Please help me figure out how one should rule these situations:
1) There are two adjacent rooms and a closed door,
In each room, one group of an unspecified number of people is making loud noises. Each person in both room is aware that "someone" is in the other room, but they cannot see how many people.
In each group there is one person hidden.
The door opens, combat starts.
Is anyone surprised?
2) Same situation as above, but the 2 people hidden are NOT allied with anyone else. Is anyone surprised now?
3) Mario and Luigi are playing cards. Bowser is hidden close to them.
Bowser wants to attack Mario and Luigi in a surprise round. Can bowser get close to them "out of combat" and then use a standard action to attack, or must initiative be rolled as soon as Bowser detects Mario and Luigi?
If initiative is rolled as soon as Bowser is aware of Mario and Luigi, What happens if Bowser doesn't attack at all?
4) Same situation as 3, but Mario and Luigi are fighting each other instead over who gets to eat the mushroom.
Bowser arrives. How does initiative work for Bowser? Are Mario and Luigi flat-footed vs Bowser only?
4.b) Is the answer is no, is there anything preventing people to declare they'r constantly "in combat" vs rocks or allies to become immune to surprise?
Please mind I'm asking RAW
5) This is a special request, I would really personally appreciate if you complied:
Before answering, for every explanation, please make an effort at imagining if the rules you're describing always, always work, in every obscure unimaginable corner-case, or if there are specific exceptions, and if there are, please state it clearly and suggest a course of action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As soon as one side notices the other and plans to attack the GM should call for initiative.
Only people that are aware of enemies and aren't seen by them get a surprise round.
1)No surprise, they were both aware of eachother.
2)Nothing about opening the door causes a surprise round for the hidden people. Now whenever the hidden people wanted to attack and you weren't already in combat then they'd get a surprise round.
3)As soon as bowser plans to attack and sees Mario and Luigi he starts his surprise round. If Bowser doesn't attack then Mario and Luigi make checks to see if they are aware of him, otherwise they continue playing cards.
4)Bowser is being added to initiative, unless he was using stealth and unnoticed they aren't flat footed to him.
4.b)Yes, the GM. The GM decides when it's initiative time, not the players. And you're flat-footed until you act in initiative.
5)
I feel that answers to situations
1 and 2
Are kind of awkward. Why is it important if the hidden characters are on either side or alone?
Can character X declare "I'm upset so I want to count as if I'm alone" and then ambush enemies while his (former) allies make noise?
I don't care if it's silly or it enrages your inner GM I'm asking if it's rules-compatible.
Also
3, of course Bowser can approach unseen, let's imagine he has invisibility + mind blank.
Does approchaing unseen always count as combat, even if one does not attack?
What if I'm only walking around the street, is every passerby in combat?
If so, clearly, they can never be surprised as long as I'm around, right?
Please only answer by RAW, DM call is not RAW, is "on the fly" ruling, which is not rules.
Please realize that I'm looking on weird corner cases on purpose, I have no use in being told "the GM should rule it the way he likes it the most" I already know that. I'm trying to find out if existing, written, actual rules have or don't have weak points and contradictions.
This is because I'm not a fan of arbitrary rulings. I like, both as a player and a GM, clear rules for everyone that allow for informed decisions. While you may find it different from your playstyle, it's important for me, so I really want to explore things in-depth to make sure everything is always consistent, even in the most absurd of situations. (and correct it if it's not, via officially stated, consistently applied table house rule)
This is why "GM call" is not an answer. Thank you.
Thank you for being helpful and actually understanding my request and answering in a pertinent way.
I feel that answers to situations
1 and 2
Are kind of awkward. Why is it important if the hidden characters are on either side or alone?
Can character X declare "I'm upset so I want to count as if I'm alone" and then ambush enemies while his (former) allies make noise?
I don't care if it's silly or it enrages your inner GM I'm asking if it's rules-compatible.
Initiative gets called for before the door is opened, because if either side intends or is even capable of combat, both sides should get a chance to ready actions. Which means the first (surprise) round of the fight is probably useless to the hidden people.
Intent doesn't play into this.
Does approaching unseen always count as combat, even if one does not attack?
The moment you Bowser's player declares his PC "is sneaking up on" someone else, initiative becomes a tool needed by everyone in order to properly divide up time to see how things work. How many chances do Bowser's victims get to listen for him? How many changes does Bowser have to flub a Stealth check and knock something over? When you cause conflict, initiative is (probably) needed.
What if I'm only walking around the street, is every passerby in combat? If so, clearly, they can never be surprised as long as I'm around, right?
No.
Please only answer by RAW, DM call is not RAW, is "on the fly" ruling, which is not rules.
Mmmm, you can say "please", but it doesn't work that way. Pathfinder's rules get increasingly granular and detailed the more intricate an action/interaction is. At the scale of "not really combat" versus "maybe combat" versus "partially combat", the rules are spotty, because the DM exists.
In fact, the rules explicitly, specifically, and clearly denote that the DM's existence is specifically for these grey areas. That's RAW. When in doubt, the DM decides.
Please realize that I'm looking on weird corner cases on purpose, I have no use in being told "the GM should rule it the way he likes it the most" I already know that. I'm trying to find out if existing, written, actual rules have or don't have weak points and contradictions.
Oh, there's a bunch of stuff like that, but it's less interesting than you might think because it's abstract. There's no point to the investigation. The rules are deliberately vague at this scale because word-count is a concern. There are no rules for bowel movements, or what happens to your PC if they are prevented from regularly making such, for instance. The simulation is grainy, deliberately.
Thank you for being helpful and actually understanding my request and answering in a pertinent way.
Mmmm. You're being polite, but you're saying "do not answer me correctly".
By RAW the GM decided when a battle has started. Initiative is rolled when a battle starts.
At the start of a battle, each combatant makes an initiative check.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.
Unaware Combatants
Combatants who are unaware at the start of battle don't get to act in the surprise round. Unaware combatants are flat-footed because they have not acted yet, so they lose any Dexterity bonus to AC.
By RAW the GM decided when a battle has started.
I understand this much, however, if I was the GM and I wanted to be consistent and transparent with my rulings, which I deem extremely important, I would find it difficult given how the rules are vague.
Suppose the following play:
A player decides he wants to sneak, invisible, around the streets of the town.
He decides he's going to attack someone he can see, so we roll initiative, right?
Then he doesn't attack. Combat has started tho.
I might rule he wastes his surprise round, yet he's still in combat, however he's actually scratching his ass very silently.
He keeps doing that many times. He always change his mind at the last moment and then finds a new target.
Please don't propose out of game solutions. I'm making this weird on purpose, I will not tell that player to leave.
Now, should I
A)stop deciding that approaching people is combat
But if I do that, it wouldn't be consistent, and I would feel that I failed at being consistent, which is important for me and I'm not resorting to out of game solutions or being a bully GM so don't suggest that
B) Everytime he approaches a new target we roll a new initiative, so everytime a new fight ensues.
But if I do this, I give him a chance at choosing the one time when his initiative is especially high, giving him actually a chance at choosing to make a full attack vs a flat footed opponent in the "first round" because if he didn't like his initiative roll he'll just repeat the whole thing,
I won't hide initiative to prevent metagame,
I am specifically being consistent and allowing freedom of informed choice, you get my point?
C) Combat never ends as long as he has awareness of potential opponents.
Now everybody in the area is immune to surprise, because they are in combat, even if most of them have no idea that they are, which is absurd.
D) I start getting angry at the players using legitimately their tools to make informed decision and rule that if he's not serius about attacking it won't start an initiative roll and I'm the supreme judge that decides wether he's serious or not, with the caveat that if he changes his mind to contradict me it will be followed by cruel punishment.
This is not how I play however, I would feel that I failed at being fair as a GM.
I want an honest and trasparent table with consistent rules.
Of course, if something is abusable, the rule CAN and WILL be changed.
But then it will become official at the table and be followed with consistency.
I need rules that stay consistent.
The answer is how are you deciding the combat is over? So he says he's going to fight someone, okay initiative. That first round is his surprise round. Then is goes onto normal rounds. The GM decides when the players go out of initiative and the fight is over. If the player wants to startup another fight then the GM has them do initiative again.
So the closest of your proposed is B and kinda combos with C. everyone around is in the combat or are changed to be hazards/terrain to deal with.
If he never attacks anyone then what's the deal? If an invisible person is watching him with see invis up then he decides when to enter initiative he does so. He just gets X rounds to do whatever he wants where X is until noticed by the player. So this guy is getting X full rounds of surprise rounds basically. They just aren't actual surprise rounds.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Okay, I'm fine with it.
So, just for the sake of it, let me see if I'm getting this right:
PC "A" is a high level barbarian.
He has Damage Reduction.
He finds a cat, and he makes sure the cat hates him.
A ties the cat to his leg with an iron chain. Every six seconds, A performs a trip combat maneuver against the cat.
If the cat attacked A, it would deal zero damage.
This is combat by the rules, and everyone in the surroundings can see it's happening.
So now A and everyone around A is immune to surprise.
Does this work by the rules? If not, why?
Don't roll initiative until an action that initiates combat has been declared. Saying "I'm planning to attack that guy" doesn't initiate combat. Saying "I attack that guy" does. Don't let the player rescind stated actions. You can give the player the benefit of the doubt. Fishing for initiative rolls leaves no doubt.
Initiative is called when a character begins a hostile act. Not when they decide to be hostile. To break it down:
- PC 1 plunges his dagger at NPC A.
- Roll Initiative.
- The rolls indicate that NPC A reacts quicker than PC 1 stabs.
- NPC A five-foots back and effectively dodges the attack.
- PC 1 now acts.
Don't roll initiative until an action that initiates combat has been declared. Saying "I'm planning to attack that guy" doesn't initiate combat. Saying "I attack that guy" does. Don't let the player rescind stated actions. You can give the player the benefit of the doubt. Fishing for initiative rolls leaves no doubt.
Initiative is called when a character begins a hostile act.
In this case Bowser, invisible and unnoticed, is able to sneak up to Mario and Luigi playing cards, without initiative being rolled until he declares he's going to attack.
Is this correct?I'm asking because other people told me otherwise before. They told you should roll initiative as soon as Bowser detects Mario and Luigi.
Who is right?
Also, in addition to this first question,
How do the rules behave in the "cat tied to a barbarian's leg" situations?
I know it's an abuse and makes no sense outside of a metaplay perspective, but yet, I'm just asking if it's a valid interpretation of RAW
Okay, I'm fine with it. [...]Does this work by the rules? If not, why?
Sure, but depending on where you are the Barbarian is either quickly arrested and hanged for extreme cruelty or recruited as a Shadow Mage.
In this case Bowser, invisible and unnoticed, is able to sneak up to Mario and Luigi playing cards, without initiative being rolled until he declares he's going to attack.
Is this correct?I'm asking because other people told me otherwise before. They told you should roll initiative as soon as Bowser detects Mario and Luigi.
Who is right?
Mario and Luigi get a passive perception check to notice Bowser. I believe the DC is 20 to notice an invisible creature is in the area.
Also, in addition to this first question,
How do the rules behave in the "cat tied to a barbarian's leg" situations?
I know it's an abuse and makes no sense outside of a metaplay perspective, but yet, I'm just asking if it's a valid interpretation of RAW
It's RAW, but there are a host of RAW issues with it. Everyone actually gets a perception check to notice. DC 0, with modifiers. Distance, distraction, intervening people,... It doesn't guarantee the Barbarian is aware of those who might attack him, and grants a penalty to his perception for being engaged in combat. Fatigue rules apply. The GM could declare the cat helpless and declare combat over. And so on.
The GM can be just as much of a rules-jerk as the PCs want to be.
BTW, do Barbarians still have alignment restrictions? Wouldn't being that rules-lawyery be a lawful act?
I believe the DC is 20 to notice an invisible creature is in the area.
iirc, it's 20+stealth checks, if you're using stealth. Google found me this:
<<The glossary entry for Invisibility says it's a DC 20 perception check to notice the presence of an active invisible creature. If the invisible creature is moving or engaged in a noisy activity, then there's a chart of modifiers you apply to that DC. One of those entries on the chart is for when the invisible creature is Using Stealth, and the modifier you apply when that happens is "Stealth check +20" >>It's RAW
Okay, thank you.
Now that I know how it works, I want to say I do not like this rule and I would gladly change it, so I'll try to design an house rule for future use. Thank you for helping me clarify this point.The rest of the post is very funny and gave me a good laugh, thank you for that as well.
Now,
if I'm not mistaken, the only issue not entirely clarified is wether combat is triggered by hostile actions or by people noticing each other;
i.e. if Bowser is allowed to approach Mario and Luigi before initiative is rolled, or he isn't because as soon as he notices them, combat begins.
If combat is triggered by hostile actions, then you cannot prepare an action to attack an enemy that is about to break in your house, unless someone performed hostile actions.
If it just takes "being aware of non allies" however this means that walking by the street is necessarily combat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd ask the cat abusing player 'Do you want to play the game or just be a smart*ss?'. If the latter, I will send in some cat loving witch which will put the barbarian to sleep...
People noticing each other may do as well
So, to be as clear as possible,
within existing rules it's impossible to have a consistent management of what starts a combat
Because a definition of what triggers combat and when is lacking, players cannot make informed decisions
right?
GM decides when combat starts. That is the rule.
A good rule of thumb, anything aggressive will probably start combat.
anytime when the GM wants to track rounds he can call for initiative.
Like, there's plenty knowledge for a player to make informed decisions with. And unless they are trying to pull something dumb, it will probably go as they expect it would.
People noticing each other may do as wellSo, to be as clear as possible,
within existing rules it's impossible to have a consistent management of what starts a combat
Because a definition of what triggers combat and when is lacking, players cannot make informed decisions
right?
Sorry, but I spotted the trap. This isn't something that should be codified. There is too much variance in terms of intention versus result. DM-call is the best way to handle this. If the players can't handle how their DM adjudicates things, what they need is a different DM, not a rigid definition of "when combat starts".
Look at invisibility, and how clear it is. "If you attack someone." Then there's the whole argument - years of it - over increasingly ludicrous edge conditions that all boil down to "how does the spell know I intend to attack?"
This isn't a video game, and this is the perfect moment for a DM to step in and discuss intention and likely results, and determine what rules should be applied.
I'm done here since you've got an agenda - which you're entitled to, certainly - and I don't agree with it. I believe you're trying to invent more system so it can be gamed, while pretending you're trying to close loopholes. If that's not the case, I genuinely apologize in advance for slandering you.
"how does the spell know I intend to attack?"
I'm confused now, I believe attacking is a specific action with specific rules that must be declared. Can you attack without following the attack rules? If you declare an attack, the spell ends.
This seems more related to fluff than to actual rules being blurry. I don't think rules are blurry in this case.This isn't a video game
Exactly, because this is not a videogame, one has the opportunity to try and patch the system. Because it's a shared experience, it is my beliefe that such modifications should be openly presented, discussed, and then officially implemented.
I'm against sudden changes that give a player the impression that "the GM is changing rules on the fly to prevent me from doing what I was told I could do"This almost inevitably leaves a bad taste in the player's mouth and I couldn't feel accomplished as a GM if I had to do this.
I believe you're trying to invent more system so it can be gamed, while pretending you're trying to close loopholes. If that's not the case, I genuinely apologize in advance for slandering you.
Nah, I'm just a fan of mental excercise on rules systems.
I.E. I love glorious loopholes like Locate City Bomb or Psionic Sandwich or A**plomancer in 3.5, but I would not like to see them in an actual game (unless, of course that was intended and agreed upon in advance)I'm a fan of the idea of social contract too.
I want to be able to discuss about stealth, surprise, and find a consistent solution, whatever it may be.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The consistent solution here is "GM decides when combat starts based on stated intentions of players". It is the only sane and sensible answer.
If a player keeps changing his stated intentions to gain some percieved advantage then the GM is obligated to call that player on it and tell them to stop being disruptive and wasting everyones time.
It is really that simple.
If a player keeps changing his stated intentions to gain some percieved advantage then the GM is obligated to call that player on it and tell them to stop being disruptive and wasting everyones time
Of course, but I would also ask "why are you doing this? Do you feel you're being unfairly restricted? why? I believe this rule is written like this because it serves this and that purpose, and that's why it is the way it is. we can work together to find a solution if you want"
This actually happened at my table, with different rules. I explained what I thought of the rule and what consequences would happen in the game if we changed it, and they told me they were fine with the rule as it was. But if they insisted, I would have tried to go and make it happen at the best of my possibilities.
"how does the spell know I intend to attack?"I'm confused now, I believe attacking is a specific action with specific rules that must be declared.
FIRST... thank you for engaging me. I enjoy debate and discussion, and as long as things have somewhere to go, I believe it's worthwhile for both sides. I have as much to learn as you have to teach.
Excellent. Welcome to the last 15 years of 3.5e's rules. Yes, "attack" is a named action. And yes, it would be absolutely within your rights to consider that the sole scope of what breaks invisibility.
But what happens when a PC deliberately uses the "drop an item" action in a manner that will explicitly cause harm to someone they wish to harm?
Right. That's a free action that isn't called "attack". But the intent and the result of the action you're taking are that your target is attacked. That's when most DMs step in and say "yeah, you become visible". But how did the spell know?
How about using Intimidate to make someone shaken? It's not an attack, but it is harmful and deliberately so. There are a bunch of these and I won't recap them. The point is that the RAW that says DM's need to arbitrate the rules is second only to "have fun" for a reason. The tighter you make the rules (to a degree), the more explicitly you underline the edge conditions so you can have table arguments.
I'm against sudden changes that give a player the impression that "the GM is changing rules on the fly to prevent me from doing what I was told I could do"
This almost inevitably leaves a bad taste in the player's mouth and I couldn't feel accomplished as a GM if I had to do this.
Absolutely. I play Pathfinder specifically because I want a codified framework of what I (and my mooks when I DM) are permitted to do. I play on a battlemat because I don't feel like dealing with "how far is the bad guy" having the answer "65 feet" when the range of my favorite ability is 60ft.
Nah, I'm just a fan of mental excercise on rules systems.
Okay, cool. Please accept my apologies (again). I've read an awful lot of um... trollish discussions like this and my senses were tingling. Bonus kudos for not freaking out and getting defensive. Deep respect.
I personally believe the rules as written provide sufficient framework for managing the vast variety of situations where initiative becomes a useful/mandatory tool. But by all means, enjoy the exploration of the topic.
Very much in agreement with the general consensus, the GM decides when combat begins (but it shouldn't be any later than a player saying "I'm going to cast fireball on the king").
The surprise rules are vaguely worded, entirely on purpose, to allow the GM to adjudicate edge cases, but the basic idea is that initiative is checked when any one party involved becomes "aware" of their opponents - and yes, that can include a PC deciding to randomly stab someone in the street. Surprise is checked after initiative is rolled.
So, to answer the original 4 questions:
1) There's one hidden person in each room that the other side cannot possibly know about, even though they know there's "someone" there. The hidden people get a surprise round, but nobody else does.
When a combat starts, if you are not aware of your opponents and they are aware of you, you're surprised.
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.
Unaware Combatants: Combatants who are unaware at the start of battle don't get to act in the surprise round. Unaware combatants are flat-footed because they have not acted yet, so they lose any Dexterity bonus to AC.
2) Same answer as 1.
3) I'd call for initiative as soon as Bowser is using stealth within line of sight. He then has to make stealth rolls and Mario and Luigi make perception rolls each round until either Bowser gets out of Dodge, or gets close enough to attack.
4) As others have said, Bowser's initiative gets inserted into the combat as soon as he starts interacting with it. He won't get surprise, but if Mario and Luigi aren't aware of him, he may still deny them Dex to AC.
4.b) The GM. Players never get to choose when they're in combat. They may certainly take actions at any time, but the GM is the one who says "roll initiative".
Both 1 & 2. Surprise
Surprise
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Surprise
Summary: The surprise round takes place in initiative order for the participants not surprised.
[Detailed more by Chemlak; I am mainly providing the rule link.]
3. Roll the Initiative as per the Town Scenario #5 below, depending on the Perception v. Stealth rules or if Bowser wants to attack. I am assuming Stealth is rolled by Bowser (he can do so even untrained).
Stealth:
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/coreRulebook/skills/stealth.html
Breaking Stealth: When you start your turn using Stealth, you can leave cover or concealment and remain unobserved as long as
you succeed at a Stealth check and end your turn in cover or concealment. Your Stealth immediately ends after you make an
attack roll, whether or not the attack is successful (except when sniping as noted...)
Note: if Bowser remains still (does not leave cover/concealment), he does not need to re-roll Stealth and
Mario/Luigi do not get a new Perception roll (unless Bowser makes some noise, etc.).
4. Unaware Combatants:
Are flat-footed at the start, until they have acted [as noted by Chemlab].
Same link as #1 & 2 as part of Surprise rules [though no one has Surprise in this #4].
5 [new]. Town scenario
I would not bother rolling initiative for everyone in the street, though technically they are entitled.
I would roll Perception individually for the townspeople vs. the Stealth of the hidden character.
Only if the character wants to attack [with surprise] or someone beat the stealth roll [no surprise] would I bother with Initiative.
6 [old #5]. The first 4 points are RAW. The new #5 is just time-saving and reasonableness.
I'm confused...!?
Some people said in situations 1&2 the hidden characters get a surprise round.
Others said they don't.
Why?
Some people told me Bowser can sneak and initiative is not rolled until someone decides to perform an attack; others told me initiative must be rolled right away.
What are the arguments that support either side?
What Byakko said, but since the rules explicitly allow for "some surprise", the only way to let that work is if one side has any number of characters the other side is not aware of, the one side has a surprise round for the "hidden" characters. It's possible for both sides to be in this situation. Any other solution doesn't allow for partial surprise.
What Byakko said, but since the rules explicitly allow for "some surprise", the only way to let that work is if one side has any number of characters the other side is not aware of, the one side has a surprise round for the "hidden" characters. It's possible for both sides to be in this situation. Any other solution doesn't allow for partial surprise.
So, to sum it up:
-There are foes in the adjacent rooms
-PCs are aware of "some" foes, who knows how many
-Foes are aware of "some" PCs
-Door is closed
-One PC is hidden
Foes want to prepare so that as soon as PCs enter the door, they attack with a ranged weapon.
What is happening now? Is this a readied action? If it's a readied action, then initiative must start.
But how can initiative start if neither side is sure of who/what/how many/where is in the other room?
Can the foes prepare that? Why? Why not?
Depending on the answer to the previous question, what happens next?
-Door opens
-Two PCs in front of the door can see the foes, foes can see 2 PCs
-Other PCs cannot, including the hidden one, neither can the foes see them
what happens now
Roll initiative first, then check for surprise. It's the order laid out in the combat chapter, it's what makes many of the perceived problems vanish.
The GM can start combat whenever he wants, but he's still got to abide by the turn order.
So, in this situation, the GM is aware that the PCs know that there's "some enemies", and the enemies know that there are "some PCs" (using the term to differentiate the two sides). The GM calls for initiative.
Since some PCs are aware of some enemies, and some enemies are aware of some PCs, the ones nobody on the opposing side are aware of get a surprise round (note: the door is still closed). Those with surprise may take their standard action (all the enemies who can take a readied attack for "when the door is fully open", hidden PC does the same).
Then it's first normal round. Everyone who goes before the door opener readies an action to attack "when the door is fully open", the door opener opens the door (pro tip: best if it's the guy who got the lowest initiative (so everyone else can attack straight away) or the highest initiative (minimise incoming attacks from readied actions)), and now combat resolves normally.
Note that I've assumed the GM calls for initiative and everyone chooses to immediately get on with the fight, but after that surprise round, there's nothing stopping the PCs taking several rounds to buff (the enemy can do the same, as well as take cover, set up a barricade against the door, whatever).
Gary the Guard is eating his lunch in a warehouse full of crates and supplies. Tommy Thief has snuck in and plans on stealing some stuff after knocking Gary out. Tommy is aware of Gary but Gary doesn't know Tommy is present. Meanwhile, Bobby Backup has been hired by the warehouse owner and is skulking about, covering Gary in case he's attacked. Bobby is aware of everyone, but nobody else is aware of Bobby.
Tommy gets close to Gary and draws his sap. The player says "I club the guard in the surprise round!"
A DM could do a couple things at this point. He could ask for initiative and give Tommy and Bobby a surprise round, and leave it to relative initiative scores to determine if Bobby is able to stop Tommy (presumably with a ranged attack or spell). Or the DM could decide that both Tommy and Bobby should get a surprise round relative to one another, treating the combat as two separate combats. Bobby gets a surprise round in his combat with Tommy. Tommy gets a surprise round in his combat with Gary.
Either is reasonable, but I prefer the third option:
Roll for initiative when Tommy starts stalking Gary. Run things round by round. Let Bobby ready an action to stop Tommy if he makes a move on Gary. Ignoring Bobby, Tommy gets to start the combat because on Gary's turn he just uses standard actions to eat his sandwich. Tommy will effectively get a full round for surprise. Player should be happy... until Bobby's readied action paralyzes him.
So yeah, the more intricate the combat and awareness, the more possible ways to do something. There's enough flexibility that a DM can apply the rules however best suits the specific situation.
**Oh, and for the two rooms, one door scenario with a couple hidden mooks, I usually ask for initiative right before the door is opened. It's the best way, again, to allow people to ready actions where appropriate, since you can't ready outside of initiative. There's no way the people who can hear one another shouldn't be able to ready actions for the even the door is opened. So... even if the surprise round happens for the hidden folk, they get a standard action to... what? Keep hiding? Chug a potion? Meh. Just doesn't matter much, in the scale of the combat. Suppose they could ready an attack, but if they're hidden, they probably can't see the doorway to use it. Looks like their surprise round might be: stand up and stop hiding so I can participate in the upcoming fight. <Grin>
I think that the cat kicking Barbarian should really be a Bloodrager with a cat bloodline familiar, perhaps a Figment who he regularly kicks to death each day before it reappears the next day.
The fact you can't ready actions even when you're pretty sure combat will start soon has been a source of frustration and amusement in many games. Sometimes you "just know" that the pile of bones will turn into a skeleton or the statue will attack you when you get near. Somehow that damned statue still gets the drop on you though. It is the same with the animated rugs...alas...