Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hriston" data-source="post: 7760954" data-attributes="member: 6787503"><p>You're mixing up fictional events with actual events at the table. Players at the table in the real world roll initiative to resolve who goes in what order each round in a fictional combat that has already been established to be taking place in the fiction. The way this is established is usually that one of the players or the DM declares an action for a character that s/he controls that requires resolution in combat rounds. Part of the resolution of that and subsequent actions declared for the participants is to roll initiative to determine the order of resolution. So first it's established at the table that combat is happening in the fiction, and only then are the combat resolution mechanics engaged, including the rolling of initiative.</p><p></p><p>I don't think it's a good call for a DM to call for initiative because a player or a character is thinking about attacking (it's unclear which you mean, but I don't think it matters), because I can imagine plenty of situations in which someone is contemplating making an attack but decides not to, and rolling initiative in that case would have been a pointless exercise. That's because it hasn't been established yet that combat is taking place.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Look at the examples under "Surprise". Adventurers surprise bandits by "springing from the trees to attack them." A gelatinous cube surprises adventurers by engulfing one of them before they notice it. In each case, the unnoticed party surprises the other by attacking before being noticed. The fact that the resolution of those attacks at the table awaits the engagement of the combat resolution mechanics in no way means that offensive action hasn't been committed to in the fiction. If not, then why engage the mechanics?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, "atypical" combat that isn't "a clash between two sides" is still defined by other statements about combat. It's a set of rules for "characters and monsters to engage in combat," not, as you have described, for them to have chance meetings in dimly lit hallways after which they decide how they feel about each other. The participants in combat are described as taking part "in a battle", not as deciding whether they want to be a part of a battle after initiative has been rolled. Combat, both typical and atypical, is just that.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>My point is the distinction you're making has no meaningful difference in actual play. I'm speculating, but I don't think the designers intended for the word <em>direct</em> to hold as much weight as you're giving it. Compare this with the language used in the "Contests in Combat" sidebar where there's no mention of "direct opposition". All that's required for a contest under that description is that prowess is pitted against prowess. Dexterity is a form of prowess.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, it is. It represents the directly opposed efforts of you and your opponents to do whatever it is you're doing on your turns before they do, and vice versa. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The "action" you are locked into by rolling initiative is trying to do whatever it is you do on each of your turns in combat before your opponent does whatever it is they do on each of their turns. The sword swinging and spell casting were just examples.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Right, so my speculations as to his motives are just as valid as yours.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hriston, post: 7760954, member: 6787503"] You're mixing up fictional events with actual events at the table. Players at the table in the real world roll initiative to resolve who goes in what order each round in a fictional combat that has already been established to be taking place in the fiction. The way this is established is usually that one of the players or the DM declares an action for a character that s/he controls that requires resolution in combat rounds. Part of the resolution of that and subsequent actions declared for the participants is to roll initiative to determine the order of resolution. So first it's established at the table that combat is happening in the fiction, and only then are the combat resolution mechanics engaged, including the rolling of initiative. I don't think it's a good call for a DM to call for initiative because a player or a character is thinking about attacking (it's unclear which you mean, but I don't think it matters), because I can imagine plenty of situations in which someone is contemplating making an attack but decides not to, and rolling initiative in that case would have been a pointless exercise. That's because it hasn't been established yet that combat is taking place. Look at the examples under "Surprise". Adventurers surprise bandits by "springing from the trees to attack them." A gelatinous cube surprises adventurers by engulfing one of them before they notice it. In each case, the unnoticed party surprises the other by attacking before being noticed. The fact that the resolution of those attacks at the table awaits the engagement of the combat resolution mechanics in no way means that offensive action hasn't been committed to in the fiction. If not, then why engage the mechanics? No, "atypical" combat that isn't "a clash between two sides" is still defined by other statements about combat. It's a set of rules for "characters and monsters to engage in combat," not, as you have described, for them to have chance meetings in dimly lit hallways after which they decide how they feel about each other. The participants in combat are described as taking part "in a battle", not as deciding whether they want to be a part of a battle after initiative has been rolled. Combat, both typical and atypical, is just that. My point is the distinction you're making has no meaningful difference in actual play. I'm speculating, but I don't think the designers intended for the word [I]direct[/I] to hold as much weight as you're giving it. Compare this with the language used in the "Contests in Combat" sidebar where there's no mention of "direct opposition". All that's required for a contest under that description is that prowess is pitted against prowess. Dexterity is a form of prowess. Yes, it is. It represents the directly opposed efforts of you and your opponents to do whatever it is you're doing on your turns before they do, and vice versa. The "action" you are locked into by rolling initiative is trying to do whatever it is you do on each of your turns in combat before your opponent does whatever it is they do on each of their turns. The sword swinging and spell casting were just examples. Right, so my speculations as to his motives are just as valid as yours. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Mearls On D&D's Design Premises/Goals
Top