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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="sithramir" data-source="post: 6413427" data-attributes="member: 12183">I'm generally ok with it on the first round of combat just not as an every round thing. I still think the rogue readying an action to attack the first creature he has the ability to get sneak attack on would be ok as an example.I guess i'm thinking that if Rogue goes first and delays, NPC 1 attacks and kills another PC, NPC 2 decides to attack the body to ensure he dies, NPC 3 also attacks the body also because all three were really doing it "at the same time" but their initiatives were one off or some such and they just want that PC dead. The rogue could have killed a goblin (or tried to) beforehand, he could have readied and potentially hurt/killed a goblin but with the delay he instead after NPC 1 can suddenly move in and attack before NPC 2 before the NPC 2's swing actually hits the PC? I know we're just trying to mechanically show a way for each person to act but it seems wrong.I think I just put more realism in initiative in my head and thus don't like those kind of scenarios. Perhaps if delay was instead "you drop 5 in the initiative" or insteps of 5 or something then it would be ok? The rogue might not attack until after all the NPC's did and thus was almost to "round 2 anyways" or might have randomly went in between but otherwise it feels a bit too meta-gamey to be that "precise?".I had 0 problem with delay until this thread actually. Now I think I might not allow it in my games or do something slightly different on first rounds. I just feel "use your action" because you get another action in round 2 anyways.Also: I allow sneak attack from a rogue if he's the first to act as a house rule. Sort of the flat footed idea of 3.x. That is how I prefer to reward them with high initiative. No advantage (unless hidden). Just how I try to balance it</blockquote>

Verification