The surprise round and you

[dmnqwk]

I would rule it slightly differently to most, which still creates the same outcome:

The Guard, with a 20 initiative, is surprised and cannot act, but has a turn. This means the first part of Assassinate does not count (ie there is no advantage).
The Rogue, with his 6 initiative, gets to attack the Guard. Based upon the "attacker unseen" rules, I would grant advantage if the situation allows an ambush-style attack (aka no more than 5' of movement in front of the Guard before the attack is unleashed).

This would mean the Rogue still gets the full benefit of Assassinate, in terms of a critical hit and a sneak attack, but the advantage is granted by a different rule.

If the Rogue went first in initiative, this means the Rogue would only get ONE sneak attack, because after revealing with the first Assassinate, the Guard has a turn in the surprise round (even if they cannot act) and so they wouldn't have Advantage on the second attack (unless granted through some other means). And since it'd be out of the surprise round by then, no auto crit either.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The rules are clear in that case and this is the balancing factor of that ability. Otherwise other subclasses are crap in comparison.
So the assassin is really good when working alone. Or with a stealthy team.

 

[Azurewraith]

The rules are clear in that case and this is the balancing factor of that ability. Otherwise other subclasses are crap in comparison.
So the assassin is really good when working alone. Or with a stealthy team.

I wouldn't say they were crap just less combat oriented.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Let's turn it around.

The GM says to a player, "Your character takes *rolls* 37 points of damage."
.......... "How?"
"A stealthed assassin has hit you with a crossbow, that's critical and sneak attack damage."
.......... "Don't I get to roll initiative?"
"No, you were surprised."
.......... "That's not fair! Why don't I get to roll initiative?"
.......... "All right, I shoot the assassin."
"You can't."
.......... "Why not?"
"He used Cunning Action to Hide and then move away."
.......... "That's not fair!"

I'm failing to see the problem here.

Although granted... as I DM from more of a story than mechanics perspective, the PCs wouldn't arbirtrarily have an assassin after them to do massive critical damage attacks. They would have had to have done things in the story to warrant having assassins sent after them, and if that was the case... then darn right they're getting shot at like that. And if they don't want the damage, they need to be better at keeping their eyes out and maintaining vigil looking for the assassins that are after them.

 

[Flamestrike]

I disagree with everyone in this thread.

If an assasin sneaks up on a guard and declares he wants to shoot the guard with a crossbow then the combat sequence commences.

When the combat sequence commences, all combatants roll initiative. Then the DM determines surprise, and surprised creatures cannot act on their turn on round 1 of the combat.

So if the assasin rolls a higher initiative score, he goes first and his assasinate ability triggers. If the guard rolls higher, the assasin cannot use assasinate (double crit) but arguably could use assasinate (advantage to hit) as the guard hasnt technically 'taken' a turn yet (he's surprised so cant act on his turn.

The guard reacted fast enough to thwart the assassins attempt to murder him (although he still wears a crossbow bolt to the face).

Any DM that gave someone a 'free hit' outside of the combat sequence, I'd probably quit the game then and there. I see it all too often unfortunately. It happened in an AL game on the weekend and annoyed the hell out of me.

If youre doing it in your games, please stop. 5E is deadly enough already without granting a whole extra rounds worth of actions to the first player at the table who screams I ATTACK!!! the loudest and quickest.

 

[DEFCON 1]

So if the assasin rolls a higher initiative score, he goes first and his assasinate ability triggers. If the guard rolls higher, the assasin cannot use assasinate (double crit) but arguably could use assasinate (advantage to hit) as the guard hasnt technically 'taken' a turn yet (he's surprised so cant act on his turn.

The difference here I suspect for many of us is that we prefer to use the DEX (Stealth) vs WIS (Perception) method for determining whether the guard can react to the assassination attempt, rather than DEX (Initiative) vs DEX (Initiative). If the guard wants to stop the attempt, then they need to roll higher on the Perception check to notice the Assassin in the first place.

Now, there's nothing wrong with using Initiative as the determining check to see whether the Assassin gets to use his/her ability... but because we've probably already had the DEX (Stealth) vs WIS (Perception) check done too to find out if the Assassin was even able to sneak up on the guard... layering DEX (Initiative) vs DEX (Initiative) on top of it seems superfluous for some of us, and just presents one more hurdle for the Assassin PC to have to jump over to get to use his ability.

And considering critical hits aren't THAT big of a deal (seeing as how the Assassin is going to get other critical hits 1 out of every 20 attacks anyway regardless)... making it more difficult for the Assassin to do it at the top of a fight to me just seems unnecessary. But hey... to each their own.

 

[SkidAce]

The difference here I suspect for many of us is that we prefer to use the DEX (Stealth) vs WIS (Perception) method for determining whether the guard can react to the assassination attempt, rather than DEX (Initiative) vs DEX (Initiative). If the guard wants to stop the attempt, then they need to roll higher on the Perception check to notice the Assassin in the first place.

Now, there's nothing wrong with using Initiative as the determining check to see whether the Assassin gets to use his/her ability... but because we've probably already had the DEX (Stealth) vs WIS (Perception) check done too to find out if the Assassin was even able to sneak up on the guard... layering DEX (Initiative) vs DEX (Initiative) on top of it seems superfluous for some of us, and just presents one more hurdle for the Assassin PC to have to jump over to get to use his ability.

And considering critical hits aren't THAT big of a deal (seeing as how the Assassin is going to get other critical hits 1 out of every 20 attacks anyway regardless)... making it more difficult for the Assassin to do it at the top of a fight to me just seems unnecessary. But hey... to each their own.

Haven't figured out how I'm going to resolve this, but that was very well said and explained.

 

[Plaguescarred]

The assassin creeps up upon the guard. He successfully stealths into range and points his trusty crossbow at his target. He pulls the trigger...."Wait. We have to roll for initiative.""Um, okay. I get a 6.""The guard gets a 20."So now: The guard goes first, but because he is surprised he cannot move, take an action or a reaction. When the assassin fires, does he get advantage on the attack roll and the free critical if he hits?Or put another way, does losing initiative negate the assassin's abilities?

Yes loosing initiative negate Assassinate, because the surprised creature already took a turn when the rogue's turn comes up.



Surprise: 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.


Assassinate: You have advantage on attack rolls against any creature that hasn’t taken a turn in the combat yet. In addition, any hit you score against a creature that is surprised is a critical hit.

 

[Flamestrike]

The difference here I suspect for many of us is that we prefer to use the DEX (Stealth) vs WIS (Perception) method for determining whether the guard can react to the assassination attempt, rather than DEX (Initiative) vs DEX (Initiative). If the guard wants to stop the attempt, then they need to roll higher on the Perception check to notice the Assassin in the first place.

Now, there's nothing wrong with using Initiative as the determining check to see whether the Assassin gets to use his/her ability... but because we've probably already had the DEX (Stealth) vs WIS (Perception) check done too to find out if the Assassin was even able to sneak up on the guard... layering DEX (Initiative) vs DEX (Initiative) on top of it seems superfluous for some of us, and just presents one more hurdle for the Assassin PC to have to jump over to get to use his ability.

And considering critical hits aren't THAT big of a deal (seeing as how the Assassin is going to get other critical hits 1 out of every 20 attacks anyway regardless)... making it more difficult for the Assassin to do it at the top of a fight to me just seems unnecessary. But hey... to each their own.

He already has used stealth. To get close to the target and to gain the surprise round in the first place. Thats a massive advantage to anyone, and to an assasin, it sets up a guarantee of a kill (At least one attack at advantage that is an auto crit - maybe more, plus possibly going first in round 2 and getting even more attacks in).

When he declares the shot, the Guard gets a dex check to react to the 'twang' of the crossbow. Or his sixth sense kicks in at the last split second. Or he luckily moves a fraction, ruining the assasinate attempt.

I was in an AL game the other day, and was talking to an NPC creature (warily, and with weapon in hand) when the DM declared it attacked me.

He then rolled to hit.

I suggested that initiative preceeds attack rolls, he came back with 'you cant roll initiative unless an attack has been declared and resolved'. I really wanted to say something, but being group play, let it slide.

If that wasnt bad enough, he then told me were were 'surprised' on round one, and I had to sit there and cop a second rounds worth of attacks. Luckily I rolled OK on initaitive so didnt have to sit through a third round of attacks before I got my first action. No complaints, but I resolved then and there to not come back to any more sessions with this guy.

Its a pet peeve of mine. The rules for combat are clear. The DM decides when 'combat sequence' is triggered. Within that sequence attacks are resolved and narrated accordingly. First comes initiative. After this comes determining who is or is not aware and thus surprised and cannot act on turn one. Then finally, come actions in turn order.

If you react to an ambush rolling higher than the surprising foes on initiative, something tips you off (you notice the arrows in flight, or simply have a sixth sense that warns you of danger). You still cant act mind you, but you can take reactions after your turn of inaction. That might be something like casting the shield spell at the last second against those arrows, or a monk deflecting the arrows from the ambushers.

There is no compelling need to disregard the combat sequence as written. Certainly no gamist reason (the abilities as written are balanced around the combat sequence as described) and clearly no narrativist reason. I guess some DMs cant wrap their simulationist heads around the 'simultaneous action' the combat reound represents.

In the OP's example, the guards reation to the crossbow attack (even if he fails to notice the assasin) could be narrated in one of a dozen ways.

If you ignore this, then initiative simply becomes a case of whoever declares 'I attack' first, and making that declaration grants a whole rounds worth of free action. In 5E, thats a death sentence.

 

[FormerlyHemlock]

So if the assassin then decides not to attack and remains hidden, can he declare "Combat Over" and then restart combat hoping to roll higher the second time around?

You've just discovered why cyclic initiative and making decisions after rolling initiative is inferior to AD&D-style "everyone declares then everyone acts."