PallidPatience
First Post
If you have time, you can take 20 on Hide checks.
Ready action advice
- Thread starter Paul Grogan
- Start date
Gerion of Mercadia
First Post
As one side is already "in initiative" and the other side isn't - a suprise round is warranted.
The INSTANT a player declares "I assume there is a combatant on the other side" - that character rolls for initiative. If the whole party does this, the PC's are acting like a SWAT Assault team.
The rogues in question, instead of having a "suprise round" would now be under a ready action, as both sides have rolled for initiative.
The act of "breaking an object" is made at combat speed, in the course of initiative. As the rogues are attacking from concealment on the first round, the guy kicking in the door has no dex bonus to AC barring uncanny dodge - sneak dice MIGHT kick in, depending on the exact square each rogue is in and the square of the meatshield doing the kicking.
If the (likely) meatshield who is doing the kicking has cover from the rogues AFTER the door is kicked in, no sneak dice as combatant is not flatfooted and although gets no dex bonus to AC - he still has cover from the attack. (Watch any Police show like COPS or Law and Order - watch where the actor or the officer actually stands relative to the door/window/whatever being kicked in.)
Of course if the Player sticks the mini smack dab in the center of the doorway instead of alongside the door...
In either case, the rogues in question now act immediately AFTER the doorbasher. This is because the readied action goes of in response to the door being succesfully kicked in, which is a result of the PC action, not the "PC tries to kick in the door" action itself.
Dross
Explorer
nittanytbone said:
Would you simply take 10 on the listen check? They are apparently not actively listening.
The rest would be the way I'd run it.
The only time I'd not roll would be if the best PC's spot with a roll of 20 could not match the rogues' worst hide with a roll of 1 (of course if this is the case, there are other problems :\ ).
Paul Grogan
First Post
Gerion of Mercadia said:
And this is the thing. What is to stop everytime anyone goes into a room, they always say that, which means there is never a surprise round. I can see the reasoning for this, and part of me says that it is unfair for the characters to have faced a surprise round and then to lose initiative when they are fully prepared for a fight. Basically, they are in a thieves guild, and they have been in a number of rooms already and fought rogues, but if you allow then to do this then, whats to stop them doing this all the time in every situation.
And thats what I was querying. A few people have said I did it right, but I wasnt sure.
Forget the whole thing with the listen checks. Lets just go with the rogues in the room know for a fact that the players are outside and about to burst in. The players think there may be enemies in the room but have no proof. Forget the hiding thing.
Two options for what happens when the door is opened:
1. Enemies get a surprise round, then roll initiative
2. Door opens - Everyone rolls initiative
I'm thinking that option 1 is correct. If both sides heard each other, then you would be in combat straight away, ticking off rounds. There is an example of this in DMG. At this point the bad guys would be readying actions to shoot.
On a related note - its good to see the "Can I take 20 on a hide check" discussion again, I still dont have a definite answer to that, some people say yes, some say no. Strictly speaking, there is no penalty for failure. Those who say this have got that bit wrong. A penalty for failure means something bad happening (climbing, disabling device, etc). Somebody spotting you could indirectly cause something bad to happen, but thats not the same.
robberbaron
First Post
A. If the 'meatshield' simply shouldercharged the door then a surprise round is justified - he was unprepared for a combat - 3 full attack sequences with sneak damage (I'm assuming the rogues positioned themselves within 30' and with no cover for the door opener).
B. If the party got ready for action then the 'meatshield' pushed the door until it opened then I think the rogues would have readied their attacks. 3 attacks (readied standard actions) with no sneak damage - door opener prepared then initiated the encounter and is not flat-footed.
Big difference.
Use A if the party are blundering around like axe-brained fools. Use B if they are taking sensible precautions in a hostile environment. I've seen both, from the same party.
I guess there may be an option between A and B but I can't think of it right now.
B. If the party got ready for action then the 'meatshield' pushed the door until it opened then I think the rogues would have readied their attacks. 3 attacks (readied standard actions) with no sneak damage - door opener prepared then initiated the encounter and is not flat-footed.
Big difference.
Use A if the party are blundering around like axe-brained fools. Use B if they are taking sensible precautions in a hostile environment. I've seen both, from the same party.
I guess there may be an option between A and B but I can't think of it right now.
Elethiomel
First Post
robberbaron said:
For option A, Remember that a surprise round is not a full round. Only a move or standard action is allowed, so no full attack sequence.
For option B, If the rogues are hiding behind cover inside the room the figher would still be denied dexterity for their attack unless he spots them before they fire.
I'd rule that there's no initiative without someone definite to roll initiative against. If you don't see the enemy or notice their attack, you're not in initiative yet. However, if you allow things to go to initiative before the players break down the door, and the rogues ready actions to attack whoever comes through the door, then I'd say that since the rogues know exactly where to expect an enemy, and the player is facing a room with several possible enemy locations, he'd be denied dexterity against those ready actions anyway.
But that's just me.
robberbaron
First Post
Elethiomel said:
So, Option A and B both mean 3 single attacks with Sneak damage.
Elethiomel said:
I agree with your ruling, but that's just me as well.
Paul Grogan
First Post
We discussed this at the start of our last session. I used information from here, so thanks to everyone for their input. The three things we wanted to stop were.
a) The rogues getting 2 sneak attacks
b) The players being able to open the door, rush in and hit something before he gets to fire his crossbow.
c
Point a) was not because I want to be nice to the players, and some people have backed me up and said I was correct to do a surprise round and then roll initiative, but it seems wrong (and dare I say unrealistic) for a character to burst into a room fully prepared for there being defenders (since they are in the base of a thieves guild which they know is on alert), and for him to be shot at twice with sneak attack damage twice.
We came up with all sorts of extra rules to cover it, but I wanted to keep it simple. We toyed with the idea of allowing the players go into initiative when they wanted. So, they line up outside the door, go into initiative, all delay until the character at the front gets his go, who then opens the door, and they all follow.
But, strictly speaking, they wouldnt be flat footed. The rogues inside would be in initiative too, so they could ready an action, which solves part b)
There was then a discussion about it would be sneak attack, because at the point the attack is made, the rogue is considered invisible, and I didnt fully understand that argument - it was something along the lines of the rogue shooting as he sees the door opening, so the bolt is fired before the PC sees the rogue, but this all sounded too complicated, so I didnt go with that.
When hiding, its simple - Character opens the door - reactive free spot check. If he fails to see them, then the rogues readied action kicks in and sneak attack damage applies. But what if the rogue is not hiding at all - they are just stood there 10ft away from the other side of the door. It seems unfair to not give him at least 1 sneak attack.
I'm still not sure about this - after 5 years of playing 3/3.5, I'm astounded by my confusion over fundamental rules like these
a) The rogues getting 2 sneak attacks
b) The players being able to open the door, rush in and hit something before he gets to fire his crossbow.
c
Point a) was not because I want to be nice to the players, and some people have backed me up and said I was correct to do a surprise round and then roll initiative, but it seems wrong (and dare I say unrealistic) for a character to burst into a room fully prepared for there being defenders (since they are in the base of a thieves guild which they know is on alert), and for him to be shot at twice with sneak attack damage twice.
We came up with all sorts of extra rules to cover it, but I wanted to keep it simple. We toyed with the idea of allowing the players go into initiative when they wanted. So, they line up outside the door, go into initiative, all delay until the character at the front gets his go, who then opens the door, and they all follow.
But, strictly speaking, they wouldnt be flat footed. The rogues inside would be in initiative too, so they could ready an action, which solves part b)
There was then a discussion about it would be sneak attack, because at the point the attack is made, the rogue is considered invisible, and I didnt fully understand that argument - it was something along the lines of the rogue shooting as he sees the door opening, so the bolt is fired before the PC sees the rogue, but this all sounded too complicated, so I didnt go with that.
When hiding, its simple - Character opens the door - reactive free spot check. If he fails to see them, then the rogues readied action kicks in and sneak attack damage applies. But what if the rogue is not hiding at all - they are just stood there 10ft away from the other side of the door. It seems unfair to not give him at least 1 sneak attack.
I'm still not sure about this - after 5 years of playing 3/3.5, I'm astounded by my confusion over fundamental rules like these
