Lookout clarification please

[darrenan]

First here's the text of the feat:

Lookout:

Benefit: Whenever you are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat, you may act in the surprise round as long as your ally would normally be able to act in the surprise round. If you would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise round, your initiative is equal to your initiative roll or the roll of your ally –1, whichever is lower. If both you and your ally would be able to act in the surprise round without the aid of this feat, you may take both a standard and a move action (or a full-round action) during the surprise round.

So if my inquisitor (3rd level with Solo Tactics) takes this feat, and is adjacent to an ally, and said ally rolls a good enough perception check to not be surprised but my inquisitor doesn't, does that mean that my inquisitor still gets to act in the surprise round on his ally's initiative?

[chaoseffect]

Yes, if your ally can but you can't, you act on his initiative -1 or yours for the surprise round, using the lower. Or if you are both able to act in the surprise round, you get a standard and a move action.

[Howie23]

Your ally also has to have the feat.

[Damanta]

It depends on if you count as acting in the surprise round as receiving a bonus or not. I'd go with yes :)

Solo Tactics:

At 3rd level, all of the inquisitor’s allies are treated as if they possessed the same teamwork feats as the inquisitor for the purpose of determining whether the inquisitor receives a bonus from her teamwork feats. Her allies do not receive any bonuses from these feats unless they actually possess the feats themselves. The allies’ positioning and actions must still meet the prerequisites listed in the teamwork feat for the inquisitor to receive the listed bonus.

[nosig]

please excuse the thread necro...

ok, here's the part I am having trouble parsing thru...
"Whenever you are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat, you may act in the surprise round as long as your ally would normally be able to act in the surprise round. If you would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise round, your initiative is equal to your initiative roll or the roll of your ally –1, whichever is lower."

So, my ally and I are adjacent, we both have the feat, but neither of us rolled well enough on the Perception Check and so we don't go in the Surprise round... In other words we are both "denied the ability to act in the surprise round."

Now, my ally rolled a 20 for Initiative, and I rolled a 2.

SO, our "...initiative is equal to your initiative roll or the roll of your ally –1, whichever is lower.". So for me this would be Init 19 or 2 - so I have an Initiative of "2" because that is lower. And my ally would have 20 or 1 (1 being my Init -1), so he goes on Init of 1 because that is lower.

This makes no sense to me. Shouldn't it be "your initiative is equal to your initiative roll or the roll of your ally –1, whichever is higher."?

[zza ni]

it's actuly very logical.
the basic bonus for the feat is the ability to ACT instead of staying there twirling your thumbs being surprised. and when you act depand on your friend to help you.
so if your faster, you need him to pull you out of it(of being surprised) and act right after he does (-1 to initiative). if he is faster he warned you but you still can't act before you actuly CAN ACT hance your initiative roll is used.

think of at as standing behind some1 in a spotlight, if you'r ready to go but he isn't you wait till he move (ur initiative is higher case). if he moved while your playing with the radio setting, you move when you are ready. (your initative is lower). ether way you use the lower case.

if using the higher roll it would be like your moving into him while he's standing or him tieing his car to you and pull you when he move while you are still playing around the radio settings. ether of these tend to bend the front of your car...

[nosig]

zza ni wrote:

it's actuly very logical.

the basic bonus for the feat is the ability to ACT instead of staying there twirling your thumbs being surprised. and when you act depand on your friend to help you.
so if your faster, you need him to pull you out of it(of being surprised) and act right after he does (-1 to initiative). if he is faster he warned you but you still can't act before you actuly CAN ACT hance your initiative roll is used.

think of at as standing behind some1 in a spotlight, if you'r ready to go but he isn't you wait till he move (ur initiative is higher case). if he moved while your playing with the radio setting, you move when you are ready. (your initative is lower). ether way you use the lower case.

if using the higher roll it would be like your moving into him while he's standing or him tieing his car to you and pull you when he move while you are still playing around the radio settings. ether of these tend to bend the front of your car...

ok, now let me walk thru this then.

So, my ally and I are adjacent, we both have the feat, but neither of us rolled well enough on the Perception Check and so we don't go in the Surprise round... my ally rolled a 20 for Initiative, and I rolled a 2.

So for me this would be Init 19 or 2 - so I have an Initiative of "2" because that is lower. And my ally would have 20 or 1 (1 being my Init -1), so he goes on Init of 1 because that is lower.

This means that during the actual first round of combat, because we both have the Teamwork feet, we go on Initiative Counts 2 and 1.

Whereas if we DIDN'T have the Teamwork feat, we would go on Initiative Counts 2 and 20.

How is this logical again? Sorry, I still think I'm missing something.

[Dave Justus]

"If you would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise round, your initiative is equal to your initiative roll or the roll of your ally –1, whichever is lower."

This sentence only applies when you CAN act but normally (without Lookout) you would not be able to. In other words, when you don't make the roll but your ally does.

In your example, since no one made their perception lookout never gives you the ability to act and your initiative is just what you roll.

[nosig]

Dave Justus wrote:

"If you would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise round, your initiative is equal to your initiative roll or the roll of your ally –1, whichever is lower."

This sentence only applies when you CAN act but normally (without Lookout) you would not be able to. In other words, when you don't make the roll but your ally does.

In your example, since no one made their perception lookout never gives you the ability to act and your initiative is just what you roll.

Lookout: Benefit: Whenever you are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat, you may act in the surprise round as long as your ally would normally be able to act in the surprise round.

Ok, this part is clear (maybe). If your buddy can go in the surprise round, you can too. (if you are adjacent and both have this feat).

If you would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise round, your initiative is equal to your initiative roll or the roll of your ally –1, whichever is lower.

so... this is still dealing with when you are adjacent and both have the feat, but it's calling out when "you would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise"... so... when you missed the perception roll right? so if your Ally can go and you didn't. But it actually doesn't say that. It appears to be assuming we know that our buddy is going in the surprise round, AND we "normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise".

If both you and your ally would be able to act in the surprise round without the aid of this feat, you may take both a standard and a move action (or a full-round action) during the surprise round.

So, there are 4 possible states that would you could be in...

a) Both would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise round.
b) You can go, but your buddy would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise round.
c) Buddy can go, buy you would normally be denied the ability to act in the surprise round.
and
d) Both are able to act in the surprise round.

Is this correct?

Now
d) is covered with "If both you and your ally would be able to act in the surprise round without the aid of this feat, you may take both a standard and a move action (or a full-round action) during the surprise round."
c) would be your buddy can go, so he triggers you at his Init or your Init minus one (whichever is lower).
b) would be you can go, so you trigger his actions on your Init minus one or on his Init (whichever is lower).
a) is not addressed in the description/does not effect the Init. order.

Is that the way it should work?

[Dave Justus]

Yes, you are correct.

The phrase 'if you would normally' implies an abnormal situation has occurred, from context that situation is described in the previous sentence. More verbose would be 'If you would normally be be denied the ability to act in the surprise round but are able to act in the surprise round because you are adjacent to an ally who also has this feat and is able to act in the surprise round your initiative is ..."

Obviously that would be repetitive and unnecessary given the context.