Do the initiative rules discourage parley?

[Saeviomagy]

If I start casting a spell, I have STARTED casting. You then, in response, interrupt with your Readied Action.

I'd suggest we stay away from interrupting a spellcaster, because that has it's own special set of rules for resolution.

However, using your words, my action is resolved before your action. So when my action is resolved, your action has, by the rules, not even started.

Otherwise doing things like "I move if he shoots at me" is totally pointless, because the DM can say "nuh-uh, shooting is an atomic action, and your readied action occurs after it starts, therefore after it is resolved".

IOW - the ready rules cease to work unless there is the capability to resolve the readied action in it's entirety before the triggering action.

And that includes your opponent becoming un-flat-footed.

If the ability to resolve before the trigger is granted, then we can interpret triggering conditions to handle anything.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

But, he could do it with the Quick Draw feat. Or, he might have Improved Unarmed Stike and not need a weapon. Or maybe he sleeps with a weapon in hand.

The point is that it could still happen.....

Maybe he had poison on his blade.

Sure, but I acknowledged the possibility that he might be Joe Prizefighter or Joe Quickdraw. The point is that, as soon as the hobo ceases to be pathetic, it is no longer ridiculous that he could get the drop on the PCs. The hobo was initially a counterexample. The original example was Neo. It does not strain believability at all that Neo might get the drop on a SWAT team in the Matrix even if they wake him up with guns pointed at him while he's sleeping. In fact, we expect Neo to be able to take them all out before they can shoot him. After all, Trinity pretty much did that in the opening sequence of the first movie and Neo is quicker than Trinity.

You acknowledged this when you made the counterexample. I believe your post was "sure, but Neo has 26 strength and dex." The logic of the counterexample was that "Joe Hobo" has to be someone who you not only do not expect to be able to get the drop on the PCs and take one out before they act, but also has to be someone who shouldn't be able to do so.

As soon as you give "Joe Hobo" an assassin level, Improved Initiative, Quickdraw, or Improved Unarmed Strike, he is no longer someone who shouldn't be able to get the drop on the PCs. He's someone who could conceivably get the drop on the PCs (but who is unlikely to do so). And the more you stack the deck in his favor (quickdraw and a poisoned dagger, for instance), the more "Joe Hobo" looks like Neo. And we expect Neo to be able to do that reliably.

Your attempts at dissecting this example do not invalidate the point of the example though.

The point is that nonsensical action resolution orders can occur due to the wide range and lack of a bell curve of a D20 for initiative, especially in round one.

The point only survives if the action resolution order is actually nonsensical. It ceases to be non-sensical as soon as you give the Joe Hobo the feats and weapons that actually make it possible.

For example, maybe he casts a spell from the ground and kills everyone, even though they were basically ready for it.

That doesn't seem nonsensical either. Lucky, perhaps. Maybe unlikely. But not nonsensical. Everyday in real life, cops die when suspects turn on them. They were basically ready for it (as is evidenced by the fact that, most of the time, the cop wins). But basically ready isn't the same thing as being actually ready and the split second between when a person realizes their enemy is acting (he's not just scratching his rear, he's going for a gun; I should shoot and not yell "keep your hands where I can see them") and when they pull the trigger or release the string is often too long. That a powerful wizard could cast a spell and kill the PCs from the ground? That's even more believable than the real life examples. If it's the right spell, he doesn't need to reach for anything.

The main thing that bothers me about initiative is that in a situation where everyone is aware of everyone else, combat starts and some characters are still flat-footed. Even though actions are SUPPOSED to be simulataneous and even though one character might have to charge 60 feet in order to attack another character.

The charging sixty feet stretches credulity a little bit, but I've seen enough fights to think that flatfooted is actually a fairly good mechanic. When I taught martial arts and did kickboxing, there was always that opening moment in the fight, right after the referee said "fight!" that I (or the other guy) could sieze the initiative and my opponent might not be prepared. We were both aware of each other. We were both waiting for something to happen. But until we were actually fighting for a few seconds, we weren't at our best. It was even more apparent in point-fighting. Since there would be a break there as soon as someone scored a point, you would see a lot more of that sezing the initiative, moving 10 feet and landing a punch, kick, or chop before the other guy had gotten in motion.

 

[FreeTheSlaves]

Part of the problem-perception is what is the difference in appearance between a warrior that is flatfooted and the same that isn't? My belief is that the same warrior looks and acts very different from when he is expecting trouble from any quarter to when he is attuned to the clear & iminent danger.

Only the Barbarian & Rogue are always twitching with the expectation of constant danger, & only he with combat reflexes has the technique learned to respond aggresively in an instant.

As for the parley, I'm happy for it to be interrupted by violence and perhaps continue after someone is defeated. As a DM I will not actively compensate for blood thirsty action that deprives the PC's of any vital information, that is too bad and no doubt can positively feed into another story arc. I figure that if I keep the consequences real and don't abuse speeches, they will be savioured as the treat they are.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'd suggest we stay away from interrupting a spellcaster, because that has it's own special set of rules for resolution.

Why?

Because it supports my position as opposed to yours?

However, using your words, my action is resolved before your action. So when my action is resolved, your action has, by the rules, not even started.

No, my action, by the rules, has not been resolved.

It has been started.

Otherwise doing things like "I move if he shoots at me" is totally pointless, because the DM can say "nuh-uh, shooting is an atomic action, and your readied action occurs after it starts, therefore after it is resolved".

Incorrect. Actions are NOT atomic. That is the flaw in your thinking.

Actions can be interrupted.

Your movement action can be interrupted with my Attack of Opportunity, even though you have already done some of your movement.

Your spell casting (or any other action) can be interrupted by my Readied Action.

IOW - the ready rules cease to work unless there is the capability to resolve the readied action in it's entirety before the triggering action.

This is the only sentence that I agree with.

And that includes your opponent becoming un-flat-footed.

If the ability to resolve before the trigger is granted, then we can interpret triggering conditions to handle anything.

Flat-footedness is not an action that can be proceeded.

It is an adverse condition (see page 300 of the DMG).

I ready a spell to heal him if he goes unconscious.

He goes unconscious. He falls to the ground. You heal him.

He does not go unconscious, you heal him, and he was NEVER unconscious and never falls to the ground.

Why?

Because you go before an ACTION that triggers the Ready Action. You do not go before AN ADVERSE CONDITION that triggers a Ready Action. Plus, you cannot really trigger on some adverse conditions (such as flat-footedness because it is not a condition the opponent is aware of and the reason it is not is that if you are unconscious and helpless and somebody heals you, you are immediately go from helpless to normal, not helpless to flat-footed, flat-footed is more a state of being not prepared and your opponent cannot perceive that).

"Readying an Action: You can ready a standard action, a move action, or a free action. To do so, specify the action you will take and the conditions under which you will take it. Then, any time before your next action, you may take the readied action in response to that condition. The action occurs just before the action that triggers it. If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character. Assuming he is still capable of doing so, he continues his actions once you complete your readied action."

Now, do not get confused between the triggering condition and adverse conditions. They are two different game mechanics.


Let's take a further example:

1) PC1 readies an action to cast Remove Blindness if PC2 gets blinded (or if the bad guy blinds him).

If you take the literal reading of Readying An Action above as per your definition:

2) The bad guy blinds PC2.
3) The ready action kicks off before the action that triggered it.
4) So, bad guy has not yet blinded PC2.
5) PC1 casts Remove Blindness on PC2.
6) Bad guy then blinds PC2.
7) PC2 is blind.

This is how it works with your "the readied action always goes before the action (or presumably condition)" literal interpretation where you throw the next sentence "If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character" sentence out the door.

 

[Gomez]

No one wants to go back to the tavern with tales about being sucker-punched
by the town hobo!

The last time this whole thing cheesed me off (as I complained about here) was the BEG started his
"Haha! You fools -- let me tell you how my zombie army...."
The party went "Feh, let's just kill him." and the tank of the group ( who
normally rolls horrible initiative) rolled high, crossed the room past all of the
zombie guards, and crushed the BEG.

In that case, it wasn't the fact that the attacker got a surprise round but
that everyone was flatfooted (no AoO) --- which is almost as bad!! -- and
that you can't ready an action until combat begins, not during your soliliquy.

If a BEG can be killed by a single blow from a fighter then he is no BEG!

 

[KarinsDad]

If a BEG can be killed by a single blow from a fighter then he is no BEG!

Lots of Fighters can do 15 to 30 points of damage straight up, 30 to 90 (depending on weapon crit multiplier) or more with a critical.

 

[Gomez]

First off, nobody can interpret your intent that way. If you say "Take 20", we think you mean "Take 20".

Secondly, now that you have stated this, you are now making up a house rule here.

Take 20 IS a rule. It is a rule for both skills and ability checks. Rolling initiative IS an ability check. It is a Dexterity ability check:

"The normal take 10 and take 20 rules apply for ability checks."

"At the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check. An initiative check is a Dexterity check. Each character applies his or her Dexterity modifier to the roll."

So with your logic, someone can "take 20" on a damage roll or saving throw.

 

[Gomez]

Does anyone know what book has the Hobo prestige class in it. I have a fighter/rogue that would love to take some levels in it.

 

[KarinsDad]

So with your logic, someone can "take 20" on a damage roll or saving throw.

Is a damage roll or a saving throw an ability check in the game? No.

Do you roll damage and saving throws when you are threatened or distracted? Yes.

So according to both of these rules, you cannot Take 20 for damage rolls or saving throws. In fact, you cannot Take 20 in combat at all.

An initiative roll, on the other hand, is an ability check. However, you roll initiative when you are threatened or distracted, so you still cannot Take 20 on an initiative roll.

Care to try again?

 

[Nail]

...(snip)....This is how it works with your "the readied action always goes before the action (or presumably condition)" literal interpretation where you throw the next sentence "If the triggered action is part of another character’s activities, you interrupt the other character" sentence out the door.

I think there are now - officially - more examples in this thread than you can shake a stick at. Wow. Everytime I visit this thread another two or three "readied action" examples have been added.

The "remove blindness" example is clever....and runs exactly counter to one of KarensDad's earlier examples about the Hobo ninja. In one, he argues the readied action happens before the action that triggers it, and in the other he argues that the readied action happens after the action that triggers it.

Anyone's head spinning yet?