Recently played a scenario with Rogue. The situation was that our party entered the clearing area with creatures we spotted and were not yet in encounter mode. We rolled high enough knowledge check (nature I believe) to know they were dangerous and then decided we would attack them. GM called for initiative. Since I am Rogue I told GM I was rolling Stealth for initiative (i.e. Surprise Attack). However, GM ruled that because I wasn’t actively trying to sneak that I couldn’t and had to use Perception. So I did and game went on. But as I read the rule it isn’t a feature related to sneaking necessarily and, in fact, could role deception as well. Seems that the Rogue gets this just because they tend to react faster than other foes not because they’re trying to sneak (rule below). Which is correct?
Surprise Attack
You spring into combat faster than foes can react. On the first round of combat, if you roll Deception or Stealth for initiative, creatures that haven’t acted are flat-footed to you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I'm a little hazy on the order of events from your description, but it sounds like your GM was right. Assuming you entered the clearing and were spotted by the creatures, you can't use stealth. If you're staring at each other and then one side decides to attack the other, nothing especially sneaky was going on. If the monsters hadn't seen you, you should have had the opportunity to use stealth for initiative barring your party's barbarian pulling a Leeroy Jenkins or something.
I think your reading of Surprise Attack is wrong though. It doesn't let you use Deception or Stealth for initiative any more than anyone else, it just gives you extra benefits when you do. In the future you should be Avoiding Notice in Exploration Mode as much as possible if you want to utilize this.
I think I see what your are saying. Basically, If the situation is such that you can role Stealth for Initiative THEN anyone that hasn't acted would be flat footed to me.
In this case there were "bushes" in the clearing and we spotted them from 30ft off and did nature checks to realize they were creatures not bushes. We then decided we would attack first. Someone else rolled better than I and moved up and attacked. Had we just stood there they wouldn't have moved towards us most likely.
Great explanations all. Thank you for setting me straight!
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My opinion is that the DM screwed up, and here's why. But first let me clarify that I am speaking as both a player and DM as I feel it's worth mentioning...
You DM is "supposed to" ask the party what their Exploration mode tactic is prior to rolling initiative (In this case, prior to the players knowing there is another creature nearby). This gives you the opportunity to choose to Avoid Notice, which would trigger Surprise Attack if there is a transition to Encounter mode. It also gives you the opportunity to choose other tactics which means you would be actively giving up the opportunity to apply Surprise Attack at the opportunity cost of gaining some other potential benefit.
(Note: I use the quotation marks above on the words "supposed to" because this is my opinion, nothing more.)
Perhaps chalk it up to people early in the game's existence trying to "crack the egg" that is Exploration mode generally?
Cheers.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
(...)
Since one of your compatriots charged, you cannot use stealth for initiative
I mostly agree with Laran, except for this. Just because they saw and heard the barbarian coming, doesn't mean they saw the rogue coming in from the side.
Mechanically, you can do Avoid Notice, roll stealth for initiative, and get surprise attack, even if other people in the party are doing something else.
Now, if your party came to a suspicious clearing, your party and you stood talking about the suspicious bushes for a bit, and then you attacked, that would be different. At the point the GM can reasonably say you've come out of hiding to have a conversation with your party so you're not entitled to Stealth initiative anymore.
If you walked towards the bushes pretending not to have noticed they were suspicious, then Deception would have made sense as initiative.
---
Basically, PF2 doesn't have ultra-hard rules on which skills can be subbed in for initiative, it's mostly open to the GM to determine based on what makes sense in the situation.
I agree generally with Ascalaphus. Just because the party was found out doesn't mean the rogue was necessarily found out.
I've been allowing the party Rogue to just use Stealth regardless of where he happens to be as long as nobody has spotted him. If on the other hand he was standing out in the open when initiative is rolled, then I'd make him use perception. This feels like the most fair way to treat the situation.
Regarding exploration tactics. I am running it with the players setting a tactic and then having to say what they are doing if they change that tactic.
That is to say if the party gets spotted someone who was searching cannot say "I am avoiding notice now" and someone who was detecting magic cannot say "I am scouting now". The encounter starts based on what people were doing when it initiated.
However if a party member is avoiding notice, and other party members aren't. It is logical to assume that they aren't with the other party members unless they have some means of blocking a primary sense of onlookers.
Regarding exploration tactics. I am running it with the players setting a tactic and then having to say what they are doing if they change that tactic.
That is to say if the party gets spotted someone who was searching cannot say "I am avoiding notice now" and someone who was detecting magic cannot say "I am scouting now". The encounter starts based on what people were doing when it initiated.
However if a party member is avoiding notice, and other party members aren't. It is logical to assume that they aren't with the other party members unless they have some means of blocking a primary sense of onlookers.
Or they are just flitting from cover to cover. I'd probably start such a character behind the nearest cover if initiative got rolled.
Or they are just flitting from cover to cover. I'd probably start such a character behind the nearest cover if initiative got rolled.Regarding exploration tactics. I am running it with the players setting a tactic and then having to say what they are doing if they change that tactic.
That is to say if the party gets spotted someone who was searching cannot say "I am avoiding notice now" and someone who was detecting magic cannot say "I am scouting now". The encounter starts based on what people were doing when it initiated.
However if a party member is avoiding notice, and other party members aren't. It is logical to assume that they aren't with the other party members unless they have some means of blocking a primary sense of onlookers.
I generally allow my players to place themselves on the map, sometimes before and sometimes after I place monsters. Depends on circumstances.
If they get the drop on the enemies, the enemies are placed first. If it's the other way around, even if the rogue wasn't caught, it's the other way around with some characters starting "undetected" by the enemy.
Or they are just flitting from cover to cover. I'd probably start such a character behind the nearest cover if initiative got rolled.Regarding exploration tactics. I am running it with the players setting a tactic and then having to say what they are doing if they change that tactic.
That is to say if the party gets spotted someone who was searching cannot say "I am avoiding notice now" and someone who was detecting magic cannot say "I am scouting now". The encounter starts based on what people were doing when it initiated.
However if a party member is avoiding notice, and other party members aren't. It is logical to assume that they aren't with the other party members unless they have some means of blocking a primary sense of onlookers.
I generally allow my players to place themselves on the map, sometimes before and sometimes after I place monsters. Depends on circumstances.
If they get the drop on the enemies, the enemies are placed first. If it's the other way around, even if the rogue wasn't caught, it's the other way around with some characters starting "undetected" by the enemy.
I prefer establishing a marching order on a map for a default, unless the PCs got the drop on the enemy or had another reason to deviate from it.
I prefer establishing a marching order on a map for a default, unless the PCs got the drop on the enemy or had another reason to deviate from it.Or they are just flitting from cover to cover. I'd probably start such a character behind the nearest cover if initiative got rolled.Regarding exploration tactics. I am running it with the players setting a tactic and then having to say what they are doing if they change that tactic.
That is to say if the party gets spotted someone who was searching cannot say "I am avoiding notice now" and someone who was detecting magic cannot say "I am scouting now". The encounter starts based on what people were doing when it initiated.
However if a party member is avoiding notice, and other party members aren't. It is logical to assume that they aren't with the other party members unless they have some means of blocking a primary sense of onlookers.
I generally allow my players to place themselves on the map, sometimes before and sometimes after I place monsters. Depends on circumstances.
If they get the drop on the enemies, the enemies are placed first. If it's the other way around, even if the rogue wasn't caught, it's the other way around with some characters starting "undetected" by the enemy.
Each approach has merits. I usually cordon off "deployment areas" for the characters then fill in terrain and things after placement. But I started out in the hobby space in 40k and Warmachine/Hordes, so that is just a thing I'm comfortable with. As long as it gets the battle going there really is no wrong answer.
I have been playing a rogue through the first book of Age of Ashes. I have been trying to be a good player and declaring my exploration tactics (usually Avoid Notice) well in advance. I don't try to convince the GM that I was avoiding notice in situations that are clearly not compatible. Then last session the GM decides to drop a bomb shell on me:
You know what, I don't think you should be able to Avoid Notice while you have a light source.
Needless to say, as a HUMAN rogue, I was not too happy about that. I mean it is not like Avoid Notice and Surprise Attack are supposed to make me invisible to his monsters, it just means that if I react faster than them (by rolling higher initiative) I can catch them off guard (flat-footed).
Then he also dropped this one on me too:
I don't think it is fair for you to use stealth for initiative because your bonus is too high.
Well, my stealth bonus is the same as the druids perception bonus. He also does not need need to use any special exploration tactics to enable it. The math is so tight in this edition I am not sure I can outclass anyone at anything unless it is something they neglected or it is by design.
I am not sure what I can do to combat with this kind of logic but it is really taking the fun out of being a rogue :-(
I have been playing a rogue through the first book of Age of Ashes. I have been trying to be a good player and declaring my exploration tactics (usually Avoid Notice) well in advance. I don't try to convince the GM that I was avoiding notice in situations that are clearly not compatible. Then last session the GM decides to drop a bomb shell on me:
You know what, I don't think you should be able to Avoid Notice while you have a light source.Needless to say, as a HUMAN rogue, I was not too happy about that. I mean it is not like Avoid Notice and Surprise Attack are supposed to make me invisible to his monsters, it just means that if I react faster than them (by rolling higher initiative) I can catch them off guard (flat-footed).
Then he also dropped this one on me too:
I don't think it is fair for you to use stealth for initiative because your bonus is too high.Well, my stealth bonus is the same as the druids perception bonus. He also does not need need to use any special exploration tactics to enable it. The math is so tight in this edition I am not sure I can outclass anyone at anything unless it is something they neglected or it is by design.
I am not sure what I can do to combat with this kind of logic but it is really taking the fun out of being a rogue :-(
To the first point, he has a point. It is hard to avoid notice while carrying a torch. This doesnt apply in social situations however. If say you are simply trying to blend into a crowd at night, carrying a lantern around isn't that odd.
To the second, that is just bad dming imho. Using stealth for initiative is one of the hallmarks of being a rogue. I would definitely push back on that one. See what the rest of the party thinks on the subject, but as long as you haven't cheated to get an abnormally high stealth, it's fair game for initiative.
I have been playing a rogue through the first book of Age of Ashes. I have been trying to be a good player and declaring my exploration tactics (usually Avoid Notice) well in advance. I don't try to convince the GM that I was avoiding notice in situations that are clearly not compatible. Then last session the GM decides to drop a bomb shell on me:
You know what, I don't think you should be able to Avoid Notice while you have a light source.Needless to say, as a HUMAN rogue, I was not too happy about that. I mean it is not like Avoid Notice and Surprise Attack are supposed to make me invisible to his monsters, it just means that if I react faster than them (by rolling higher initiative) I can catch them off guard (flat-footed).
Then he also dropped this one on me too:
I don't think it is fair for you to use stealth for initiative because your bonus is too high.Well, my stealth bonus is the same as the druids perception bonus. He also does not need need to use any special exploration tactics to enable it. The math is so tight in this edition I am not sure I can outclass anyone at anything unless it is something they neglected or it is by design.
I am not sure what I can do to combat with this kind of logic but it is really taking the fun out of being a rogue :-(
To the first point, he has a point. It is hard to avoid notice while carrying a torch. This doesnt apply in social situations however. If say you are simply trying to blend into a crowd at night, carrying a lantern around isn't that odd.
To the second, that is just bad dming imho. Using stealth for initiative is one of the hallmarks of being a rogue. I would definitely push back on that one. See what the rest of the party thinks on the subject, but as long as you haven't cheated to get an abnormally high stealth, it's fair game for initiative.
Yup. And while you probably can't use stealth for initiative while carrying a torch, I don't see why you couldn't use it while someone else carries a torch. Just stay out of the bright radius, either hanging in the dim light zone or even in the darkness itself. This might require being at the back of the party to pull off, which might make reaching an enemy a problem, but it seems legit.
It really shouldn't be an issue for group exploration, but a rogue without darkvision has always had problems as a solo scout I'm afraid.
To the first point, he has a point. It is hard to avoid notice while carrying a torch. This doesnt apply in social situations however. If say you are simply trying to blend into a crowd at night, carrying a lantern around isn't that odd.I have been playing a rogue through the first book of Age of Ashes. I have been trying to be a good player and declaring my exploration tactics (usually Avoid Notice) well in advance. I don't try to convince the GM that I was avoiding notice in situations that are clearly not compatible. Then last session the GM decides to drop a bomb shell on me:
You know what, I don't think you should be able to Avoid Notice while you have a light source.Needless to say, as a HUMAN rogue, I was not too happy about that. I mean it is not like Avoid Notice and Surprise Attack are supposed to make me invisible to his monsters, it just means that if I react faster than them (by rolling higher initiative) I can catch them off guard (flat-footed).Yup. And while you probably can't use stealth for initiative while carrying a torch, I don't see why you couldn't use it while someone else carries a torch. Just stay out of the bright radius, either hanging in the dim light zone or even in the darkness itself. This might require being at the back of the party to pull off, which might make reaching an enemy a problem, but it seems legit.
It really shouldn't be an issue for group exploration, but a rogue without darkvision has always had problems as a solo scout I'm afraid.
Alright, I will put it down to edition bias on my part then. I have come from Pathfinder 1st Edition where everyone is flat-footed if they haven't acted so in my head it doesn't seem powerful enough to gated like this. It is hard to unlearn assumptions made from the previous edition of the game. ;-)