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

[payn]

The standing around talking to each other is always tricky. I voted #1 normal initiative because thats how I handled it so far. I've seen some systems that try and weigh speed of action and simultaneous resolution, but they are always too crunchy for their own good and slow the game down.

 

[JarooAshstaff]

If everyone is wary then regular initiative since there is no way to gain surprise. There are no "top of the initiative" rules that I heard of.

 

[Mort]

Roll for initiative as normal.

If the person who initiated really DID surprise everyone else, then they will act first even if they didn't "go" first. (but not the case here, everyone saw the person reach - so normal initiative)

If they managed to surprise some of the people they will act before those surprised. (again not the case here)

Seems to work ok.

 

[Maxperson]

I picked other, because it's dependent on the circumstances. If there are a group of orcs and one or all start charging at the party, it's normal initiative, since there's plenty of time for someone else to act first. However, if there just wouldn't be time for someone else to go first, then the one acting has highest initiative unless there a very good in fiction reason for it to be otherwise. If it's a whole group without some sort of well oiled navy seal like training who are acting, then I will just go to normal initiative, since I can't possibly figure out whose slow and whose not, so I default to the rules.

 

[Xetheral]

Ability checks, like initiative, are only needed to resolve uncertainty. In a situation where only one character is trying to start combat, there's no uncertainty regarding who starts combat for an ability check to resolve. Accordingly, in the situation described I would have the initiator at the top of the initiative order, and have everyone else roll to determine the rest of the order. (In a different situation, where multiple characters wanted to react to the same IC stimuli by starting combat, I'd roll as normal, so there's no advantage of being the first to shout out that you attack.)

My approach comes at a cost: in situations with one initiator it becomes impossible for someone else to act faster. However, I'd point out that all methods for transitioning to initiative with one initiator come at a cost: if you want to keep the ability to pre-empt the initiator, you have to either: (1) lock the initiator into their declared action; (2) allow the pre-emptor to react to a declared action that may never actually happen; or (3) let the initiator start--but not resolve--their action prior to transitioning to initiative.

From a RAW standpoint, I think (2) is arguably correct, but it comes with the additional complication of what information you give to the pre-emptor: do you let them act on the knowledge of the initiator's declared action, even though the initiator may choose not to take the declared action when it finally gets around to be their turn? If so, you introduce weird causality issues, but if not, going first in initiative may be a disadvantage if you don't know enough about what is coming to make going first useful. (In the most extreme case, if you have to skip your turn because you don't want to initiate combat and IC your character doesn't know that the initiator is going to, the end result of winning initiative is the same as going last in initiative.)

I think the cost of not allowing pre-emption when there is only one initiator is the least disruptive of the available options, but that's strictly personal preference.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Unless one side or the other has put in the effort to surprise the other (whether through deception, stealth checks, or just plain smart strategy), it's always going to be just rolling initiative as normal in my games. I'm not a big fan of giving someone a free action before combat just because they shout "fireball" at me in the middle of an NPC talking.

 

[Charlaquin]

Roll initiative as normal. If the situation is one where no one expected combat to break out (e.g. the initiator just up and sucker-punched someone in the middle of a friendly conversation), then everyone save the initiator might be surprised. I’d have to judge it on a case-by-case basis.

 

[CleverNickName]

We resolve the action that triggers combat (the casting of the spell, or the rapier stab, or the intimidation check, whatever). Then we roll initiative as normal.

In my next campaign, I'm going to try something different. Everyone except the person triggering combat will roll initiative. Then the person who triggers combat will be assigned an initiative that is higher than everyone else, and will get to act first.

 

[Arilyn]

They'd usually get to go first but roll their initiative for the remaining rounds in combat.

 

[Mannahnin]

Unless one side or the other has put in the effort to surprise the other (whether through deception, stealth checks, or just plain smart strategy), it's always going to be just rolling initiative as normal in my games. I'm not a big fan of giving someone a free action before combat just because they shout "fireball" at me in the middle of an NPC talking.

Exactly this.

Normal initiative rolls unless there's a genuine possibility of surprise. No free actions for cutting off dialogue. I'm not incentivizing that behavior.