Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ComradeGnull" data-source="post: 5736810" data-attributes="member: 6685694">Ok, I think I see- I think the talk of coins and doors had me confused.  Let me try a different example to see if I understand you:Mexican standoff between A and B.  They are negotiating at the moment (not in combat, no initiative order established, etc.), but A has a crossbow trained on B with the intention that if B moves, goes for a weapon, etc., A shoots him.In a valid interpretation of the RAW, when B decides to draw his weapon and charge A, you both roll initiative.  No one is surprised.  If A rolls a 4 and B rolls a 16, B can draw his sword, make his full move, and strike A before A pulls the trigger.  A is flatfooted for the strike, and has no Dodge bonus to his AC.This seems stupid, and is.  In this case, I would say: don't do that.  Unless B is The Flash and A is Action Zombie, let A take his action, then roll initiative.  Doing otherwise requires abandoning common sense.  If both parties are contemplating an action that can be resolved in the same time frame (i.e., A has a gun trained on B and vice versa), then initiative makes sense.I think there is probably some argument regarding when you start counting time in rounds relative to an impending conflict that can support this in the RAW, but it seems like a case where common sense makes a better rationale.I'm not convinced that the flat-footed rule for combat that starts equitably ever made a lot of sense.  Does it come into play anywhere other than Sneak Attack eligibility?</blockquote>

Verification