Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Water Bob" data-source="post: 6057458" data-attributes="member: 92305">This is an interesting take--one that I've thought about myself but haven't shared in a post.  It's kinda like a lawyer trying to use a different meaning to a definition in a court case.  "Your honor, my client did put his lips on the marijuana cigarette, but he did not inhale.  Therefore, my client did not smoke the illegal substance." As controversial as it might be, it is a damned interesting look at the rules:  The three characters are not combatants at first, but there is a point at which they do become combatants.  Therefore, a Surprise round, by the rules, is legal and called for in this instance shown in the OP example. As the Surprise rules state, a Spot or Listen check can be made by the Thief, with success determining whether he's aware that the Fighter and Ranger are at odds, about to go to blows.  With success on the check, the Thief is included in the Surprise round (and can perform a Partial Charge, but is otherwise limited in action by the Surprise rules).  If the Thief fails, then he doesn't recognize the Ranger as a threat to his brother, the Fighter, and therefore is on the ball and probably enroute to the table once initiative is thrown. I think that's the answer I'm looking for, unless anyone here disagrees with the definition on combatants and awareness of them for the use of Surprise. Thoughts on this?</blockquote>