D&D 5E Initiative of summoned monsters

In the course of a discussion about the initiative of summoned monsters at https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/02/1...ured-animals-roll-a-15-do-they-go-on-my-turn/, Jeremy Crawford said this:

Honestly, we never should have had spells tell you to roll initiative for creatures. The general rules just need a line that says, "If a creature joins a battle that's already in progress, roll initiative for the creature as normal."

I don't know if this is one of the great contentious issues in 5e, but this seems like a straightforward rule. Any thoughts?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Its just that in some situations the initiative of the new creature should match your own. Like say a ranger somehow teleported in his companion.

I think the general rule is still a good idea, just that it needs to be clear that the new combatant's initiative should be determined in the same way it would have been if the creature had been in the combat when it started.
 

Slows the game down. Player summons should use the same initiative as the person who summoned them, unless there is a really good story reason to do otherwise.
 

Why roll at all? It seems to me that since they operate under a certain existing participant's control, they operate as part of that person's turn.
 

Why roll at all? It seems to me that since they operate under a certain existing participant's control, they operate as part of that person's turn.

Probably because of:

They obey any verbal commands that you issue to them (no action required by you).

If it took your action to control them (like with the beast master or chainlock), then it would make sense that they act on your turn, but since the action that they use is theirs, they need to have initiative.

One could speculate on whether it would have been better to have made commanding the summoned monster(s) take an action by the summoner, but that is a whole 'nuther barrel of monkeys.
 

Probably because of:

They obey any verbal commands that you issue to them (no action required by you).

If it took your action to control them (like with the beast master or chainlock), then it would make sense that they act on your turn, but since the action that they use is theirs, they need to have initiative.

One could speculate on whether it would have been better to have made commanding the summoned monster(s) take an action by the summoner, but that is a whole 'nuther barrel of monkeys.

This is severely splitting hairs.
 


Almost certainly, but it doesn't take deep insight into 5e to see that one of the goals was to keep one player from spending 45 minutes on his/her turn without some kind of break, and this seems like one of those breaks.

Summoning has always done this. It is a well-documented way to bog down the game and break the system. All 5E did over 3X(the system they modeled the majority of 5E after) was make it take 30 minutes instead of 45. And frankly, I don't think it makes a lick of difference is Bob takes one half-hour turn, or six 5-minute turns. The end result is still that it takes Bob considerably more time, slows down the game and is more likely to break the encounter.

If they wanted to actually fix summoning (which they didn't) then the solution is simple: summons work like concentration spells and you lose your action to command them instead. Multiple summoned creatures would act like swarms, attacking the same target and sharing the damage (to keep things quick and simple), single summons would work as "replacement" characters. While Bill the summoner runs around trying not to get hit, his Mammoth whoops booty.

But 5E really didn't want to address these issues. And their half-hearted attempts left the wound smaller, but still open.

It's one of the reasons I've largely gone back to 3X, if I've going to play a system with all the same flaws, I'm going to play the one with vastly more content.
 

The big issue (and argument) that I've seen is that summoned creatures with high initiative are often punished by acting later than a summoned creatures with lower initiative, since if they roll above the caster's initiative, they wait until next round to act. IMO, there are two methods of "fixing" this issue, that should be decided in session 0.

1) If a creature is summoned into a combat during a turn, and that creature's initiative is higher than the current turn, reduce its initiative to be just after the current turn. Summoning in this case is refereed to any creature that is magically brought into the area as a result of an action or effect.

2) This is a feature, not a bug. When choosing what type of creature to summon, you should consider the initiative modifier in relation to your current initiative, and those of other creatures.
 

In the course of a discussion about the initiative of summoned monsters at https://www.sageadvice.eu/2018/02/1...ured-animals-roll-a-15-do-they-go-on-my-turn/, Jeremy Crawford said this:

Honestly, we never should have had spells tell you to roll initiative for creatures. The general rules just need a line that says, "If a creature joins a battle that's already in progress, roll initiative for the creature as normal."

I don't know if this is one of the great contentious issues in 5e, but this seems like a straightforward rule. Any thoughts?

It's a rule that doesn't feel right. Initiative is there to #1 structure fights and #2 give some meaning to who acted faster. Having a monster roll initiative midturn still gives the fight structure but it loses the normal meaning about who acted faster.

As such the most sensible thing to do is to have the bear roll initiative and anything higher than your initiative becomes your initiative because its obvious the bear you summoned didn't react to the fight faster than you.

This keeps initiative meaning both #1 and #2.

If a monster joins the fight at the end of a round then it's initiative roll should work just like normal.
 

Remove ads

Top