesn't. I quoted you the absolute language that you are using for initiative. Here's a DIFFERENT example.

"Stealth. Make a Dexterity (Stealth) check when you attempt to conceal yourself from enemies, slink past guards, slip away without being noticed, or sneak up on someone without being seen or heard."

There's nothing circumstantial or optional there. And here's another example.

"Investigation. When you look around for clues and make deductions based on those clues, you make an Intelligence (Investigation) check."

Nothing circumstantial or optional there, either. And a fourth example.

"Insight. Your Wisdom (Insight) check decides whether you can determine the true intentions of a creature, such as when searching out a lie or predicting someone's next move."

All of those examples use your "mandated" terminology.

The MORE SPECIFIC combat rule (which is only a subset of the ability check. just for one ability and in a specific circumstance) specifically tells you to roll. So you roll. It does not tell you to make a check, it tells you, SPECIFICALLY, to roll.

No. You don't get to declare it a subset of ability check when the rules don't say that. It's an ability check plain and simple, and as such falls under the ability check rules like any other ability check.

 

[Bill Zebub]

If he has the extra attack feature, sure.

But you just made statements about “realism” in regard to the speed of throwing daggers vs. moving 30 feet. Do you only assert realism before normal combat begins, or do you continue to bend rules to fit your concept of realism throughout the fight?

I’m being somewhat facetious, of course. Just trying to make the point that all of D&D combat is abstract and unrealistic. It’s a game, not a simulation. So I find it a bit odd to pick this one thing and insist it be realistic.