November's SAGE ADVICE Is Here!

November's Sage Advice column by WotC's Jeremy Crawford is up. This month deals with lightfoot halfing and wood elf hiding racial traits, some class features, backgrounds (you can have only one!), muticlassing, surprise rounds in combat, and more. Check out this month's Sage Advice here. The advice here has been added to the Sage Advice Compendium.

 

[Miladoon]

The level of annoyance for 5E grows each time I read one of these articles.

Let us be, jeremy. We are DMs, we got it from here.

 

[Flamestrike]

Unarmed strike are natural body parts not designed as weapons uses as weapons. They aren't weapons.

If I am unarmed and I strike you, I am not using a weapon. I'm unarmed.

 

[abirdcall]

The level of annoyance for 5E grows each time I read one of these articles.

Let us be, jeremy. We are DMs, we got it from here.

But people don't have it. These are questions asked over and over again.

I think it comes from a more fundamental misunderstanding of the ideas that 5e are based on that then confuse the rest.

 

[Minigiant]

The level of annoyance for 5E grows each time I read one of these articles.

Let us be, jeremy. We are DMs, we got it from here.

They kinda don't have it.

Not every DM is good at cornercase judgements. Actually few are.

That's why he gets so many questions.

 

[Miladoon]

I would suggest DM's play and make mistakes to become better at DM'ng rather than hang from the teets. The best sage advice I can think of is for the sage advice column come out and say, just roll with it.

 

[brehobit]

No, of course not. It is your decision to shoot or not to shoot.

Just know, that the victim is now aware that there is something foul going on. He heared your bowstring, he saw a glint .... whatever. He is no longer suprised but "in combat" now. You may very well retreat (being stealthy as you are) and try again later, tomorrow or next week, but not in this fight.

In combat everything happens at once. It is just the needed abstraction of the combat round, that lets us think that the things happen in a particular order. Sometimes this seems to be important. As with the slow assassine. Nonetheless, it is your decision to not shoot if you are behind in initiative order. No one can take that away from you (at my table).

Interesting take on it. So this would be true if I were invisible and silenced?

The whole thing is just weird. I see both sides of this discussion, but I really don't like that people can react to things that haven't happened yet. How do you get "unsurprised" if you don't know about the opponent (opposed checks cover that). Don't like the "second bite at the apple". But I can see why others like it.

What I _really_ don't like is that something as critical as this is really in the hands of the GM. If I were playing with a group, I'd ask the GM how they plan on dealing with this before I pick my character. But in organized play, the character's effectiveness is varying by a LOT based on how the DM runs is. Ick.

 

[Flamestrike]

Interesting take on it. So this would be true if I were invisible and silenced?

The whole thing is just weird. I see both sides of this discussion, but I really don't like that people can react to things that haven't happened yet. How do you get "unsurprised" if you don't know about the opponent (opposed checks cover that). Don't like the "second bite at the apple". But I can see why others like it.

What I _really_ don't like is that something as critical as this is really in the hands of the GM. If I were playing with a group, I'd ask the GM how they plan on dealing with this before I pick my character. But in organized play, the character's effectiveness is varying by a LOT based on how the DM runs is. Ick.

Youre just that quick you can sense an imminent attack at the last moment and even react to an invisible creature. Did you find 'uncanny dodge' jarring in 3.5? It basically did the same thing.

The rules are clear: Approach your enemy hidden, and then make your attack. You need to act quicker than your opponent in order to assasinate him (he basically gets a save against your assasinate ability by virtue of an opposed dex check, - but you still get sneak attack on him as he has yet to act.

A DM could rule differenly (like he can with anything) but the assinate ability was balanced around you needing to also win initiative.

 

[abirdcall]

Interesting take on it. So this would be true if I were invisible and silenced?

The whole thing is just weird. I see both sides of this discussion, but I really don't like that people can react to things that haven't happened yet. How do you get "unsurprised" if you don't know about the opponent (opposed checks cover that). Don't like the "second bite at the apple". But I can see why others like it.

What I _really_ don't like is that something as critical as this is really in the hands of the GM. If I were playing with a group, I'd ask the GM how they plan on dealing with this before I pick my character. But in organized play, the character's effectiveness is varying by a LOT based on how the DM runs is. Ick.

But it isn't up to the DM. It has been the rule all along. And has even now just been clarified for you.

And the character is not reacting before something has happened they just gain the ability to have reactions.

Even if you can't understand the difference the rule should still be clear.

 

[Ristamar]

The whole thing is just weird. I see both sides of this discussion, but I really don't like that people can react to things that haven't happened yet. How do you get "unsurprised" if you don't know about the opponent (opposed checks cover that). Don't like the "second bite at the apple". But I can see why others like it.

The rule is correct, but allowing an initiative roll to serve as a secondary Perception check versus Assassins is a very clumsy piece of design. It makes sense in some cases, others not so much. I recommend adjudicating based on the circumstances. Otherwise, you can run into goofy scenarios like this.

 

[JohnLynch]

What I _really_ don't like is that something as critical as this is really in the hands of the GM. If I were playing with a group, I'd ask the GM how they plan on dealing with this before I pick my character. But in organized play, the character's effectiveness is varying by a LOT based on how the DM runs is. Ick.

The DM deciding things like this is a central conceit of 5th edition. It has moved away from the RAW mentality that dominated 3rd edition and 4th edition and has gone back to trusting DMs to know (or have the ability to learn) what rules work best for their group. If you don't have a DM that is able to do this for you, then I'd suggest plating a different game, such as Pathfinder which has it's own organised play program called Pathfinder Society.

They kinda don't have it.


Not every DM is good at cornercase judgements. Actually few are.


That's why he gets so many questions.

You don't have to make the right ruling. You have to make the ruling that results in the most fun at your table. Blindly following the Sage Advice is quite possibly going to mean you fail to make a ruling that results in the most fun.