Um... why? Do all monsters in your universe fight to the death every time? Especially when they know their allies are dead and they can make things worse for you by alerting their allies there are adventurers around.
I don't know, but I think this is ironic considering the next quote.
This is why Fear is a situational spell. There are a lot of times you don't want people running for help and screaming.
Ok. As a point of fact they can run for help screaming if you don't cast fear too and if that is what you don't want them to do it probably is what they would (or at least should) do.
But yes if you do not want them running from the room you should not cast fear. If you want to ""clear the room" you should cast fear.
And ultimately all that happens is you've cleared the room and that there are a collection of gargoyles wandering around either waiting to ambush you or alerting the other monsters in the dungeon.
You can follow them and they can't save as long as you do. If it is outside you can chase them until they all die or a minute ends.
This is neither more nor less than the
Peasant Railgun abuse of D&D's simplifying a living universe to a turn-based game. For players to try this sort of cheese that allows messages to break the sound barrier let alone throw things would be silly. For the DM to deploy this sort of exploitative physics-based cheese to nerf a player ability is nothing more than prime grade douchbaggery. If the DM wants to automatically win they can just throw an asteroid or tarrasque at the players.
That is the rules and mechanics, you might not like them and are free to homebrew them.
You've bolded the wrong words. They each act at the same time. Which means they each start their action at the same time and they each finish their action at the same time. While the first one who saved is raising his hand to act the second one is staring at the pretty lights. Then the first one slaps the second and the second one blinks awake. They each act at the same time - but the first one has already acted which means that the second one can't take their action at the same time as the first because the first one's action has finished.
At the same time means on the same initiative. They do not start their "action" at the same time they start their turn at the same time and "act" at the same time. The move, action and bonus action all happen in that turn. If they started their action "at the same time" it would be impossible to move then attack(action) then disengage (BA) than move again using the remainder of your move if the guy next to starts off by attacking because they would both need to "use their action at the same time". The order they use their action, move, reaction is completely up to the enemy.
Further it would be impossible for enemies to "help" if this was correct because when you "help" the next person that attacks gets advantage. You have to "help" before the guy next to you uses his action to attack.
Please answer this is it possible for enemies to use help? Is it possible for one Goblin to start his turn with a move while another starts with an attack? How do you reconcile that with your logic here?
It doesn't lose a turn after it recovers. It loses the turn it started hypnotised.
That is not written in the spell.
"On a failed save, the creature becomes Charmed for the Duration. While Charmed by this spell, the creature is Incapacitated and has a speed of 0.
The spell ends for an affected creature if it takes any damage or if someone else uses an action to shake the creature out of its stupor."
It does not say it stays charmed until the end of its turn when shaken out of the stupor, it does not say the stupor has to last until its next turn. If you play it that way it is homebrew.
It hasn't recovered until the action on its own initiative is over,.
It does not say that in the spell description. It does not imply it, no rules anywhere suggest that.
It doesn't have to. Its action is happening at the same time as the action freeing it. Its action time has passed.
If that is how you want to characterize it fine, Goblin 1 shakes goblin 2 out of his charm and Goblin 2 attacks at the "same time". If that is how you want to play the fiction that is fine.
Moreover if this is really what is at play, how is it one Goblin attacks and then walks across the room while another walks across the room and then attacks if all the actions "happen at the same time"? Please explain this to me in light of your explanation above.
Nope. What is happening is that you are twisting the rules to give NPCs initiative-juggling superpowers.
It gives them the exact same initiative juggling capabilities that the PCs have.
The tables I DM roll initiative for everyone individually. Those I play on do it like that for the most part although two of them used use a single roll for a group of like creatures.
If you had eight goblins at initiative 13 you'd effectively have them acting on initiative 13.8, 13.7, 13.6 ... 13.1 so they each act in order.
This is how the tables I play with that have a single initiative have done it, although I do not know that this is articulated in the rules anywhare.
Moreover this undercuts your previous argument becuase 13.8 uses his turn (including action, bonus, move) before 13.7 goes.
If this is the case it is much like what I put initially and you will have a few of them lose 2 turns instead of 1 turn.
Which would be fair enough. But where the superpowers come in is that you arbitrarily allow the goblins to assign their initiative orders in any order on any turn.
As I said above on the two tables I played that used group initiative we used this. However where the rules come from is the PHB page 189 where it states
"The DM decides the order among DM-controlled creatures"
As I say your interpretation is the same interpretation that the peasant railgun relies on, and it's the same exploit in both cases. And you're doing it all to make the PC abilities as uncool and ineffective as possible.
I am not familiar with the peasant railgun so if you want me to comment on it you are going to need to explain it.
