So, what, exactly, is a turn?
- Thread starter Rune
- Start date
tiornys
Explorer
For further support that each individual monster takes its own turn, see page 38 of the DMG: "For example, the orc raiders can both move into a flanking position and then both attack with combat advantage. Technically, the first one to move would have to ready its attack until the other one moved into position, but it all works out the same in the end."
t~
t~
WalterKovacs
First Post
Well, it's RAW that a ranger and his beast, or a sentinel druid and his animal, have one set of actions that they share on the PCs turn. Similarly the rules relating to mounts (for PCs) is that the mount/PC share an initiative (the PC's) and a set of actions until the PC has been dismounted for an entire turn. The rules there actually add that only one of them can provoke an OA at a time (i.e. if the mount moves away, with the rider on it, both provoke, but you can only attack one of them).
Basically, a turn is different from the initiative count. Not everyone that goes at 12 goes on the same turn ... they still have to figure out the order (specifcally with PCs and monsters that go at the same initiative count, if you are on the same team it's easier to delay and allow your friend to go first and thus decide that particular order yourselves, but in folow up turns, with end of turn effects, the order that each turn occurs is important.)
Grumble-grumble-grumble, oh no, wait, it was ok in the end simon misread the power anyway.Players (esp Kerranin) yesterday tried to convince me that since all my 47 monsters went on the same init count, they only got 1 turn!! Nice try guys.
The only exception here being if the creatures needed to charge in order to reach their target (i.e. move and then move their speed as part of the charge). In that case, the first monster would not be able to ready an action to attack when his buddy got into flanking (though the second creature would still get flanking). Of course, the number of times that this particular scenario are likely to come up in the course of a campaign is pretty minimal.
eamon
Explorer
I was going to say and even then only if both creatures need to charge; but now that I think of it:
Monster A moves; readies to charge the PC as soon as monster B moves adjacent to the PC.
Monster B moves; charges, enters a bunch of squares, eventually entering the square adjacent to the PC - Monster A's trigger!
- Monster A's action triggers, charging and attacking. When he attacks, Monster B is already adjacent, since it's a reaction to B's being adjacent. Done's Monster B may resume...
Monster B's attack goes off; he attacks, but now monster A is adjacent too!
So assuming they both charged into flanking positions, they both get the charge bonus and the flanking bonus.
Actually I think it might not be a good idea to encourage this kind of thing by doing it yourself. It could slow down gameplay (I can just see the initiative chaos when PC's do this regularly). Depends on the group.
Good point, forgot about that. I also would certainly agree that it may be wise to limit the use of that particular tactic as at least at my tables (with a couple of my players) it would instantly generate a rules debate as to whether or not the move portion of the charge can be separated from the attack portion (since the readied action would technically fall in the middle of the triggering action as Charge is all one action). Again, fortunately it is unlikely to come up all that often given the restrictions on charge, initiative, etc.
As a general rule though, I only do this with monsters at the same spot in the initiative order (or at least effectively the same spot -- 1 monster at 11 another at 10 with no PCs in between frex).
eamon
Explorer
That's why you ready on the move adjacent. Moves can explicitly be interrupted by immediate actions, and a charge contains a move. (Similarly, you could ready an action to go after a teleport or a shift, or forced movement, it doesn't matter).
In any case, as you say in practice DM's just use this for monsters as part of the same group. I do wonder, do you actually keep track of the immediate reaction? I don't think I do. Again, not that that's very important, usually...
I do keep track of it (as well as any minor actions that might otherwise be available) mainly because that's the price the monster pays for making sure he gets CA for his attack. I'd make the PCs pay the same price if they were to try it too. As a practical matter though, I consider this to be something of a more "advanced" battle technique, and not something that your dumber monsters would think of. A mindless zombie for instance is generally just gonna to try to rip apart whatever is in front of it. Even a lot of your smarter animals or lower int level humanoids (goblins, orcs, etc.) are likely not to wait to make their attack (exceptions apply of course). If I am at all unsure as to whether or not the monster would be smart (or composed) enough to think of it, I'll have it make an Int or Wisdom check (same as I often do with marked critters). But yeah, for the most part it comes up rarely. Even when I have say 5 goblins acting at the same time, I'm likely to not give the first one CA if they all have to move into position. Though if one of those 5 is already engaged in melee it will be the last to act of the 5 so as to allow as many of the others to get CA as possible.
Similar Threads
