Do the initiative rules discourage parley?

[Jeff Wilder]

I've noticed in 3E that players (including me) rush immediately into combat with the Bad Guys, hoping to get a surprise round. It occurs to me that the rules actually discourage pausing to soliloquy or offer surrender terms or gloat or anything but charge.

By the rules as I understand them, even if you're holding weapons on someone to threaten him, initiative is rolled when combat starts, and you've blown your chance at surprise. I realize a lot of DMs house rule this, but I'm interested in RAW. Am I missing something that would encourage my players to pause and talk to the Bad Guys before slaughtering them?

 

[moritheil]

I've noticed in 3E that players (including me) rush immediately into combat with the Bad Guys, hoping to get a surprise round. It occurs to me that the rules actually discourage pausing to soliloquy or offer surrender terms or gloat or anything but charge.

By the rules as I understand them, even if you're holding weapons on someone to threaten him, initiative is rolled when combat starts, and you've blown your chance at surprise. I realize a lot of DMs house rule this, but I'm interested in RAW. Am I missing something that would encourage my players to pause and talk to the Bad Guys before slaughtering them?

Initiative is not rolled until the DM calls for it. If the DM wishes the BBEG to give a speech on petunias before he goes into combat, for dramatic reasons, the speech is given in its entirety and then initiative is rolled.

There are always people who get impatient with dialogue and rush to declare something like "I shoot him with my crossbow," but the DM can always rule that the BBEG finishes speaking first. If the players don't want to speak, well, that's their problem. A few encounters with NPCs they didn't need to fight that outclass the party, have valuable information, and don't have their treasure with them should make them realize that it occasionally doesn't hurt to talk instead of fight.

If they complain about "losing the surprise round," point out that the surprise round is lost because the BBEG is aware that they're all there anyway. Otherwise, why is he giving the speech?

 

[Bront]

Generaly, we don't get supprise too often, as often both parties are somewhat aware of the other in some manner. If your party rushes into battle, then they may not have ever been placed in a situation where they shouldn't have, or at least they felt they shouldn't have (before or after). Occasionaly, it's fun to drop a hint to the PCs that maybe they missed something. Perhaps after combat they spot an emblem of a messanger who they should have talked to alive, or perhaps get their behinds handed to them by a group that would not have been hostile if they hadn't attacked.

 

[Crothian]

No, it doesn't. I've had great parlays with villians using the system.

 

[AuraSeer]

Initiative is not rolled until the DM calls for it. If the DM wishes the BBEG to give a speech on petunias before he goes into combat, for dramatic reasons, the speech is given in its entirety and then initiative is rolled.

This bugs me a lot, because it removes even the appearance of the party's free will. Why should the PCs be forced to stand motionless and wait for him? They're supposed to be participants in the world, not spectators watching "DM Theatre".

When the evil wizard spends two minutes talking about his garden, that's twenty rounds of dead time-- practically an eternity! What stops the fighter from waltzing over and chopping his head off mid-word? Why don't all the characters use the free time to drink potions or cast defensive spells, or at least draw their weapons? Who says I have to be polite and let the villain talk before I start trying to kill him?

The world is controlled by the DM, but the PCs are controlled by the players. Arbitrarily screwing with that makes for (IMO) a bad game.

 

[Mirage_Patrick]

This bugs me a lot, because it removes even the appearance of the party's free will. Why should the PCs be forced to stand motionless and wait for him? They're supposed to be participants in the world, not spectators watching "DM Theatre".

When the evil wizard spends two minutes talking about his garden, that's twenty rounds of dead time-- practically an eternity! What stops the fighter from waltzing over and chopping his head off mid-word? Why don't all the characters use the free time to drink potions or cast defensive spells, or at least draw their weapons? Who says I have to be polite and let the villain talk before I start trying to kill him?

The world is controlled by the DM, but the PCs are controlled by the players. Arbitrarily screwing with that makes for (IMO) a bad game.

I'll second that one

 

[William_2]

“Am I missing something that would encourage my players to pause and talk to the Bad Guys before slaughtering them?”

Leaving aside the system, IS there a good reason for them to do this? If not, then they certainly shouldn’t. There is no reason characters can’t speak as they move into position, either- you can offer surrender terms with every attack if you wish, as s free action, if you are seeking surrender. Are they?

I think the system allows well for parlay- simply ready or delay, and speak briefly. It has a cost, as it should if there is a benefit to it. No surprise round for sure, maybe even act second instead of first. So, deciding to speak to an armed and evidently hostile stranger rather than, say, trip them first, is a difficult decision.

If you have given your players good solid Bad Guys (capitalization yours) that they know are bad and that they are going to fight, expect them to go for the throat at first opportunity.

Regarding the aside above, the idea that an even moderately good DM would start an encounter with a long villain speech before rolling initiative is a bit of a stretch, I think. Encounters certainly start at the DM’s discretion, but once they start, rules have usually been agreed to, and in my experience are usually followed. I guess optional villain soliloquy may be a house rule- seems like a bad one, though.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

If passing up a precious opportunity to tag a flatfootedness target is generally too great a price to bother with negotiation, then you are roleplaying a paranoid sociopath who could never be trusted anyway. "Golly gee, if I win initiative fair and square I see no reason not to just kill him."

If that is the mindset at the outset, then it seems to me the rules are working just fine. Nothing unrealistic at all about that.

But to answer your question a bit more helpfully, we roll initiative and if there is an inclination to negotiate, everyone just Readies an action. By the RAW, this would be a bummer for the Rogues, but a non-issue for everyone else. Then we talk.

Really though, the RAW breaks down at this point. If hostilities do breakout, how does the DM adjudicate a motley roomful of people with Ready Actions that by their nature intertwine and overlap? (Everyone: "If any one of them makes a hostile move, I attack him.", etc.)

As our houserule, we just roll Initiative. And Rogues get their chance to get a flatfooted target if they roll well.

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

Regarding the aside above, the idea that an even moderately good DM would start an encounter with a long villain speech before rolling initiative is a bit of a stretch, I think. Encounters certainly start at the DM’s discretion, but once they start, rules have usually been agreed to, and in my experience are usually followed. I guess optional villain soliloquy may be a house rule- seems like a bad one, though.

If we are not interested in the speech, we tell the DM it is time to roll Initiative. The way we play it, any player can always ask for Initiative at any time.

 

[two]

No, it doesn't. I've had great parlays with villians using the system.

This is kinda like saying shooting yourself in the head doesn't always kill you, because you have done it twice now and lived to tell the tale.

You CAN parlay is any game system.

The question was, does the D&D initiative system help or actively hinder parlay?

You simply can't argue D&D does help parlay, because it doesn't.

As RC pointed out, if you do start talking and ready a bunch of actions -- well, it all boils down to initiative once again.

Once you have blown your chance to suprise, in D&D, it's gone forever.

(there isn't even a way to get a bonus to initiative).

For example, your party could sneak up on a sleeping collection of thieves. The party is all in position and alert. The party spokesman speaks, waking the thieves. They talk for 10 seconds, then somebody does something stupid. Initiative is rolled, and it turns out all the thieves go before any of the PC's. Even though the PC's are just sitting them, arrows notched, waiting for something.

You see?

That doesn't inspire a lot of talking.

It would be nice if the party in this case had "auto initiative", something like a presumed "20" on their initiative roll when things get ugly. They are, after all, waiting for things to get ugly. But it also allows a very fast thief to bet their init if he rolls really well, etc.