D&D 5E Is my DM being fair?

[clearstream]

How would you rule this...

My PC has a weapon of warning. It's not exactly alert, but it negates surprise for the whole party.

Bad guy NPC scry us. They are about to teleport in and surprise us.
DM: OK, your all surprised as I teleport in and everyone is shooting you.
Me: Weapon of warning remember no surprise...
DM: Fine, roll initative.

initative 24(my cleric/paliden) 23 (Tie the PC Rogue and the NPC gunmen) 17 (PC Fighter) 12 (NPC wizard) 11 (PC Ranger) 9 (NPC with us demi god) 7 (PC fighter/rogue)

so my turn first "So what do I see"
DM "Nothing they can't teleport in until 12...
Me "OK, I cast Bless"
DM "You can't nothing happened!"
Me "Yes something did the weapon of warning alerted us"
DM "Fine waste your spell"
(lots of discussion and declairs of actions)
finally on 12 DM "My wizard saw you do all this prep she isn't teleporting in she's going to wait for your spell to run out"

What I will be trying in my campaign is that when a specific actor is clearly starting the action, everyone rolls initiative and I start the count on that actor. So in your example, the cleric can't cast Bless because we start on initiative 12. What do you think?

 

[Corwin]

What I will be trying in my campaign is that when a specific actor is clearly starting the action, everyone rolls initiative and I start the count on that actor. So in your example, the cleric can't cast Bless because we start on initiative 12. What do you think?

Only if I'm allowed to voluntarily lower my initiative to 12 or less if I roll higher. The last thing I'd want to do is roll a 13 initiative. That would basically mean I'm going "last".

 

[iserith]

What I will be trying in my campaign is that when a specific actor is clearly starting the action, everyone rolls initiative and I start the count on that actor. So in your example, the cleric can't cast Bless because we start on initiative 12. What do you think?

I think I'd choose to be a Rogue (Assassin) more often than not and always be the guy kicking things off.

 

[billd91]

What I will be trying in my campaign is that when a specific actor is clearly starting the action, everyone rolls initiative and I start the count on that actor. So in your example, the cleric can't cast Bless because we start on initiative 12. What do you think?

I think that would be pretty bad. As a DM, I'd have the attacking group teleport in. That's the event that trigger's the encounter. Think of it as PCs opening the door to a dungeon chamber. At that point, surprise is determined and initiative checked. And since the PCs were magically forewarned, we go right with the initiatives as rolled. And YES, that means some of the PCs may react and act before the guys attempting the teleporting ambush. That's one of the benefits of the weapon of warning.

 

[Kalshane]

I think I'd choose to be a Rogue (Assassin) more often than not and always be the guy kicking things off.

I agree. Any system that rewards the aggressor in any situation by allowing them to automatically go first (whether it's before initiative is rolled or by starting initiative on their count) greatly rewards players/characters that have a "kill first, ask questions later" approach.

 

[clearstream]

Only if I'm allowed to voluntarily lower my initiative to 12 or less if I roll higher. The last thing I'd want to do is roll a 13 initiative. That would basically mean I'm going "last".

That's a good point: we don't want to make fast reflexes a bad thing! Due to concerns of that kind, the alternative we're playtesting is simply moving the instigator to the top of the initiative order.

 

[clearstream]

I agree. Any system that rewards the aggressor in any situation by allowing them to automatically go first (whether it's before initiative is rolled or by starting initiative on their count) greatly rewards players/characters that have a "kill first, ask questions later" approach.

True. I feel like it is genuine bug in 5e. Several times now we've had awkward starts to combats. And I've read plenty of comments on these boards of other DMs experiencing likewise. 3e handled it by giving ambushers a free round. That meant the surprised party didn't even need to make initiative checks until the first non-surprise round and narrative oddness was averted. Maybe that is in fact better?

I'll report back after trying the "move instigator to top of initiative order" rule.

 

[iserith]

I'll report back after trying the "move instigator to top of initiative order" rule.

In my view, the initiative system is like democracy in that it's terrible... until you compare it to the alternatives.

But good luck anyway!

 

[clearstream]

In my view, the initiative system is like democracy in that it's terrible... until you compare it to the alternatives.

That's actually true

Although I find myself saying of democracy "It'd be a great system, if it was practiced." Still, I know what you mean. We'll try our tweak and come back to the thread!

 

[ShadowHelmGuard]

Yes! The DM is being unfair, He doesn't like it now that it make him have to think on a different way to almost kill you. If he did have a good reason he would have told you before he said yeah. I mean I understand Why he does it but still its unfair.