Forked - Flatfooted and the beginning of combat.

[Celebrim]

Firstly, leaving a bow or crossbow readied for long periods like that is a very quick way to destroy your bow or crossbow.

Oh, get real. We are talking about cocking a crossbow for 30 seconds or 3 minutes or something. Have you ever actually been hunting with a crossbow?

This is really simple. By everyone's description (so far) but mine every combat is an ambush. Sure, you don't always get a surprise round, but you do 'surprise' the other side enough to catch them off their gaurd and flatfooted.

Does that make the slightest bit of sense either under the rules or in real life???

There are four basic situations:

1) Both sides are caught unaware. Neither side can act immediately, the side that acts first catches the other one briefly off gaurd.
2) Side A is surprised but side B is not. Side A prepares an attack (the surprise round) or 'ambushes' side B, and then if it can act first catches side B possibly off gaurd.
3) Side B is surprised but side A is not. Side B prepares an attack (the surprise round) or 'ambushes' side A, and then if it can act first catches side A possibly off gaurd.
4) Neither side is surprised or caught unaware, so neither side can catch the other off gaurd.

Why is everyone here claiming #4 is impossible, when the rules plainly state that you stop being flatfooted whenever you are aware of the threat and take your first action? Why is everyone here claiming that #4 is impossible when it was clearly possible under every prior edition of the game? Why is everyone claiming #4 is impossible when it reflects experience and common sense about how things 'really work'?

As for PC interruptions to the bad guy's speech, the issue is not one of catching the bad guy "off his guard" - he can't be surprised, after all. It's a matter of "throwing the first punch". Sure, as soon as you go for your sword, he's going to react, both in trying to avoid/block your attack, and also (most likely) in trying to wipe you out in turn. So, it becomes a matter of determining who goes first - the very thing Initiative is used to resolve.

He can't be surprised, but if he can be caught flatfooted that is a huge advantage. Initiative is supposed to resolve 'who goes first'. It isn't supposed to turn every fight against an alert opponent into an ambush/counter ambush situation. Winning initiative is a huge enough advantage as is - 9 times in 10, whoever wins initiative is going to win the fight because of the fact that D&D fights are usually over in 1-4 rounds, going an 'extra round' is already huge. If winning initiative turns every fight into an ambush, even if the opponent has been aware of you for several rounds, then its just ridiculous.

I have no problem with interrupting a villains monologue. My villains generally don't monologue more than, "Kill them.", anyway. The issue I have is that a player interrupting like that is IME metagaming. They are interrupting because they seem to think there is or are angling for a 'ruthlessness' bonus that they think the side that announces the most ruthless and most sudden attack earns. I personally think that arguing that its impossible to begin 'a battle' (by which I mean, the point in combat where someone takes an attack action, not the point where we start tracking rounds) with neither side flatfooted is precisely that sort of argument in favor of 'ruthlessness. It leads IMO to pure 'hack n slash', because why bother talking to an NPC if it risks getting you caught flatfooted? Attack first and always attack is then the surest way to ensure survival. I know that as a PC first time I tried to initiate parley with a strange group, and the DM had me take sneak attack damage because I was supposedly 'flatfooted' despite being aware of the threat it would never happen again.

 

[Celebrim]

As for how a character can be caught flat-footed by an attack he knows is coming: play some tennis sometime. Or badminton, squash, or pretty much any other racket sport.

Or you could fence, or box, or fight in the SCA. Pretty much any combat sport, but yes I agree tennis has a lot of combat-like elements to it.

You know the serve (first attack) is coming, you know roughly when, you know roughly where, and you are on your guard for it... and you can still get caught out.

Yes. And you can also be ready for it as well. You aren't _always_ caught off your gaurd.

 

[coyote6]

Yes. And you can also be ready for it as well. You aren't _always_ caught off your gaurd.

Wouldn't that be the analog of the situations where you got a higher initiative total than the server?

In general, I kind of agree with what you're saying, in that I think there are situations where no one should be flatfooted -- take two parties that each know the other is hostile, and expects a fight to start, but they decide to parley for a bit before fighting. Barring some Bluff checks or the like, it seems like they should all be ready to fight -- and thus probably not caught flatfooted.

However, your approach seems to mean that no one will be flatfooted at the start of a fight unless they are surprised -- which seems wrong to me.

In my games, I play those situations by feel, maybe ask for Sense Motive checks. <shrug> They aren't that big of a deal, IME.

 

[Celebrim]

However, your approach seems to mean that no one will be flatfooted at the start of a fight unless they are surprised -- which seems wrong to me.

Yes, although you have to use 'surprised' in the widest sense here. When the bandits road out of the woods 300' away in my original example, both the party and the bandits where initially unaware of each other. Because they were both in the open and not hiding, both pretty much immediately detected the other. But everyone is at that point flat-footed, because no one expected to encounter the other and they are relatively unprepared for the attack of someone from that particular direction, at this time, at that range, etc.

So far me and everyone else in the thread agrees. Where we radically depart from each other is everyone else in the thread seems to be arguing that if neither side attacks immediately, then they cannot take ready actions, or move actions, or other sorts of 'combat actions' and hense both sides remain flat footed indefinately until one side takes an attack action, at which point we roll initiative and the winners surprise the losers (catch them flat-footed). That is, if the bandits take a move action, ready an action, and use their free action to speak, because this is somehow 'out of combat' and all such actions would be illegal.

Flat footed by the way means:

unprepared
Synonyms: asleep, asleep on the job, daydreaming, flat-footed, inattentive, napping, spaced out, unalert, unready, unsuspecting, unvigilant, unwatchful, zoned out

So what everyone else is saying is effectively that no matter what you do, no matter how alert you are, no matter how on gaurd you are, you can't prepare for an attack so you will always be unready, unvigilant, zoned out, and unwatchful.

Does that seem reasonable to you?

In my games, I play those situations by feel, maybe ask for Sense Motive checks. <shrug> They aren't that big of a deal, IME.

In my games, if you wanted to try to catch someone alert flatfooted, you would use bluff to cozen the target, or distract them so someone could hide, or otherwise set them up - to which they could oppose your actions with a sense motive check. There would be no automatically setting an alert target flat-footed with no chance to defend on their part just because you declared - 'ruthless attack'. And that would work both ways.

 

[Janx]

this is an interesting thread.

I've never liked the surprise rules. A round of free attacks before the real round always seemed hard to abjudicate when it qualified.

When 3e introduced flat-footed, that looked like a better rule candidate. Roll low for init, you're flatfooted (simulating surprise).

If I were making house rules, I'd consider giving an init bonus to simulate surprise, in situations where one side is clearly aware of the other, and the other side is clueless. This would ensure they likely get to attack first, and the flat-footed rule simulates that vulnerability.

I'd also consider that if both parties have weapons drawn and are "prepared for immediate combat, expecting trouble", then there'd be no flat-footed. A party moving in a dungeon is likely expecting trouble. Orcs in a dungeon room probably aren't, unless an alert was sent.

If a PC isn't aware of an NPC, the NPC doesn't exist. The DM chooses the NPCs status when he discloses the existance of the NPC to the PC. Therefore, it is unnecesary for an NPC to roll initiative until the PC effectively becomes aware.

Whereas, a PC can/should roll initiative when he is aware of the NPC, and planning to enter combat, so you can measure out spell durations, and movement speed as the NPC moves through the space. I would only roll init because combat is pretty obvious.

Thus, orcs in a room who here a noise and get ready for an attack, they don't have to roll initiative. The PC trigger initiative when they open the door and the orc are going to open fire. At this point, that's either a surprise round check, or an init bonus for the orcs (house rule idea), or just normal initiative. If the PCs are clearing rooms SWAT team style, they're ready for this kind of trouble, normal initiative, probably no flat-footed. If this is the PCs home, and they're just going to the barracks for a nap, you can bet this is a surprise attempt or flat-footedness would apply.

Additionally, if you're not actively holding a weapon, you're un-armed. Any unarmed bonus/penalty would apply, in addition to being flat-footed if you lost init. Furthermoe, you'd have to spend an action to draw a weapon (the real reason for quick-draw feat), costing you an attack, depending on the rules (i'm too lazy to look it up, and it varies on the rule set).


As for "readying an action", here's a test. Take 2 people, and hand them nerf guns.

Put 1 person in a room, make him sit on the far side, give him something to hide behind. Tell him that he should expect an opponent to come in at any time, and he is to shoot him as a surprise attack. Close the door.

Then have the second person wait outside the room quietly for a random amount of time. Then, he is to make a noise, like a bump on the door. Then he is to wait again, for even longer. Then he is to open the door and shoot the person in the room.

The point of the test is to see what it's like to be the person in the room. He knows somebody will enter the room. He's ready for it. Odds are good, that for a few minutes, after the close of the door, and the first bump, he'll be very alert. But as time passes his attention will drift. This is the real world limit of "ready an action".

Personally, I think the Surprise Round rules are crap. I suspect that the flat-footed and draw a weapon and unarmed AC penalties would simulate surprise just as well. Throw in a spot check to avoid an INIT penalty, and you'd have a decent set of surprise/initiating combat rules.

 

[Rykion]

So what everyone else is saying is effectively that no matter what you do, no matter how alert you are, no matter how on gaurd you are, you can't prepare for an attack so you will always be unready, unvigilant, zoned out, and unwatchful.

Does that seem reasonable to you?

Yes. In a game with things as abstract as hit points, I have no problem with the way initiative works. Even an alert person can be too slow to react. This is compounded by the fact few fights in D&D are one on one. Sure the fighter might be ready for the bugbear to try something, but he wasn't ready for the goblin behind it with a bow. The start of a fight is confusing, and being quick pays off.

It's also important to note that not all synonyms of flat-footed will be correct for all uses. Unvigilant, zoned out, and unwatchful probably don't really apply to an alert adventuring party. Members of the alert party might still be unready or unprepared for what their opponents do, or the speed with which they act.

 

[Celebrim]

Yes. In a game with things as abstract as hit points, I have no problem with the way initiative works.

Leaving aside the odd sentiment behind such a statement, it's most basic problem is it works the way I describe. They may have changed it in 3.5 as #108 of the long list of boneheaded moves that they made when 'patching' the game, but in 3.0 it was clear that as soon as you took an action after becoming alert to a threat, you stopped being flatfooted. What's so hard or contriversial about that?

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

The problem with all of that is that sometimes, you have no real way of knowing whether either side is 'planning' hostile action. Worse yet, the whole 'roll initiative' then becomes a metagame signal of each sides intentions.

That's the point. Initiative basically means "At least one creature in this encounter is about to make an attack or threatening action that others will want to react to."

When I roll initiative, it is always with a description of WHY I'm rolling initiative. If there are a group of PCs and a group of enemies staring at each other and talking to each other and one of the PCs says something that offends the enemies, I tell them "The enemy seems to take offense to your comment, you see the anger in his eyes and his hand starts to move quickly towards his sword, about to draw it and attack you. Roll for initiative."

The PCs might roll better initiative and cut down the enemy before he gets his sword out of his sheath, but they knew he was about to attack. If they didn't, then initiative is not rolled. I sometimes allow a really quick action to be taken before initiative starts. For instance, "Everyone draws their weapons, you draw yours....then roll for initiative."

Why not run this scene as a combat scene where both sides need not necessarily take an attack action?

Because it wastes time to run every tense scene in combat order. Plus, it ruins some of the combat mechanics.

Combat should be the time when you KNOW you need to fight. Not just suspect. That's why there is no facing inside combat but there is outside of combat. There's a difference between "I think that guy might be dangerous" or "There was a noise that might be enemies behind the door" and "I can see a guy in a fighting stance with a weapon in his hand in the process of moving quickly towards me".

No matter how much you THINK you might be in a combat, it's not the same as actually being in one.

The combat mechanics are designed around this idea. That's why readying is not allowed out of combat. Most adventurers are on their guard most of the time. They are wary that each person who walks into a bar might be an assassin out to kill them. But being in a combat stance with your weapon in hand while being able to see your enemy gives you more adrenalin, it gives you a better chance to prepare for incoming attacks, it focuses your senses on exactly where to expect the danger from, and so on and so forth.

Why does combat only begin with an attack action, rather than every other possible action you can take in combat? If the player signals that they want to take a full defence action, does that begin combat or not? If the player signals that they want to take a ready action, does that begin combat or not? Are ready actions only allowed on the second round of combat for some reason?

Because until it is absolutely clear that there is a fight, you aren't in one. Ready actions can't be taken outside of combat. So, it doesn't start combat if you take the action, instead it just isn't allowed. I will tell a player "You are always prepared for something to attack you. No one is though. If someone were about to attack you, you could roll for initiative to see how quickly you could react to that, however. Either that, or you could attack him before he attacks you or shows any indication that he's attacking you. In which case, we'll roll for initiative to see how quickly he reacts to your attack."

I'd say the same thing about the full defense action. You can have your sword in hand, you can be prepared for someone to attack you, but you can't actively defend yourself against a threat you aren't sure is there. That guy MIGHT have a sword, he might have a throwing dagger. It might be in his left hand, his right hand, or still in a sheath. It isn't until you see which hand he moves towards his weapon or what type of stance he goes into that you can begin to predict his actions. So, the full defense action has no effect unless you are in a combat.

My point is simple. 'Combat' is an abstraction. The game inhabitants don't go in and out of combat subsystems. We start tracking 'combat' for metagame reasons, not because of anything in the game world, and _any_ action after a party is aware stops them being flatfooted. It's that simple.

Actually, I agree with this entirely. We keep track of initiative for metagame reasons. That's precisely WHY it doesn't start until a combat action is taken. We could keep track of initiative constantly. We don't because the only time it matters is when you are trying to figure out how fast people can react to each other.

If you can go into initiative at any time, you get around the protections the rules have. I allowed it a couple of times when I was new to DMing 3e, and I realized how easy it is for the players or DM to abuse this and how many rules it breaks.

I like the idea of being a very fast rogue with improved initiative and standing next to an enemy in a standoff, neither one sure when to make a move. Then, in a lightning fast move, you quick draw your dagger and slash his throat(getting sneak attack) even before he has a chance to raise his sword in defense(flat footed). This is way too easily ruined when the DM says "Sorry, the enemy declared you were in initiative when he first saw you, he's no longer flatfooted, and he readied an action to hit you if you tried to attack him. He hits you before you hit him. Even though he has an init mod of -1 and you have +20....he's just faster than you on the draw."

 

[catsclaw227]

Leaving aside the odd sentiment behind such a statement, it's most basic problem is it works the way I describe. They may have changed it in 3.5 as #108 of the long list of boneheaded moves that they made when 'patching' the game, but in 3.0 it was clear that as soon as you took an action after becoming alert to a threat, you stopped being flatfooted. What's so hard or contriversial about that?

Are you playing with 3.0 or 3.5 rules? It seems from your comment that the 3.5 rules changes were boneheaded.

I find in a thread about rules and how they work, it should be obvious what rules system are used as the baseline of discussion.

 

[Majoru Oakheart]

I thought of another example where allowing this sort of thing becomes a problem.

You have a party who makes listen checks but fails to hear enemies behind the door. The enemies don't hear the PCs. They all ready actions to attack the next enemy they see as soon as the door is opened. Someone opens the door, they all get a free attack, then initiative is rolled. They win and get to hit the monsters again.

This is the way the game normally DOES work if the PCs are aware and the enemies are not. The PCs get a surprise round. However, if you allow readying out of combat, it allows the PCs to essentially get a surprise round against every encounter even if they fail to perceive them.

Especially cunning parties say "As I'm walking down the hallway, I roll for initiative assuming there might be enemies somewhere in this dungeon. I'm readying an action every round to attack the first enemy I see while using a move action to keep moving." in order to get surprise rounds against every encounter, even against monsters that surprise THEM.

I certainly don't think it makes much sense for the following to happen:

DM: "You are walking down the hallway, when out of a side passage comes an Orc taking your completely by surprise. He 5 ft steps from around a corner and then shoots a crossbow bolt..."
Player: "Umm, I readied my action to attack anything I could see. I think the 5-ft step around the corner puts him into sight. I shoot an arrow at him and kill him before he gets a chance to attack."
DM: "But he surprised you...you had no idea he was there. How do you react faster than he does?"
Player: "I was ready for someone to attack me."
DM: "But so was he. He KNEW you were coming. He heard you. You only suspected there might be an enemy somewhere in this entire dungeon."
Player: "Yeah, but I said the words 'I ready my action'. It's an ancient mantra that makes you faster than everyone else."