ad_hoc
(they/them)
You know what I mean.
You started off talking about farmers and now you're saying they're the same as assassin because they both aren't classes because assassin is a subclass.
D&D 5E Surprise and Sneak Attack
You know what I mean.
You started off talking about farmers and now you're saying they're the same as assassin because they both aren't classes because assassin is a subclass.
Yes, you can read the seperate sentence (about surprise) as dependent on the first sentence (about going first in initiative). That is a reasinable reading.
Or you can read it as independent.
Both make sense.
One reading leads to assassin's preparation being nullified if they fail to beat the target's initistive check. The other doesn't have to.
But sure, it does simplify things.
I am saying the readings that lead to "surprise ends when they take their turn" or "assassins who fail to win initiative have a useless level 3 feature" are reasonable. I am also saying that alternative readings also work. And if you object to the effect of one interpretation, just read it in a way that doesn't cause the problem.
Lyxen
Great Old One
It's the only reasonable one, otherwise it assumes that the second sentence has no end, since surprise is not a condition or status and does not have a defined end anywhere in the rules. Moreover, the first sentence is about hitting and the second one about damage, so it makes perfect sense.
Please don't call me unreasonable.
You can read "surprised" as plain English, and the two sentences as not dependent on each other, and the reading works perfectly fine.
We have, in the rules, codified when "surprised" starts at the beginning of combat, and common sense can be used to determine when it ends. And that common sense can include "a creature who is unaware combat has begun, and was surprised at the start of it, remains surprised".
Lyxen
Great Old One
Wow, where did that come from ? Where did I even do that ? I'm only talking about a reasonable reading, these were your exact words...
Except it makes no sense compared to the rest of the 5e rules, which shows that the other reading actually does not work at all.
Once more, "suprised" is neither a condition or a status, so how can it remain ? Until when ? The rules say nothing about this. It does not even "start" as you say. Where does it say that "surprise" starts ? You are applying to much of other editions readings, the 5e rules are extremely simple and contained in a few short sentences. It only says that a side gains surprise, etc.
To be even more precise, it just says: "Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter," it does not say that "surprise starts..."
You are talking about my position being unreasonable. What more, you are stating that only your position is reasonable, nothing else can be.
Saying X is reasonable is different than saying Y is unreasonable.
Similarly, saying something is clever is different than saying every other position is dumb. (I AM NOT SAYING you are saying this. I am drawing an analogy; "X is positive" and "Y is negative" are not the same thing, that is all.)
The word "surprised" as a meaning in English.
We are told they are surprised at the start of combat. I described this as "we know when they start being surprised" (I was implicitly talking about "being surprised by the combat", but omitted it).
When they are no longer surprised by the combat is unclear in 5e rules. You have found a way to sidestep the problem; by tying sentence 2 to sentence 1. I find that a reasonable way to handle it. If you do this, you are right, "when are they no longer surprised" has no need to be answered.
On the other hand, reading it the other way leads to the question "are they still surprised when the assassin attacks". Both "once their first turn is done, they can do reactions, so they should no longer be considered surprised" and "well, if they have no in-game knowledge that combat has begun, they are just as surprised by the assassin's attack as if it was before their turn in initiative" both work.
Of course, you can also read it as "any creature that was surprised in this combat, the assassin auto-crits on, for the entire combat" or "any creatures that was surprised in any combat ever, the assassin auto-crits on". I don't think anyone here is advocating for either of those interpretations of the rules? So they aren't relevant.
The existence of interpretations of the rules that nobody is advocating for doesn't matter to me. The fact that there is more than one reasonable reading of the rules, and that "this is a reasonable reading of the rules" isn't sufficient to determine how you should read the rules, also isn't a problem.
I think you should look at the various and multiple reasonable readings of the rules, then pick one based off what consequences you want the rules to have. "Is this a reasonable reading" doesn't mean "we should play the game this way" to me, because (a) there is more than one reasonable reading, and they disagree, and (b) you should play the game in a way that is fun.
So, do you want assassins to be able to do a setup plan and use it, and if they succeed at the setup get a reward of their class feature doing something, even if they don't win initiative? Then read the rules one way. If you don't, read the rules another way.
Lyxen
Great Old One
Please read this again (and again), since your attitude starts to be really annoying:
- You say: "That is a reasinable reading."
- And I say: "It's the only reasonable one"
Yes, and does english tell you how long it lasts ? No. End of discussion.
Which should tell you, once more, that it is NOT a status or condition with a beginning or an end.
And that is the end of the discussion for me. You insist on a reading of the rule that is not supported by anything else in the rules. That should give you a hint that this reading of yours is unreasonable.
"Only" talks about everyone else's readings.
Oh the irony!
It all started with Mr yak fiercely accusing yours truly of making up rules just for the sake of it.
But now, after this passionate discourse spreaded like wildfire, it became even the more apparent, that yes, someone was indeed making up rules and advocating its own malicious interpretation of the sacred texts!
But it wasn't humble yours truly, nor the other gentle souls partaking in polite confrontation. It was the Yak itself!
O
M
G
What a plot twist!
I'd never saw that one coming!
But seriously, man, this is getting comical.
First of all, I came here to be salty about a table top game and happily complain with strangers. Because i'm a nerd and because complaining about the rules is part of the game itself.
Evil mr Crawford made his evil rules too confusing, I misunderstood them, my favorite PC is screwed and now I'm so mad I want everyone to know. Seriously Yak, have a laugh. You're picking up keyboard fights with grown ass adults who use their free time to play make believe... We love what we do, we know it's as meaningful as it is silly and, overall, a mean to have a good time. Taking it seriously takes all the fun out of it, for you more than the rest of us, I think.
Especially because you are 100% wrong.
You're not wrong about how you want to play the game, I hope this is crystal clear. The way you interpret 5e surprise mechanics is very similar to how i used to think it worked. You're right in ruling it that way at your table. full support from me, really!
But you are comically wrong in insisting you are the only one who gets the rules as written.
Look, I'll re-write what i already posted, but this time i'll try to be annoyingly precise, just for this one time. Rules lawyering is super boring, but your constant whining made it fun for a short while.
FIRST
Game systems employ some precise common use words as keywords. This means that in the context of explaining game effects this words are to be read as a specific game mechanic, not as what they originally mean in English. EG: in magic the gathering, "spell" has a very specific meaning: it stands for any non land card in the moment it's played and before it resolves or enters play. It doesn't indicate actual "spell like cards", like "lightning bolt" or whatever. It's counterintuitive, but it's a fundamental difference players are required to know to play.
Surprise is used in the PHB AS A KEYWORD. If you insist in reading it in its proper english meaning, you'll never get how it works. It doesn't refer to "not expecting something to happen and be all like whoa dude what was that", it refers to a exact set of conditions to fulfill in order for the mechainc to trigger.
The explaining of the surprise mechanic is especially confusing in the phb, i totally agree. But It's also very precise, once you remember to read it as a formula and not as narrative, because, again, those are rules, not literature.
SECOND
Look, from chapter 9, page 189, of the 10th reprint of the player handbook:
"The DM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side. Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter. If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first TURN of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends. A member of a group can be surprised even if the other members aren't".
This paragraph says a lot more than it seems, which is terrible! This whole part should take its time to explain in detail how surprise works, not test your knowledge of the system... Bad boy, Jeremy, bad!
so, SURPRISE IS:
-something that can affects creatures and pcs on the first round of combat, and on the first round only
(you see why it feels natural to me to call it a "status"? it uses the same wording of the incapacitated condition!)
ROUND ≠ TURN ---> THEY ARE NOT SYNONIMS, THEY ARE DIFFERENT KEYWORDS.
Same page of the phb:
"A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world.
During a round, each participant in a battle takes a
turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning
of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative.
Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to
the next round if neither side has defeated the other.
So to be offensively clear:
a round is the sum of all turns
a turn is what a single creature can do for that round (excluding reaction)
If surprise lasts for one turn, it clearly means that after you spend your turn doing nothing, you are no longer surprised.
I hope it's crystal clear now. This has been endlessly repeated on this thread and all over the internet.
Surprise is actually very similar to a status, since it's something you gain, affects you by giving you modifiers (sets speed and number of actions to 0), expires when certain conditions are met.
It's purpose is to reward forward thinking, by giving you extra actions. it doesn't improve your chance to hit nor your damage nor gives you extra backstabs. But it's ok, giving you free actions is extremely powerful.
The initiative order shouldn't matter too much, because surprised creatures can't act anway during the first turn (they only get reactions if they have higher initiative than you). The devs tried to make a universal formula to solve all combat scenario, that's part of why it's spelled like
AFAIK the only situation in the game in which this is actually a real issue is the assassinate ability, because is worded in a way that forces the assassin to roll high on initiative or be totally useless. This makes the assassin too unreliable to even consider using, so many people, including me, are really annoyed by this design choice and won't stop complaining about it over the internet.
To conclude:
I, as I suppose many other here, like to passionately argue about my make believe experiences and share ways to improve them.
This is the reason I exhumed a dead thread (whose topic is still super hot, it seems). I wanted to know what others thought about my thoughts. I don't care about hardcore rule lawyering and i care even less to win arguments over the internet with edgy yaks.
But the situation got so hilarious I couldn't resist to point out how much you're making a fool of yourself.
Now, since we made clear that acting superior makes you look super dumb, let's actually be friends, mr yak (or mrs, not sure), I mean it!
I would be happy to hear your opinion about how and why the assassin could be improved or how you think surprise could be handled.
I personally think I'll talk with my friends and propose to just go back to the old surprise round, since I just like it more.
It all started with Mr yak fiercely accusing yours truly of making up rules just for the sake of it.
But now, after this passionate discourse spreaded like wildfire, it became even the more apparent, that yes, someone was indeed making up rules and advocating its own malicious interpretation of the sacred texts!
But it wasn't humble yours truly, nor the other gentle souls partaking in polite confrontation. It was the Yak itself!
O
M
G
What a plot twist!
I'd never saw that one coming!
But seriously, man, this is getting comical.
First of all, I came here to be salty about a table top game and happily complain with strangers. Because i'm a nerd and because complaining about the rules is part of the game itself.
Evil mr Crawford made his evil rules too confusing, I misunderstood them, my favorite PC is screwed and now I'm so mad I want everyone to know. Seriously Yak, have a laugh. You're picking up keyboard fights with grown ass adults who use their free time to play make believe... We love what we do, we know it's as meaningful as it is silly and, overall, a mean to have a good time. Taking it seriously takes all the fun out of it, for you more than the rest of us, I think.
Especially because you are 100% wrong.
You're not wrong about how you want to play the game, I hope this is crystal clear. The way you interpret 5e surprise mechanics is very similar to how i used to think it worked. You're right in ruling it that way at your table. full support from me, really!
But you are comically wrong in insisting you are the only one who gets the rules as written.
Look, I'll re-write what i already posted, but this time i'll try to be annoyingly precise, just for this one time. Rules lawyering is super boring, but your constant whining made it fun for a short while.
FIRST
Game systems employ some precise common use words as keywords. This means that in the context of explaining game effects this words are to be read as a specific game mechanic, not as what they originally mean in English. EG: in magic the gathering, "spell" has a very specific meaning: it stands for any non land card in the moment it's played and before it resolves or enters play. It doesn't indicate actual "spell like cards", like "lightning bolt" or whatever. It's counterintuitive, but it's a fundamental difference players are required to know to play.
Surprise is used in the PHB AS A KEYWORD. If you insist in reading it in its proper english meaning, you'll never get how it works. It doesn't refer to "not expecting something to happen and be all like whoa dude what was that", it refers to a exact set of conditions to fulfill in order for the mechainc to trigger.
The explaining of the surprise mechanic is especially confusing in the phb, i totally agree. But It's also very precise, once you remember to read it as a formula and not as narrative, because, again, those are rules, not literature.
SECOND
Look, from chapter 9, page 189, of the 10th reprint of the player handbook:
"The DM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side. Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter. If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first TURN of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends. A member of a group can be surprised even if the other members aren't".
This paragraph says a lot more than it seems, which is terrible! This whole part should take its time to explain in detail how surprise works, not test your knowledge of the system... Bad boy, Jeremy, bad!
so, SURPRISE IS:
-something that can affects creatures and pcs on the first round of combat, and on the first round only
- determined by the dm, who HAS to use a precise process: the dm checks the stealth rolls of the ambushers and compares them to the ambushed's perception rolls. No sneaking, no surprise. Period. (at least RAW, which can't possibly solve every scenario)
- preventing creature who rolled lower perception than its ambusher's stealth to move, take actions and reactions.
- Surprise only lasts for one TURN, then it ends
(you see why it feels natural to me to call it a "status"? it uses the same wording of the incapacitated condition!)
ROUND ≠ TURN ---> THEY ARE NOT SYNONIMS, THEY ARE DIFFERENT KEYWORDS.
Same page of the phb:
"A round represents about 6 seconds in the game world.
During a round, each participant in a battle takes a
turn. The order of turns is determined at the beginning
of a combat encounter, when everyone rolls initiative.
Once everyone has taken a turn, the fight continues to
the next round if neither side has defeated the other.
So to be offensively clear:
a round is the sum of all turns
a turn is what a single creature can do for that round (excluding reaction)
If surprise lasts for one turn, it clearly means that after you spend your turn doing nothing, you are no longer surprised.
I hope it's crystal clear now. This has been endlessly repeated on this thread and all over the internet.
Surprise is actually very similar to a status, since it's something you gain, affects you by giving you modifiers (sets speed and number of actions to 0), expires when certain conditions are met.
It's purpose is to reward forward thinking, by giving you extra actions. it doesn't improve your chance to hit nor your damage nor gives you extra backstabs. But it's ok, giving you free actions is extremely powerful.
The initiative order shouldn't matter too much, because surprised creatures can't act anway during the first turn (they only get reactions if they have higher initiative than you). The devs tried to make a universal formula to solve all combat scenario, that's part of why it's spelled like
AFAIK the only situation in the game in which this is actually a real issue is the assassinate ability, because is worded in a way that forces the assassin to roll high on initiative or be totally useless. This makes the assassin too unreliable to even consider using, so many people, including me, are really annoyed by this design choice and won't stop complaining about it over the internet.
To conclude:
I, as I suppose many other here, like to passionately argue about my make believe experiences and share ways to improve them.
This is the reason I exhumed a dead thread (whose topic is still super hot, it seems). I wanted to know what others thought about my thoughts. I don't care about hardcore rule lawyering and i care even less to win arguments over the internet with edgy yaks.
But the situation got so hilarious I couldn't resist to point out how much you're making a fool of yourself.
Now, since we made clear that acting superior makes you look super dumb, let's actually be friends, mr yak (or mrs, not sure), I mean it!
I would be happy to hear your opinion about how and why the assassin could be improved or how you think surprise could be handled.
I personally think I'll talk with my friends and propose to just go back to the old surprise round, since I just like it more.
Mod Note:
No, not really. It is, however, getting personal and snarky.
Folks, if you aren't going to stop for a minute and ask yourself, "Is this actually going to make the discussion better? Will this actually have a positive effect?" then maybe you should leave the discussion before you make things worse, and have moderators giving you the hairy eyeball.
Think before you click "post reply" people. Thanks.
Similar Threads
