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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gantros" data-source="post: 2114387" data-attributes="member: 15836">As I've already stated, the bit on pg. 26 does not prohibit what I'm suggesting.  It states that actions cannot be readied outside of combat, but nowhere does it define what constitutes the start of combat.  The example on pg. 23 demonstrates how it's possible for combat to start (i.e. track time and rounds, and allow preparatory actions to be taken) without any attacks being made, and without rolling for initiative.If we accept that Ready could be considered a preparatory action (something which is not made clear in the RAW), then you can do the following:  Using the Ready action to prepare before the actual fighting begins, you pick one specific event to trigger on and one specific response to make.  The restriction on when this can occur is that both parties must be aware of each other, and either unable or unwilling to initiate hostilities immediately.  As long as neither side is attacking the other, there is no need to roll initiative because there are no contested actions.  As soon as someone opens the door, contested actions can begin and everyone rolls for initiative.  As soon as anyone does something that triggers a readied action, that action occurs, regardless of initiative.  And once a readied action is triggered, the user is considered to have acted and thus cannot be caught flat-footed in the subsequent round.I believe most of the questions you're raising here are only an issue where two opposing readied actions conflict (e.g. orc's bow shot vs. player's charge).  In such a case the DM can use the following procedure to handle it:1) Decide the order of action that makes the most sense according to the particular circumstance.  For example, a bow shot should realistically go off before a 60' charge.2) If it's not clear which should happen first (e.g. the opponents both readied actions to fire bows at each other), rule that both actions happen simultaneously.3) If for some reason it doesn't make sense for both actions to happen simultaneously, then use initiative to determine who acts first.This set of guidelines should eliminate the nonsensical situations resulting from using the flat-footedness rule in situations where it really shouldn't apply, and I believe it does so without violating the RAW or introducing any significant balance issues (although I'm interested to hear if anyone can show otherwise).</blockquote>

Verification