The GM determines whether you can use reactions before your first turn begins, depending on the situation in which the encounter happens.
On what basis would a GM not allow a reaction before your first turn of combat? Because the reaction isn't gained until you start your turn? Reactions can happen in exploration mode, so a creature presumably already has their reaction available going into combat. Does rolling initiative somehow rob a creature of its reaction?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's just to tell that outside an encounter with initiative the GM will decide if a use of a reaction is possible or not. This is basically because reactions usually are recharged at the beginning of your turn in an encounter. But in exploration mode this isn't clear because the initiative isn't rolled yet and you don't have a clear point to know how many times you are able to use your reactions.
Usually most APs, hazards and GMs allows 1 reaction usage just before roll the initiative. This reaction usually doesn't count in your round reaction limit because happened before the encounter mode. But it's GM fiat, a GM may decide that a situation isn't valid to use your reaction before roll the initiative and asks the players to roll initiative first then allow a reaction (in this case you will only recover your reaction at beginning of your turn).
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO, that is the replacement for a surprise round.
So basically if the party is ambushed, the penalty would be not being allowed to use your reactions before your initiative count comes up.
There are abilities that use your reaction and happen on things like 'you roll initiative' (see several of the Gunslinger Ways for examples). So having a blanket ban on having your reaction available before combat doesn't make a lot of sense.
So if an entire party were to successfully Avoid Notice against a dragon (beating both its initiative and its Perception DC), they could potentially knock the dragon prone and prevent the dragon from Arresting the Fall? And if one party member failed to Avoid Notice, would the dragon therefore not be "surprised" and have its reaction available to Arrest the Fall?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's there to empower GMs to say no, whereas if they didn't include that in the rules players would (rightfully) argue they're being robbed with no support. Let's face it, not all players respect a GMs ruling, especially if there is no basis like this to support it.
I would say that in an ambush situation, the party being ambushed loses their reaction until they've had their turn. Possibly other situations too.
Because it's left to the DM, it shouldn't be considered a "rule" at all ( aka, there's no specific trigger ).
It's there just to remember the DM that, in some specific circumstances, they might forbid players from using their reactions.
Which means that by default every players has reactions ready before the beginning of their turn, unless the DM says otherwise ( for example, if the party is ambushed, the might decide that players lose their reactions before the beginning of their first turn).
It's the other way around: By default you don't have a reaction. You have to ask the GM if you want to use one before your turn happens.
I personally allow the party to use reactions only when they were perfectly aware of the enemies before the fight breaks out. If they happen to "fall" on the enemies, no reactions (I may sometimes allow a Shield Block when someone is defending as a rare exception as the character was ready to perform such reactions).
One important things to see also is that if you allow reactions before the first turn, you open the door to Ready shenanigans. So it's a good rule of thumb to remove them most of the time and only allow them on an exceptional basis.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's funny because we are both wrong. The sentence is: "The GM determines whether you can use reactions before your first turn begins, depending on the situation in which the encounter happens."
So there's no default, it's always up to the GM. Unfortunately, they don't explain exactly what should impact the GM's choice.
Because it's left to the DM, it shouldn't be considered a "rule" at all ( aka, there's no specific trigger ).
It's there just to remember the DM that, in some specific circumstances, they might forbid players from using their reactions.
Which means that by default every players has reactions ready before the beginning of their turn, unless the DM says otherwise ( for example, if the party is ambushed, the might decide that players lose their reactions before the beginning of their first turn).
Yep.
Having GMed a lot of PF1, the change of language in PF2 was welcome. GMs have leeway to adjudicate many standard iffy situations (and hopefully not by fiat, rather reasoning).And by no means does "the GM determines" default to "you don't have a Reaction". One can't assume to always get a Reaction, but I'd go so far as saying GMs should read that the opposite way, letting PCs do their shticks unless there are circumstances that warrant losing one's ability to react.
Then there's always the tool of asking how players would respond if the rules were played the reverse way. "You can't can't catch the edge of the cliff because the orc pushing you went first." would be horrible reasoning if the PC was otherwise functional & alert.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I might even go so far as to rule that some types of reactions are available and others aren't.
Instinctive self preservation reactions such as Arrest a Fall and Grab an Edge would be the last to be removed (so nearly always available).
Reactions that specify a trigger that happens during initiative would be in a very similar category. They are obviously intended to be available and used - otherwise why print them in the rules in the first place.
But more combat focused reactions that imply some sort of awareness of combat being in progress would be the first ones forbidden if the character is surprised. So things like Attack of Opportunity, Nimble Dodge, Opportune Riposte, or Recognize Spell.
Because it's left to the DM, it shouldn't be considered a "rule" at all ( aka, there's no specific trigger ).
It's there just to remember the DM that, in some specific circumstances, they might forbid players from using their reactions.
Which means that by default every players has reactions ready before the beginning of their turn, unless the DM says otherwise ( for example, if the party is ambushed, the might decide that players lose their reactions before the beginning of their first turn).
It's the other way around: By default you don't have a reaction. You have to ask the GM if you want to use one before your turn happens.
I personally allow the party to use reactions only when they were perfectly aware of the enemies before the fight breaks out. If they happen to "fall" on the enemies, no reactions (I may sometimes allow a Shield Block when someone is defending as a rare exception as the character was ready to perform such reactions).
One important things to see also is that if you allow reactions before the first turn, you open the door to Ready shenanigans. So it's a good rule of thumb to remove them most of the time and only allow them on an exceptional basis.
Ooh, the Ready action. Yeah, I wouldn't want to allow that before a creature's first turn either. Imagine the orc example above but the orc loses initiative and still pushes the PC off the cliff before the PC's first turn.
On the other hand, what about a PC pushing an enemy off a cliff before the enemy's first turn to stop them from catching the ledge? I'd probably allow the ledge catch and disallow the Ready no matter which creature is doing which, but I wish there was some default assumption to work with in the base rule to prevent arguments at the table when situations like this arise.
Ooh, the Ready action. Yeah, I wouldn't want to allow that before a creature's first turn either.
That takes care of itself though.
You can't use the Readied reaction unless you have first spent the two regular actions preparing something. So no one is going to be using a Readied reaction during their first round of combat anyway...
Unless they were already well aware that combat was coming in the next several seconds and spent the actions preparing Ready during exploration mode before combat. At which point, I would probably allow it to be used. For example, the party hears the enemies that they are tracking on the other side of a door. One party member Readies an action to shoot through the door as soon as it opens and an enemy becomes visible, and another party member opens the door to initiate combat. I'd allow that to work.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't ever allow readying outside initiative. If someone readies an attack, then we must be in a state where tracking turns/time matters. Therefore, we have to begin initiative.
If the players have a clever plan or did good scouting for extra info, I'll give them a bonus on initiative to capture that.
Also, more GMs need to let people use different skills for initiative. Shoving the door you know and you know someone's standing on the other side? Roll Athletics for initiative!
I usually give reactions on the first round, but as others mentioned up to the circumstance. It makes choices like Defend more meaningful, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless they were already well aware that combat was coming in the next several seconds and spent the actions preparing Ready during exploration mode before combat. At which point, I would probably allow it to be used.
Very bad idea. Fights starting with a conversation will have everyone ready. And in case of ambush enemies will have a free action before acting. You just put back the surprise round in PF2.
It is one action - not an entire round.
And in a social/conversation that becomes a fight, the action of readying an attack would be what starts combat. So you wouldn't be able to use the two actions for Ready before initiative is rolled.
But yeah. Haven't there already been plenty of threads complaining that setting up an ambush isn't rewarded in PF2... You can't have it both ways. Either an ambush gives some advantage - or it doesn't. Allowing readying of attacks or not is one tool that the GM could use to tweak things to better match the way that the table prefers to run.
One-action before initiative is pretty common for surprise attacks in APs. Usually is used to draw weapons or something like this.
My question is, why does there need to be a basis? The rules say that's how it is, so that's how it is.
While you're correct, "that's how it is, so that's how it is" does not really help provide guidance to a GM trying to figure out how to navigate the system better.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
There are quite a lot of reactions that make sense out of combat, so a blanket "by default no" doesn't make sense to me.
Just to name a really big one: complex hazards. They typically have a reaction that does some initial attack, and THEN they roll initiative as the last part of the reaction. If you couldn't have reactions before initiative, those hazards could never trigger.
You could try to distinguish between reactions that should and shouldn't be available before combat, but that's a loooooot of combing rules and can get you some angry looks from players because they just picked up a feat thinking it'd work, because the last three feats all worked, but you then suddenly decide this one is different.
I'd rather decide based on the circumstances, but then use the same decision for all different reactions.
My default would be that you can use reactions, unless you're less ready than normal. For example when:
- enemies attack from ambush that you didn't spot
- enemies used Deception to pretend to be harmless and get close
I have found that it can help to be upfront about this as well. In the PFS setting I will often take a moment to explain the rule and my own reasoning. That way either side you falll on, they know and combat flows more smoothly.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My question is, why does there need to be a basis? The rules say that's how it is, so that's how it is.While you're correct, "that's how it is, so that's how it is" does not really help provide guidance to a GM trying to figure out how to navigate the system better.
OP sounds like either a player who doesn't like that their GM is preventing them from using reactions at the start of combat, or a GM who's players are complaining so they want something to back up their view. I am just trying to point out that in a home game the GM has final say on things, and can change rules how they see fit (society has more strict rules but that should be asked in the Society side of things).
As for how I deal with it, I use the method that others have mentioned: yes unless you are ambushed or unaware for some reason.
But even then, some reactions should work regardless, typically things that seem to be an "automatic" response to stimuli, like the Wicked Thorns reaction.
|
I might even go so far as to rule that some types of reactions are available and others aren't.
Instinctive self preservation reactions such as Arrest a Fall and Grab an Edge would be the last to be removed (so nearly always available).
snip
But more combat focused reactions that imply some sort of awareness of combat being in progress would be the first ones forbidden if the character is surprised. So things like Attack of Opportunity, Nimble Dodge, Opportune Riposte, or Recognize Spell.
I would go further. As an example, if the Fighter is for some reason the first up the cliff-side path and has a reach weapon, then I would not give him an Attack of Opportunity when a concealed enemy moved past him to shove the 2nd squishy-looking party member off the ledge. Most likely I would allow a Grab an Edge; that's what it's there for and doesn't come up that often in PFS (which is mostly what I play). But if the 2nd PC has Rapid Mantel, I'd certainly allow the reaction: the PC has expended a resource (a feat) to accomplish this, let him get some value out of it.
Similarly, if the 2nd (or 3rd) PC is a spellcaster with Feather Fall I would absolutely allow it. A spell selection has been expended choosing this reaction spell. Once again, the PC has expended a resource just for this situation.
I know this probably sounds like an edge case, but I am trying to illustrate a point.
I have a houserule where you are flat-footed to anyone who beats your initiative score by ten, until your first turn starts. This seems a fair way to deal with a lack of surpise rounds and such, while rewarding high rollers. I allow reactions before your turn though, as not all PCs or creatures have reactions.