Do you play the "You're Flatfooted 'til your Initiative" rule?

[Thanee]

97.50% voted yes so far!

Seems like your groups are indeed uncommon, reapersaurus!
But that doesn't need to be a bad thing!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Shard O'Glase]

I run it as is, but I don't think a change would be nerfing rogues back to 2e status. Even if sneak atacks were removed from the game, the mid bab, multiple attacks form bab, and feats, evasion, and uncanny dodge abilities would amke them competent in a fight, not masters of a figth like the fighter classes, but with 8sp and the most diverse class skill selection they are masters out of combat. In 2ed the %system for skills meant they never really until extemely high elvels became masters out of combat, and they weren't even competent in a fight even with backstabs. Admitedly I run a heavy skil useage campaign so maybe I value 8sp and a wide class skill selection more than others.

Oh and what is RAW, it may be obvious to some but I suck at these thins and my mind is fealing realy foggy right now.

 

[Thanee]

Rules As Written? (I can only guess)

BTW, in 2e you could get high percentages as a Thief, because you could decide where to put the %-points each level, in 1e you had that fixed slow progression!

Bye
Thanee

 

[maddman75]

We play as written, though I'll admit its an often forgotten rule. I especially try to remember when rogues stand to get sneak attack dice. I don't want to hose them just because we are eager to get into the thick of it.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Rules As Written? (I can only guess)

BTW, in 2e you could get high percentages as a Thief, because you could decide where to put the %-points each level, in 1e you had that fixed slow progression!

Bye
Thanee

Yes if you chose to specialize in two fields those %s could get high fairly quick. Climb walls always started decent, add in dex, and race and you could get some skills to the 95% range decently fast. Problem was thier was no above 95%, while thier were plenty of penalties.(I beleive the high level handbook addressed this to some degree) I think an outstanding lock had a 40% penalty so the ebst lockpikcer in the world owuld have at best a 55% chance of success, and if he failed the attempt he just couldn't make another attempt.

 

[reapersaurus]

It seems like that vote is off even from the responses here (unless you play the rule as written every single time, you're not playing it by the rules)

But for example - Thanee - I know we aren't playing it that way in the Non-Iconic Adventure.
I'm fairly sure most online games aren't using it.
I've seen/played in probably 8 different ones, and with my 6 or 7 different RL groups, that encompasses almost a hundred people, and they never mentioned it, or to my knowledge used it.

I guess asking the Rules Forum of the most knowledgeable 3E Message Board is not the place to get a feel for the common game , so maybe it's just that you guys are the uncommon ones in relation to this rule.

 

[Pax]

Apparently, even when there is no surprise round, a character is considered flatfooted until it reaches their initiative order in combat.
Main impact to game: No DEX boni, suffer sneak attacks, and no AoO.

Example: 4 1st level combatants, 2 on a side. NO SURPRISE.
1st side has Rogue Archer and Spiked Chain Ftr, 2nd side has Bbn and Mage.
Initiative: Bbn (20), then Rogue (18), then Chain Ftr (17), then Mage (16).

Bbn WAY in the back rank goes. Rages, pulls out greatsword, runs 80' right past the mage, past the Chain Ftr's entire threatened quadrant (incurring NO AoO's) and charges into Rogue, almost killing him cause no DEX bonus.
All because he started his Charge a couple blinks of an eye faster than the Rogue & Ftr started?

Any Spiked-Chain wielder worth the paper an ink the character is recorded with, *will* have Combat Reflexes (Human Fighter (1); Exotic Weapon: Spiked Chain ... Combat Reflexes ... Weapon Focus, Spiked Chain)

Then, the Rogue goes. He steps 5' back, ignores the Bbn that almost killed him, and fires at the Mage who he easily hits cause no DEX bonus and kills him with sneak attack damage.

Does this make sense to you?

Sure. Makes near-perfect tactical sense, EXCEPT, the Barbarian should have charged the Fighter, who would be the greater tactical threat than the Rogue.

Who plays this way?
I'm guessing that since I've never heard this rule discussed, and it's in the books, that MOST people would play this way, and I've just had uncommon groups.

I play that way ... and I think your guess is right.

If sneak attack were useful "only" in surprise rounds, and when the Rogue had flanking ... then beiong able to get a Sneak Attack bonus to ranged attacks would be pointless. In fourteen-plus months of gaming, I saw ... two, yes two instances of one side or the other gaining surprise. Cautious PCs, and home-ground-advantage NPCs.

But I think I'd remember if any group had done special AC calculations that only applied in the first round, and only until their PC moved, and used different tactics in the first round to take advantage of the PC or NPC that looked like they hadn't reacted yet.

How would that go, anyway?

Player1 to DM: I want to BullRush someone off the cliff. Which Kobold looks like they haven't moved yet?

The DM's answer would be "weren't you paying attention? now just pick one, already!"

The player should observe which kobolds have or haven't taken their action.

Additionally, most games I've played in, or GMed ... the NPCs tend to have initiative rolled in groups. IF there are twenty kobolds, I'd split them into groups of 5. Other GMs would just roll once for the whole mess of kobolds.

That just sounds so awkward.
And more: Wouldn't this rule change the entire weight of initiative being rolled in the open?
There are so many reasons to now roll initiative secretly, so as not to unduly influence the strategies used in combat.

Players shouldn't be making ANY rolls "secretly". As a DM, I don't announce the NPCs initiative until I have all the PC initiatives to hand; if that counts as rolling initiative "in secret" ... then I guess that's what I do. Occasionally, for a critical combat, I'll fudge the initiative roll, so that the main villain has the initiative to make his dramatic speech-and-exit, leaving his/her/it's minions to deal with the PCs, and so on. That rather requires not rolling openly ...

 

[Pax]

Yes if you chose to specialize in two fields those %s could get high fairly quick. Climb walls always started decent, add in dex, and race and you could get some skills to the 95% range decently fast. Problem was thier was no above 95%, while thier were plenty of penalties.(I beleive the high level handbook addressed this to some degree) I think an outstanding lock had a 40% penalty so the ebst lockpikcer in the world owuld have at best a 55% chance of success, and if he failed the attempt he just couldn't make another attempt.

Not true.

A roll of 96-00 always failed, but you COULD go above 95% skill ... the extra points served ONLY to offset penalties.

So the "best lockpicker in the world"might have a 150% skill, which means even with poor, improvised tools (-20%) against an autstanding lock (-40%), they still have a (150% - 20% - 40% = ) 90% chance of success

Full Plate Armor could be climbed in, just dandily, if you had a 180% or higher Climb Walls.

But even outside the armor, with no penalties at all ... a roll of 96-00 would always fail, 180% climb walls or no.

 

[Thanee]

It seems like that vote is off even from the responses here (unless you play the rule as written every single time, you're not playing it by the rules)

We do play the rule (flat-footed at the start of combat) every single time. The exceptions (I mentioned above) are built into the rules and just an interpretation of them!

But for example - Thanee - I know we aren't playing it that way in the Non-Iconic Adventure.
I'm fairly sure most online games aren't using it.

Actually, I'm fairly sure we do, just that it doesn't affect the game much. Also we are using a slightly different initiative approach, as everyone posts before the actions are resolved in one batch. That's just an oddity that happens in online gaming, unless you really want to wait for everyone to post and let the DM resolve each particular post in initiative order, which would take years!

But I'm sure that we use the flat-footed rule.

I've seen/played in probably 8 different ones, and with my 6 or 7 different RL groups, that encompasses almost a hundred people, and they never mentioned it, or to my knowledge used it.

Maybe you just didn't notice it?

I guess asking the Rules Forum of the most knowledgeable 3E Message Board is not the place to get a feel for the common game , so maybe it's just that you guys are the uncommon ones in relation to this rule.

*LOL*

Bye
Thanee

 

[Dark Eternal]

My game, as well as the two or so that I'm playing in at any given time, has always used the flat-footed rules. I'd imagine (as someone above stated) that that's the reason that most of my fellow players always load Improved Initiative onto their characters at first level, no matter how little sense it makes, and that it's also the reason that I hate NPC rogues, seeing as I despise wasting one of my precious feats on Imp. Init...

Seriously, neither I nor any of my fellows have ever had reason to question or debate the flat footed rule. In an initiative system that got quite a few nasty comments when we first switched over, it was one of the least often argued against aspects.

I will, in good honor, admit that we have a single player who still complains about the flat footed rule every time he gets struck by it. But then, the poor bastard in question has the worst die rolls I have EVER seen, as a consistant rule. I don't even know why he plays the game; if there's a check or a save to roll, he'll miss it. So he always goes last, and the NPC's always love to pick on his poor flat footed AC.

Anyways, just my ha'penny's worth.