|
... and shoot the first thing I see when I open the door.
At least, that's the standard operating procedure of one of my players. At. Every. Single. Door.
His intent, obviously, is to essentially gain a surprise round action where he is the sole participant - assuming any creatures on the other side fail their listen checks while he's doing his rogue activities.
I'm curious to hear how other people rule actions like this.
Should opening the door make any creatures on the other side "aware" therefore nullifying the surprise round?
Is there something I'm missing that would make this kind of activity less of the 'free attack on anything' action that is seems to be?
Aside from putting an innocent NPC behind the door as a guilt target, I can't think of any other way within the context of the rules to limit the effectiveness of this particular maneuver.
Since opening a door is a standard action, wouldn't THAT action be the extent of his surprise round? Or, is his argument that the "surprise" doesn't come until after his out-of-combat door opening? (which is a valid argument if he's been super sneaky)
The only way I can see this working is if the door opened unexpectedly. If the PCs are outside the door, the people in the room would get a chance to hear them in general, and another chance to hear the lock opening, etc.
Now, I could see, if the people in the room didn't hear the party, one person using their "surprise" round to bust the door open, and once the door burst open, the rogue taking his shot . . . but then the plan is vulnerable to another person being heard (likely an unstealthy tank), and to said tank breaking the door down in one shot.
Sure thing. It sounds like your player is trying to take a ready action outside of the combat round structure. This cannot be done, and there's a very good reason this cannot be done. It goes beyond an annoying and unbalancing tactic (i.e., getting a free attack against anything in the room). Consider what would happen if an enemy inside the room was also readying an action to shoot whoever opened the door. Now the PC and the NPC are each readying actions against each other, both to be taken as soon as they see each other. Assuming they see each other at the same time (a very likely outcome of the described scenario), whose action wins out? Who gets the readied action first?
The answer: neither. This very issue arose in one of my games. The actual mechanical structure at work here is the surprise round. Each of the characters with "readied actions" is expecting each other, so neither is surprised and they both get to act in the surprise round, while everyone who was less prepared does not. Initiative, however, is rolled completely normally. The only way your PC can get a shot off before the other guys is if the dice favor him and his turn comes up first.
Of course, this assumes the opponents on the other side of the door are expecting the PC. Opening a door is a move action, and most doors (in a pseudo-medieval setting especially) are going to make a significant amount of noise. Thus, if you so choose, you can say the very act of opening most doors alerts the creatures in the room enough that they are not surprised. Initiative would then be rolled normally.
On the other hand, this is a rogue we're talking about, correct? Getting the drop on people is one of the best ways to get a sneak attack, thus employing his signature class feature. It's kinda his schtick. Of course, anything can be overused and exploited, especially tactics. If he's shooting the first thing he sees, he should only get his free attack against the closest obvious creature in the room, friend or foe. This could really backfire; either netting him an attack against a friendly or a wasted sneak attack against some weakling minion which would have gone down easily anyway, while at the same time ruining the advantage of surprise against a stronger foe further back which would have been a better target for the sneak attack.
|
... and shoot the first thing I see when I open the door.
At least, that's the standard operating procedure of one of my players. At. Every. Single. Door.
There's nothing wrong with experienced adventurers having standard tactics. If they can safely assume their SOP will work every time, that's no-one else's fault than the DM's.
The monsters get a Listen check when he picks the lock - probably not a difficult one, if you think about it. They get another Listen check if there is any other noise, such as when his friends talk (when, and therefore where, does the party hold tactical discussions?) or when clumsy oafs in metal armour move around the room behind him. There's no reason that an alert guard couldn't itself Listen actively at the door.
You would be entirely justified to place a monster with a good Listen check in an encounter and allow it to take 10 and then roll for each additional noise made, then have it standing at the door ready to clobber whoever opened it. Or have five crossbow-things aiming at the door ready to shoot the first thing they see.
Further, he can say "I shoot the first thing I see" if he likes. He is not yet in combat, so he absolutely doesn't automatically get first initiative. Monsters are smart, experienced and dangerous and sometimes they can be faster than PCs.
|
|
Thanks for a lot of good thoughts on this.
(Why don't the Paizo boards allow a multi-qoute option? grr.)
My player's argument is that the act of opening the door, and having it open, should trigger a surprise round. So as has been noted, he's essentially hoping to ready combat actions, during non-combat activities - which was eloquently pointed out to be an invalid activity for good reason.
Now, although I mentioned that this is SOP for the character, it's certainly not always successful, I do my listen and spot (well, perception, now) checks and often enough they succeed ... but it's about those few times where they fail, and what in combat (ie. we've rolled initiative) would be two distinct actions *kick open door**shoot weapon* is essentially being viewed as a single action because it's not being done within the context of combat actions.
The player is essentially trying to do the fantasy equivalent of a SWAT breach.
I think what I'm going to do is lower the perception DC on the door itself opening, particularly since even in the real world its hard to open a door into a room without someone noticing and I'm pretty sure they didn't have WD40 around back then to stop the hinges from squeaking.
If the occupants notice, then it goes to standard combat initiative, if they don't then I'll give him his surprise against the nearest creature in his line of sight.
Hm... if I was a DM and saw this as a problem I would have to say the player is going to feel really really crummy when he shoots that little kid playing in the room.
|
|
Hm... if I was a DM and saw this as a problem I would have to say the player is going to feel really really crummy when he shoots that little kid playing in the room.
haha ... oh, have faith, I have a 'find my daughter' sidequest the players are showing some interest in pursuing, and I'm feeling highly incentivized to have her be the only thing 'behind the door'
That should open up some interesting RP possibilities, if nothing else.
Fill a closet with brown mold. Then laugh.
Hm... if I was a DM and saw this as a problem I would have to say the player is going to feel really really crummy when he shoots that little kid playing in the room.
Consequences. That's the name of the game. A bunch of trigger-happy psychos are eventually going to do something at least one of them will probably regret. One of my players still has a guilt trip over gunning down a goblin-child playing in a barn they were pilfering from (TORG) since they got into a shoot-first-Haste-shoot-again-and-then-maybe-think-about-asking-questions mode. Same player also bemoans the fate of some farmers that died horribly because the party insisted that they were entitled to stay in the barn (traditional fantasy trope, after all) even though they knew they were being trailed by a creature of evil. Now they understand why common people lock all the doors and windows and stay inside and aren't chatty with strangers that show up on the threshold on that night.
On the other hand, I'm not sure I agree with the previous post about the order. Unless something in the room was alerted to the rogue picking the lock, the surprise round should be triggered when the door is opened. Though I do agree about the rogue not being able to ready an action if he's opening the door. Arguing that it should be outside the combat round seems like a bit of meta-gaming chicanery, IMHO. Seems like someone else could do that for him though--the wizard could get some pretty good cover from behind one of those doors after all.
Agreed, after the lock is picked and trap removed (or bypassed, both of which probably make noise) the wizard can usually just cast open/close to actually open the door, however the whole situation seems a bit odd to me but easy to handle, just let him peg some innocent people a couple of times. If he then starts stating he's going to scan the room first, point out that takes a bit of time.
Beyond all that the 'best' means of ensuring a suprise round when a door is involved in Pathfinder currently is a cleric with the travel domain.
|
Have the door in question be a mimic.....
Have as some one else suggested their be brown mold in the room....
Have an undead creature standing stock still and waiting to attack the first thing that comes into the room from a hidden recess that the pcs cant see when first entering...
Have the little girl on the other side of the door....
Have a noisy dungeon where he cant hear a thing on the other side of the door because of the racket....
Have the muffled sounds come from prisoners the pcs were unaware of...
Have the trap be on the other side of the door...
|
|
Ultimately you have to ask yourself, is this player's behavior in character or metagaming?
If he is in character, then throwing a consequence in his way might slow down the behavior, but I really don't think you should punish clever play, especially from a rogue type, unless he is clearly exploiting.
If the player is metagaming or exploiting the situation try talking to him about it outside of the group. Maybe he can see why he should tone it down a bit. Communication is key.
Last but certainly not least, if your players are using aggressive SWAT caliber tactics, then by all means have your encounters operate the same way. Ambushes, dogged chases and drag-em out pacing can really equalize things for a party that seems to be too clever for its own good.
Besides nothing says problem solved like a TPK...
(I jest!)
Besides nothing says problem solved like a TPK...
(I jest!)
I believe there was an old button/bumper-sticker/t-shirt that read, "A Sucking Chest Wound is the DM's Way of Telling You to Slow Down."
Fill a closet with brown mold. Then laugh.
Awesome idea.
And having little innocent Sally right there.
Also, putting a big freaking HTH combatant with a 10 foot striking range at the door to greet him.
|
|
He can't find every trap that way. Here's a simple one: Paranoid dungeon denizen set up a trap which is triggered by opening said door. There is a rope tied to the handle, and when pulled it launches a hail of arrows at the door.
or a reverse lock. Hours of fun. When looked at, it appears to be locked, but is in fact unlocked. If someone attempts to pick the lock, they instead lock it. If he blindly takes his picks to the door every time without tugging on it first, this will be quite the underhanded trick.
Illusionary wall beyond the door. Or maybe the opposite: They open the door, it appears to lead into an open room, but instead they get a face full of brick when they try to enter.
|
|
Have a noisy dungeon where he cant hear a thing on the other side of the door because of the racket....
OOH! I just thought of an entire dungeon when I saw this sentence. Somewhat of a clockwork-type building where there are gears inside the walls, automating everything and making quite the large amount of noise, imposing a hefty penalty to listen checks were they to hold their ears to anything due to the resonance. Moving floors, auto-resetting traps... You wouldn't need many monsters for this. Just the one crazy gnome wizard living in the middle of the constantly-shifting crazy building.
I would be tempted to just set some kind of pressure plate thingy on the other side, which brings down fiery death when hit by, say, crossbow bolt. Realistic? Bah.
... and shoot the first thing I see when I open the door.
At least, that's the standard operating procedure of one of my players. At. Every. Single. Door.
His intent, obviously, is to essentially gain a surprise round action where he is the sole participant - assuming any creatures on the other side fail their listen checks while he's doing his rogue activities.
I'm curious to hear how other people rule actions like this.
Should opening the door make any creatures on the other side "aware" therefore nullifying the surprise round?
Is there something I'm missing that would make this kind of activity less of the 'free attack on anything' action that is seems to be?
Aside from putting an innocent NPC behind the door as a guilt target, I can't think of any other way within the context of the rules to limit the effectiveness of this particular maneuver.
It shouldn't give any advantage. Just think about it logically, without even considering game mechanics. First, there's the noise. Then there's the moment when you open the door and you're vulnerable because you're just standing there with one hand occupied...opening the door. Then you have to stand there for a few moments and scan your surroundings. Now let's say you see something you want to kill. It's slower than ripping a door open and charging in like a berserker, brandishing a club or mace. Once you ID a target, you have to bring the weapon into position, aim it, and fire it.
I think you're doing the right thing.
* Sometimes, the players should be able to surprise the monsters.
* Sometimes, the monster should be able to surprise the players (e.g. the monster was hiding beside the door, waiting quietly).
* Sometimes, no one is surprised.
That sounds reasonable to me. In practice, I find that the first few monsters get surprised, but the noise of previous fights tends to alert monsters later on.
|
|
HAHA ... awesome ideas from everyone - I'm particularly interested in running with the "trap on the other side of the door" idea. Time to pull out Grimtooth again methinks.
Ultimately you have to ask yourself, is this player's behavior in character or metagaming?
It's a bit of both and a bit of something else. If I had a problem player he'd be the one - you know the type; burn down the dungeon don't explore it, speak with dead is a valid negotiation technique, constant loner, every character is selfish/evil regardless of alignment, etc.
He's also far more versed in the rules than I am, at least in recognizing corner cases and min/maxing. In other words, at least once every few sessions I'm forced to re-read some rule/spell/feat in minute detail to see where he pushed the boundaries.
In this instance more than others though, it's metagaming - using a combination of out of combat actions not covered by any kind of adjuticatable rules to provide an in-combat advantage.
My ruling for it now, after some of this discussion is going to be:
1) Traps/Locks each result in perception checks from room occupants, success means opponents become aware, thus they are only participants in surprise round when the door opens - effectively nullifying my player's tactic.
2) Open door starts "combat" - initiative is rolled.
3) Opening the door also results in another perception check, if the opponents failed the checks in part 1. Opponents who succeed also get to participate in the surprise round. For unnarmed opponents this may mean diving for cover or picking up a weapon, but for spellcasters it could be a quick lightning bolt...
4) Combat then proceeds normally from then on.
So the player still gets a surprise round benefit, but he's no longer getting the "free outside of combat attack" that he was aiming for before.
|
I've been on both sides of this situation.
In the game I'm currently playing, the Ranger and I have a breaching method similar to what is described. He's looted a Hand of the Mage and my Monk has proficiency with a Longbow. Since my AC is the highest, I stand 5 feet away from the door with bow drawn "ready to shoot anything hostile that comes at me". He uses the Hand of the Mage to open the door without being in the line of fire. Sometimes this tactic is useful, sometimes it just makes things angry.
As a DM, I had a door rigged to a crossbow set to fire dead center once the door opens. The party Rogue picked the lock, and then decided to look through the keyhole. I told him(and only him) what he saw. He steps aside, looks to the necromancer and says "There you go, its all yours." The wizard opened the door and was immediately shot, while the Rogue decided to slip off and scout ahead.
Dealing with tactically minded players isn't a big problem, as long as they don't whine when their standard tactics don't work.
Mixing things up can certainly keep things interesting, and there should never be a method of doing something that's always effective. Like dealing with a Wizard who decides he's going to use all the spell slots he can to prepare Fireball; throw a Fire Elemental at him. On the next day he may actually change tactics.
You've said why this guy is a problem, but I still don't understand why this particular tactic is a problem. Why is it so bad that he plays smart and usually gets exactly 1 free shot?
You said that he wants to do a SWAT style breach. Well there is a reason why the SWAT teams do it, because it works.
Now his being a bad player is a completely seperate problem. Don't screw over his good and frankly legitimate tactics just because he is a bad player. Punish the actual bad behavior.
*Rogue opens door and fires crossbow*
'Oops!'
*Rogue closes door and runs screaming*
*Dread wraith floats through door after rogue...*
I agree that if they fail to make the necassary rolls and notice him then he should get his free shot.... However I think he's going to hit innocents, or people he should have negotiated with instead as well as big guys with reach since he fires before looking and you should definately use that. The shoot first and ask after approach is technically valid, but if you want any "realism" at all then it's going to kill him one day is all I'm saying.
|
OOH! I just thought of an entire dungeon when I saw this sentence. Somewhat of a clockwork-type building where there are gears inside the walls, automating everything and making quite the large amount of noise, imposing a hefty penalty to listen checks were they to hold their ears to anything due to the resonance. Moving floors, auto-resetting traps... You wouldn't need many monsters for this. Just the one crazy gnome wizard living in the middle of the constantly-shifting crazy building.
Make your dungeon floorplans out of RoboRally boards...
"No! Not Cannery Row!"
Everytime I read this thread I still don't get how he is choosing a target and still getting the free attack. To me he would throw the door open and on the suprise round make a Spot check to determine a target. Then if he gets initiative he would get a sneak attack on that target. Granted if he has the Quick Recognoiter feat which allows Spot as a free action (normally a move action I believe) then his tactics are fine as long as the foes fail their listen checks.
I have had a group use exactly these tactics. They were a finese group composed of a rogue, monk and wizard (with a ranger cohort). The rogue and the monk would sneak up and since the rogue had Quick Recognoiter (which also gives a +2 to initiative by the way, with the preq of Improved Initiative) the rogue would typically get two sneak attacks in before the foes got an action. But keep in mind that the rogue spent a lot in skill point for her Hide and Move Silently to be high and two feats so I didn't worry about it. It also made this somewhat unconventional group work.
So I guess I'm saying that what they are doing is not really wrong but takes a lot of investment to work.
|
|
Everytime I read this thread I still don't get how he is choosing a target and still getting the free attack. To me he would throw the door open and on the suprise round make a Spot check to determine a target. Then if he gets initiative he would get a sneak attack on that target. Granted if he has the Quick Recognoiter feat which allows Spot as a free action (normally a move action I believe) then his tactics are fine as long as the foes fail their listen checks.
I have had a group use exactly these tactics. They were a finese group composed of a rogue, monk and wizard (with a ranger cohort). The rogue and the monk would sneak up and since the rogue had Quick Recognoiter (which also gives a +2 to initiative by the way, with the preq of Improved Initiative) the rogue would typically get two sneak attacks in before the foes got an action. But keep in mind that the rogue spent a lot in skill point for her Hide and Move Silently to be high and two feats so I didn't worry about it. It also made this somewhat unconventional group work.
So I guess I'm saying that what they are doing is not really wrong but takes a lot of investment to work.
The spot check is a free action (according to the SRD) if it is 'reactive'. Since the readied action is to 'shoot the first thing I see', I'd have the rogue make a Will save if he didn't want to do that once he had seen what was on the other side of the door.
The spot check is a free action (according to the SRD) if it is 'reactive'. Since the readied action is to 'shoot the first thing I see', I'd have the rogue make a Will save if he didn't want to do that once he had seen what was on the other side of the door.
It's all how the original poster wants to run it. IMHO the Spot check in this case is not reactive. The rogue is actively trying to gain suprise on whatever is on the other side of the door. It's not reactive to a readied action since he can ready an action until combat starts and it hasn't started yet. You can't really be in combat with someone who is unaware of being attacked. But ultimately is however he wants to run it for there to be balance in his game and so that everyone is having fun.
If you have to spend a move action to determine a target via spot, doesn't that mean a surprise round is basically worthless and nobody could make a full attack during round one without taking penalties for fighting blind?
I'm just saying, I see spot as the skill of finding things that are overlookable details, or hidden creatures. The ogre standing in the middle of the room and the three goblins next to it don't really qualify in that regard, but the goblin writing on the floor just inside the door saying "no forget trap here" and the one goblin who's just paranoid and is always hiding in a corner would qualify.
I'd say the main thing is to determine at your table what "awareness" is. If you make a listen check and hear something moving, are you "aware" of it? Or do you have to see it? If sight is needed, then a suprise round can not be gained using these tactics. If listening is all thats required, then suprise would work fine, and this situation would pan out in one of 4 ways (assuming combat is the end result).
Party hears monster, monster doesn't hear party. Door is opened, suprise round begins in party favor.
Party hears monster, monster hears party. Door is opened, roll initiative.
Party doesn't hear monster, monster doesn't hear party. Door is opened, roll initiative.
Party doesn't hear monster, monster hears party. Door is opened, suprise round begins in monster favor.
What the player wants to be doing isn’t possible according to the rules. You cannot make combat actions when not in combat.
The sequence of events should go as such:
1. The character does his thing at the door, then opens it. By the by, opening the door requires at least one hand, a crossbow is a two hand weapon.
2. NOW you start combat. Determine who sees/hears who, and who’s surprised. Roll for initiative.
3. Surprise round. Anybody not surprised can take go in order of initiative.
4. Regular combat. Everybody goes in order of initiative. Rinse and repeat.
If the player is surprised and doesn’t make initiative, he doesn’t go first.
If the player is not surprised and doesn’t roll highest for initiative, he doesn’t go first.
He has to be unsurprised and have highest initiative to go first.
If you have to, start combat before he opens the door. Put everybody into initiative beforehand. Anyone unaware of the other group is considered surprised until they are aware. Have everyone act on their initiative and let the player go on his turn; remember opening a door is a move action. The other players can hold till he goes.
It seems to me that you have too many doors in your campaign.
Interesting. So, to be clear, he...[I listen/check for traps/open locks] and shoot the first thing I see when I open the door.
At least, that's the standard operating procedure of one of my players. At. Every. Single. Door.
- sneaks/stealths up to each and every door (halved speed)
- makes a Listen check while readying his thieves' tools (which he has to have to make that Search/Perception check along with his Trapfinding class feature) as his first full-round action
- then spends at least a move action on the search/perception check to attempt to discern a trap IF his Listen/Perception check does not reveal something - which can eat up more of his character's actions
- then spends a minimum of anywhere from another full round (DC 10 trap) to as many as 2d4 rounds' worth of full-round actions - on average, 5 full rounds - for a DC 25+ trap
- then spends a minimum of anywhere from 1 more full-round action (DC 20 simple lock) to another 2d4 rounds' worth of full round actions (DC 30+/good or amazing locks) opening the lock.
- Then he readies his weapon as presumably a free action from having the Quick Draw feat, otherwise it is a move action
- then he spends his standard action to open the door.
- Then he has to successfully perceive a foe, otherwise he enters every door with a loaded and readied crossbow - a hostile action to be sure.
The entire time he would have to be making opposed Move Silent/Stealth vs. Listen/Perception checks each round, with no option to take 10 unless by your leave or by having selected Skill Mastery for all the involved skills to not alert whatever is on the other side of all those doors. This kind of activity is going to eat up a LOT of "table time", all of it at the expense of the rest of the players.
At a minimum count that's at least 2 or 3 full-rounds worth of actions at each and every door. Worst case scenario this results in - assuming only ONE trap and ONE lock on the door - 10 full rounds' worth of actions. So, any where from roughly 30 seconds to two minutes solid per each door is a reasonable result of this behavior. And if this is the characters' "mission statement" (i.e., the player establishes this as a constant modus operandi) then that's fine, by all means let him do so.
I can see several things happening:
- He neglects to make a final check for any additional traps, eating a rude surprise via trap
- While in town his constant presence at doors will get the attention of guards, see him take doors to the face and at least once get his pockets picked.
- He opens a door quietly enough - but is well-lit enough that he is clearly visible and entering the room/exiting the portal with plain intent to do harm, with plentiful repercussions all its own
- He neglects to repeat his routine beyond the door, since he could not, and steps on the pressure plate/trips the trip cord/gets a chamber pot dumped on his head and down his collar
- He steps right onto the Symbol of Death the sage beyond the door has scribed there; seems the poor old chap doesn't trust stealthy types much, but he DOES have a pet ooze that needs feeding
I am sure plenty more fun can be had, without doing so constantly. It is a good tactic - but constantly doing so is time-consuming and WILL slow the entire group down, both in terms of clock time and in terms of game time.
I can also see that peer pressure from the players may / should come into effect rather quickly. Perhaps use his "take 8" Move Silent/Stealth total (as he is distracted while disabling devices and opening locks) as the DC of the opposed Listen/Perception checks on those rounds. Even use a "take" version for the other side of the door, depending on what is there and what's going on in there...
Just make the "first thing he sees" be the local baron's daughter held captive.
^_^ You know, I hear about this lovely "illusion" school of magic ... just the thing for trigger-happy paranoid types...
|
|
A few methods to trip them up:
*
In games that I run, I would not have a problem with letting the player (if he made the rolls) do as he asks, with one exception. He would not have to state that he shoots the first thing that he saw, instead I would give him feedback and let him decide if he wanted to fire or not. How tough that call is would be based on how obvious the situation is. In some cases a spot roll would be needed, and if he did not roll well enough, the decision to shot or hold could be very hard (you just see a shadowy shape, could be a kobold or a gnome, you can’t tell, do you want to shoot?).
\
I agree with pretty much alll of this. If the player doesn't make a Spot check he fires at anything that could in a couple of seconds be preceived as a threat. Actual creature, statues, furiture that is roughly the same height and width as a person. I would roll randomly what he is shooting at.
A very good post.
I also agree with this. Sometimes there may be a cunning trap on the other side of a door to foil this tactic, but it should be appropriate to the situation, placed by a creature intelligent enough to expect this approach to an extent it would invest the resources (which it must be capable of procuring and implementing in some way) to create such a trap.
Essentially, as has been said many times, the tactic is valid and that is why it is employed so often. But even when the situation "works" (there's some enemy on the other side of the door to shoot at), it has a built-in feature which should prevent it from becoming monotonous and an automatic success: namely, the die rolls addressed many times already. The rogue has to succeed at a Listen check and hope his enemy fails a like roll against the rogue's on Move Silently (I would only require one). If that works, the rogue gets surprise and a free shot. If the creature is aware of him (as it surely will be a number of times), the rogue must win initiative, even in the surprise round, in order to get that free shot. Rogues tend to be good in this area, but even then they will fail sometimes. So the tactic is good, and it should work most of the time; but it is not full-proof.
Further, as others have also said, use less doors. Mix up the way encounters begin, so that even if the rogue always gets a free shot when he does this SWAT breach, it doesn't mean he always gets a free shot at the start of every combat. Even in an inhabited structure, not everything has a door. Not are empty archways, and even those with doors may stand open most of the time. How many of us have even half the doors in our own houses closed more than they are open? Creatures move arond their environments, and if they don't have a reason to keep the doors shut, they probably won't.
Ugh, you guys are tough.
You can't ready outside of combat as noted - so it's not a readied action. The question is whether or not it's a surprise round.
If the guys on the other side of the door haven't perceived the party, then it's a surprise round. The entire party gets a surprise action, not just the rogue.
Now, I'd require someone to open the door as their surprise round action -- opening the door first would alert anyone in the room with a view of the door thus ruining a chance of surprise.
A spot check to see what you are shooting at is certainly fair......I think if you start the combat after the door opens (with the sound of the door opening starting the combat),
Requiring a Spot check is ridiculous. It's a surprise round, which is normal combat. Do you require a Spot check at the start of every combat to see who attack?
Yes, if the players want to open the door first and then check for surprise; that's certainly a RAW way to do it. Everyone in the room gets a Spot check to notice the door opening, which seems like a pretty low DC and thus gives a lot of the folks in the room a chance to act in the surprise round.
Starting the surprise round with the door closed requires a listen check, through a door at -10, against a Move Silent; much harder to do thus giving the party better chance at surprise.
People keep comparing this to the SWAT tactics. Let's consider that for a moment. Why do the SWAT teams use this tactic?
BECAUSE IT WORKS. In real life this approach is used on a regular basis by highly competent people dealing with life and death situations. On the whole they don't end up shooting the hostages when they do it. The whole "baron's daughter" thing sounds fun, but how often do you hear about SWAT breaches where the SWAT team member shot a hostage?
And as for the booby traps behind the door, how often is this door going to be used? It is there in the dungeon because someone is expecting to have to go in and out of that room from time to time. Do they really want to have to disarm it every time they do? Aren't they worried that they might forget and set off the trap? Frequently these dungeons are somewhere that these critters live in. Do you really think they will put a trap in their living room?
If your goal is to punish the player for being a bad player, pick a better way to do it. If you goal is to screw a player over for repeatedly using good tactics that are appropriet to his class AND work in real life, then grow up. If your goal is to get a little varience in the game then there are much better ways than messing with a legitimate tactic.
|
|
To those who repeatedly state that RAW state this is not a valid tactic: The rules also state that an arrow fired at an object deals its damage and then stops. That makes sense if the object is a wooden door, but what about a glass window? It still stops. Line of effect ends at that window, and there are no rules for the arrow to continue through it. Doesn't make much sense, does it?
There are times when the rules must be taken at face value, and then there are times when you have to look more at the spirit of the rules and less as legal strictures.
Am I being a jerk? Maybe, but I'm kinda good at that. :P Doesn't mean I don't have a point. Many of the things I say are hyperbolic, but they do help me get my message across.
The idea that someone couldn't breech in that manner doesn't make much sense, especially due to there being a class in the game who's big feature is based around the concept of catching people off guard(either through distraction or sudden action). A DM granting leeway to allow this should be fine.
However, I do also believe that the original poster should consult the gamer in question if this is becoming too much of a problem. Several of my suggestions are merely for NPCs who are supposed to be smart or lucky, in the case of the crumbling door(Hmm, that sounds like it could be the name of a bad mystery novel, "The Case of the Crumbling Door").
Oh well, time for me to find somewhere else to spread my smartassery.