Do the initiative rules discourage parley?

[Primitive Screwhead]

Surprising Hobo..

Spot checks, to which the PC's should get hefty bonuses to.

I should have stated 'applicable checks to avoid surprise, be it Spot, Sense Motive, or whatever is appropriate, with hefty bonuses for the ambusher's'


If a PC is distracted at the critical moment and does not notice that the Hobo is awake and belligerant.... *and* the Hobo can get up, close with, and destroy said PC in the standard action only surprise round....without knowing which, if any, PC is flatfooted... yes.
And yes, thats one heck of a Hobo!

In the Hobo circumstance, there is virtually no chance of the Hobo getting the drop on the entire party, but is possible for one PC.

In the gunfighter scenario, its the same mechanic but seems less silly....

The surprise round is the 3 seconds worth of the combatants brains going 'oh S&&*' as steel prepared to cut flesh. Luck, skill, and training can overcome this 3 second delay as your brain kicks into gear. A previous poster mentioned how he experienced this in martial arts tournements.

IMHO, the initiative system works well as a whole in all but the very weird situations. The key is defining very clearly when to apply the game term of 'combat starts'.

 

[Jeff Wilder]

The key is defining very clearly when to apply the game term of 'combat starts'.

Okay, so when do you apply "combat starts" such that PCs are not heavily penalized when they attempt to get the drop on opponents, but not immediately slaughter them?

 

[Nail]

That's one heck of a hobo, though.

Oh, we've already established that. (See KarinsDad's ever more challenging posts above.) This is a well-trained and thoroughly equiped ninja hobo.

...ya just never can tell, can you?

 

[Nail]

Okay, so when do you apply "combat starts" such that PCs are not heavily penalized when they attempt to get the drop on opponents, but not immediately slaughter them?

Don't start combat until someone takes a hostile action. (And thus everyone is flat-footed at the beginning of combat, as per RAW.) Allow circumstance bonuses to initiative for the prepared party.

Then let 'er rip!

 

[moritheil]

Oh, we've already established that. (See KarinsDad's ever more challenging posts above.) This is a well-trained and thoroughly equiped ninja hobo.

...ya just never can tell, can you?

No, no, it's an NPC with the hobo PrC! See this thread:

http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=130108

 

[Primitive Screwhead]

Start of Combat

Okay, so when do you apply "combat starts" such that PCs are not heavily penalized when they attempt to get the drop on opponents, but not immediately slaughter them?

When an aggresive action is announced, by either side. The definition of aggresive action is left open based on the perception of the opponents. Drinking a Potion of Dragon Breath may be bluffed as just being thirsty.

Sample: Group sneaks up on Temple Guards. Palidon suggest that they parley and convince the Guards that letting them in is a Good Thing. Rogue sneaks up on the side and prepares to ambush if need be. Bard steps out and starts chatting up the Guards {Diplomancy, taking a couple minutes}

During this time, the Guards get a chance to see the Hiding Rogue and act on that knowledge.

At the end of Diplomancy the options include;
The Guards could be Hostile and launch into combat..
The Bard could get annoyed with his poor rolls and launch into combat..
The Guards could be convinced and step aside.
etc..

Assuming combat, failure of any one character in noticing the intent to begin combat results in a surprise round, which those characters are not part of.
The initiative focused Thief, having not been spotted and notices the Guards reaching for thier swords, launches from his hidind place and Sneak Attacks the guard. Then, as his normal initiative is higher, gets to act first in the normal round and still benefits from the flat-footedness of his opponents.

Ambush complete. No loss of advantage for stopping to talk.

Basically, if the party prepares for the encounter instead of simply wading forward into melee, they can retain the benefits and are not penalized. Contrarywise, they can be rewarded as the succesful Diplomancy is considered overcoming the encounter, so they gain XP without expending resources {other than time}

 

[Nail]

No, no, it's an NPC with the hobo PrC!

Right!

See, telling us that before we used it in an example about initiative would have been important!

 

[KarinsDad]

Don't start combat until someone takes a hostile action. (And thus everyone is flat-footed at the beginning of combat, as per RAW.) Allow circumstance bonuses to initiative for the prepared party.

Then let 'er rip!

I like Plane Sailing's suggestion of pretending that you are starting in round two instead of round one for stand off situations. That way, the assassin does not run past all of the King's guards and gets a sneak attack against the King, just because he decided to do a hostile action and they stand around like store window dummies. He can still run past them, but at least the King is not flat-footed.

 

[meleeguy]

Initially, after reading your post I felt compelled to argue that the rules encourage, or at least don't discourage parley.

After reading this thread, however, I'm afraid the only logical choice a poor player can make is to charge headlong into the safety of battle, or risk being immobilized in a quagmire of rules complexity wherein the DM repeatedly bashes your head as a readied action.

 

[moritheil]

Initially, after reading your post I felt compelled to argue that the rules encourage, or at least don't discourage parley.

After reading this thread, however, I'm afraid the only logical choice a poor player can make is to charge headlong into the safety of battle, or risk being immobilized in a quagmire of rules complexity wherein the DM repeatedly bashes your head as a readied action.

While facetious, you have a good point. I find that as DM, how much I screw over the players for parleying is what determines how likely they are to parley, not any other factor, regardless of its apparent cost in efficiency or mechanics.

That is, with villains who honor agreements, promote prisoner exchanges, and allow everyone to leave alive in a "nobody has to die" sort of way, the party is likely to consider talking.

If I bring in villans who repeatedly renege on deals, talk only as a way of getting the suckers to stop fighting for a second or gather 'round, and generally abuse the party's ideas of decency and fair play, the party is unlikely to want to talk.

After screwing over a group for the ninth time because they listened to the villain's pleas for negotiation or mercy, a DM has little right to be surprised when in their next encounter they slaughter the enemy in cold blood no matter what the enemy claims.