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

[GMforPowergamers]

i go back and forth on this alot... but I am defaulting to 'they react quicker'

there is an episode of one of the star treks (I think it must be DS9 cause it was about augmented genetics) where a 'super human' tells the captain "I'm going to attack you" then does before the captain can react.

 

[Lanefan]

So the act of throwing the dagger is not the same thing as the action of throwing the dagger ? At this stage, I think I'm done with this discussion if this is what you are pretending.

I think he's saying that declaring the action of throwing the dagger happens at a different meta-time than the in-fiction act of throwing the dagger; and though others at the table can (and probably will) react to the declaration, there isn't really enough time in the fiction for anyone to interrupt the throw.

No, your intent is to throw the dagger. It's so much an intent that you assume that it's already thrown so that no-one can intervene.

Close; the assumption is that the odds of someone being able and-or fast enough to intervene are far lower than standard initiative-rolling would provide.

But then, if your only intent is to put your hand on the dagger, then we are in agreement, that gesture starts combat but then drawing it and throwing it is subject to initiative and is not going to happen since that gesture of putting your hand of the dagger has tingled the extremely aware barbarian 30 feet away and you are already dead from a greatsword cleaving you from shoulder to groin.

Yes, if the dagger-thrower hesitates like that then yeah, he's in a world o' trouble.

 

[Lanefan]

And once more, specific beats general, out of all the ability checks, there is one that HAS to happen in combat:
View attachment 155323

Step 3 "Roll Initiative"is not optional; EVERYONE involved in the combat ROLLS INITIATIVE. No option. It has to happen. Therefore it's uncertain.

Done, just above, it's for EVERYONE INVOLVED IN THE COMBAT. It's not optional. You cannot even take turns and resolve actions (including all attacks) before you have done that.

The key word there is "involved".

My take on it is that in a sudden-attack situation not everyone is involved right at the start; only the attacker and maybe a few others who happen to be alert enough or lucky enough to see it coming just in time. And if this doesn't agree with how 5e wants it, well tough.

side note - I'm a bit taken aback by the order here: I'd have expected positions to be established before surprise is determined, as positioning can play a very large role in what one can observe or notice.

 

[Mort]

i go back and forth on this alot... but I am defaulting to 'they react quicker'

there is an episode of one of the star treks (I think it must be DS9 cause it was about augmented genetics) where a 'super human' tells the captain "I'm going to attack you" then does before the captain can react.

But this isn't odd at all. The guy is just THAT confident he can win on an opposed DEX check (which is all initiative really is) and attack first.

5e is swingy because it's a D20, but you can approach being that confident and modeling it. A gloomstalker ranger, for example, with the alert feat can reasonably rock +13 on initiative. Do that with advantage (say by being genetically augmented?) and you can be fairly certain you're beating the average human and going first.

 

[Bill Zebub]

.

One big difference between us, I think, is that I have no problem at all with "gotcha" situations - both for and against the PCs - as long as they make sense in the fiction. I mean, from my perspective the whole point of Thieves and Assassins is to be "gotcha" characters; otherwise what's the point?

And I don’t want a DM who arbitrarily discards rules just based on their own notion of realism. There’s already plenty of leeway for that in certain areas of the rules without also ignoring the parts that are perfectly clear.

 

[Lanefan]

You've never been in a situation where people are armed on one or both sides and are talking things out?

It doesn't matter if high alert is happening. It takes less than a second to reach back and then hurl the dagger forward. Even on high alert, by the time you can register the motion beginning to happen, it's impossible for you to move 30 feet and attack before that dagger is thrown.

What you're running aground on here is that by RAW*, movement happens instantaneously and doesn't take any in-fiction time - it's like a mini-teleport. Far more realistic would be "OK, Swordyguy, your spot in the turn order is 19 but that 30 feet of movement is gonna take you 9 initiative pips, so for this round your actual attack comes in on 10. Next round you're back to 19."

* - can't even blame 5e for this one; it was a major problem in 3e that has, sadly, been carried forward since.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

But this isn't odd at all. The guy is just THAT confident he can win on an opposed DEX check (which is all initiative really is) and attack first.

5e is swingy because it's a D20, but you can approach being that confident and modeling it. A gloomstalker ranger, for example, with the alert feat can reasonably rock +13 on initiative. Do that with advantage (say by being genetically augmented?) and you can be fairly certain you're beating the average human and going first.

yeah this is what I meant.

I imagine a guy with +7-+10 initiative felling he is always going to go first against the guy with a +2. So no surprise, and he just goes first... but if the guy with the +2 tries to 'get the shot in' of 'drawing his knife and stabbing guy' and the DM says roll initiative that and the one who didn't initiate goes first (again +10 vs +2) it means that while drawing the knife the other guy reacted first...

come to think of it that is the gunslinger thing too "they have to touch there gun so it is a 'fair' shot...

 

[GMforPowergamers]

It doesn't matter if high alert is happening. It takes less than a second to reach back and then hurl the dagger forward. Even on high alert, by the time you can register the motion beginning to happen, it's impossible for you to move 30 feet and attack before that dagger is thrown.

I may not be a gunslinger(although I play a mean game of paintball), I am defiantly no cop, but I think there is WAY more to it then the second to hurl the dagger. you tense for that second, and are about to draw and the MUCH faster combatant gets to hit you seems to fit fine.

 

[Lanefan]

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.

Yes, but where it can be made to better simulate reality without overly complicating game play, why not do it?

In 1e heavy crossbows have a slower attack rate than thrown daggers and that's reflective of reality. There was no need for 5e (or whichever edition first did so) to simplify it, as it didn't need simplifying!

 

[Bill Zebub]

Yes, but where it can be made to better simulate reality without overly complicating game play, why not do it?

Because in the examples being described it leaves the players uncertain what the rules are because the DM is making arbitrary decisions.

If you want to codify it in a consistent house rule that players can understand and plan around, that’s a different matter.