| Crimeo |
Players are assumed to be appropriately ready for things if they're able.
Yes for "things" i.e. ready generically for all things.
The whole point of readied action is to foresake one's broad focus on all the things, and focus them intensely on one thing with one course of followup action, thus reacting more swiftly than when attention is dispersed.
That is a basic cognitive ability that one could choose to do, by common sense, at any point in the day.
The surprise round is the mechanic to used to account for one side being more prepared than the other
No it's for exactly what its title says: the side that has surprised the other. Readied actions are for what they are titled... being specifically ready for a specific action...
Somebody can logically be:
* surprised and specifically ready,
* surprisING and specifically readied,
* surprised and not specifically ready,
* surprisING and not specifically ready,
* not surprised and specifically ready, or
* not surprised and not specifically readied.
| Byakko |
You're mincing words. Surprising someone means you had foreknowledge or were prepared for the encounter.
And you still can't take readies outside of battle as previously explained.
This is a combat simulation and doesn't closely mimic a real fight, especially when it comes to initiative and turn taking.
It's designed for balance, not for realism.
(although they attempt to do both where possible)
| Crimeo |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Surprising someone means you had foreknowledge or were prepared for the encounter.
Surprise round has a specific definition in the book that is not what you just wrote. You get a surprise round if you are "aware of your opponents" but they are not aware of you. That's it. That's surprise rounds.
That has nothing to do with the separate concept of focusing your broad attention onto one narrow thing in order to be able to react more quickly to it. (readied actions) Which can be literally anything, even during combat, I could ready an action to hop on one leg if a tomato flies across the room. What does that have to do with awareness of enemies? Hell, we could have started the combat and all become aware of one another half an hour ago before I do that...
They are totally separable ideas and situations that can be mixed and matched in any order. They are also totally separate concepts in real life! Surprise has nothing to do with preparedness in common English either. I can all of the sudden realize an enemy is in front of me with a split second to act first and have had NO IDEA that was about to happen. Or I can be intensely prepared and then have my enemy pop out from behind me. Different things entirely.
And in game should follow similarly, all of the following should be common sense possible scenarios:
A) I can be aware of my opponents, them not aware of me, yet I am still allotting my attention broadly and evenly. (surprise round, no readied action)
B) I can be equally aware of my opponents as they are of me, but still primed and ready to do X if and when I see Y, narrowly focusing my attention and mental resources on that one chain of events (no surprise round at all, but readied action yes)
C) I can be aware of my opponents before they are aware of me, and during that time, choose to focus all my attention on one narrow chain of cause effect (both a surprise round and a readied action)
D) I can be equally aware of my opponents as they are of me, and also allocating my attention broadly and evenly (no surprise round, no readied action)
etc. etc.
If you choose to be annoying and deny these common sense scenarios arguing "you have to be in combat already!" then even if for sake of argument we were to agree that was how the rules worked for sure, either way, out comes the bag of rats.
And if you flatly say "No" to the bag of rats, then IMO that's a point against you as a fun, competent GM, that you chose to make a house rule to deny somebody doing something that is RAW, common sense, AND not game breaking all at once. (utilizing bag of rats to effect a realistic situation)
Especially the part about it being RAW is relevant here as this is the rules forum. But it being done for the noble cause of acting realistically, and to fight AGAINST cheese, not for it, is also important.
| Byakko |
Like I said, you're mincing words. The book definition translates more or less to my explanation, minus a few nit-picks. It really doesn't matter, we can use the book definition. It doesn't change anything. I find it amusing how you poke holes over my pretty minor explanatory divergences from the text, yet then do FAR more yourself.
If you're going to be a stickler for playing by the rules, then you can't deny the logic I presented earlier and the fact that you can't ready outside of battle.
If you choose to try and circumvent the intent of the rules by using shenanigans such as bags of rats, I think this says far more about you as a player than whoever has to deal with this as a GM. I would expect any "fun, competent GM" to shut this down in short order to maintain table order and preserve the balance of the game.
Again, you go on about RAW, yet choose to ignore the RAW because it conflicts with what you believe to be "common sense possible scenarios". You really can't have it both ways.
| Crimeo |
If you choose to try and circumvent the intent of the rules
Disagree strongly, I think the intent of the rules is absolutely that you can ready outside of combat. This is the default for everything else. You can swing a sword outside of combat (that begins combat). And so on for pretty much everything in the chapter, spells, blah blah. They all just begin combat when you do them. Simple.
You're hanging your logic for this one small subset of things on a few extra words, which is fine for a technical argument, but claiming INTENTION is crazy. There's no good reason the developers would want to single those out as being the only things to not do out of combat, none. No balance reason, no story reason, no mechanical reason, nothing. AND it's completely unrealistic for a cognitive activity that doesn't even have to involve combat to be restricted to combat. If it's a thing at all, it's a mistake.
Again, you go on about RAW, yet choose to ignore the RAW because it conflicts with what you believe to be "common sense possible scenarios". You really can't have it both ways.
This is not contradictory.
It is important to know and establish what RAW is so that you know WHEN you're house ruling or not and for constrained situations like pathfinder society purposes, or if you're guest GMing somebody else's game, or to know whether to announce something as a house rule, or to remember what the original balance was for reference, etc.
That doesn't mean a good GM should go by it when it leads to stupid results.
| Byakko |
It's a very poor idea to create a house rule to allow readies outside of combat because:
1) it allows players to cicumvent their character's actual reaction speed
2) Replaces, defeats, or generally messes with the existing mechanic for this, the surprise round
3) adds an unneeded and unintended layer of player readiness tracking
4) tends to trivialize fights where it would be used
5) and... doesn't really matter if you agree with the above since it's still a house rule that many (I would hope most) gms won't let you do in PFS (which is the primary place where the actual rules matter)
As far as paizo intent, while perfect knowledge is certainly not possible, they made no explicit changes to the game to allow readies outside of combat so we can look at previous editions for insight, and second, many examples of how to run combats appear in the books. Can you guess how many of these feature readies being made before the start of combat? Zero. This is actually a fairly good indicator of how they expect combat to flow.
LazarX
|
Ravingdork wrote:Unless of course there is no surprise round, such as is the case in my example where both people are fully aware of the other within the room.Except if Billy the Kid really did beat the mook on initiative, the mook never gets the opportunity to draw in your scenario, because he's dead before he gets a turn since Billy draws and shoots. But the mook paradoxically is still the one who starts the fight by drawing the weapon?
Because that's what being the fastest gun in the West is all about. Savvy gunfighters challenging newbs to a gunfight always tell them to "DRAW!". They may be the first to tug on their weapon but are often dead before they get to pull it out because the gunfighter is so fast.
Also part of your confusion comes from trying to mentally connect turn based combat with real time simulation.... it just does not work.
| _Ozy_ |
Like I said, you're mincing words. The book definition translates more or less to my explanation, minus a few nit-picks. It really doesn't matter, we can use the book definition. It doesn't change anything. I find it amusing how you poke holes over my pretty minor explanatory divergences from the text, yet then do FAR more yourself.
If you're going to be a stickler for playing by the rules, then you can't deny the logic I presented earlier and the fact that you can't ready outside of battle.
If you choose to try and circumvent the intent of the rules by using shenanigans such as bags of rats, I think this says far more about you as a player than whoever has to deal with this as a GM. I would expect any "fun, competent GM" to shut this down in short order to maintain table order and preserve the balance of the game.
Again, you go on about RAW, yet choose to ignore the RAW because it conflicts with what you believe to be "common sense possible scenarios". You really can't have it both ways.
Please show the rules which define when combat can and can't start.
Here's what I found:
How Combat Works
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.
So, initiative is rolled as soon as combat begins, and this is before step 2, in which you determine which characters are aware of their opponents.
Is there anything in the rules, at all, that prevents someone from saying: "Ok, we're in front of this door. I think there are bad guys behind it, let's start the combat clock and I'll ready an action."
| Jodokai |
Ozy,
So what you're saying is no one can can be surprised. If I just simply say "I'm readying for a hostile action at all times" I'll always get to go first. That's the mechanical problem with that line of thinking.
Let's go back to your SWAT example: Are you saying SWAT is never surprised? You don't think a SWAT officer that was moving tactically has ever been shot? When a door opens, the SWAT officer's brain has to acknowledge what it's seeing and come up with the appropriate response, all of that takes time. Some people react faster than others, and that's what initiative (fixed the dang auto-correct) is.
| _Ozy_ |
Ozy,
So what you're saying is no one can can be surprised. If I just simply say "I'm readying for a hostile action at all times" I'll always get to go first. That's the mechanical problem with that line of thinking.
Let's go back to your SWAT example: Are you saying SWAT is never surprised? You don't think a SWAT officer that was moving tactically has ever been shot? When a door opens, the SWAT officer's brain has to acknowledge what it's seeing and come up with the appropriate response, all of that takes time. Some people react faster than others, and that's what initiative (fixed the dang auto-correct) is.
I said no such thing, and no it is not a mechanical problem with that line of thinking, it's conflating readied action with surprise, two different things.
A readied action needs a trigger. A trigger has to be a perceived event. Surprise happens when you don't perceive your opponent.
I hope that explains it.
The fact that you seem to think there should be no mechanical difference in combat readiness between kicking down a door in a potentially life threatening situation compared to shopping in a department store seems a bit off, but maybe that's just me.
| Crimeo |
It's a very poor idea to create a house rule to allow readies outside of combat because:
1) it allows players to cicumvent their character's actual reaction speed
Your actual reaction speed would and should in game get faster for something you've specifically allocated all your attentional resources toward reacting to in a specific way. So this is a positive, realistic, and fair outcome.
2) Replaces, defeats, or generally messes with the existing mechanic for this, the surprise round
Surprise round is entirely unrelated, and is not interfered with one way or the other. The surprise round is for simulating awareness of enemies, readied action is for simulating devoting more resources to something. Two totally different concepts, and if they happen to stack in special circumstances, it's because they would also stack in reality. Positive, fair outcome.
3) adds an unneeded and unintended layer of player readiness tracking
I believe it is intended, and if players don't want to track it, they are welcome to not use it... neutral / up to them.
4) tends to trivialize fights where it would be used
How? Please explain the logic for this, while keeping in mind that NPCs can also ready actions.
5) and... doesn't really matter if you agree with the above since it's still a house rule
No, using a bag of rats method to initiate combat whenever you want and then use that to ready an action is not a house rule. If you think that it is, please explain what rule it is breaking.
| Byakko |
Quote:Your actual reaction speed would and should in game get faster for something you've specifically allocated all your attentional resources toward reacting to in a specific way. So this is a positive, realistic, and fair outcome.It's a very poor idea to create a house rule to allow readies outside of combat because:
1) it allows players to cicumvent their character's actual reaction speed
While there is some "reality" logic to that, there is no rules support for it. Note, that you could simple use the Delay Action instead of Ready to delay your turn to initiative count 999,999,999 or whatever.
Quote:2) Replaces, defeats, or generally messes with the existing mechanic for this, the surprise roundSurprise round is entirely unrelated, and is not interfered with one way or the other. The surprise round is for simulating awareness of enemies, readied action is for simulating devoting more resources to something. Two totally different concepts, and if they happen to stack in special circumstances, it's because they would also stack in reality. Positive, fair outcome.
If you are in normal combat rounds, you have already passed the point where a surprise round is possible.
Quote:3) adds an unneeded and unintended layer of player readiness trackingI believe it is intended, and if players don't want to track it, they are welcome to not use it... neutral / up to them.
There's no way I'm going to believe that readied actions were intended to be used outside of combat, backed up by the vast amount of historic evidence for its lack of use in official material.
Quote:4) tends to trivialize fights where it would be usedHow? Please explain the logic for this, while keeping in mind that NPCs can also ready actions.
While keeping in mind that NPCs can't ready actions outside of combat, and neither can players, modules tend to give specific tactics for foes. Readying actions outside of combat is not something they write (again, largely because it's not legal). Thus, the players would always go first for a GM following the supplied tactics.
Quote:5) and... doesn't really matter if you agree with the above since it's still a house ruleNo, using a bag of rats method to initiate combat whenever you want and then use that to ready an action is not a house rule. If you think that it is, please explain what rule it is breaking.
This is kind of a different issue entirely: whether bags of rats count as viable threats. I brought it up because it's a good example of silly things a GM should nip in the bud, just like readied actions outside of combat. There's plenty of other threads about this, if you feel inclined to comment on them.
------
Anyway, I feel I've fully covered most of the explanations needed for this topic, so probably won't comment here any more. Honestly, I felt my first post should have been enough, but there you go.
One thing I can say, in closing: If you do go along with the idea that readies are allowed before the real combat starts, you're going to be in for a rude awakening at any large/semi-official paizo convention!
| Crimeo |
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you are in normal combat rounds, you have already passed the point where a surprise round is possible.
The readying of an action itself can BE your standard you choose during a surprise round, by a reading of the rules where you can choose to begin combat whenever you like (which is within the scope of RAW, but not strictly specified. See above where the text telling you when initiative is rolled is just "when combat begins" without any real direction). This would be the circumstances under which readying and surprise can stack. If you're of the opinion that you can't initiate combat with a ready voluntarily, then they wouldn't be able to stack.
I think it allows for interpretation either way by GMs (note that neither = "readying outside of combat"). But I think the way that happens to correspond with basic common sense human psychology is definitely the better one, RAI-wise and immersion-wise.
That said, the alternative bag of rats strategy is undeniably RAW anyway. So no matter what you rule about readying as the start of combat or only after something else, it ends up being a bit of a moot point, because using bag of rats instead is still a viable rules-legal way to ready before you kick down a door regardless by RAW.
The only time it wouldn't be practically viable to ready prior to kicking down a door one way or the other is with a house rule banning bag of rats, at the very least.
Which should also rule out prevention of it in places like PFS, if they are to go by RAW.
While keeping in mind that NPCs can't ready actions outside of combat, and neither can players, modules tend to give specific tactics for foes.
You don't have to play modules by RAW, and GMs can come up with their own totally custom NPCs by RAW, so tactics written by Paizo don't really restrict anything in a general sense.