Do the initiative rules discourage parley?

[two]

This is the opposite problem of thinking that whoever acts first gets a surprise round.

First, you can essentially 'take 20' on initiative provided you get a round to prepare. Unfortunately, this is a problem because the thieves can after a round do the same thing, which would favor the thieves I admit.

But, thieves lying on the ground need a move equivalent action to standup, and another move equivalent action to draw or pickup a weapon. So unless you are dealing with high level thieves with quickdraw and amazing tumble skills, the players would still get a full round of attacks on the thieves before they could do anything - and a full two rounds if the players win initiative.

Second, even if the thieves win initiative (as I pointed out above) they won't catch the party flat footed.

Thirdly, why doesn't someone in the party have the initimidate skill and intimidate these thieves into timidity? I would suggest that this is an example of something that would give a pretty high circumstance bonus to your initimidate checks.

Fourthly, if a player expressed a concern to me that this wasn't enough and/or the player seemed particularly careful to watch for any sign of hostile intent, I'd allow the players to make a sense motive check vs. the thieves bluff skill to detect the attempt of a thief he was covering to ready his combat action and give that player oppurtunity to respond using his readied action 'take 20' initiative before the thief can 'take 20' himself, thereby forcing the thief to beat the players initiative bonus + 20 - which would be hard for almost anyone improved initiative or not. For the record, I thought that the rules on this where alot clearer back in 3.0 when the Refocus action was specifically spelled out rather than made an aspect of the Ready action as in 3.5.

Fifthly, how did the thieves signal to each other that this was the time to go. Surely if they hadn't passed some gestures covertly to each other, one thief jumping up and attacking would catch the other thieves as much by surprise as it would the party.

And sixthly, whatever you think is a fair way to handle this, understand that the same is true for the party of thieves catching the player's unaware and sleeping. If the player's want some advantage, remind them that that same advantage can be used against them.

Lastly, and somewhat off topic, I don't think that D&D's initiative system is really all that unrealistic for having such a large random factor. Real life, things happen really quickly, and even people with agile reflexes can be caught blinking. Think of the times that NFL players catch each other off completely gaurd even after dozens of times facing each other in the same game and even though all of them are well honed atheletes and aware that the action is about to begin. Keep all this in mind the next time you are watching real combat footage.

At the end of the day, we are in agreement.

I like your house rule (4) very well, which does indeed allow the party to talk and at the same time keep (pretty much) their "we go first" advantage which, after all, is blown by the standard D&D initiative system where, after talking, not only is the enemy not flatfooted anymore, but despite any situational negatives gets a straight initiative roll to beat yours to move first if combat breaks out.

Readied actions don't change anything; everyone has something readied; who goes first? Roll init.

The party doesn't have a problem with " for tat". After all, the party could have used the surprise round to just lay down smack. Instead, they get a chance to talk and then lay down smack on non-flatfooted fully aware opponents; it's a trade off (assuming you let the party go first). It's clearly better to just attack. But if you allow a house rule like yours (4) it also allows the party to talk/parlay.

Clearly a sleeping party would be happy if a band of thieves decided to open dialogue before attacking THEM for very obvious reasons. There is no balance problem here.

Without a house rule, parlay/talking just throws away whatever advantage the party might have had.

Surprise round -- bye
Flatfooted -- bye
We are assured of acting first -- bye (see loss of surprise round)
We might even go twice before they get to go once (see loss of surprise round)
No advantages because they are sleeping (slitting throats, etc.) because you woke them.
Etc.

It's no wonder most parties don't talk first!!!

The D&D system: punishes, punishes, and punishes you for doing this.

At the very least, allow the party to burn their surprise round in order to get initiative on their opponents -- after speaking/waking them up, and talking a while.

If only for game-play's sake.

In other words, allow the party to make a tactically sub-optimal choice and throw them a bone: let them speak, and then attack. The thieves are better off than the alternative, and you have had a nice dialogue to boot.

 

[KarinsDad]

The one with the higher initiative bonus. Effectively, what you have in this case is the 'gunfighter showdown' scenario.

Both sides stare at each other and ready for the first sign that the other acts. Effectively, both sides have taken 20 on thier initiative check (old refocus action, new ready action). The one with the highest initiative automatically wins no matter who flinches first.

How do you "Take 20" on an initiative check?

You cannot Take 20 when you are faced with a threat or a distraction.

 

[KarinsDad]

It strikes me as strange, though that people would choose to ready actions in a surprise round rather than attacking first. I typically see players "get in free damage" during a surprise round.

True, but we are discussing the scenario where one group is aware of the other and surprises them and decides to parlay instead. The initiative system does not handle that scenario very well.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

True, but we are discussing the scenario where one group is aware of the other and surprises them and decides to parlay instead. The initiative system does not handle that scenario very well.

Yes, it does - for a certain value of "very well."

Talking is a free action and, unlike most actions, can be done outside of your own turn.

One party surprises the other, asks them if they want to parley. The other side, outside of its own turn in initiative order, can respond. If they don't choose to respond (or respond negatively), then the first side still has surprise.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

I think that this misperception can be cleared up by adding the 'reason' for rolling for initiative everytime.

"Roll for initiative because the swordsman's stance has just gone warlike, his eyes have hardened and his hand is about to blur towards his scabbarded sword."

 

[Goblyn]

Parley problems like this are probably why James Bond villains always trap him and tie him up all good before telling him their life stories.

 

[Felon]

Yes, you can ready an action to attack him if he moves. You cannot ready an action to "include the passive action of becoming un-flat-footed". That is a game mechanic concept, not a game action concept.

Are you trying to assert that being deprived of your Dex bonus is some imperceptible, indistinguishable abstraction? If so, I pity the rogues in your campaign. Flat-foofedness is a game mechanic that represents an action concept. If characters can perceive the difference, it sounds like a suitable condition for readying an action to me.

The DMG specifies that you should be specific and "becoming un-flat-footed" is not a specific game action.

I'm looking at the rules for readying an action, and there is not mention of a need to be highly specific with regards to the condition, nor that the condition need be some standard or move action. Regardless, this is a very specific and a very commonly-used condition. Freeze or I'll shoot. Stand perfectly still. Do not move a muscle or I'll blow you away.

In fact, he becomes "un-flat-footed" on his initiative on round one automatically. It is not his choice (since it is a game mechanic), it just happens. So, your solution here is invalid.

He stops being flat-footed even if he doesn't want to? That's pretty asinine. It's safe to say that people can remain in a still position and forego their Dexterity bonus if they choose to. Then again, this goes back to the rather obtuse assertion that it's just a mechanic with no physical correllary whatsoever.

And allow me to add, if you possess some official authority on the rules that I'm unaware of, please state your qualifications. I do not dispute your knowledge of the RAW--your posts on the whole display that you are erudite in these matters--but your attitude that you are qualified to declare with absolute finality what isn't "specific" or "valid" is pretentious in the extreme. You are making a unliateral ruling on matters that are entirely subjective and argumentative. Really, the only rebuttal I needed here is "says you, Karinsdad".

And, what if the opponents ready actions to attack the surprising characters if they move? Who wins the readied action when somebody finally moves?

Unless there's some Sage Advice column I haven't read, then that's not a rule that's covered. Use initiative bonus? Use a random die roll? A combination of the two? It's hardly problematic (indeed, the lack of predictability in such a tense situation could be very entertaining).

The initiative rules are just not set up to handle certain fairly common game events.

In this case, I submit that it isn't the rules that are inflexible, but rather your interpretation of them. I just provided a very simple, easily-implementable way to handle the scenario using the open-ended nature of the rules for readied actions, you went out of your way to dismiss it as unplayable. You did not find flaws of a practical nature, so you focused on conjectural issues. Indeed, asserting that characters cannot voluntarily remain flat-footed is highly impractical.

EDIT--Having said all that, I should emphasize that I too am dealing in a very conjectural manner with how readied actions work. While your average "un-flat-footed" character is noticably on-guard, shifting his facing constantly and trying to keep an eye out in every direction against incoming attacks, a character that is surprised in the manner I illustrated above is probably being more subtle, and could conceivably appear to be complying while cautiously putting his guard up, which is why I added that a Sense Motive check opposed by Bluff would be an appropriate response.

 

[Celebrim]

How do you "Take 20" on an initiative check?

You cannot Take 20 when you are faced with a threat or a distraction.

Well, that's why I put 'take 20' in quotes, because although it is effectively the same as taking 20, it's not actually the same mechanic as taking 20 with a skill check. At all.

This is one of those things - like weapon sizes - that I don't like about 3.5.

If you'll look on page 134 of the 3.0 Player's Handbook, you'll see a tiny little entry in the middle of the page for 'Refocus'. My understanding is that it disappeared from 3.5. That's a shame, because as a DM I've found it one of the most useful tools for sorting things out. Basically, it lets you take 20 on your initiative as a full round action where you just observe whats going on around you and get ready to act. As I understand it, 3.5 got rid of it by letting you take a Ready action that would effectively move your action to the top of the initiative order at the beginning of the next turn. That's not quite the same thing, and it has both positive and negative qualities. On the positive side, you never lose a turn getting refocused to people with extremely high initiative counts. On the negative side, it confuses people as to who actually goes first when two people are in a 'ready action' standoff. The answer is 'the one with the highest initiative bonus', but its much much clearer that that is true if you explicitly look at it as 'taking 20' on intiative. Also, its just alot more conceptually simple (and in my opinion cinematically cool) to think of it as 'refocusing' and taking 20 on your initiative, than to think of it in terms of the somewhat confusing 'ready' action.

Refocus ends up happening alot in my campaign. People who are hiding who have a couple of rounds to observe the target will take it to ensure that they have a high initiative. Spell casters or other 'second rank' types that don't have available targets (or don't want to spend a spell) will use it whenever they think that they can get away with it (it's not as safe of a choice as total defense). I _make_ anyone take it who seems to be unduly delaying, dithering and unsure of what to do, as in "Come on its a combat, you don't have 30 minutes to plan out your move like this was a chess game.

 

[Saeviomagy]

Yes, you can ready an action to attack him if he moves. You cannot ready an action to "include the passive action of becoming un-flat-footed". That is a game mechanic concept, not a game action concept. The DMG specifies that you should be specific and "becoming un-flat-footed" is not a specific game action.

In fact, he becomes "un-flat-footed" on his initiative on round one automatically. It is not his choice (since it is a game mechanic), it just happens. So, your solution here is invalid.

When you take a readied action, your action is resolved before that of your opponent, and your initiative is also before that of your opponent.
Since your opponent has not acted yet, he is still flat-footed when you get your go.

In a hyper-literal interpretation, "Freeze or I shoot" and "I ready my action for if he does anything" would have to be restated as "render yourself helpless or I shoot" and the readied action would be "I ready my action to shoot if he does anything except render himself helpless".

And it is perfectly possible to give up your dex bonus. I believe the optional rules on striking cover include the possibility (ie - if you want to give cover to a friend, you can choose to discard your dex bonus to allow a projectile to strike you). Although that may be 3.0...

 

[Saeviomagy]

If you'll look on page 134 of the 3.0 Player's Handbook, you'll see a tiny little entry in the middle of the page for 'Refocus'. My understanding is that it disappeared from 3.5. That's a shame, because as a DM I've found it one of the most useful tools for sorting things out. Basically, it lets you take 20 on your initiative as a full round action where you just observe whats going on around you and get ready to act.

No shame whatsoever. The effect is perfectly duplicated via the modifications to the delay action - you are no longer limited in how long you can delay - it's always possible to delay your action to any point, not simply to -(dex bonus) in a round. So refocus is unecessary. "I delay until after everyone else" is the same as "I refocus and beat everyone else on initiative".