Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 6677472" data-attributes="member: 7006">I don't roll initiative until the first hostile action is taken and the person doing it will usually go first.&nbsp; This can only be counteracted provided another person in the party says they are trying to stop their party-member from attacking, and at that point I'd roll initiative between the two to see if the second player could stop the first.So for instance, the party is talking to a band of orcs and one of the rash party members says they fire their bow at the nearest orc (because that player doesn't want to parlay).&nbsp; Now, theoretically that would start combat and thus you'd roll initiative... but I find the idea that this particular PC who said they were starting the fight somehow ends up going AFTER every other character because they rolled poorly on initiative makes no narrative sense to me at all and thus I don't bother with initiative yet.Instead, the PC says they are attacking, and I give any other members of her party the chance to react to this (because they notice her nocking an arrow and bringing up the bow for example).&nbsp; If a party member is close enough to try and stop her (by physically grabbing the bow or throwing her a look to tell her to stop what she's doing), then I'd have both of them roll initiative to see which of them got to go first and do whatever it was they wanted.&nbsp; If the attack was not stopped for whatever reason, at *that* point I'd have everyone else roll initiative, slotting in those two PCs who had already rolled.&nbsp; So even though the bowman went &quot;first&quot; in that out-of-initiative attack, they might not react fast enough to go first in the first round of actual combat.&nbsp; Which I'm fine with.By the same token when it comes to stealth and surprise... I run it old-style wherein you only get a &quot;surprise round action&quot; if you aren't surprised.&nbsp; If you are surprised, you don't get a &quot;turn&quot; in the surprise round.&nbsp; Which does mean it goes against the &quot;rules&quot; stating you get your Reaction once your spot in the initiative order comes and goes during the Surprise round, but frankly I don't care.&nbsp; I've never had a problem with it either way, and if doing it my way eliminates the arguments about the Assassinate ability (wherein the Rogue can't auto-crit because the person they are surprising rolls a higher initiative than they do) then so much better.&nbsp; The Assassinate ability isn't so strong that I feel the need to halve the numbers of times the Rogue actually gets to use it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 6677472, member: 7006"] I don't roll initiative until the first hostile action is taken and the person doing it will usually go first. This can only be counteracted provided another person in the party says they are trying to stop their party-member from attacking, and at that point I'd roll initiative between the two to see if the second player could stop the first. So for instance, the party is talking to a band of orcs and one of the rash party members says they fire their bow at the nearest orc (because that player doesn't want to parlay). Now, theoretically that would start combat and thus you'd roll initiative... but I find the idea that this particular PC who said they were starting the fight somehow ends up going AFTER every other character because they rolled poorly on initiative makes no narrative sense to me at all and thus I don't bother with initiative yet. Instead, the PC says they are attacking, and I give any other members of her party the chance to react to this (because they notice her nocking an arrow and bringing up the bow for example). If a party member is close enough to try and stop her (by physically grabbing the bow or throwing her a look to tell her to stop what she's doing), then I'd have both of them roll initiative to see which of them got to go first and do whatever it was they wanted. If the attack was not stopped for whatever reason, at *that* point I'd have everyone else roll initiative, slotting in those two PCs who had already rolled. So even though the bowman went "first" in that out-of-initiative attack, they might not react fast enough to go first in the first round of actual combat. Which I'm fine with. By the same token when it comes to stealth and surprise... I run it old-style wherein you only get a "surprise round action" if you aren't surprised. If you are surprised, you don't get a "turn" in the surprise round. Which does mean it goes against the "rules" stating you get your Reaction once your spot in the initiative order comes and goes during the Surprise round, but frankly I don't care. I've never had a problem with it either way, and if doing it my way eliminates the arguments about the Assassinate ability (wherein the Rogue can't auto-crit because the person they are surprising rolls a higher initiative than they do) then so much better. The Assassinate ability isn't so strong that I feel the need to halve the numbers of times the Rogue actually gets to use it. [/QUOTE]

Verification