So this is very much an arguement of semantics and I am 100% sure RAI would not work. The scenario here is and Questions are purely meant to use RAW.
Delayed Action:
Delay
By choosing to delay, you take no action and then act normally on whatever initiative count you decide to act. When you delay, you voluntarily reduce your own initiative result for the rest of the combat. When your new, lower initiative count comes up later in the same round, you can act normally. You can specify this new initiative result or just wait until some time later in the round and act then, thus fixing your new initiative count at that point.
You never get back the time you spend waiting to see what’s going to happen. You also can’t interrupt anyone else’s action (as you can with a readied action).
Initiative Consequences of Delaying
Your initiative result becomes the count on which you took the delayed action. If you come to your next action and have not yet performed an action, you don’t get to take a delayed action (though you can delay again).
If you take a delayed action in the next round, before your regular turn comes up, your initiative count rises to that new point in the order of battle, and you do not get your regular action that round.
This seems pretty straight forward and useful in quite a few circumstances but not powerful in any way. However it seems to mean that you never start your turn on the original initiative score and only start your turn on the new initiative score. Now whichever way you interpret this has unintended consequences as there are effects that occur at the start of your turn and effects that last till the start of your next turn.
So here are some abilities/feats/actions it matters alot for and your interpretation changes how it might be used.
Power Attack - This says these bonuses and penalties last until your next turn. If your turn begins on your normal initiative then theoretically any attacks you make between your origional and new initiatives are not modified by Power Attack.
Charge - This says you take a -2 to AC till the start of your next turn, if you turn does not start the -2 lasts till your new initiative however if it does start then your initiative goes up despite you taking no actions.
Now these both seem like low yield cases generally and I feel like these are not a big enough deal to FAQ over however some of the other effects and implications are much more powerful and important to know how they stand.
One big example is Destructive Dispel which has the following text.
Destructive Dispel:
When you successfully make a targeted dispel check against an opponent, that opponent must succeed at a Fortitude save (DC equals the DC of the spell used to dispel) or be stunned until the start of your next turn. If the save succeeds, the opponent is instead sickened until the start of your next turn.
So lets say you manage to get a solo monster to fail the fort save after a targeted dispel, they are stunned and all you might have to do is delay your action to keep them perma stunned.
Here would also be an example of a way to just be able to take one extra turn away from the monster.
Initiative round 1 - You:18, Monster 15, Ally1: 10
Round 1 you dispel effect on monster and monster fails fort save. Monster is stunned and takes no action. Ally does something.
Round 2 you decide to delay initiative to a 12, new initiative is - Monster:15, You:12, Ally1:10
Monster goes first but if your turn has not started he is stunned and does nothing. You go, monster is no longer stunned, you get to act normally. Ally1 gets a turn.
So my questions are as follows.
1. When you delay does your turn start on your original initiative or on your new initiative?
2. If you delay a full turn taking no actions and return to your original initiative and delay again do you begin either of your turns?
3. a. If your turn begins on your original initiative when you delay when does your turn end?
3. b. If it lasts only till the end of that initiative do things which trigger at end of turn have the potential to trigger twice in a round?
3. c. If it ends at the end of your new initiative does all turns between those two initiatives count as happening on your turn?
Round 1 you dispel effect on monster and monster fails fort save. Monster is stunned and takes no action. Ally does something.
Round 2 you decide to delay initiative to a 12, new initiative is - Monster:15, You:12, Ally1:10
Monster goes first but if your turn has not started he is stunned and does nothing. You go, monster is no longer stunned, you get to act normally. Ally1 gets a turn.
No, that's not what happens. Just because you don't take any action other than delaying doesn't mean you don't have a turn. Delaying very specifically is an action since it's under "Special Initiative Actions" in the rules. And unless otherwise stated, you can't take actions outside of your own turn.
When you delay, you reduce the initiative count for the rest of the combat, not for the turn where you decide to delay. So, at the moment where you decide to delay, your turn has already started, so the monster is no longer stunned when it's turn comes up.
So, really, it's like this:
Round 2, your turn starts, the monster is no longer stunned. You decide to delay to initiative count 12, it's the monster's turn at 15 and it gets its full turn.
DaPenguins wrote:
So my questions are as follows.
1. When you delay does your turn start on your original initiative or on your new initiative?
2. If you delay a full turn taking no actions and return to your original initiative and delay again do you begin either of your turns?
3. a. If your turn begins on your original initiative when you delay when does your turn end?
3. b. If it lasts only till the end of that initiative do things which trigger at end of turn have the potential to trigger twice in a round?
3. c. If it ends at the end of your new initiative does all turns between those two initiatives count as happening on your turn?
1. To even delay, it has to be your turn. After you delay, your turn starts on the new initiative count.
2. Yes, you can't delay outside of your own turn. You can't take any actions on a turn where you delay, though.
3. Tricky. The way I originally thought it worked was that you essentially get two turns in the round where you delay, but you do nothing but delay on that first turn. But that would mean that "round per level" effects would tick down or trigger twice in that round which doesn't make much sense. So, I would probably have any effects that happen "on your turn" activate on the turn where you delay rather than the one where you take any other actions, to stay consistent and solve the perma-stun issue.
I could have sworn that I read somewhere (back in the D&D 3E days) that when you delay, bad things that happen on your turn happen immediately but good things are delayed until you actually take your turn. Under that interpretation, delaying works best when you don't have bad things happening to you on a periodic basis.
This FAQ is instructive in intent. Although the FAQ is only talking about poisons, what we should probably take from that is that any effect that lasts till your next turn, or triggers on your next turn, etc, should really be read as going off the next time the init order reaches the same number as the init order it was set up on. Which in 99% of cases will be identical to the creatures next turn.
Or in other words, the phrase "start of the creatures next turn" was written from the general case, and delayed actions was not considered.
To properly fix RAW to match RAI, delayed actions text should have additional errata stating that triggers based off a characters next turn can not be delayed by the delay action.
This FAQ is instructive in intent. Although the FAQ is only talking about poisons, what we should probably take from that is that any effect that lasts till your next turn, or triggers on your next turn, etc, should really be read as going off the next time the init order reaches the same number as the init order it was set up on. Which in 99% of cases will be identical to the creatures next turn.
Or in other words, the phrase "start of the creatures next turn" was written from the general case, and delayed actions was not considered.
To properly fix RAW to match RAI, delayed actions text should have additional errata stating that triggers based off a characters next turn can not be delayed by the delay action.
This is by far the best answer so far as it does seem to imply your turn starts when you delay however there are still the follow up points which need to be addressed such as when a turn ends if it is delayed, and does everything that occurs between the start and end of your turn count as on your turn?
This does seem to answer that your turn does indeed start on your original initiative.
I agree. Your turn is when you make a selection on your initiative and if that selection is to delay, that's still the start of your "turn". Anything based on that moment, duration of spell, save for continuous effects, delay count on Delayed Fireball, remains at the start of your turn. You cannot delay action indefinitely to avoid poison effects,so it seems clear you cannot delay indefinitely to maintain any other effects either. The delay action IS, effectively, starting your turn.
I agree. Your turn is when you make a selection on your initiative and if that selection is to delay, that's still the start of your "turn". Anything based on that moment, duration of spell, save for continuous effects, delay count on Delayed Fireball, remains at the start of your turn. You cannot delay action indefinitely to avoid poison effects,so it seems clear you cannot delay indefinitely to maintain any other effects either. The delay action IS, effectively, starting your turn.
Well thats the thing it can't effectively start your turn it either does or does not which this heavily implies it does but because it seems to start your turn it begs the question of when does your turn end as there are effects which occur at the end of your turn or last till the end of your turn. So that portion of the question remains unanswered
I agree. Your turn is when you make a selection on your initiative and if that selection is to delay, that's still the start of your "turn". Anything based on that moment, duration of spell, save for continuous effects, delay count on Delayed Fireball, remains at the start of your turn. You cannot delay action indefinitely to avoid poison effects,so it seems clear you cannot delay indefinitely to maintain any other effects either. The delay action IS, effectively, starting your turn.
Well thats the thing it can't effectively start your turn it either does or does not which this heavily implies it does but because it seems to start your turn it begs the question of when does your turn end as there are effects which occur at the end of your turn or last till the end of your turn. So that portion of the question remains unanswered
I'd treat it as the same way something that triggers at the beginning of your turn does.
i.e, something at the beginning triggers at the init count of when your turn would normally be.
Something at the end of your turn would trigger at the end of the init count where your turn would normally be.
Agree with the others. Things which would happen at the time of your turn should happen. If you are the first person in your party to act in a combat where your party is surprised and you decide to delay in order to let the others get in position you would not be considered flat-footed even though you are delaying your action. So even if an enemy attacked you between your original initiative number and whatever later time you chose to act, you would be counted as having 'acted', even if your action was to take no action yet.
Similarly, you can't extend the benefits of effects that last 'until the end of your next turn' by delaying your turn. They would end at the point you choose to delay your turn.
i think when you delay it should just be for that round and your initiative should return to normal afterwords
Then a player with high initiative could delay to the end of initiative order and act twice in a row, and we would have additional questions about the awkwardness of effects that span multiple turns, trigger on start of turn, etc.
It's simpler to have a delaying character act on the new initiative from then onwards. :)
i think when you delay it should just be for that round and your initiative should return to normal afterwords
Then a player with high initiative could delay to the end of initiative order and act twice in a row, and we would have additional questions about the awkwardness of effects that span multiple turns, trigger on start of turn, etc.
It's simpler to have a delaying character act on the new initiative from then onwards. :)
but it wouldn't mess with the turn order i see many people choose not to delay their actions because it ends up costing them rounds in combat
i think when you delay it should just be for that round and your initiative should return to normal afterwords
Then a player with high initiative could delay to the end of initiative order and act twice in a row, and we would have additional questions about the awkwardness of effects that span multiple turns, trigger on start of turn, etc.
It's simpler to have a delaying character act on the new initiative from then onwards. :)
but it wouldn't mess with the turn order i see many people choose not to delay their actions because it ends up costing them rounds in combat
delay is a tactical choice, like you're a fighter but decide to delay after the cleric to receive a healing spell so the cleric don't have to cast defensively and have a chance to lose a spell, or you're a rogue and decide to delay after the fighter to have flank and to sneak attack the enemie, delay is not for the lols, everything you do in combat is a tactical choice and must live with the consequence of your action, its like in life there are consequence to your actions, weird eh?
i think when you delay it should just be for that round and your initiative should return to normal afterwords
Then a player with high initiative could delay to the end of initiative order and act twice in a row, and we would have additional questions about the awkwardness of effects that span multiple turns, trigger on start of turn, etc.
It's simpler to have a delaying character act on the new initiative from then onwards. :)
but it wouldn't mess with the turn order i see many people choose not to delay their actions because it ends up costing them rounds in combat
Delaying never costs you turns (that matter) in combat unless you delay so long that it gets back to your turn.
For the following example lets assume you and your ally hit the monster each time, and it takes 6 total hits to kill it.
Monster init 25
My init 20
Ally init 15
Normal progression.
Round 1 - everyone takes a turn
Round 2 - the same
Round 3 - the same, monster dies.
You got 3 actions.
Delaying
Round 1 - Monster goes, I delay till 14, ally goes, I go.
Round 2 - Everyone goes on their current inits
Round 3 - same as 2, monster dies.
Everyone got 3 actions.
Alternate Delaying
Round 1 - Monster goes, I delay till 14, ally goes, I go.
Round 2 - Monster goes, ally goes, I delay till init 26
Round 3 - You go, monster goes, ally goes.
Round 4 - You go, monster dies.
Everyone got 3 actions.
Now you could delay in ways that gives the monster an extra turn before you finish it off, or you could delay such that you only make 2 attacks, your ally makes 4 - monster dies, thus your turn to make a third attack isn't meaningful (so your third action is lost in that sense).
i think when you delay it should just be for that round and your initiative should return to normal afterwords
Then a player with high initiative could delay to the end of initiative order and act twice in a row, and we would have additional questions about the awkwardness of effects that span multiple turns, trigger on start of turn, etc.
It's simpler to have a delaying character act on the new initiative from then onwards. :)
but it wouldn't mess with the turn order i see many people choose not to delay their actions because it ends up costing them rounds in combat
Delaying never costs you turns (that matter) in combat unless you delay so long that it gets back to your turn.
For the following example lets assume you and your ally hit the monster each time, and it takes 6 total hits to kill it.
Monster init 25
My init 20
Ally init 15
Normal progression.
Round 1 - everyone takes a turn
Round 2 - the same
Round 3 - the same, monster dies.
You got 3 actions.
Delaying
Round 1 - Monster goes, I delay till 14, ally goes, I go.
Round 2 - Everyone goes on their current inits
Round 3 - same as 2, monster dies.
Everyone got 3 actions.
Alternate Delaying
Round 1 - Monster goes, I delay till 14, ally goes, I go.
Round 2 - Monster goes, ally goes, I delay till init 26
Round 3 - You go, monster goes, ally goes.
Round 4 - You go, monster dies.
Everyone got 3 actions.
Now you could delay in ways that gives the monster an extra turn before you finish it off, or you could delay such that you only make 2 attacks, your ally makes 4 - monster dies, thus your turn to make a third attack isn't meaningful (so your third action is lost in that sense).
say there's a 6 person party vs 5 monsters and 2 players are always delaying to get the "best" tactical advantage the more rounds the combat goes on the more rounds those players lose in 10 rounds they would lose quite a few actions and in 20 they would lose even more
Fights almost never go that long in my experience.
i've had a couple that have gotten to 15 rounds just purely from poor rolls on both sides we either missed or just couldn't do enough dmg to overcome dr and same with the monsters
