I have a serious issue with some of this, namely, why in the blue blazes should I be flat footed if I know of my enemy before they attack me?
For example, my character is facing enemies, she knows they are enemies, is in a defensive stance, is staring into their eyes, and is simply waiting for the bell to start fighting. There is no reason whatsoever why she should be flat footed.
In another case, my character is headed for some people nearby and is prepared for a fight, aware that the people may be enemies, and they start yelling, pull out bows, and start firing them, which isn't exactly surprising to my character.
In both cases, the GM has considered the first attack roll as the start of combat and made my character flat footed despite being fully aware of and prepared for the incoming attacks which directly contradicts the entire concept of being flat footed.
That is the way the rules work. You are looking at a real life reason not to be flat-footed, and I agree in real life you would likely be able to at least try to use your dex to move out of the way. However with the way the game works you roll initiative before combat starts, and until your number comes up you are flat-footed.
You can have the BBEG monologue(with him telling you all the ways he will kill you) for 7.5 hours, and be flat-footed if you lose initiative.
Now if you are just saying you think the rule is stupid that is another argument altogether and you should clearly state that. Some posters will think they are talking about "what a rule should be", and everyone else will think that post is disagreeing with how the rule actually works.
It is not much different than someone being paralyzed getting a reflex save despite the reflex save being movement based. <--Does not really make sense, but the rules allow you to get one.
PS:paralyzed <Rolls nat 20> "That fireball was afraid of me."
I have a serious issue with some of this, namely, why in the blue blazes should I be flat footed if I know of my enemy before they attack me?
For example, my character is facing enemies, she knows they are enemies, is in a defensive stance, is staring into their eyes, and is simply waiting for the bell to start fighting. There is no reason whatsoever why she should be flat footed.
Initiative has issues, yes.
Imagine a typical wild west shootout. Two gunfighters standing there, ready to shoot.
Now if they roll bad (or the others roll high) on their initiative other people can do their whole turns worth of action before the two gunfighters are able to quickdraw and shoot.
And having a surprise round can be bad for you. For example a sniper can't snipe* in a surprise round RAW. So he would have to waste his surprise round doing nothing so he can snipe during his first real action. But meanwhile the targets would be in combat mode and have acted so they would not be flat-footed anymore and know they are being attacked despite nothing having happened.
*Sniping needs a standard action to shoot and a move action to hide again.
...As soon as your side moves up, the first time you do it in round 1, you have taken your turn and are no longer flat-footed....
Exactly my point. Whether players start flat footed depends entirely on when the GM calls for start of combat. It isn't tied to anything IC, nothing at all. It is completely disassociated.
Literally, the same scenario run with the same characters and same action choices, and even the same dice results, can have vastly different outcomes based solely on when the GM decides is the start of combat.
If the GM calls for start of combat when the two sides start making perception checks, then they move up and start attacking, there is no flat footed round. But if the scenario is exactly the same but the GM calls the start of combat for the first attack, (letting both sides move up prior to combat) then flat footed comes into play.
This is based entirely on the GM's whim and style. It has nothing to do with representing anything in character, otherwise it occur whenever the thing it represents occurred, but it doesn't, and that is the point. The trigger for when it happens isn't tied to in character circumstances at all. Not in the slightest.
I don't understand this question.Even more, if the first attack should always be made against a flat footed AC in combat, why is it attached to first round where only some characters might get attacked? Why is it not attached to the first attack in a fight?
See my point above. No character choice or circumstance has any bearing on whether they count as flat footed or not. Being called out as flat footed is based entirely on when the GM starts combat.
But every reason thus far presented for why flat footed makes sense, claims to make sense for the first attack , not the start of combat, yet whether a character faces this penalty depends entirely on whether they get attacked on the first round or not. So if a character gets ignored till the second round, then they never deal with the penalty of the first time they get attacked while having nothing occur that didn't happen in previously refuted examples of characters knowing they were going to get attacked.
So basically, this ignored character knows combat is coming, that they are going to get attacked, yet they don't get flat footed for no reason except that every attacker attacked others first, or had to move up, or for whatever reason didn't attack at the time some GM decided was the start of combat.
It isn't about eligibility, it is about what the rule is trying to capture and that fact that it doesn't capture whatever it is trying to represent.
Well, the multiclass option is available if you think the ability is worth it, but you're right, Uncanny Dodge won't be available to everyone.
Nor should it be.
I don't agree with this in the slightest, but it is off topic. For now, I just consider it a problem with the concept of classes and the inability to properly represent any character concept.
Sounds like a good house rule. Talk it over with your GM. Maybe a REF save to avoid being flat-footed.
Your party's rogue (or other sneak attacker) won't thank you
Now this statement sounds like I'm attacking the entire concept of flat footed in all cases, but I'm specifically referring to start of combat (whenever that is.).
Maybe it's just a gamist mechanic...
Another name for that is a "very bad mechanic." The rules are support for the goal, not the goal itself.
So what we really need is, oh, I don't know, a giant list of several thousand possible combat situations covering every possible way combat could begin with every possible kind of enemy, ally, spell, weapon, distance, special ability, etc. Each of these situations should cover in minute detail exactly what we can and cannot do in the first round and how surprised every combatant will be.
Is that what we need?
What makes you think we need all that? What we need is either,
A, the flat footed rule happens to those who are unprepared for combat during the first round.or B, flat footed applies to surprise rounds, not the first round.
or C, define the start of combat in a way that it would make sense for characters to be flat footed every single time combat starts (perhaps by saying that a character is "in combat" when they are ready to be attacked, thus the first round of combat for them is the round when they become ready to fight.)
Basically, the rule needs to be tied to something it is trying to represent. If it isn't tied to such a thing, then it needs to be fixed.
@ wraithstrike
OK, so yes I am saying the rule needs to be fixed. It is broken, though not in the usual way I've heard of rules being called broken.
However I would also like to point out that the rule being a problem depends entirely on an undefined element left to the GM (and I just think too many GMs are not taking this undefined element into proper account). The undefined element being when combat starts.
If you take combat to start when the party is aware of, or suspects, enemies to be around, then it doesn't make a problem at all. If they get surprised, then it makes sense for them to be penalized, and if they know they are about to enter a fight, then they don't count as flat footed during the first attack. Thus no problem.
But if combat starts when the first attack is made, then that is when problems occur, because the first attack isn't always a surprise.
But the rules do not say when combat should be considered to start.
|
It is not much different than someone being paralyzed getting a reflex save despite the reflex save being movement based. <--Does not really make sense, but the rules allow you to get one.PS:paralyzed <Rolls nat 20> "That fireball was afraid of me."
Strictly speaking, it would almost have to be a nat 20, since your dex penalty is -5! But I understand giving it. Sometimes things just go your way. With the fireball example, why do we get a reflex save anyway? To get your arm in front of your face? Or perhaps to get out of the way of a particular jet of heat slicing through the air? Maybe 5% of the time that super-hot jet happened not to be aimed at you in the first place.
I personally think the flat-footed rules are absolutely spot-on. The person higher in initiative got the jump on you. Period. The only disagreement I have is with anyone who says those who act in the surprise round are then flat-footed in the first full round of combat. I think that's just silliness.
Flat-footed mechanics make sense. Even if you as a player have more "initiative" than the GM, your character does not always. Oh and by the way, you as a character can always say, (usually interrupting the GM) "While he's talking, I shoot him in the face with an arrow." A fair GM will give you a surprise round in that situation. Though if you don't have your bow out, I'll certainly make you burn your surprise round to draw it!
The person higher in initiative got the jump on you.
But why only the first round of combat?
How do you define the first round of combat?
What event in the game world triggers the start of combat?
------
You say someone with higher initiative gets the jump on someone yet you only apply this to the start of combat. What about all the other rounds where the character has higher initiative, or what about if they delay to have a higher initiative?
So if it can't be applied to every round, what is it about the first round of combat that makes it suddenly so much more important than following rounds?
It's arguments like these that make me grateful for Rule 0 at my table.
|
GM DarkLightHitomi -
You don't seem to understand two guiding principals here -
Abstraction & KISS
The whole initiative system is an abstraction. People don't actually take turns swinging at one another. It's all an abstraction, and initiative is getting the drop on the other guy.
You keep talking about the 'bell', but in a boxing match, both people are already in combat before the bell - hence neither being flat-footed. Having higher initiative is catching the other guy off guard to come degree. It won't happen in a boxing match or a pitched battle. But in an ambush or 98% of the type of fights adventurers get it - it's a good abstraction mechanic.
KISS. You seem to want different mechanics for every theoretical situation. That's not viable. Too many possible scenarios. Too much complexity added to the system for too little gain. Pathfinder is complex enough - so KISS it. (For those not in the know, KISS = Keep It Simple Stupid.)
Surprise
When a combat starts, if you are not aware of your opponents and they are aware of you, you're surprised.
Determining Awareness
Sometimes all the combatants on a side are aware of their opponents, sometimes none are, and sometimes only some of them are. Sometimes a few combatants on each side are aware and the other combatants on each side are unaware.
Determining awareness may call for Perception checks or other checks.
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.
If you are both aware of each other, no surprise round. You guys are arguing about something that has already been dealt with.
First, there is no need for a bunch of mechanics.
Second, my entire point is that in a boxing match, the boxers are in combat before the first attack. Thus the start of combat is something other than someone making the first attack.
Third, honestly all that is needed is for the rules or the GM to recognize the above point number two and when it happens in game to handle it appropriately by saying that everyone was in combat before the first attack (or separate the flat footed from the first round of combat and make it a conditional instead. either way)
Fourth, the problem is that the rules don't address this at all. Start of combat is not even abstract, it is undefined. This has a major effect, as the abstracted rule of being flat footed at the start of combat depends entirely on the undefined thing, start of combat.
@ alexd1976
actually, we aren't talking about the surprise round. There is a rule that says that during the first round of combat, all combatants are flat footed until they have acted.
This makes sense when there is a surprise round (assuming you consider the surprise round the first round of combat), or if everyone is surprised.
However, if no one is surprised, then we have the issue of folks being treated as surprised even though they aren't.
Mostly this is due to the fact that there is no definition of the start of combat, and GMs just treat the first round of someone making an attack as the start of combat even when that makes no sense.
I get where DLH is coming from, but I accept it in the rules of the game for the sake of simplicity and abstraction.
Example:
Two sides are facing off against each other. Player 1 decides he's had enough of the talk and that he's going to fire off a magic missile.
GM calls for initiative.
The initiative chart looks like this:
NPC 1
Player 2
NPC 3
Player 1
Player 3
NPC 2
By the rules, Player 1, who started the fight is flat footed while NPC 1 and NPC 3 attack.
Discuss.
|
|
By the rules, Player 1, who started the fight is flat footed while NPC 1 and NPC 3 attack.Discuss.
For argument: he takes a couple seconds to cast spell during which he's distracted - the other combatants aren't idiots and start to fight the instant he begins to cast. (Of course - this gets to my pet peeve - why do you have to ready an action to break the concentration of a caster instead of just hitting them during your normal turn? After all - everything is happening at once - the turns are abstractions.)
Player 1 THOUGHT he was starting the fight. It didn't work out that way.
A boxing match is not combat. The initiative system would not work at all.
If you want to change the rule to "he who says he acts first, acts first" then you haven't changed anything. Every player will say, "I attack" when they walk in your front door.
The game has to add an element of chance. That is what the initiative roll is. No player can completely control the fight just by saying, "I attack".
|
|
Player1 started the fight, but is flatfooted until his initiative comes up.
Whatever he's doing - one can make the abstract argument that he gave it away to some degree. (cocking his fist back - tensing & taking in a sharp breath etc) Not beging the type of character to give such things away is part of what initiative represents. If he's doing it from stealth where it can't be given away - he gets a surprise round.
Remember - abstract.
|
RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I get where DLH is coming from, but I accept it in the rules of the game for the sake of simplicity and abstraction.
Example:
Two sides are facing off against each other. Player 1 decides he's had enough of the talk and that he's going to fire off a magic missile.
GM calls for initiative.
The initiative chart looks like this:
NPC 1
Player 2
NPC 3
Player 1
Player 3
NPC 2By the rules, Player 1, who started the fight is flat footed while NPC 1 and NPC 3 attack.
Discuss.
PC 1 goes to start casting his spell. NPC 1 notices the move and reacts so quickly that PC 1 is caught off guard at the speed of the response. PC 1 is flat-footed because he thought he was attacking first. He was wrong.
PC 2 reacts a split second after NPC 1, but still so fast that the other NPCs haven't quite figured out a fight is starting. PC 1 is still in the process of realizing he's not as fast as he thought he was.
And so forth. I presume we've all seen movies where the person who starts a fight isn't really the first one to actually act - plenty of action heroes shoot first while the bad guy is still reaching for his gun, so to speak. That's what beating someone's initiative can represent.
As an aside, you do get to retain some dodging when flat footed. If you were just standing there unmoving your Dex would be 0 for a -5 mod; but instead you get to use up to a +0 modifier to dodge - representing your "not quite ready" dodging. Once your mind has caught up to the fact that you're fighting you get the rest of your Dex mod.
|
|
AD&D worked that way, or closer to it - You started casting, it took X segments (basically ticks on the initiative clock) and attacks during that time could disrupt the spell.
I think that was too complex. The KISS version would just be that if you've been hit since your last turn - you need to roll a concentration check vs the damage you took in order to cast a spell. (Or 1/2 the damage like wtih damage over time effects.)
I guess you need to have a high initiative then... I didn't realize we weren't talking about surprise rounds.
Being flat footed makes sense, even if you INTEND to throw the first punch, sometimes the guy you are trying to sucker punch reacts to your wind-up faster than you are able to throw said punch...
As you are cocking your arm to smack him in the nose, he jabs you quick and catches you... flat footed.
Imagine Bruce Lee vs Random Couchslob...
Random Couchslob decides to attack Bruce... Bruce isn't expecting the swing, but rolls initiative, and wins. Random Couchslob initiated combat by starting to throw a punch. Bruce Lee, with his extensive training (and by virtue of winning initiative) sees Random Couchslob's punch coming, and quickly punches him in the chest before Random Couchslob's punch lands...
The fact that this doesn't exist beyond the first round of combat is odd, but thems the rules. Don't like it? Change it.
My group has always focused on having stupid high initiative (they play rocket tag with enemies) so they rarely get caught flat footed.
Honestly though, it makes perfect sense that someone can initiate a fight but not act first, like my example above... there is a reason you want to act first in a round... being flat footed just drives the point home further.
Maybe the rule was introduced in an attempt to reduce the time combat took, by having FF people not only act after the first person, but also easier to hit.
Generally low defense, yep... if you can kill an enemy before he attacks you, it doesn't matter what AC or saves you have.
|
|
Generally low defense, yep... if you can kill an enemy before he attacks you, it doesn't matter what AC or saves you have.
That can USUALLY work. But you'll still occasionally be ambushed or roll badly on your initiative, or there are too many to kill quickly etc. *shrug*
I'm generally a believer of "The best defense is more defense.". :P
For example - my next PFS character is going to start at level 4 (been doing an AP) and will have an AC of 27, 43HP, Fort:+12, Ref:+12, Will:+11. His offense will be only be middle of the road - but good luck trying to hurt him.
Still missing the point.
Every above example assumes that combat starts with the first attack. Why do you all insist on making that assumption?
Nothing in the rules says that is when combat starts.
|
|
I'm generally a believer of "The best defense is more defense.". :P
For example - my next PFS character is going to start at level 4 (been doing an AP) and will have an AC of 27, 43HP, Fort:+12, Ref:+12, Will:+11. His offense will be only be middle of the road - but good luck trying to hurt him.
Total tangent, but I am not a sharer of that philosophy.
If you can't hurt the monster, why should they focus on you? They'll just give you your AoO and go around to kill the damage dealing threats. An unhittable tank can be grappled, pinned, and coup-de-graced at the monsters' lesiure after the threats are neutralized.
Back to the thread topic:
GM DarkLightHitomi is completely correct. The d20 dropping for initiative is a completely meta factor that does not retroactively impact the actions taken ingame that occured before that point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rules say that combat starts when the GM says it does.
Technically, combat could start at the moment your character wakes up in his bed in town. Roll for initiative and go about your morning business, heck, your entire daily business, in 6-second increments, round by round. Hundreds of rounds later your party finally leaves town, and a few thousand rounds later you have your first encounter of the day. Etc.
That would be silly. And tedious.
Most GMs who aren't idiots and who aren't forum trolls will probably start each combat at the precise moment when one side or the other is going to do something. Starting it later is just silly - "OK, I know the troll has hit you seven times already, but now we're going to start combat; everyone roll for initiative!" makes no sense. Starting it earlier also makes no sense - we might as well just roll initiative once each morning when we wake up.
So the clever GM (or even the ordinary, average, not-an-idiot GM) will simply begin combat at the precise moment when something combat-ish starts to happen.
So I still don't see the problem.
|
|
I'm generally a believer of "The best defense is more defense.". :P
For example - my next PFS character is going to start at level 4 (been doing an AP) and will have an AC of 27, 43HP, Fort:+12, Ref:+12, Will:+11. His offense will be only be middle of the road - but good luck trying to hurt him.
Total tangent, but I am not a sharer of that philosophy.
If you can't hurt the monster, why should they focus on you? They'll just give you your AoO and go around to kill the damage dealing threats. An unhittable tank can be grappled, pinned, and coup-de-graced at the monsters' lesiure after the threats are neutralized.
I didn't say that his offense was crap - you assumed that. (+6/+6 for 1d8+4 damage with a third swing every other round - not amazing for level 4, but nothing to sniff at) Besides - as long as no one in the group is a glass cannon - there are no weak points for them to go after.
Basically - it's only when some of the group are extreme glass cannons that it makes sense to ignore the solid defense characters and go after them. Easy solution: don't have any glass cannons and make sure everyone has somewhere between pretty decent & great defenses. There are no classes which can't have at least pretty decent defenses without too much effort.
Besides - you're assuming that our opponents know precisely what our stats are. Sure - they might know a character hard to hit after the first couple rounds - but if the DM has people avoid swinging at him before then he's metagaming.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe the problem is that you're confusing "encounter" with "combat". They're not the same thing.
Lots of encounters are resolved with no combat. Encounters with merchants, nobility, quest-giving NPCs, even bad guys when combat isn't reasonable. We ROLEPLAY through all these encounters without ever rolling initiative or making even one attack.
In some encounters, at some unspecified point (that is, unspecified by any written rule), one participant of the encounter (PC, NPC, Monster, whatever) decides it wants to attack another participant. It might or might count as surprise, but even if the defender anticipates this sudden attack, he might not be exactly ready for it - maybe the defender was still negotiating, or monologuing, or checking the surroundings for hidden enemies hiding in the bushes, or whatever, and the suddenness of the attack leaves the defender marginally unready for it, just for a split-second, even if he anticipated it.
It's really not that far-fetched.
Still missing the point.
Every above example assumes that combat starts with the first attack. Why do you all insist on making that assumption?
Nothing in the rules says that is when combat starts.
Combat begins when the GM says it does.
Combat is cyclical; everybody acts in turn in a regular cycle of rounds. Combat follows this sequence:
1. When combat begins, all combatants roll initiative.
2. Determine which characters are aware of their opponents. These characters can act during a surprise round. If all the characters are aware of their opponents, proceed with normal rounds. See the surprise section for more information.
3. After the surprise round (if any), all combatants are ready to being the first normal round of combat.
4. Combatants act in initiative order (highest to lowest).
5. When everyone has had a turn, the next round begins with the combatant with the highest initiative, and steps 4 and 5 repeat until combat ends.
So, first you roll initiative, and then, round by round, everyone takes actions (Blah, blah, surprise round, blah) until combat finishes.
There is literally zero point in the GM declaring combat until he's ready for round by round activity, because if he does he's as locked in to the combat sequence as anyone else.
Of course nobody has to attack for combat to exist, but by the rules, all of the characters involved are required to have initiative and be locked into the turn sequence.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How's this for a wrinkle?
I make players roll initiative immediately after each fight or crisis situation. That way initiative scores are already generated for the next fight, as well as everything that occurs outside of combat before that point.
Why do you need initiative scores outside of combat?
I find them useful for avoiding spotlight hogging. You get to do one thing, then I go on to the next person, and so on. Initiative gives some sensible order other than clockwise/counterclockwise around the table.
I'm also big on GM tradecraft. If you declare "roll for initiative" players abandon diplomacy and just begin shooting. Players feeling their characters' ambiguity as to whether or not combat is about to begin is hugely beneficial.
|
|
How's this for a wrinkle?
I make players roll initiative immediately after each fight or crisis situation. That way initiative scores are already generated for the next fight, as well as everything that occurs outside of combat before that point.
There are advantages to this method - but to play devil's advocate - the disadvantage is that the players can game positioning by knowing what their initiative for the next fight will be. If the rogue knows he rolled a 27, he's more willing to go off on his own as he can always retreat before he's pinned down. The wizard who rolled a 4 is going to hang back further since he'll be flat-footed for the first round and won't have time to cast short duration buffs before he's swung at. Etc.
(Not saying it's not arguably worth the disadvantages. Just pointing out that they exist.)
Anythiny wrong with saying that everyone is in combat before starting the round by round actions?
Quite simply I say a character is in combat under one of two conditions, either they are aware of enemies who mean them harm, or they suspect enemies and are prepared.
|
|
How's this for a wrinkle?
I make players roll initiative immediately after each fight or crisis situation. That way initiative scores are already generated for the next fight, as well as everything that occurs outside of combat before that point.
There are advantages to this method - but to play devil's advocate - the disadvantage is that the players can game positioning by knowing what their initiative for the next fight will be. If the rogue knows he rolled a 27, he's more willing to go off on his own as he can always retreat before he's pinned down. The wizard who rolled a 4 is going to hang back further since he'll be flat-footed for the first round and won't have time to cast short duration buffs before he's swung at. Etc.
(Not saying it's not arguably worth the disadvantages. Just pointing out that they exist.)
That's a fair criticism. There are ways to deal with such metagaming, like having the next fight come from behind (putting the rogue and wizard exactly in the opposite of where they were trying to be), deciding that any stressful scene or challenge constituted a "crisis situation" and merits new rolls, or even better, just surprising them by having them re-roll initiative at the beginning of the fight.
Fear and ignorance! those are GM watchwords that still apply to Pathfinder :)
|
|
I get where DLH is coming from, but I accept it in the rules of the game for the sake of simplicity and abstraction.
Example:
Two sides are facing off against each other. Player 1 decides he's had enough of the talk and that he's going to fire off a magic missile.
GM calls for initiative.
The initiative chart looks like this:
NPC 1
Player 2
NPC 3
Player 1
Player 3
NPC 2By the rules, Player 1, who started the fight is flat footed while NPC 1 and NPC 3 attack.
Discuss.
Player 1 acts in the surprise round, takes his action, and is no longer flat-footed.
Initiative continues as normal.
|
|
I get where DLH is coming from, but I accept it in the rules of the game for the sake of simplicity and abstraction.
Example:
Two sides are facing off against each other. Player 1 decides he's had enough of the talk and that he's going to fire off a magic missile.
GM calls for initiative.
The initiative chart looks like this:
NPC 1
Player 2
NPC 3
Player 1
Player 3
NPC 2By the rules, Player 1, who started the fight is flat footed while NPC 1 and NPC 3 attack.
Discuss.
Player 1 acts in the surprise round, takes his action, and is no longer flat-footed.
Initiative continues as normal.
Also, perhaps make an alignment check. That kind of act is not exactly lawful.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I get where DLH is coming from, but I accept it in the rules of the game for the sake of simplicity and abstraction.
Example:
Two sides are facing off against each other. Player 1 decides he's had enough of the talk and that he's going to fire off a magic missile.
GM calls for initiative.
The initiative chart looks like this:
NPC 1
Player 2
NPC 3
Player 1
Player 3
NPC 2By the rules, Player 1, who started the fight is flat footed while NPC 1 and NPC 3 attack.
Discuss.
Player 1 acts in the surprise round, takes his action, and is no longer flat-footed.
Initiative continues as normal.
There is no way I'd give player 1 a surprise round there. Not if the other side has any inkling that a fight may break out.
The problem with your idea of just saying, "combat on" to make you "aware" is that it takes away from the classes (Ninja, Rogue) that are built around catching you flat-footed.
|
|
The problem with your idea of just saying, "combat on" to make you "aware" is that it takes away from the classes (Ninja, Rogue) that are built around catching you flat-footed.
Not to mention nerfing the Deadly Stroke feat & boosting characters where much of their AC comes from dex & dodge but lack uncanny dodge.
|
|
There is no way I'd give player 1 a surprise round there. Not if the other side has any inkling that a fight may break out.I get where DLH is coming from, but I accept it in the rules of the game for the sake of simplicity and abstraction.
Example:
Two sides are facing off against each other. Player 1 decides he's had enough of the talk and that he's going to fire off a magic missile.
GM calls for initiative.
The initiative chart looks like this:
NPC 1
Player 2
NPC 3
Player 1
Player 3
NPC 2By the rules, Player 1, who started the fight is flat footed while NPC 1 and NPC 3 attack.
Discuss.
Player 1 acts in the surprise round, takes his action, and is no longer flat-footed.
Initiative continues as normal.
So you're saying that if Player 1 decides to toss a magic missile in BBEG's face while BBEG is monologuing, in the middle of a word, he's not going to be surprised?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Surprise is not being aware that an attack may come. Flat-footed before acting is reaction speed and luck.
If the BBEG is demanding surrender and one of the PCs starts the fight, damn straight I'm not granting a surprise round.
Let's put it in the reverse: the PCs have told you that they're expecting a fight, the BBEG starts talking to them, and in the middle of a sentence, casts magic missile. Surprise round? I've met players who would walk out of the game at such behaviour from a GM.
|
|
Surprise is not being aware that an attack may come. Flat-footed before acting is reaction speed and luck.
If the BBEG is demanding surrender and one of the PCs starts the fight, damn straight I'm not granting a surprise round.
Let's put it in the reverse: the PCs have told you that they're expecting a fight, the BBEG starts talking to them, and in the middle of a sentence, casts magic missile. Surprise round? I've met players who would walk out of the game at such behaviour from a GM.
Hmm. Well, I wouldn't walk out of the game. I think that's exactly what a surprise round is for. The BBEG knew that combat was about to occur, because he was about to initiate it. The others might have expected it, but they didn't start it. Now, if the GM decided to offer a surprise round to EVERYONE in the BBEG's party, that would be a little much, unless he has a psychic link to each of them or has been rolling bluff checks to pass instructions via hand signals.
I imagine a scenario in a TV drama in which police and gang of thugs are all standing around pointing guns at each other, and I still say that the fact that nobody has elected to "initiate" combat pretty much means that the first person to decide to pull the trigger is going to get off the first shot and will therefore be the only one to act in the surprise round. The SECOND shot would be the one who reacted most quickly to the first one.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mexican Standoffs are indeed hard to adjudicate if you ignore everything that isn't RAW.
That's just another example of why you shouldn't limit the rules to (what you say is) RAW.
I can definitely see a role for Bluff and Sense Motive in resolving whether you can get the jump on someone you've been interacting with in a non-combat manner.
When Han Solo shot first, Greedo clearly failed his Sense Motive and gave up the Surprise Round.
The problem with your idea of just saying, "combat on" to make you "aware" is that it takes away from the classes (Ninja, Rogue) that are built around catching you flat-footed.
Incorrect. The issue we are talking about hapoens once in a combat. Further, rogues and similar can get flat footed in many other ways that actually make sense and are associated mechanics. Rogues rely on stealth, tricks, and flanking, which means they have plenty of ways of dispatching foes without relying entirely on the first round of combat (after all, what woukd they do when out numbered otherwise?).
|
|
When Han Solo shot first, Greedo clearly failed his Sense Motive and gave up the Surprise Round.
Favorited for the Star Wars reference, and because Han Solo ALWAYS shot first, and looking at his hand tracing the bricks is EXACTLY how HS bluffed his way into the surprise round! Move action to draw his weapon, rolled higher on initiative, and got to use his first action to shoot.
It isn't so rare for me, hence why I find it a problem.