Playtest Update

[Crazy Jerome]

With surprise, I'd try going with all surprised creatures get no d20 roll on initiative and disadvantage until after their first action.

So most of the surprised people are going towards the end of the initiative order, except the quicker among them will occasionally make the middle of the order. And then their first actions are going to be somewhat ineffective. Meanwhile, the ambushers get close to a free round, take up whatever minimal response the surprised guys can deliver, and then get to go first again.

That's a lot like having a free action at the beginning of the fight, but with a slight element of threat still present in the opposition. If the party manages to ambush a tough group of monsters (or a weak group of monsters manages to ambush the party), you'll have things swing the way of the ambushers for a couple of round, then start to turn the other way. Better hit hard while you can! But there is always that chance that one of the surprised guys will get in a lucky, nasty hit early.

 

[dd.stevenson]

I'm one of those who really didn't feel the -20 mechanic. The math felt clumsy in play, and winning surprise just didn't feel as awesome as I thought it should.

The more I think about it, the more I think it would be better if surprise were represented in some place besides the initiative count.

A first-round bonus/penalty would be fine. But I really think this is the place for Mearls to strut his "new mechanic" mojo--this is one area where I think d&d could benefit from some fresh ideas.

 

[Agamon]

With surprise, I'd try going with all surprised creatures get no d20 roll on initiative and disadvantage until after their first action.

Can't XP you, but this is a great compromise, I think. Giving advantage to the surprisers is too much, but disadvantage to the surprised is gives the other side an "advantage" without the chance to wipe the other side out.

Helps eliminate the negative numbers and less clumping, too. Good stuff.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

I am wrong.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Was I the only one shocked when I read next playtest end of summer?!?

I was expecting mid to end of july

 

[Nebulous]

Because its one of those rules that's fun for one session but not a two year campaign. Within a year of 5e being released there will be hundreds of abilities, spells, powers, monsters, etc all based around it. You'll be rolling two dice most of the time. Less dice not more.

Yes, i can see advantage dice being a rampant issue in very short term, the game will easily revolve around "what grants advantage." And what seems initially unique and fun could because droll and repetitive.

 

[DEFCON 1]

For me and my group, we would absolutely prefer to do the former (a series of skill checks to hide and get the drop on the guard) even if it makes no difference mechanics-wise. The story is the thing.

Well, then it doesn't matter what the mechanics are for you (or even if there ARE mechanics.) Which is fine for you and your group, but doesn't solve the problem for the rest of us.

If there is a game element called 'Surprise', and if this element is not something that is meant to appear every combat and is supposed to be a special occurrence... then the mechanics should be special as well. Of which "going first" I do not believe is really it.

 

[Rydac]

Was I the only one shocked when I read next playtest end of summer?!?

I was expecting mid to end of july

No you weren't I was shocked too......I seem to recall them saying every 5 to 6 weeks depending on speed of feedback and content. Perhaps some of the response threw them for a bit of a loop. I would think with the playtest rolling they could have alternatives or tweaks for some of the issues out in July for more testing.

Another pet peeve of mine is that he mentioned criticals. Mr. Mearls please, please, please don't think about putting in that fun sucking moment of rolling to confirm crits that I still endure while playing in my friend's pathfinder campaign.
Max damage is easy and well loved by players I game with.....now if you want to add in an easy crit table with some additional juicy effect no prob, but remember quick and easy so we don't slow the game down and diminish the drama of the critical

 

[Herschel]

Was I the only one shocked when I read next playtest end of summer?!?

I was expecting mid to end of july

They have a boatload of sessions at Gen Con. That would be a good place to try out face-to-face new ideas (or I suppose get one last good look at what they have so far, but I think it'll be with the new additions.)

 

[GSHamster]

Ganging up on a single target is good tactics and happens anyway, at least with parties that think about things. Spreading the party's damage output over several targets will prolong the fight and make things harder and more dangerous. I concede that being surprised may well mean that the enemies could, in theory, take someone out before they get a chance to act, but my response to that is a) that goes both ways (ie the players can do this just as readily as the monsters can), and b) then take steps to avoid it. You know that being surprised can be bad news, so don't allow it to happen. Scout ahead. Dim your light source. Move quietly. And to quote from Sun Tzu: Emerge to their surprise.

Let's say it's the 5th round of combat. If there was no surprise, you might see an initiative order like:

Enemy 1
Player 1
Player 2
Enemy 2
Player 3
Enemy 3

The players and enemy actions are interleaved. However, if there was surprise in the first round, the fifth round would still look like

Enemy 1
Enemy 2
Enemy 3
Player 1
Player 2
Player 3

This means that the three enemies can hit a single player before any player has a chance to respond, and vice versa, even deep into the combat. Combat becomes very swingy,

Basically, interleaved actions leads to more interesting combat, and the surprise rules makes it very likely that the resulting combat will not be interleaved, but rather group sides together.