DreamLyrics™ Play-by-Post Forums Hall of Fame - Latest Top 10 completed games LMP: Lost Mines of Phandelver OOC thread

agreed!!

Very cool composite.

Am leaving on Monday for another business trip. Won't be back until Friday. Posting will be very light during that time.

Guys, I think while you're all chatting that last goblin is still alive. We both missed (AC15) unless something has changed. So you may all want to edit your posts in order until one of you can finish it off. I know Karok would appreciate it. I'm sure the last thing you want is a surly dwarf healer on your hands.

Edited accordingly.

Yup. Also a miss it seems. Need Jaliera and Chandan to attack.

Nivek, I've moved ahead to the next round. Everyone from the top again.

Also, to address the weapon use and swaps. I will always allow the drop the bow, whip out shield and sword as "free". The goblins all swapped weapons once engaged but I should have been more explicit about it. You can see that they used the scimitars last round.

Also, read pg 70 of the Basic Rules v2 or page 190 the PHB for a list of examples of such actions. Maybe this is more permissive than you want to allow in games that you run, but I want to run it like this. The next time it probably works in your favor.

You probably wanna put that post in your thread Nivek. It might get overlooked here in the OOC thread <chuckle>

OK, I will amend my post

Oops too late and I think it is dead now! She'll continue to cover the entrance to the cave.

lol It does present a great scene though, with the dwarf still laying into the goblin while everyone else stands by and chats.

D&D adventurers really are a scary lot.

But yeah, I think a free drop and swap will work in favour of the PCs overall, since they're the ones most likely to micro their abilities, and also have multiple loadouts.

One thing's for sure, you can draw a sword massively quicker than you can notch an arrow!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udyhpBqENeU

You realize ... that only works if you are wearing sandals and a dress, right? <gd&r lmao>

Flipflops and a sarong count?

Close enough <chuckle>

Time for the argument And for the record,

Lingo can attack the wolf because he was not surprised. Had the wolf stayed hidden, he wouldn't but as soon as a critter comes out of hiding, he's an available target. Period. Even Lingo, when he hides.

So let's say Lingo is hiding behind a rock (or Bern - same thing), he steps out and fires at a critter. If they were NOT surprised, they can now target Lingo in the surprise round.

Lingo was surprised. By all enemies except one Goblin.

Otherwise, true enough. You are correct. I edited my post to indicate the Wolf has come out of hiding and is now a viable target.

In which case the only advantage to Surprise is it gives you Advantage on your attack (which I forgot to roll versus Lingo btw. Just added it, and still missed. ;-) ). So, unless you have some special ability to use when you have surprise (Like the Rogue's bonus damage when he has Advantage, which Surprise gives), gaining Advantage on your attack is all you really get. Plus, importantly, the fact that those ahead of you in the initiative order who don't see you can't target you.

BUT - According to the rules: "If you're surprised (meaning your PP is less than your foe's Stealth Check) you cannot move or take an action or reaction on the first turn of combat". It also says "A member of a group can be surprised even if other members aren't."

So, Lingo's PP was less than the Stealth rolls of every enemy in the room except for 1 Goblin. That should mean he is surprised by all the enemies except 1 Goblin and cannot move or take an action against anyone except that one Goblin (or now the Wolf too since it has revealed itself).

So the only ones who would fall under that rule about not being able to move or attack during round 1 would be those whose PP fails against EVERY enemy?

So, in effect we are saying that in order to be able to attack when you have surprise, but not be attacked back (and when others of your allies do not have surprise), you should "Delay" until the whole party has gone without revealing yourself. Then you jump out and attack at the end of the round? That seems silly.

No. You got it wrong.
Surprise means I cannot act during the first round. Period.
There is no "partial" surprise.

So anyone that detected anyone can act and attack anyone that they see. Feel free to ask in the WOTC thread for this:

Ask a simple question....

Oh, and here's a really good write-up of it....

Stealth, hiding and you!

Which is what I posted. You can only attack those you can see. Those who are seen by no foes have Surprise on those foes who can't see them (goes for both the party and the enemy).

If you fail in your PP versus all foe's Stealth you cannot act (no one falls into this category as everyone can see at least 1 foe).

There is no wrong, btw. From the site you sent me to: (where I asked the question btw. We'll see what the responses are.)

"I think the most important thing to note is the devs have stated in videos and on twitter that the DM is supposed to make "rulings" on stealth scenarios, and that the rules are intentionally vague to facilitate such. From memory Mearls gave an example ruling, he said if a lightfoot halfling tries to hide in the same spot twice in one combat (eg behind an ally), then his ruling would be that that could be possible, but to use common sense, and that he would impose disadvantage on the check."

Zeim,

I agree with Nep that there really are =two= benefits for the person with surprise. First, they cannot be targeted by the surprised person, second they have advantage in their attacks against the surprised person.

Now, if you go with group surprise, it is the same for all the characters all are surprised ... vs ... the surprisers. In the case of our group in this situation, it didn't seem like all of our group would have been surprised by all of theirs ... so I agree that individual surprise is reasonable. But I could also envision a similar set up where it =might= be reasonable for group surprise.

As to who can do what ... that is a lot more complicated with individual surprise. Your way is certainly 'better' for our group, but there is a different interpretation. That is: because they were 'set' for an 'ambush' ... the bad guys would all get their actions and we would not. =But= any attacker that attacks someone that did see them would not get advantage on their attack.

The former is, I think a bit more 'realistic' (at least in this situation since we were on the look out for trouble ... unlike the initial ambush on the road) while the latter seems to be more in keeping with the 'letter of the law'. However, one of the tenets of the new version is that the rules are guidelines now and not 'cast in stone', as it were, so you can, =I= think, go with either interpretation and be well within your GM rights =and= still adhering to the spirit of the game.

Does that make sense (whether you agree with it or not <g> )

The rules make it more than your first sentence, MikeD. They say if you are surprised you cannot move or act or react. So that kind of implies it has to be an all or nothing thing. Partial surprise (being surprised by some but not others) seems not to work well with that rule. After all, if you are surprised by some monsters but not others, then how does the rule "If you are surprised you cannot move, act or react" work in that case?

There is another way too, and I might use it, or at least leave it open for discussion.

You make a single "Group" Stealth roll for the monsters. You use whichever monster has the worst Stealth check in order to account for the fact that stealthier monsters would have a penalty for hanging out with less stealthy ones.

Then you compare the pc's =individual= PP against that monster group stealth check to see who is and is not surprised. Any pc whose PP is below the monster's group stealth check is surprised and cannot act. Those whose PP is above the monster group stealth check can see and attack anyone on their turn (with possible adjustments to AC for cover).

That seems to follow the rules.

Problem comes in if pcs are all stealthing too. But then I guess the party makes a group stealth check (again using worst stealth adjustment for the group) and you compare monsters individual PP against pc group stealth check to see which of them are surprised.

It gets messy quickly, though. Some pcs are surprised by some monsters but not others, and some monsters are surprised by some pcs but not others. Who gets to move/act and who doesn't?

Much cleaner to have a single group stealth roll for the side trying to sneak/hide, and individual PPs to see who is surprised. And if both are trying to stealth then you have both sides make a single group stealth roll (with worst adjustment from both sides) and whoever rolls highest has surprise over the other. Tie no one does. Perhaps if you don't win by at least 5 no one does?

Hmm. I am liking that last paragraph so far.

Thoughts?

Zeim,

Yes, that is the situation best illustrated by that initial 'ambush' (as I mentioned above <g> )

The 'group check' idea is certainly a reasonable option and it is certainly much easier to adjudicate <g> But I have to say that I think your version where the monsters that fail are seen and those that did not are still 'unknown' and vice versa.

The 'gets messy' part is why lots of GMs will opt for the group checks ... especially at the time limited setting of a convention, for example.

Lets look at the various options ...
1. Group vs group check and one group is surprised or no group is surprised.
2. Group vs group, but individuals can have advantage or not depending on how the individual perceptions succeeded (that is the option that I described)
3. Individual vs individual ... depending on who sees who ... which is what you initially were going with.

I think all three versions are justifiable. Pick which ever variation you are happy with. I don't have a problem with any of them. They are all reasonable <g>

The most realistic, in some sense, is #3.

A key quote from Stealth, hiding and you! A mini guide thread is:



In other words, it's really up to the DM to decide what happens no matter what the "rules" say. Vague rules give DM's the leeway to adjust the narration the way that they think it makes sense to them. So, whatever makes sense in DM's mind is how they should rule.

On the one hand it's frustrating when the DM has to explain every decision. On the other hand it's liberating to be able narrate.

Yeah. I think except for the error Neptune pointed out that once the person with Surprise (the Wolf in this case) exposes himself and attacks, he is fair game for whoever is left to go, it is the most realistic (if also the most complicated to adjudicate).

My issue, though, is what it lends itself to is this: The best tactic for the Wolf (presuming it wants to attack with no chance of it opening itself up to attack on Round 1), and presuming it has Stealth/Surprise on everyone, is to "Delay" and let everyone else go first. None can attack it as none can see it. Then, after all have gone, it gets to attack whoever it chooses, w/Advantage, and by that time (when it is finally revealing itself) the round is ending and we go back to the top of the Initiative order for Round 2. Yes, it will go last each round from then on, but that's the only down-side.

But perhaps that also is a realistic result? It stays hidden, watching and waiting to see how the initial battle plays out, then it pounces from hiding?

BTW, Bern is up in the "Z" thread.

First (because it came up earlier) I'm using the same individual stealth/surprise approach for this encounter but the tactical situation in the N-game is very different.

As for the wolf, you could roll a "hidden" DM intelligence check to see if the wolf picks up on that strategy. Otherwise you could determine that it resorts to the raw animal instinct to attack.

Well, I think my problem is that there is a slight difference to what MikeD said were the benefits of Surprise. Yes, you get to attack with Advantage, but the point about not being able to be targeted is the issue.

First that only applies until you act/attack. Once you reveal yourself you can be attacked, that means if you have initiative, and act, you effectively lose that benefit.

However what is not clear is the rule specifically say not only that you can't be targeted, but that a person who is surprised cannot act. That is a bigger thing. If you cannot act then it does not matter if your enemy reveals himself and attacks you. You cannot act, So even if he attacks you you cannot attack him back or even move. But how can you not be able to move/act against one foe yet still be able to move against another? I understand that you might be able to attack one enemy but not another, but moving is moving.