Last week, I had a character initiate combat by casting Hold Person on a guy they were standing there talking too. I rolled initiative, and the bard that was getting the hold person cast on him got a higher initiative score than the character.
The PC argued that his spell goes off first in the round, and than everyone goes after that, or he should at least get a surprise round.
I argued that both groups (The PC's and NPC) were aware of one another and that by casting a spell, he's starting combat, therefore everyone rolls initiative and people go in order. I ruled this at first, and the bard beat the PC's initiative, and cast a spell on the PC. Said PC got butt hurt and argued that his spell should go off first.
Who's right?
If the encounter was not hostile until the spell was cast I would say your PC should have gotten a surprise round. Think of it this way, if you are standing having a conversation with four or five people and someone starts counting to ten really fast would you be able to count to ten before they finished?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"The Surprise Round: If some but not all of the combatants are aware of their opponents, a surprise round happens before regular rounds begin. In initiative order (highest to lowest), combatants who started the battle aware of their opponents each take a standard or move action during the surprise round. You can also take free actions during the surprise round. If no one or everyone is surprised, no surprise round occurs."
Sounds like everyone was aware of everyone else, so the conditions for a surprise round were not met. If the possibility of things devolving into hostilities existed, why shouldn't the bad guy be wound up just waiting for the PC's to start doing something to give him an excuse? If I was talking to a potentially hostile wizard, the moment he started reaching for guano and waggling his fingers you'd better believe I'd have a hammer flying at his face.
Actually, it is still a surprise round, especially if combat beginning is unexpected. "Aware of their opponents" is the operative phrase. If I can see you, but have no idea that you have hostile intent against me, then you are going to get a surprise round on me. If both sides are shouting insults and tempers are flaring and combat looks like a logical escalation, then no surprise round, as at that point sides are clear and people become opponents.
I'd need a little more information on this specific situation to give a clearer answer, but I'd say a surprise round (with maybe the character casting Hold Person being the only one in the surprise round) would have been in order.
I would implemented bluff vs sense motive - or possibly a spellcraft check - to decide who acts in the surprise round. That someone is casting a spell should be pretty clear, even if the nature of the spell is not.
|
|
If it was a hostile situation already but hadn't come to blows, I don't see a surprise round here. If the bard thought the PC's were his best friend right up until someone started slinging spells, maybe.
It's certainly not a "readied action", unless the PC declared he was readying the spell before the conversation even started. The PC would have had to take the action to ready the action.
You made the right call. Once a wizard starts reaching for his pouch and chanting, the warrior has a chance to get the jump on him and run up next to him (or strike him if within range) before the spell goes off.
Unless your player had already bluffed the enemy into thinking he's casting some benign spell, attempting to cast a spell begins combat. You made the right call in letting the character with best initiative act first.
I would say that the PC would deserve a surprise round in this case. By RAW, it's true that everyone was aware of each other, but I would extrapolate in this case. It certainly sounds like the PC is initiating combat through a 'surprise,' and if he didn't actually perform his action, no one would be rolling initiative anyway.
@ Ssalarn: I think the matter of readied action would fall to the bard (the PC's opponent, if I read the OP correctly). If the bard had a readied action in this case, that's fine. If not, I'd say the PC is initiating combat, and gets the surprise round.
|
|
I would say that the PC would deserve a surprise round in this case. By RAW, it's true that everyone was aware of each other, but I would extrapolate in this case. It certainly sounds like the PC is initiating combat through a 'surprise,' and if he didn't actually perform his action, no one would be rolling initiative anyway.
@ Ssalarn: I think the matter of readied action would fall to the bard (the PC's opponent, if I read the OP correctly). If the bard had a readied action in this case, that's fine. If not, I'd say the PC is initiating combat, and gets the surprise round.
I think we really probably need more information here to contextualize the situation. Was this bard on guard and meeting the party in some seedy back alley for an information exchange? Was he half-tuned in a bar where the PC's had been feeding him drinks for the last half-hour? Was the party in the middle of negotiations while engaged in a Mexican stand-off with weapons half-drawn? The circumstances leading up to the spell being cast could have a large impact on the result.
Even putting aside RAW, it seems dangerous to RP if you houserule it so that spells go off before initiative. It will encourage your players to cast now and ask questions later.
It also doesn't make sense temporally. Casting a spell is something that takes about 3 seconds - are we to believe that this group of highly trained murderhoboes have reaction times of 3 seconds?
@ Ssalarn: Agreed, context matters a lot here. If it's a stand-offish situation, I could understand the enemies being prepared for any hostile actions on the part of the PC's.
@ Rumpin: I'm confused... are you saying the enemies should have reaction times of 3 seconds or less? Which may be understandable, but not to the point of being able to interrupt someone else in that time (imo, at least).
I always give the players the benefit in these situations. As you can see there are multiple interpretations of the rules here. Like everyone else here it depends on the specifics of the situation. Was he aware that the PC's might end up attacking him?
If I had an NPC speaking with a group of players and he was under the idea that it was a friendly chat with no chance of getting stabbed I would give the player the spell.
If the NPC was weary and waiting for action then let initiative decide the outcome.
|
I always give the players the benefit in these situations. As you can see there are multiple interpretations of the rules here. Like everyone else here it depends on the specifics of the situation. Was he aware that the PC's might end up attacking him?
If I had an NPC speaking with a group of players and he was under the idea that it was a friendly chat with no chance of getting stabbed I would give the player the spell.
If the NPC was weary and waiting for action then let initiative decide the outcome.
That is true, there is a lot of missing info here on the situation to make a complete call.
To clarify the situation as best I can, the bard was hired by another kingdom to come and make trouble for the PC's. He was to denouce them in public, maybe try and force them into a confrontation, which he successfully did.
@ Rumpin: I'm confused... are you saying the enemies should have reaction times of 3 seconds or less? Which may be understandable, but not to the point of being able to interrupt someone else in that time (imo, at least).
Yes, I think 3 seconds is enough time to make an action before the spell goes off. If a quick-drawing rogue is standing next to someone he doesn't trust and they begin casting, he should have a chance to stab them before they finish.
|
|
To clarify the situation as best I can, the bard was hired by another kingdom to come and make trouble for the PC's. He was to denouce them in public, maybe try and force them into a confrontation, which he successfully did.
So the bard was having a conversation with people he knew were his opponents. He would have been on guard and there's no reason there should have been a surprise round.
|
|
To clarify the situation as best I can, the bard was hired by another kingdom to come and make trouble for the PC's. He was to denouce them in public, maybe try and force them into a confrontation, which he successfully did.
with that info, I would say that you judged correctly. The bard went into the situation ready for a fight. So at the first sign of hostility he was ready to react. It does not matter that it was a spell or a sword, both are just standard actions vs a ready opponent. The bard just happened to be quicker on his feat then the PC's.
Yes, I think 3 seconds is enough time to make an action before the spell goes off. If a quick-drawing rogue is standing next to someone he doesn't trust and they begin casting, he should have a chance to stab them before they finish.
Hmm. I'd personally disagree on that, because stabbing someone, in game rules, would take about 3 seconds as well. If the PC started first, I'd say it's logical to think they would still finish before the bard (or rogue in your example).
That said, given the context, I can understand the guy being ready for battle and interrupting the player. I would clarify that it would still be up to the GM to decide whether or not he should have been ready (i.e. whether or not he actually did have a readied action, as I think it should still be needed in this case), but I could certainly see him being prepared for it in this situation.
|
|
Can someone please point me to where it says that casting any standard spell always takes 3 seconds?
A standard action does not mean that it only takes 3 seconds (just like a move action does not always take only 3 seconds), only the level of effort needed to do said action. The smallest time slice we have in the game (per RAW) for combat is 6 seconds.
There is nothing to state that the hold person took a little longer to cast then what ever spell the bard did. And that once the PC caster reached for that F/DF that the spell requires that the bard did not us a spell like shout or some other spell with only a verbal component.
3 seconds is not stated anywhere, and is merely a socially accepted average.
Can someone please point me to where it says that casting any standard spell always takes 3 seconds?
A standard action does not mean that it only takes 3 seconds (just like a move action does not always take only 3 seconds), only the level of effort needed to do said action. The smallest time slice we have in the game (per RAW) for combat is 6 seconds.
There is nothing to state that the hold person took a little longer to cast then what ever spell the bard did. And that once the PC caster reached for that F/DF that the spell requires that the bard did not us a spell like shout or some other spell with only a verbal component.
I was using 3 seconds as a rule of thumb, it shouldn't be taken as a hard fact. The point being, there is plenty of time between when someone starts chanting and when the spell goes off to take an action.
Even spells like Shout could take just as long as a somatic spell - there's no reason to believe Shout doesn't involve an incantation before the actual "shout" part of the spell can take effect.
I think RAW in this case is clear, realistic, and fair - you can get a surprise round if your opponent is unaware of you, otherwise the highest initiative gets to act first, regardless of who initiates combat.
Well, as the bard knew that the PCs were his opponents, I think I would've ruled it similarly.
It's fair to assume that everybody who talks to opponents is on guard, so there isn't a surprise round, but I think I would've given the first person to actually start combat a bonus on his initiative check.
In a mexican stand-off scenario, most people would probably not only be aware of the possible opponents, but actually readying to do something, like a quickdraw-attack or a jump behind cover.
However, I think it's a bit more complicated with spellcasting. With so many people in Golarion able to cast spells, and so many non-harmful spells available, you can't just go around and kill everyone who starts casting something.
You'd need to do a spellcraft check to know what he's up to. If you don't succeed, smash his head and find out later that all he wanted to do is cast prestidigitation or a silent image of a map to show somebody the way... You might end up in jail.
|
I always give the players the benefit in these situations. As you can see there are multiple interpretations of the rules here. Like everyone else here it depends on the specifics of the situation. Was he aware that the PC's might end up attacking him?
If I had an NPC speaking with a group of players and he was under the idea that it was a friendly chat with no chance of getting stabbed I would give the player the spell.
If the NPC was weary and waiting for action then let initiative decide the outcome.
And you do the reverse too? Or that would be being a jerk GM?
It it work in one direction it work in the other too."Dear PC, let's speak in peace, and my word is fireball."
Sorry guys, he get a free spell as he has started combat.
To clarify the situation as best I can, the bard was hired by another kingdom to come and make trouble for the PC's. He was to denouce them in public, maybe try and force them into a confrontation, which he successfully did.
Ah, him. :-)
I see why the PC disliked him. Still bad idea murdering him in public.
A person who is hostile but trying to give the impression they are not is bluffing. It really should be a bluff vs sense motive. If the hostile person wins, they get a surprise round, if not, regular initiative. Works both ways, if its a secretly murderous wizard posing as a quest giving benefactor. This works even if the opposing person is hostile as well (trying to provoke a fight as previously stated). A person picking a fight can still be caught by surprise at their target's response if it comes out from under a solid poker-face.
To clarify the situation as best I can, the bard was hired by another kingdom to come and make trouble for the PC's. He was to denouce them in public, maybe try and force them into a confrontation, which he successfully did.
Given this, I think the Bard should not have gone first. But not because he couldn't go first.
If he wanted to force them into a confrontation, he would want a party member go first. Otherwise, he just attacked them, and that wouldn't have "satisfied" his mission requirements.
He wants the party to get a bad name, having them attack him (first), does this. But if he attacks first, then he gives them the "Self Defense" act to fall back on. And only ruining his own view by the public.
To clarify the situation as best I can, the bard was hired by another kingdom to come and make trouble for the PC's. He was to denouce them in public, maybe try and force them into a confrontation, which he successfully did.
If the person had Quicken Spell or something that allowed him to cast the spell as a free or swift action and the bard was expecting combat to start; or if the bard wasn't expecting some sort of hostile action. Then I would allow the player that announced he was casting to finish his spell, and only that player, then go to initiative.
If he has nothing to speed up the casting, and the bard was expecting combat, then go straight to initiative.
Ok i know the AP this situation comes up and my advice is for the party to simply kill the bard if they can't outtalk him.
Anyway, how i would have runned it, if the spell cast by the player was with no material components/foci and was a silent and still spell, then surprise round happens and the PC's act on the surprise round is to cast the spell*, now if the spell doesn't meet the above criteria then i would make it a bluff vs sense motive.
*in the game i run, i do things like that with the witch (hexes, i hate them) PC i have