I kick open the door and charge into the room!

[Antikinesis]

Under the case being described, I'd rule differently.

So let's sum up the scenario.

We've got an archer, a mage, and a fighter in one room, they've made a lot of noise, and there's another room right next to the one they're in - a simple wooden door being the only barrier.

In the next room are several gnolls. They have heard the party fighting in the room next to them, and have heard humans speaking. They know something is wrong, and that the humans will have to get past THEM next. The party, on the other hand, is ASSUMING the next room is occupied, but does not necessarily know.

So the fighter decides to kick down the door and charge into the room.

Huh?

You just summed up a new and completely unrelated scenario, and then proceeded to explain that we were mishandling the original scenario because it didn't fit correctly with the new scenario you just provided.

The discussion was about a situation where the two parties were aware of each other, on opposite sides of a closed door.

Try again.

-AK

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Yow! Long post. Here we go...

Make the players responsible for recognizing their triggers have been met. If the player misses it, he or she should have been paying more attention.

It's a nice idea but unfortunately it doesn't work. The problem in the situation is not that the PCs or monsters don't recognize their triggers but rather that their triggers should all occur at EXACTLY the same moment. The wizard is readying his fireball for when he sees the orcs and ogre. The orcs are readying their javalins for when they see their foes. Unless you want to invent some kind of opposed spot check mechanic to substitute for what initiative is supposed to do, the DM is either going to have to cheat ("The orcs hurl their javalins at--[Player interrupts: Hey, you said orcs. If I see them my readied action goes off]--sorry, too late. I already said the orcs hurled their javalins, your action can go off after that.") by asserting that he always goes first because the players don't get a description of the room before he describes the orcs ACTING, describe inactive orcs (DM "You see some orcs. They [Player interrupts: Hey my readied action goes off] OK. Roll damage for the fireball) and thereby always give initiative to the players, or come up with a non-arbitrary mechanic for who goes first. The last solution, of course, is the best as it fosters cooperative gameplay and polite listening at the table instead of encouraging and rewarding interruption and spotlight hogging. However, it essentially amounts to inventing a new initiative roll.

Punish foolhardy play. If your players get into a habit of this, there are countermeasures. "Oops. You realize in horror that the hostages you were trying to rescue just died a horrible, fiery death as their screams echo in your ears.... Through the smokey haze, you charge full speed into the room, and fall into [insert nasty trap of choice here]... Your "detect magic" spell shows that several of the piles of ashes were once magical in nature." You get the idea..

This is, of course, very easy. As is punishing no-foolhardy play. "Seeing you the bad guys' readied actions go off. Time seems to stop for a moment as the enemy wizard is a blur of motion then it all hits. All of your magic is dispelled by a mordenkeinen's disjunction, and you're then hit with a Horrid Wilting and a Meteor Swarm. Into this orgy of destruction, the enemy cleric partial charges you and slams a harm spell (holding the charge) into you, following it up with a quickened inflict light wounds. The enemy archer then kills the rest of you. Wasn't this fun guys?" The DM can "punish" foolhardy play if he wishes. However, by using mechanics that reward it, he ensures that NPCs (who have nothing to lose by being foolhardy since the PCs really are out to kill them) are able to reap the benefits while PCs must either deny themselves the effective tactics available to NPCs or consign themselves to be screwed over by a DM looking to "punish" their foolhardy play.

Either way puts the DM in the position of using NPC tactics to "reward" or "punish" players for using readied actions or not using readied actions. Unless the players are telepathic or have an inhumanly stable DM (who never gets frustrated that the players are having too easy a time (b/c he doesn't use readied actions which could make the battles tougher (b/c the PCs don't) or b/c the PCs use foolhardily readied actions in an attempt to outsmart his trigger setting) this won't work for long. A much better solution is just to use initiative.

Not exactly. Opening a door is move-equiv, so the cleric would still have an action available..

Mea Culpa. However, you still have the interesting situation that, all things being equal (no readied actions on any side), the cleric is able to do less in the split seconds after the door is kicked open than anyone else which doesn't make any sense unless you divide your vision of time into rounds and turns. Normal reasoning would lead to the conclusion that the cleric has exactly as much time as anyone else to react to the situation--after all nobody could do anything until after he had opened the door.

<snip>So don't allow readied actions outside of initiative order..

Except you've already set the precedent of allowing initiative to begin whenever the players or you want it to rather than when two opposing sides are aware of each other and capable of interacting. It's very easy to extend that precendent.

Initiative starts when combatants are aware of each other. .

No it doesn't. DMG 61 "If both sides become aware of the other but they cannot interact immediately, track time in rounds, giving both sides the same amount of time in full rounds, until the two sides can begin to interact." Further down, there is an example "Lidda drinks a potion. Todek and Mialee move up to the door. At the same time, the orcs move into position and one uses a ring of invisibility ot hide. . . The fighter opens the door and the DM calls for an initiative check from all. The third round begins, this time with the order of actions being important (and dicated by the initiative check results).

As previously mentioned, the actual initiative rolls can wait until one of the combatants decides to take an action. The rules allow (and, I would think, are intended to allow) players to make battle preparations as a team, by using prepared actions, if given time to do so (for example, by enemies waiting on the other side of a closed door).
-AK

The rules allow players to make preparations as a team but not to ready actions outside of initiative order--when both sides are incapable of interacting with each other.

The suggestion on p 63 that "some turns of events could make it worthwhile to reroll initiative. . . ." (Middle of the left column) further supports this interpretation of initiative. As do the nature of initiative and readied actions.
Initiative is supposed to determine how quickly a character responds to a turn of events.
Readied actions are supposed to represent waiting for the right moment to do something in combat. By selecting to ready an action, a character is moving lower in the initiative order and risking giving up his action in order to be able to take an action at a particular moment.

The interpretation of readied actions that you are supporting enables them to take the place of initiative in determining which characters react most quickly to a new situation and, rather than reacting more slowly and risking losing an action, to react more quickly--potentially gaining an action.

In short, it's an abuse of the rules which, in the long run (and for reasons described above and in the previous post) will not be healthy for the game.

 

[Mort]

The situation where you kick down the door and everyone else gets to act before you go again seems perfectly reasonable to me.

As someone stated, it could be something like a split second hesitation from bashing down the door (while presumably everyone else saw you wind up and bash the door down, so were ready to go) – the randomness of an initiative roll makes perfect sense here because any number of things could happen.

As for others getting in the room before you, it depends on the size of the door. If the door is wide enough that anyone could run in beside you – there’s no real problem – while you were recovering the party ran in (had you rolled higher on initiative you would have recovered quicker). If the door is really narrow then I may make anyone wanting to move past you roll a dex or a tumble check otherwise they couldn’t (I suppose they could also bull rush but that seems pretty stupid to do to your own party member). Obviously archers could shoot past you (though you may be cover for the monsters).

In any case to sum up – I don’t see a problem with the way the rules handle this.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

next time kill the door, don't kick it in so you can use cleave to smash your foes. Mwahahahaahh.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

You can have readied actions without a door. However, there is a significant difference: both sides are not only aware of each other but are capable of interacting. This is a much rarer example because there are actually drawbacks to taking readied actions and whoever readies is passing up the opportunity for a full round action that catches their foes flatfooted and is actually reducing their initiative score in a significant way.

The shoot-out at the O.K. Corall scenario is instructive. Let's take seven characters: Doc Holiday, Virgil Earp, Morgan Earp, Wyatt Earp, Ike Clanton, McLaury, and Joe.

Init:
Doc
Virgil
Ike
Morgan
McLaury
Joe
Wyatt

Round 1:
All ready actions. Nothing happens: tense standoff.


Round 2:
All ready actions until it gets down to Joe. Joe's nerves are frayed. He decides to try a pick pockets roll to draw his gun without being noticed so he can get his shot in before rather than after the readied actions. (The DM has to rule on this since it's not accounted for in the core rules--let's say that he does have the Quicker than the Eye feat so the DM lets him bluff as an MEA vs. everyone's spot.) He beats everyone but Doc.

Doc sees Joe as Joe readies his gun and blasts him with the shotgun.

This triggers Ike's readied action to shoot Virgil. (And McLaury's actions too but that has to come later)

Ike triggers Morgan and Virgil's actions to shoot.

McLaury's action goes next in the initiative order.

Then Wyatt's action.

Finally, Joe gets his shot off (too bad Doc beat him on the spot roll). Joe takes a full round action and rapid shots, getting three shots off because he's a 6th level gunfighter with the rapid shot feat and a +6 BAB.

In this scenario, the Earps actually would have actually got more attacks off before the Clantons if they'd not bothered readying.

Ordinary initiative: (3 attacks each from BAB and rapid shot).
Doc: 3 shots
Virgil: 3 shots
Ike: 3 shots
Morgan: 3 shots
McLaury: 3 shots
Joe: 3 shots
Wyatt: 3 shots

Earps: 12 shots. Clantons 9 shots.

With readied actions:
Doc: 1 shot
Virgil: 1 shot
Ike: 1 shot
Morgan: 1 shot
McLaury: 1 shot
Joe: 3 shots
Wyatt: 1 shot

Earps: 4 shots. Clantons: 5 shots

Had the situation played out differently and McLaury started the shooting, it would have been:
Doc: 1 shot
Virgil: 1 shot
Ike: 1 shot
Morgan: 1 shot
McLaury: 3 shots
Joe: 3 shots
Wyatt: 3 shots

Earps: 6 shots Clantons: 8 shots

Had McLaury known that he would likely be the Earps' target and started acting by fighting defensively with expertise to full, it's likely that none of the three readied shots would have landed, putting the Clantons in an even better position.

Also note, that the initiative unfolds in roughly the same order despite readying. Neither the Earps nor the Clantons gain a significant boost in initiative from readying.

None of these cases are true in the "both sides aware but unable to interact scenario" which is much more common.

Heck, you can have a scenario with readied actions WITHOUT a door, and it'd still be confusing as all hell. Unfortunately, that's just what you'd have to DO in a situation where both sides are aware of each other, but neither side wants to go first... consider the shoot-out at the O.K. Corale:

Doc Holiday: I ready my shotgun to fire at the first cowboy that draws a pistol

Virgil Earp: I ready both pistols to fire at McLaury

Morgan Earp: I ready my rifle to fire at Clanton

and so on etc... and both sides continue to "ready" actions until someone does something.

 

[Hypersmurf]

(I suppose they could also bull rush but that seems pretty stupid to do to your own party member). Obviously archers could shoot past you (though you may be cover for the monsters).

It has its place

Example - enemy spellcaster is 70 feet away from the fighter. The fighter wants to grapple him before he starts casting, but even though he has initiative, he can't get there this round.

But! The cleric bull-rushes the fighter, who doesn't resist - the cleric drives the fighter some 15 feet towards the spellcaster. Thus, the fighter is now only 55 feet away - within charge range...

-Hyp.

 

[Antikinesis]

Originally posted by Elder-Basilisk
It's a nice idea but unfortunately it doesn't work. The problem in the situation is not that the PCs or monsters don't recognize their triggers but rather that their triggers should all occur at EXACTLY the same moment.

Agreed. To repeat: resolve the simultaneous triggers in initiative order.

However, it essentially amounts to inventing a new initiative roll.

Not if you resolve simultaneous triggers in initiative order.

The DM can "punish" foolhardy play if he wishes. However, by using mechanics that reward it, he ensures that NPCs (who have nothing to lose by being foolhardy since the PCs really are out to kill them) are able to reap the benefits while PCs must either deny themselves the effective tactics available to NPCs or consign themselves to be screwed over by a DM looking to "punish" their foolhardy play.

I am NOT advocating punishing players for readying actions. I was suggesting discouraging behavior like blindly throwing fireballs into rooms they haven't seen. I disagree that the readying mechanic rewards players for being foolhardy.

Unless the players are telepathic or have an inhumanly stable DM (who never gets frustrated that the players are having too easy a time (b/c he doesn't use readied actions which could make the battles tougher (b/c the PCs don't) or b/c the PCs use foolhardily readied actions in an attempt to outsmart his trigger setting) this won't work for long.

The DM's job is to make the game fun. For most, that means challenging but not overwhelming. If the battles are too easy for the PC's, use better strategy for the NPC's. Too hard? Dumb down the NPC's. Readied actions are part of the game.

A much better solution is just to use initiative.

Right. Use initiative to adjudicate simultaneously triggered readied actions. (Is there an echo in here?)

However, you still have the interesting situation that, all things being equal (no readied actions on any side), the cleric is able to do less in the split seconds after the door is kicked open than anyone else which doesn't make any sense unless you divide your vision of time into rounds and turns. Normal reasoning would lead to the conclusion that the cleric has exactly as much time as anyone else to react to the situation--after all nobody could do anything until after he had opened the door.

The clerk was busy fiddling with the door while everyone else was concentrating solely on their battle strategy. No big deal.

Except you've already set the precedent of allowing initiative to begin whenever the players or you want it to rather than when two opposing sides are aware of each other and capable of interacting.

No I didn't. I specifically stated that initiative starts when combatants are aware of each other. I said that the actual rolling wasn't necessary until someone decided to act. If nobody does anything but wait, it doesn't matter what the actual initiative numbers are.

No it doesn't. DMG 61 "If both sides become aware of the other but they cannot interact immediately, track time in rounds, giving both sides the same amount of time in full rounds, until the two sides can begin to interact." Further down, there is an example "Lidda drinks a potion. Todek and Mialee move up to the door. At the same time, the orcs move into position and one uses a ring of invisibility ot hide. . . The fighter opens the door and the DM calls for an initiative check from all. The third round begins, this time with the order of actions being important (and dicated by the initiative check results).

The rules allow players to make preparations as a team but not to ready actions outside of initiative order--when both sides are incapable of interacting with each other.

Which is exactly what I said in the 6th post of this thread! What exactly are you disagreeing with?

The interpretation of readied actions that you are supporting enables them to take the place of initiative in determining which characters react most quickly to a new situation and, rather than reacting more slowly and risking losing an action, to react more quickly--potentially gaining an action.

If the characters choose to ready actions, and stand around waiting for their comrades to do something [edit: as the trigger], OF COURSE it's going to lower their initiative. I don't understand where you're getting the idea that I think a readied action would allow a player to increase his or her iniative.

-AK

 

[Ridley's Cohort]

<Waves his "I couldn't have said it half as well as Elder-Basilisk" flag>

The initiative system is imperfect. But the fundamental problem with the proposed fixes is that they are merely reinventing a weirder version of initiative system we have while adding plenty of new & different warts.

I have one minor suggestion as a house rule: When both sides are equally prepared, run a "surprise round" where everyone participates. That prevents the poor cleric who opens the door from being hammered horribly by full attacks, or surrounded by move + attack actions while he is flatfooted. But he still can get attacked first. It also encourages good tactics in terms of lining up a possible bow shot or quick partial charge before the door flies open.

 

[Antikinesis]

You can have readied actions without a door. However, there is a significant difference: both sides are not only aware of each other but are capable of interacting. This is a much rarer example because there are actually drawbacks to taking readied actions and whoever readies is passing up the opportunity for a full round action that catches their foes flatfooted and is actually reducing their initiative score in a significant way.

[Snipped excellent example of readied actions costing combatants attacks.]

I agree completely. Door or no door. Same thing.

-AK

 

[Storminator]

I ran the case where the lead guy kicked in the door, then we rolled init and resolved as normal, despite all the careful planning of the PCs. It seemed very unsatisfactory, as PCs far in the back had high inits and couldn't get in front, PCs passed each other, etc. Felt more like the Keystone Cops than an assault squad.

So the next time it happened (just a few rooms later) I had the players put the PCs in the init order they wanted to act in. Then I decided that since the PCs were a pretty sharp team, they would act in a reasonably coordinated fashion, so I put each PC after the door-kicker at successively lower inits, each one differing by one.

Then I had the foes on the other side of the door and the door-kicker roll init. Everyone other PC was based on the door-kicker, and didn't get a roll. So a few foes went first, and readied actions, then the door-kicker burst in and charged, then the PCs and the foes simply went in initative order.

While it may not follow the rules precisely, it gave the combat the exact feel I expected/wanted.

PS