Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Do the initiative rules discourage parley?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 2199108" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>Being 'in combat' is a gamist/rules term. It has nothing at all to do with PC actions. In theory, we could run EVERYTHING in terms of combat rounds. The only reason we don't do so is that level of detail would get to be tedious in situations that don't require it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Err... they don't? Are you saying that the rules are flawed or that the way people apply the rules is flawed?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They can.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Generally speaking, they can. I just outlined to you how under the rules, if the PC's have a higher initiative bonus than the Hobo, <em>they always go first in this situation</em>. Now, if the PC's <em>don't</em> have a higher initiative bonus than the Hobo, that implies a very special Hobo. One of my rules is that NPC's and PC's are on a level playing field. What applies to one applies to the other. If my quick reflexed PC rogue is in the hobo's position, he has a reasonable expectation of being able to do what protagonist heroes always do in the movies (and sometimes do in real life) and that is get the jump on his captors even though he's disadvantaged. Sure, it would be a difficult thing to attempt, but the PC rogue has a reasonable expectation that there is some possibility of success both for cinematic and realistic reasons. In real life, people blink. They are taken by surprise. In real life, it does often take a momment to consciously go, "Oh no, he moved, I better do something, release the string finger!" unless you have been trained again and again how to respond under pressure to the point that it is a reflex. If you don't believe that, then I doubt you've ever really been in a fight.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>He doesn't have to be. All he needs to be is faster than the PC's, and since the PC's are in D&D superpowered heroes, that certainly implies a degree of superpowered quickness.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, it isn't. There is no pretending involved. PC's can ask for the DM to begin resolving things in terms of combat rounds <em>at any time they feel like they need that level of detail</em>, even if it is merely a friendly conversation. If they did it too often when I didn't feel it was warranted, I would get annoyed and have OOC conversation about what thier concerns are, but there is no bending of the rules involved in letting PC's take whatever action they want during thier suprise round. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it was railroad DMing to limit the types of actions a PC can take in a suprise round. Surprise round is after all a gamist/rule mechanic, and not a real and discrete thing.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I just told you how I feel.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 2199108, member: 4937"] Being 'in combat' is a gamist/rules term. It has nothing at all to do with PC actions. In theory, we could run EVERYTHING in terms of combat rounds. The only reason we don't do so is that level of detail would get to be tedious in situations that don't require it. Err... they don't? Are you saying that the rules are flawed or that the way people apply the rules is flawed? They can. Generally speaking, they can. I just outlined to you how under the rules, if the PC's have a higher initiative bonus than the Hobo, [i]they always go first in this situation[/i]. Now, if the PC's [i]don't[/i] have a higher initiative bonus than the Hobo, that implies a very special Hobo. One of my rules is that NPC's and PC's are on a level playing field. What applies to one applies to the other. If my quick reflexed PC rogue is in the hobo's position, he has a reasonable expectation of being able to do what protagonist heroes always do in the movies (and sometimes do in real life) and that is get the jump on his captors even though he's disadvantaged. Sure, it would be a difficult thing to attempt, but the PC rogue has a reasonable expectation that there is some possibility of success both for cinematic and realistic reasons. In real life, people blink. They are taken by surprise. In real life, it does often take a momment to consciously go, "Oh no, he moved, I better do something, release the string finger!" unless you have been trained again and again how to respond under pressure to the point that it is a reflex. If you don't believe that, then I doubt you've ever really been in a fight. He doesn't have to be. All he needs to be is faster than the PC's, and since the PC's are in D&D superpowered heroes, that certainly implies a degree of superpowered quickness. No, it isn't. There is no pretending involved. PC's can ask for the DM to begin resolving things in terms of combat rounds [i]at any time they feel like they need that level of detail[/i], even if it is merely a friendly conversation. If they did it too often when I didn't feel it was warranted, I would get annoyed and have OOC conversation about what thier concerns are, but there is no bending of the rules involved in letting PC's take whatever action they want during thier suprise round. In fact, I'd go so far as to say it was railroad DMing to limit the types of actions a PC can take in a suprise round. Surprise round is after all a gamist/rule mechanic, and not a real and discrete thing. I just told you how I feel. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Do the initiative rules discourage parley?
Top