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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5626369" data-attributes="member: 4937">So?  The PC doesn't know what the thug's intentions are, and he still doesn't.  For all I know as a player, the thug is trying to cozen me with a lie so that he can close with me before attacking.  There is a guy with a knife, you've given him a surprise round.  We are now in battle, even if we manage resovle the situation peacefully. Then we have a very smart player.  However, that has nothing to do with whether or not initiative should be thrown because you as the DM can't know ahead of time how the player is going to react.  I mean, it's generally true that when threatened, I might respond by parley, negotiation, diplomacy and so forth.  Agreed, but having many reasons not to attack the thug is not the same as having many reasons not to throw initiative.   What are the reasons for not throwing initiative at that point?I've already well anticpated this complaint in prior posts.  You are arguing that we don't need to throw initiative unless the PC acts in a certain way.  But the sole purpose of this is to allow the NPC to hold the PC flat-footed indefinately, gaining the advantage of striking the PC flat-footed long after the PC has had plenty of oppurtunity to act and prepare himself for an attack.  I listed a very long list of actions one might take on the first round of combat after you've thrown initiative that weren't attack actions.  What if in response to the above scene, the player wants to take any of the above actions?  Why are you arbitrarily treating taking that action differently depending entirely on something - whether or not you've thrown initiative - that does happen in the game world? As for the example in the DMG, I'm very familiar with it.  It's an almost exact port of the example in the 1e DMG to the 3.X system, and it was intended to show older players that the game hadn't really changed much.  I have no serious problems with how it is run; and as far as initiative goes, I'd run it the same way.  The DM gives the spider a surprise round where the spider takes a move action to drop on to the player.  (As an aside, the 3.X rules are actually completely silent on the question of something landing on the back of a player, so this is all pretty much color in 3.X.)  Then the DM rolls for initiative.The DM rather arbitrarily decided that no spot check was required if the player's don't specificly 'look up', and although I wouldn't run it that way, he's in his rights to do so.What I find really interesting is that you think you ran the scene with the thug exactly like the example in the DMG, when its very clear to me that you didn't.  You're stuck on the idea that the DM threw initiative when the PC declared an attack.  But in fact, while this is the usual manner, the DM would have still asked for initiative no matter what action the PC took.  If the PC wanted to negotiate with the spider, initiative would still need to be thrown to see if the PC could get the spider's attention before it decided to bite it in the back of the neck.And in fact, if you read the example you'll find out that the DM asks for initiative before the PC even declares what they are doing.  In fact, he asks for initiative when all he knows is that one character wants to have a look at what is going on.   So are you sure I'm the one that is delusional?  I'm guessing you have pretty good reading comprehension skills, so how is it that you are able to read that scene and come away with evidence that isn't actually in the text?If you want to demonstrate your position is correct, show me some official examples of play where it plays out like your thug scenario.You say, "The thug could have taken advantage of a Surprise round, but, as I said above, I decided that he wouldn't start the combat at that point"Where is that in the rules?  I don't see any forking path in the rules where you get to decide that.  Show me an example of play like that.  That's completely a house rule you areusing.One thing that should be obvious is that in any scene with at least one side that immediately attacks will play out exactly the same whether you run it or I run it.  It's only scenes where one side or both sides forgo immediately attacking (get that _they have forgone immediately attacking_ but you claim the intention of the rules is that people remain flat footed after that), where we are going to disagree.   So show me the examples of play that demonstrate this forking path of surprise but not initiative thrown.Even if we roll initiative, that's still a possibility.   The way this scene ought to play out is we roll initiative, the PC determines that the opponent has the drop on him, and being a smart PC and knowing nothing about the opponent's level (for all I know the attacker is 10 levels higher than I am) he decides not to antagonize the attacker.  My first action in combat like the above would probably be to use my free action to say something and attempt a bluff ("To the temple of Aravar to beg the brothers there for shelter for the night.  I'm down on my luck and haven't a copper to my name.") or ("Well met brother, have you paid your dues to the guild this month?")  or try a diplomacy check to improve the thugs attitude ("I off to the pub, but I've got two gold here and I only need one to get drunk.  I'll let you have one if you let me pass in a hurry, because I've got a powerful thirst.")</blockquote>

Verification