1: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts an offensive spell on the players.
I guess a surprise round is in order here? What if the spell has too long casting time to take place in a surprise round?
2: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts a non-offensive spell on the players. Maybe a buff spell.
Does this count as a surprise round?
3: An NPC suddenly attacks another NPC.
I assume this would give the attacking NPC a surprise round and the players would then act after the surprise round too?
1: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts an offensive spell on the players.
I guess a surprise round is in order here? What if the spell has too long casting time to take place in a surprise round?
Unless it is stilled and silenced then they will know he is casting it, period. If it was stilled and silenced I'd tell them "he seems destracted for a moment" and let them get some sense motive checks to realize what is happening.
2: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts a non-offensive spell on the players. Maybe a buff spell.
Does this count as a surprise round?
Only if the players decide to respond to it as an attack. If they do react that way then it was the surprise round, otherwise continue with the RP, but give them a sense motive for when he does start feeling froggy.
3: An NPC suddenly attacks another NPC.
I assume this would give the attacking NPC a surprise round and the players would then act after the surprise round too?
Yes. Although again a sense motive if they ask for it might let them see it coming.
|
1: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts an offensive spell on the players. I guess a surprise round is in order here? What if the spell has too long casting time to take place in a surprise round?
I don't think this would automatically be a surprise round. SOMETHING needs to be taking place to obscure the possibility of this event otherwise Initiative as normal. Possibilities for the surprise round scenario include the attacker being a trusted friend - perhaps acting under control of another, an enemy disguised to appear as the friend, or a sinister plot by the friend to betray the PC's all along.
2: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts a non-offensive spell on the players. Maybe a buff spell. Does this count as a surprise round?
Same as above. Casting a spell is casting a spell. The offensive nature of the spell notwithstanding.
3: An NPC suddenly attacks another NPC. I assume this would give the attacking NPC a surprise round and the players would then act after the surprise round too?
Same as #1.
Just deciding to act, even if it is somewhat unexpected, is not enough to create a surprise situation. It takes a little more effort than that. Trust me... you DO NOT want to set the precedent where a character automatically achieves surprise by doing this. The PC's will expect this consideration, as well... and they'd be right to. If that works for you, great... but I'd like my players to do just a little more work to gain surprise than say, "Wait... let's talk." and start off the conversation with "TASTE LIGHTNING / STEEL / ARROWS / WHATEVER!"
|
All of OP's situations involve a character who is known of, and then acts in plain view. In all of these cases, I handle them the same, namely that the the instigator has triggered initiative, but may not get off the first action. Roll initiative.
If the situation is one where the act is completely out of the blue, I have at times used sense motive vs bluff to identify who was able to act in what then became a surprise round. Other checks might make sense depending on the circumstance.
Under no case does a a character in plain view get off a surprise action merely by racing to do so first.
1: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts an offensive spell on the players.
Call for Sense Motive from all players, with DC equal to the NPC's Bluff check. NPC and all characters that beat the DC act in the surprise round.
2: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts a non-offensive spell on the players. Maybe a buff spell.
Does this count as a surprise round?
As Jose stated, it counts as an attack if the PCs decide to treat it as such. Call for Sense Motive checks as described in the previous answer.
3: An NPC suddenly attacks another NPC.
I assume this would give the attacking NPC a surprise round and the players would then act after the surprise round too?
Once again, call for Sense Motive against the attacking NPC's Bluff.
I've always seen Sense Motive to be the social counterpart to Perception. Both are "always on" abilities, representing a character's natural and/or inherent ability to assess one's surroundings. As such, I've always felt it's important to request Sense Motive rolls for players whenever the skill would be relevant, or make the roll myself; it's rare to find a player with the same ability to read a situation that his or her character possesses, and such a player can often miss out on clues and cues that the character would not.
1: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts an offensive spell on the players.
I guess a surprise round is in order here? What if the spell has too long casting time to take place in a surprise round?
2: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts a non-offensive spell on the players. Maybe a buff spell.
Does this count as a surprise round?
3: An NPC suddenly attacks another NPC.
I assume this would give the attacking NPC a surprise round and the players would then act after the surprise round too?
1. Unless it was a quickened spell there is not surprise round and even then I would probably give a bonus to initiative at the most. I don't expect anyone used to violence to have their guards down. Maybe if the NPC was supposed to be friendly, but even that is questionable.
2. Same as number 1. Either it makes sense to get a spell off or it does not.
3. It depends on the situation.
Depends on if the characters make a spellcraft spell to realize the NPC IS casting a spell.
Thanks for the discussion, everyone! I've been a bit uncertain about how to handle this myself. Now let's expand with another scenario.
Suppose the players are talking to a character when suddenly that characters casts an offensive STILLED and SILENCED spell. Ie: There is no indication whatsoever that he is actually casting a spell until the spell hits. Would this count as a surprise round?
Stilled and Silence do exactly what they say they do, and do not do things they do not say they do.
As such, Stilled and Silence- as much as we want to say differently, doesn't effect the ability to notice a spell being cast. Why? Because the rules for the feats do not impose any such penalty.
If you are chatting with someone and they silence/stilled a spell you have the exact same chance to detect it as you do if they won't waste the feats. All the feats do is prevent you from silencing them or binding them to prevent the spell from going off.
There IS indication. It takes 4-6 seconds to cast a spell during which time they suddenly quit talking and being concentrating while trying to cast it.
If you let Silence and/or still spell start removing the rules about noticing spells being cast then start expecting your PC's to get those very, very, very cheap little rods and to start /charming/ everyone in sight without anyone Ever noticing it.
-S
Thanks for the discussion, everyone! I've been a bit uncertain about how to handle this myself. Now let's expand with another scenario.
Suppose the players are talking to a character when suddenly that characters casts an offensive STILLED and SILENCED spell. Ie: There is no indication whatsoever that he is actually casting a spell until the spell hits. Would this count as a surprise round?
I would refer you back to my oringinal post. It's clear something will be going on (unless it is also quickened, then they're just buggered). It for a sense motive for them to understand why he is sudden distracted.
Thanks for the discussion, everyone! I've been a bit uncertain about how to handle this myself. Now let's expand with another scenario.
Suppose the players are talking to a character when suddenly that characters casts an offensive STILLED and SILENCED spell. Ie: There is no indication whatsoever that he is actually casting a spell until the spell hits. Would this count as a surprise round?
I would refer you back to my oringinal post. It's clear something will be going on (unless it is also quickened, then they're just buggered). It for a sense motive for them to understand why he is sudden distracted.
Basically there's no surprise round in any of these scenarios. In the Still and Silent scenario, the caster still has to take a standard action which is assumed to consume upwards of 3 seconds. There's clearly concentration of some sort going on as even Still and Silent spell-casting can be disrupted.
A general rule-of-thumb I'd use is that free actions are the sort of things that you get away with outside of combat. Movement or more serious actions should always give the PCs the option of calling for initiative. That lets you role-play encounters without constantly asking if your players want to start things. Casting of any sort, drawing a weapon, moving around, that sort of thing always gives the PCs opportunity to react.
By definition you want to reward PCs with high Initiative scores. Part of the point of a high-Init character is that he can react to things. If the bad guy has a hostage, and has a knife up to the hostage's neck, the moment the bad guy says something like "and now you'll see why messing with me is a bad idea" and starts to draw the knife... Roll For Initiative. Maybe the high-Init character can intervene. Maybe not. The dice shall speak.
Point is that you'd call for Initiative with a non-spell situation so a Still & Silent spell doesn't change that.
My view is that all of these permit surprise rounds, assuming that the PCs failed Sense Motive checks to be wary of danger. In other words, in social situations, Bluff=Stealth and Sense Motive=Perception. However like any surprise round, the bluffers still only get a standard action. If what they're attempting takes longer than that, it won't work (in time).
Look at it from the reverse standpoint. A PC Rogue with the Quick Draw feat bluffs his way up to a guard. The guard fails his Sense Motive, doesn't think the Rogue is a threat. Why would I deny the player the ability to pop out his knife and sneak attack the Guard?
Quickdraw is a free action, a non quickened spell isn't.
-S
Quickdraw is a free action, a non quickened spell isn't.
-S
Of course. But QuickDraw+Attack is a standard action. A non-quickened spell is (usually) a standard action. Both are possible in a surprise round, and in both cases there is no indication (assuming a failed Sense Motive) that they're about to happen. Which is what makes it a surprise.
Stilled and Silence do exactly what they say they do, and do not do things they do not say they do.
As such, Stilled and Silence- as much as we want to say differently, doesn't effect the ability to notice a spell being cast. Why? Because the rules for the feats do not impose any such penalty.
If you are chatting with someone and they silence/stilled a spell you have the exact same chance to detect it as you do if they won't waste the feats. All the feats do is prevent you from silencing them or binding them to prevent the spell from going off.
There IS indication. It takes 4-6 seconds to cast a spell during which time they suddenly quit talking and being concentrating while trying to cast it.
That strikes me as a crazy kind of rules literalism.
Of course the rules have to be followed, but at the same time some degree of common sense must be applied.
Another scenario:
An NPC is facing the players but he's not speaking or doing anything. He's just standing still. Suddenly he casts a spell, like say Dominate Person (with still-spell and silent-spell on it). He's not moving and he's not making a sound. Would they be able to identify the spell as cast using spellcraft and would they even know the spell is being cast?
Spellcraft description:
"Identifying a spell as it is being cast requires no action, but you must be able to clearly see the spell as it is being cast, and this incurs the same penalties as a Perception skill check due to distance, poor conditions, and other factors."
Yes, they would, because the feats do not apply any penalties in their descriptions nor do they apply penalties due to what you listed unless you choose to make it "and other factors". Which is your choice- but its clearly a DM option rather than a 'the rules say the feats make it harder to do'.
"this feat applies X penalty to attempts to identify the spell being cast" is extremely easy to write in, and could have been done in several places (in the feats, or even in the write up about how to identify spells being cast) and it wasn't done so in either case. Across 3.0 3.5 and now Pathfinder, the designers have chosen Not to apply such a penalty.
-S
Yes, they would, because the feats do not apply any penalties in their descriptions nor do they apply penalties due to what you listed unless you choose to make it "and other factors". Which is your choice- but its clearly a DM option rather than a 'the rules say the feats make it harder to do'.
Actually, I'd say the "see the spell as it's being cast" bit pretty much covers it. A stilled/silent spell has nothing to perceive. There's no sound, there're no gestures. How exactly are you supposed to be able to tell the difference between a Stilled+Silent Prestidigitation from a Stilled+Silent Insanity spell?
Spellcraft requires you to be able to perceive the spell being cast. The indication of a spell being cast are its various components. If it has no components, how can it be perceived? Common sense should prevail here.
Yes, they would, because the feats do not apply any penalties in their descriptions nor do they apply penalties due to what you listed unless you choose to make it "and other factors". Which is your choice- but its clearly a DM option rather than a 'the rules say the feats make it harder to do'.Actually, I'd say the "see the spell as it's being cast" bit pretty much covers it. A stilled/silent spell has nothing to perceive. There's no sound, there're no gestures. How exactly are you supposed to be able to tell the difference between a Stilled+Silent Prestidigitation from a Stilled+Silent Insanity spell?
Spellcraft requires you to be able to perceive the spell being cast. The indication of a spell being cast are its various components. If it has no components, how can it be perceived? Common sense should prevail here.
This is my stance on it as well.
A new situation for the OP:
You are at an inn, getting ready for bed. A known enemy teleports to your location and attacks. Does the enemy get a surprise round post teleport (since you likely weren't expecting somebody to suddenly appear in your bedroom)?
This is my stance on it as well.
Fair enough. We'll just disagree on that. In my games, Supernatural abilities are detectable too despite total lack of components. I'm not saying I allow identification of WHAT they are but it's always evident when someone spends 3 seconds doing SOMETHING.
A new situation for the OP:
You are at an inn, getting ready for bed. A known enemy teleports to your location and attacks. Does the enemy get a surprise round post teleport (since you likely weren't expecting somebody to suddenly appear in your bedroom)?
Probably yes but it depends
. I'd allow a Perception check for the PCs to notice their attacker. If he was stupid and timed his arrival while there was still light and while the party was up and awake he'd probably not get a surprise round. If he did it once the lights were out, he'd stand a good chance of surprise.
Point is, once initiative is rolled, who is aware of each other as a threat? The Scry Buff Teleport bad guy is clearly aware. The PCs may or may not be aware, depending on the specifics.
A new situation for the OP:
You are at an inn, getting ready for bed. A known enemy teleports to your location and attacks. Does the enemy get a surprise round post teleport (since you likely weren't expecting somebody to suddenly appear in your bedroom)?
I'd allow a Perception check to notice the teleport, just like I'd allow a check vs. someone hiding in the room. I'd probably set the DC to whatever the save for the spell would be (10+spell level+ability mod). I know the spell doesn't say outright, but 95% of the teleports you see in fiction make SOME kind of perceptible effect, even if it is just the 'whoosh' of displaced air.
Each of these situations would be a straight up initiative.
My basis for a surprise round is if you are aware of the presence of the NPC. In all cases, they are looking right at the NPC when initiative is rolled... no surprise round.
If they weren't talking to and couldn't SEE the NPC when he takes his first action, that's a situation that calls for a surprise round.
If it's a REALLY surprising situation, like a loyal ally betraying his comrades, I would actually have him make a stealth roll (or in exceptional cases a Bluff check) to obtain a position where he could start his action in an unobserved way.
RPG Superstar 2013
|
1: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts an offensive spell on the players.
I guess a surprise round is in order here? What if the spell has too long casting time to take place in a surprise round?
If an NPC gets the drop on monologuing PCs, he might merit a surprise round. If appropriate, like if your players are actively suspicious or if one of the PCs is built around the skill, you might allow a Sense Motive check to guage his intention. During any surprise round, the NPC may only take a single standard action, so he cannot cast a spell that takes too long to cast in the surprise round, unless you want him to begin casting and not finish until his turn in the first round of combat, giving the PCs an opportunity to react if they roll higher for initiative.
2: The PCs are talking to a person who suddenly casts a non-offensive spell on the players. Maybe a buff spell.
Does this count as a surprise round?
Yes. Combat may not erupt as a result, meaning there's no actual iitiative rol. But if a PC is receiving help he refuses (such as a cure serious forced on him during a surprise round, or to buff the party so as to attack another NPC, you still use rules for surprise rounds if resistance could erupt.
3: An NPC suddenly attacks another NPC.I assume this would give the attacking NPC a surprise round and the players would then act after the surprise round too?
In a surprise round, you only get a standard action, so same ruling as the first question. If there's a reason for the PCs to be suspicious, maybe give them a Snesen Motive or related roll. If not, the attacking character gains surprise for that one standard action and then roll intiative as normal.