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

[Maxperson]

You are reading this completely the wrong way, it's not the result of the roll which is certain, it the OUTCOME of the roll that has to be UNCERTAIN for an ability check.

Correct, and with my dagger scenario nothing is uncertain about the thrower going first. The outcome is certain, so by RAW I can rule he doesn't have to roll and goes first that round.

And the "exception" that you are looking for is in the combat rules: They MANDATE an initiative check, so there HAS TO BE A ROLL, therefore the outcome IS UNCERTAIN.

There is no mandate there. It calls for a check, just like in the ability check section with all the various skills. There is an overarching rule that applies to ALL ability checks, though, and that's the certainty/uncertainty rule.

Show me wording in the initiative section that says you must always roll for initiative. I'm betting you can't do that.

And you once again forgot that specific beats general, the SPECIFIC rule of combat that MANDATES an ability check IMPOSE UNCERTAINTY on the result.

It's not a specific combat rule. It's a general initiative rule.

That is the only possible reading of the RAW.

Man. For someone who has falsely accused me more than once of One True Wayism...

 

[Lyxen]

Try re-reading what I said. The act(beginning to move) is not the same as the action.

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.

Moving the hand to the weapon is not the intent. It's the act. You have moved your arm and hand to the weapon and are there for acting. Intent is purely in the mind. I am thinking about moving my hand to the weapon. That's intent to do something.

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.

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.

 

[Mort]

For what reason? If I haven't so much as moved my arm yet, there is no combat or initiative. Why's the jerk starting combat?

Isn't that kind of the point?

Since there is no surprise, DG started hostilities but lost initiative.

BUT since DG hasn't attacked YET, the GSG has to be careful. Sure he "knows" the DG is about to throw, but if he whips out a weapon and attacks he'll look like the aggressor to an outside observer (who was less observant and didn't see DG going for the dagger)!

If DG was more sneaky, he'd have gotten the dagger throw off before anyone was the wiser (surprise).

Also keep in mind, DG likely has a better initiative modifier than GSG (Dex characters tend to) so has a better chance of going first, even without surprise (though the swinginess of a D20 makes it far from certain).

That's my take.

 

[Maxperson]

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.

The Strawman is strong with you Padawan. That's very clearly(as in stated clearly multiple times) not what I'm saying. LOL

 

[Bacon Bits]

Everyone is different, but I would loathe that rule in practice.

It becomes a race to scream 'I ATTACK' first.

Maybe, but it's fairly realistic. The first person to break the peace has an advantage. That's the inherent risk of attempting diplomacy. If your goal is to be violent, being violent suddenly and with surprise is more effective.

If your players just want to kill the other guys, why didn't they just sneak in and get a full suprise round? Like it's weird to me that this feels like a problem in a real game situation.

 

[Maxperson]

Isn't that kind of the point?

Since there is no surprise, DG started hostilities but lost initiative.

But he didn't. If he hasn't even started moving his arm yet, not hostilities can possibly have started, so no initiative can be rolled.. His arm must be moving to some degree prior initiative being rolled for hostilities to start.

BUT since DG hasn't attacked YET, the GSG has to be careful. Sure he "knows" the DG is about to throw, but if he whips out a weapon and attacks he'll look like the aggressor to an outside observer (who was less observant and didn't see DG going for the dagger)!

Again. He's been holding his dagger the entire time and hostilities haven't happened. The only indicator that hostilities are now happening is his arm beginning to move.

 

[Lyxen]

Correct, and with my dagger scenario nothing is uncertain about the thrower going first. The outcome is certain, so by RAW I can rule he doesn't have to roll and goes first that round.

No, it's not. This is what I'm expecting you to prove by RAW, and this is one of the area in which you fail again and again.

There is no mandate there. It calls for a check, just like in the ability check section with all the various skills. There is an overarching rule that applies to ALL ability checks, though, and that's the certainty/uncertainty rule.

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

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

Show me wording in the initiative section that says you must always roll for initiative. I'm betting you can't do that.

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.

It's not a specific combat rule. It's a general initiative rule.

It's a specific use of the ability check rule the one that you are mentioning.

Man. For someone who has falsely accused me more than once of One True Wayism...

Reading the RAW has nothing to do with that, I'm just reading the rules, not even applying them in any game. Whereas you are the one trying to explain to us that we are doing is wrong because it's absdurd.

 

[Mort]

But he didn't. If he hasn't even started moving his arm yet, not hostilities can possibly have started, so no initiative can be rolled.. His arm must be moving to some degree prior initiative being rolled for hostilities to start.

Again. He's been holding his dagger the entire time and hostilities haven't happened. The only indicator that hostilities are now happening is his arm beginning to move.

See to me, this actually weakens the argument. He's coming in with a drawn dagger in hand?!?

That means parties are on HIGH alert and looking for any excuse, depending on the situation. If he even flinches, initiative might be set off. Or, even more likely, someone sees the drawn dagger and THAT sets off initiative right there.

 

[Mort]

Maybe, but it's fairly realistic. The first person to break the peace has an advantage. That's the inherent risk of attempting diplomacy. If your goal is to be violent, being violent suddenly and with surprise is more effective.

If your players just want to kill the other guys, why didn't they just sneak in and get a full suprise round? Like it's weird to me that this feels like a problem in a real game situation.

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.

 

[Maxperson]

No, it's not. This is what I'm expecting you to prove by RAW, and this is one of the area in which you fail again and again.



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.

It's NOT A MANDATE. It's simply a rule that is subject the ability check rules. Here, look at this.

"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, make a Dexterity (Sleight of Hand) check."

There's no option there, either. Whenever you attempt it, make a dexterity check. And yet the more specific rule on when to roll ability checks still applies to sleight of hand. That more specific rule also applies to the general initiative rules.

You are imagining a mandate where there isn't one.