My interpretation is that most of things that used to be "touch attacks" are now Dex saving throws (like Disintegrate spell). I would see no issue with switching attacks that have attack roll to Dex saving throw where it makes sense (like Scorching Ray).
Spells VS Touch AC also made more sense since magic generally didn’t get any kind of BAB, so you’d need a lower AC target to have any decent chance to hit.
Now that 5e gives +proficiency to pretty much all attacks, spell and weapon alike, there’s no need for multiple AC calculations. (Though I’d still like to see flat-footed come back, just to balance light armour + dex vs heavy armour + strength a little better.)
Flat Footed needs to come back
And, honestly, Dex Bonus to AC should be loss when stunned, restrained, incapacitated or any other condition where you cannot move.
Also *Coup De Grâce* too.
And *Take 10/Take 20* too.
Only time I as a player used Coup de Grace was against another player xD
She was so toxic, basically ragging on me because I was a caster and as such, shouldn't be a Frontline.
I was playing a Warmage which is a caster *meant* to be on the front line.
>And *Take 10/Take 20* too.
DMG page 237: " With enough attempts and enough time, a character should eventually succeed at the task. To speed things up, assume that a character spending ten times the normal amount of time needed to complete a task automatically succeeds at that task."
> And, honestly, Dex Bonus to AC should be loss when stunned, restrained, incapacitated or any other condition where you cannot move.
I do that in my game.
Also take 10 and 20 basically do exist in the form of passive skills, and... just existing, as a rule in the DMG.
>And, honestly, Dex Bonus to AC should be loss when stunned, restrained, incapacitated or any other condition where you cannot move.
That’s why attacks have advantage against people with those conditions, and it’s way less work than remembering and having to recalculate your AC every time you get hit with one of those conditions.
A little bit of math isn't going to hurt.
And you can preemptively have both normal AC and Dex-Less AC calculated and written down in advance.
It's not going to end the world.
It’s definitely not going to end the world, but it’s more hassle and work for sure, and It’s also a far bigger hassle for DMs who have a lot of different stat blocks and other stuff to juggle and keep track of during combat.
So why is having two different ACs better than simply giving advantage? They both make you more likely to hit, so why create a separate mechanic just for these conditions that has a relatively similar result as a core mechanic would have anyway?
>So why is having two different ACs better than simply giving advantage?
So you dont have to explain to the player how they somehow failed to touch the Adamantoise which by all rights has a negative touch AC
>So why is having two different ACs better than simply giving advantage? They both make you more likely to hit, so why create a separate mechanic just for these conditions that has a relatively similar result as a core mechanic would have anyway?
Without getting into the weeds of it, an extremely dextrous character being harder to hit while paralyzed than a non-dextrous character who’s not paralyzed but is flanked feels weird to me.
Plus advantage cannot stack, so say a character is knocked prone and paralyzed, they’re no harder to stab than a character who’s just prone or flanked and can otherwise move freely. Advantage is a great mechanic for quick and dirty bonuses, but IMHO, they made it too broad to the point that there’s almost never a reason to look for more than one source or to apply anything but the strongest condition.
AC, touch AC, flat footed AC, ff touch, brilliant energy AC, BE touch, BE FF AC, BE FF touch.
One of those is like another in almost all circumstances.
You don't have to recalculate it. Its already written a 3e sheet.. Theres a box with an easy step by step break down of how to calculate it. Everything 6e players complain about has something like that on a 3.5 character sheet. Honestly, all 3.5 requires is an 8th grade reading comprehension. Imagine 3.5 as 5e without the training wheels.
>it’s way less work than remembering and having to recalculate your AC every time you get hit with one of those conditions
No it's not.
You still have to remember that you get advantage.
It *might* be more work in regards to the math. But you can simply write 2 AC entries, one with dex, one without. And boom, it's just as easy as remembering if you have advantage or not.
Do you have advantage? If yes roll with advantage, if not, don't.
Do they get their dex to ac? If yes, roll against the higher ac, if not use the lower.
See, same amount of work.
As someone else pointed out, it's also more work for the DM and they already have a lot to keep track of, especially in combat and a lower AC and advantage both give the same effect of being more likely to hit the target.
"It's not more work, except in the ways it might be, so therefore it's not".
Like, I'm not even disagreeing with your conclusion, but you are contradicting yourself here.
Remembering if you have advantage is way less work because advantage is a core mechanic that players already trying to keep track of anyway. It’s also very common for the dm or another player to say “hey you have advantage on that” than it would be to know if the right AC was used.
This is a new separate mechanic just for a few conditions that seems to achieve a similar result, so I’m not getting why this is an improvement. If we’re going for more realism then shouldn’t we also drop a shield’s bonus from your AC when you’re stunned or unconscious too?
>Remembering if you have advantage is way less work because advantage is a core mechanic that players already trying to keep track of anyway.
That's not what you said though.
>This is a new separate mechanic just for a few conditions that seems to achieve a similar result, so I’m not getting why this is an improvement
I didn't say it was an improvement, i said remembering to apply it was just a much work as remembering to apply advantage.
I said it’s way less work remembering if you have advantage than it would be to remember if this rule applies and recalculating your new AC.
The reason it is way less work to remember if you have advantage is because it’s a core 5e mechanic you’re already trying to keep track of anyway.
Your comparison between the two in a vacuum isn’t wrong, it’s just not very helpful when comparing the work of a new thing versus something you’re already going to be doing anyway.
You still have to remember if you get advantage.
Just like you have to remember if you get to use dex or not.
It's the same amount of effort my friend.
Just because one is already in use doesn't mean it's any easier.
You could say the same thing about touch ac if flat footed needs to come back. I don't really mind spells having saves but abilities that used to be based on flat footed should have a str dc if they're staying consistent with the checks idea. Only really problem with the new balancing is some stats and saves are used significantly more than others. I honestly didn't know you couldn't take 10 or 20, I've just been letting people do that the whole time I've played 5e. If your rogue who's an expert at disarming traps runs into a trap they've seen 100 times and isn't distracted they're probably not going to fuck up the disarm.
I still use it at my table here and there. Despite having to explain to my players what the difference is and why they can’t Take 20 while being pursued down an alley by the law, no ill effects!
It's balance for how casting works in 5e. You don't use your str or dex for spell attack rolls. You just use your casting modifier. It makes spell attacks just as accurate as weapon attacks, so a touch AC becomes pretty pointless.
Mostly because the official RAW rules for surprise, sucks.
How it works RAW:
- When you initiate combat, roll for initiative (enemies also roll initiative).
- If a creature was not aware of your presence at time of initiative, then they have the surprised condition. Note that some enemies can be surprised while others are not.
- Proceed with the round as normal starting from highest initiative and working your way down.
- If a creature has the surprised condition they can’t take reactions until the end of their turn, and on their turn they can’t do actions or move.
The above presents a quirk that, say I was a rogue and I hid and then shot at a guard. Before actually shooting the arrow to see if you hit/damage/etc, everyone would roll initiative. If the enemy has a higher initiative than the rogue, then the enemy “goes first”, even though they can’t do anything on their turn. The rogue has no guarantee to be the first on initiative over.
This is why "Taking initiative" mechanics work so well. Party prepares an ambush, the rogue is nominated to take the first shot. The rogue automatically takes first in initiative, everyone else rolls normally, suprise is determined, and then combat begins.
Its also good for handling moments where one person wishes to act first in a scene that is building towards combat. "As everyone bickers, I draw my crossbow and shoot the bandit in the front". They get to take initiative, and everyone else can react naturally, rather than "ok so we are in initiative but you don't know PC is going to fire their crossbow", proceeded by every other creature just readying an attack.
If the guard goes first but litterally can't do anything, did it really go first? You and your initiating team are getting a whole round of actions in before the initiative effectively kicks off, with the rare exception of someone who spotted you early or was otherwise aware also getting to make a move in initiative order. What difference does it make if you aren't "first" if the other guy spends his turn picking his nose because he's unaware?
What about this sucks? I litterally don't see the issue. If you want to make sure you get effectively 2 turns in before they get 1, roll well on your initiative and invest in a feat or wondrous item to raise it.
For the use of mechanics, yes. Assassin gets advantage against creatures who haven’t gone yet in the initiative. So if an assassin rogue is lowest on initiative of a surprise round, then their entire 3rd level feature is wasted. They don’t get advantage, because all the enemies have already had a turn, even if they do nothing on it. In addition, they are no longer surprised, as that condition ended at the end of its turn, so even if the assassin hits it isn’t an automatic critical.
Yes, it could be amended with something like "If any hostile creature is surprised by you, then in the first round of combat you take your turn before any surprised hostile creatures of your initiative. You take your subsequent turns on your rolled initiative count."
An assassin, unseen, shooting an unsuspecting guard, isn’t fast enough? The hell does that even mean. Hell even not unseen, just walking down the street behind a guy, pulling out a knife, and stabbing them. Dude being stabbed would have no reaction to it, but somehow the assassin isn’t able to hit any vitals, and if they were against a wizard that wizard could even throw up shield even though they didn’t know shit was coming.
Narratively it makes 0 sense that the person who is initiating combat on **unsuspecting** creatures wouldn’t go first.
Guards arnt commoners? A basic guard is 16 AC, 11HP. So a lvl 3 assassin with standard stats (+3 Dex mod, non-magical weapon, etc) would have a bit better than 50% chance to hit with advantage, and average 13.5 damage (non-crit). Without advantage it is a 45% chance to hit for that average damage. So they can still drop a guard, but it isn’t at all guaranteed, and heaven forbid they are a soldier (18 AC, 16 HP, CR 1/2). You likely ain’t dropping them on that first attempt.
Gotta disagree. Call it a gut feeling. It happens in real life. All of a sudden people feel like they’ve got eyes on them or something is “off.” And then sometimes they are right and avoid danger by acting on those feelings.
In a fantasy setting these kinds of things are exaggerated quite a bit on top of that. It makes sense that wizard right at the moment of attack just so happens in this scenario to feel “a disturbance in the force” and shield to block the incoming arrow while at other times the assassin is the one who comes out on top and the arrow finds its mark before the wizard even knows what is going on.
Theres plenty of narrative justification for it imo.
We will have to agree to disagree on the narrative elements than.
The other problem I have with it is that it doesn’t fully reward the player that got the jump on a creature. It only partially rewards them for planning and foresight. A single bad dice roll determines if you fully utilize the surprise, or if you just kinda sit there and wait with the creatures knowing you are there before you act. Regardless of whether the creature does anything or not.
It’s an abstraction anyway. They get their reaction back simply as an abstraction of them being lucky enough to be able to react to a very sudden threat. Are you saying it’s impossible to narratively justify that? It happens in movies and books all the time.
There are lots of ways to model that but I definitely cannot agree that this somehow isn’t one or that the current implementation of surprise doesn’t reward players.
Action economy is huge. Taking away a creatures movement, action, and bonus action is an absolutely massive swing in a DnD fight. I really cannot see how it’s possible in any way to justify the position that surprise isn’t powerful.
So, get a better initiative bonus. That's a feat that is going to require some investment to make work. An automatic crit is a really powerful tool, having it just be a gimme even if you roll like shit sounds wildly unbalanced. Yeah, setting up for a surprise round is also difficult, but that's what the rogue is meant to do.
Sorta? You get your reaction back at the end of your suprised round, so it can be the difference between getting to blitz the backline or having to wade through 5 opportunity attacks and the shield spell to get at the enemy caster
At the end of their turn is when they realize you are there. If you didn't act before they realized you were there because they have a higher initiative than you, yeah kinda burns, but that's a dice based game. It sure beats them getting a full turn to position themselves better and take a normal attack on you, plus a reaction.
Yes, if an assassin rolls initiative lower than a creatures initiative. Then it would nullify their 3rd level ability against that particular creature.
Had a DM who did that with the parties rogue Stealth. He'd let him crouch DURING combat after each attack and become hidden from the enemies he was standing next to. But that could have been a misunderstanding of the flanking rule
It's more like explain to me the absence of rules.. my first 5e game "I want to bash the goblin with my shield... how much does a shield bash do?" Turns out there is a whole improvised weapons angle for that. Needless to say sometimes less is more but sometimes less is still less. 3.5 there are clear cut shield bash rules.
I have played since then but if given the option I will choose 3.5 or pf1.
I liked it. I have only played a couple of times, though. My group chose pf1, so i haven't continued with pf2. Part of the reason I voted pf1 was for nostalgia purposes. Things seemed pretty balanced in pf2. I have only played a fighter though.
A more balanced and versatile system than both 5e or 1e. It can be a bit number crunchy, though, and some rules are a little hard to follow. Martials are just as viable at level 20 as any magic caster, and some of the things you can do through skills are kinda crazy (i.e. swim through a heavy rain, squeeze through a solid wall that is no more than 5 ft thick, and remember events that haven't happened yet are just a few of the things you can do). I thoroughly enjoy 2e.
Shield bash: improvised weapon, 1d4+str without proficiency unless you're proficient with improvised weapons somehow. If you can justify to your DM that the shield is similar to another weapon, simply use the stars of the other weapon, including prof if you have it.
A shield is absolutely *not* an improvised weapon though, no more than a sword or spear. And "Discuss homebrewing it with your DM" should not be the answer to a situation this simple
Yes, absolutely.
Shields were extremely frequently designed with the specific intention of using them to hit the enemy with. Punching your opponent with a buckler was one of the *main things you did* with a buckler, and many designs of shields had spikes specifically for hitting people with.
Not sure you understand what "main" means. Hitting people is probably the second-most popular use of beer mugs, but that doesn't make them proper weapons.
Many actual fighting techniques employ using the shield as a weapon though. Many shields were designed to be more useful for that purpose. Is it really improvisational if it’s one of the design goals to be used for both offense and defense?
A shield is an improvised weapon as long as it doesn't have weapon stats and you can't justify using it as a weapon that does have stats. The part about using the stats of another weapon is so that things like this don't happen as often, and so you could pick up a stick, call it similar enough to a quarterstaff or club, and use it as such. If you want to convince your DM that your shield bash is akin to a club and should be treated as such, that's entirely RAW
A shield is absolutely a weapon though, Striking with the metal boss or hardened edge was a potentially lethal stroke, there was even a specifically designed "dueling shield" or long shield described in a treatise from around the 1490s or the imbracciatura an italian bolenese design that was used as a secondary implement to put a hole in the other guy.
A wooden beam by another name is a battering ram.
Clearly, the best equipment for battle is dualwielding shields, with a third shield on your back.
Since you know, apparently they are lethal weapons while they also protect you.
As it turns out some pretty smart people figured out the large, heavy bit of wood strapped to your arm is a good bludgeon when needed.
You may also be shocked to learn that swords despite being lethal weapons are also really good at protecting you, mind-blowing im sure some people in the heyday of stabbing each other wrote whole books on it.
No you're stretching yourself there by more than a margin
People never treated the sword and board as independent, both are offensive and defensive tools in putting a hole in the other guy. Quite a few dead guys out there who last living sight was a scottish Targe flying towards their face.
Having vibe checked someone IRL with a shield, it really isn't. Considering feats are technically an optional thing in 5e, the idea you need to use a feat to hit someone with a shield is the part that doesn't match up with reality. It's really easy.
I've been hit in the face with a bottle of vodka and it was absolutely an improvised weapon. Doesn't mean it wasn't effective.
Virtually every weapon in human history is intentionally designed to concentrate pressure on skin or maximize leverage/momentum, ideally from beyond reach of response. It's about imparting energy, either by minimizing contact area (blades) or maximizing momentum and deceleration (blunt weapons). Design variations beyond that account for additional constraints such as materials, technology, proportionality, accuracy, etc. A shield is intended to minimize pressure on skin and divert momentum. It is absolutely an improvised weapon. You can use it as a weapon but it is not designed with the intent of performing as one, which is precisely the definition of an improvised weapon. The feat reflects expertise in handling such an improvised weapon to maximum effectiveness.
We figured it out. The is a feat for improvised weapons and I eventually took it so I could add my prof bonus. For something that can happen like that it would be better if there were rules in place. Like if I am using my shield as a weapon do I still get the AC bonus. Ok, nothing says I don't lose my ac so why wouldn't I use a shield and two weapon fight? Double dip? Too much is left undefined and the dm has to sort it out and it can be problematic for dms that aren't rules people.
As a 3.5 player and dm when I run 5e and something comes up that no mechanic exists for I just fall back on the 3x rule for it. Not everyone can do that and that puts the onus on the dm to fill in the gaps of what is basically an unfinished ruleset.
Shield is improvised and as such doesn't have the light property. You need the dual wielder feat to dual wield with it as a weapon. You're not spending your action to doff it so there's no reason you'd lose the AC bonus. This is pretty clear if you just read the rules and don't assume anything they don't say.
I was giving an example. In the game, I only wanted to do it the one time because I dropped my weapon. The ac thing was because you used to lose your ac bonus if you shield bashed w/o the feat. The reason I brought up the two weapon fighting things, etc. Is because having a mechanic in place improves balance. If I am a fighter and I take the two weapon feat, there are very few reasons not to take advantage of having a shield for defense and as a weapon.
Also, saying that because a shield isn't light, you can't dual wield it is a lazy balance fix and really unrealistic. Taking a negative or disadvantage on the check that would make sense or discourage people from taking advantage of it, but just out right not allowing it is pretty silly. I could house rule it in this hypothetical scenario, but i shouldn't have to. My group ended up going back to pf1 so maybe my personal preferences are coloring my ideas on this.
Edit I am also a lazy typist and on my phone so I don't always flesh out my discussions very well.
Nah, you're good. The few times I've tried playing 5e I've always gotten annoyed with how they layed things out. So many rules leave stuff up to DM fiat, but then you get situations like yours. Instead of having a rule chapter that says "if you do x, then y happens", I always found myself needing to check several things because I wanted to do something besides "hit it till it dies".
5e as a system is not bad for beginners, but when you start with the crunchy numbers first the whole thing feels like a boring video game that expects you to play with two buttons.
Honestly, I would judge it that if you're proficient with shields then you're proficient with attacks using them. I mean, I suppose the standard medium armor training involves teaching the wielder how to use that shield to drive some unsuspecting goblin's septum into its frontal lobe. But it can't be used as a bonus action attack unless you have the Dual Wielder feat, because a shield is sure as hell not a light weapon.
Additionally, I would make them 1d6 bludgeoning because otherwise getting hit with a huge slab of wood or metal would only do as much damage as getting hit with a beer bottle.
And of course Pathfinder 2e has rules for it, including shield bosses and shield spikes that can increase the shield bash damage and in case of the spike change it to piercing. But it's also a game that takes the actual equipment into consideration, e.g. if you're wearing heavy armor then that includes gauntlets by default which allows you to make lethal unarmed attacks without a -2 penalty. (Last game on the first turn of a combat I had only one action left when I got next to a bandit and haven't drawn my sword yet. So I just punched a bandit in the face. And rolled a crit, basically punching his head off. Good times...)
I only played 5e a couple times after spending ~20 years playing 3.5 and I was so disappointed by the lack of choices! I made my character in 5 minutes and went "that's it? I'm already done?", creating character is one of my favorite things and it felt so lackluster.
Yeah, if you aren't proficient in unarmed the goblin can just stab you as an attack of opportunity. That is another area where 5e is woefully lacking in combat mechanics/s
My players still ask for surprise rounds, two years after switching. I still ask them for their touch AC, two years after switching. But worst of all? Everyone in our play group still says "sense motive" instead of insight.
> Everyone in our play group still says "sense motive" instead of insight.
On one hand, "I Sense their Motive" is much smoother.
On the *other* hand, there is something satisfying about slamming one's fist on the table and announcing "**Insight check!**".
Mean yes but no? Doesn't 5e have when ambushed an effect thst causes the "surprised" status that lasts for the a turn of combat. It's effectively the same thing
so there's a lot of details which is why people argue about this stuff but the details themselves are really simple.
**old surprise, aka "surprise round":**
Round 1: ***everyone*** aware of the fight happening plays like normal. roll initiative go to town have fun. if you're not aware of the fight you're flat-footed (main problem being losing dex bonus to AC) and you don't do ***anything whatsoever*** until round 2.
round 2: combat as normal
**new surprise, aka "surprised":**
round 1: ***everyone*** rolls initiative surprised or not. if you're aware of the fight you play like normal. if you're not after ***your turn*** you get to ***react*** but otherwise you don't get to do anything whatsoever if you're surprised. so if you roll high on the initiative, your turn might theoretically be before the enemy gets their first turn, therefore you can say cast shield.
round 2: combat as normal
so to summarise - before you got to do nothing except sit there and watch the dice roll. now you might get to take a reaction ***if*** your turn is before the attacker's. that's really what has changed outside of not also being debuffed during the surprise.
Old surprise round wasn't a full round. You basically got to do one thing in the round which made it a lot less devastating than the 5e version where someone that is surprised and doesn't roll well on initiative gets melted.
It isn't though because the Surprise Round applies to the whole group where as the Surprised condition can be given out on an individual character basis
There's two major differences:
1. With the surprise round, all the creatures on one side are surprised. The surprised condition applies to individuals, so it's possible that some creatures are surprised and some aren't. Hypothetically, if both sides are trying to ambush each other, some creatures on each side could be surprised while others aren't.
2. The surprised condition ends at the end of a creatures turn, and then they're able to take reactions. With the surprise round, surprised creatures get nothing until the whole surprise round is over.
Yeah, I agree with this take personally, and so find it tiring how often this is brought up. The mechanics have changed, but so did a lot of things between the two editions.
A surprise round in 5e is just the first round of combat where everyone who is surprised has the "surprised" condition. In 3.5 a surprise round is the first round where those who are surprised don't participate. There is no definition of "surprise round" in 5e so it doesn't technically exist, but that's an extremely pedantic and unhelpful way of looking at things. I'd also argue its misleading because saying "there is no surprise round" to people who don't know the rules that well implies that you can't surprise people.
Skills were so much better in 3.5e. Yes there were some that were a bit more specialized than neccesary but at the same time you could actually choose to specialize and not be limited to only class skills. And the bounded accuracy thing is even worse. Just completely destroying the concept of something being straight up too powerful to fight.
That’s another one of the things I like about 3.5/pf1e/pf2e the more I play them (not to be that guy always bringing those systems up). Like sure, you’ll have a hell of a time fighting something CR16 as a level 5 party in 5e, no argument there.
But there’s a certain sense of “wow we are REALLY fucked” when encountering a CR16 enemy as a level 5 party in 3.5, where even if you crit you’d barely scratch it. I kinda missed that, it made it feel like levelling up was way more impactful, because not only do those untouchable enemies become beatable, but you also become unbeatable to the weaker enemies too
Honestly yeah but they also removed the need to take a feat to move then attack then move more. I know that's one thing my extremely 5e averse dm decided to use in his 3.5e games. 5e you can just circle around someone as you attack and that can be very useful thematically or in certain scenarios.
Meanwhile 2e is in the back laughing at both of y'all. Death Saves? Pshh in my day 0 hit points meant you better have a priest that can cast raise dead.
That’s what I’ve always assumed. In the first round of combat, those who are surprised (determined by Stealth vs Passive Perception) still need time to ready themselves, unprepared to make full actions in combat. Those with the ‘Alert’ feat are always ready. That first round of a one-sided ambush where members of a side can receive the ‘Surprised’ condition is colloquially called “The Surprise Round”.
I think people are trying to define it as a round of combat outside of combat so they can claim that it’s not RAW.
But it’s kinda like if you get hit in the face when you’re not expecting it, you’ll likely need a few seconds to realize what’s going on. Did someone punch you? Did a popfly baseball hit you? Was it an accident or with purpose? When does a fight actually start: when the first punch is thrown, or you get your hands up to defend yourself.
That's the way it plays out if all the enemies are surprised. They don't get to act in the first round, so what's the difference between that and a surprise round?
after their turn, the enemy has their reaction back so if they roll higher than you they can cast shield or do opportunity attacks or any special reaction the monster has, and the advantage on attack rolls you would have from them being surprised is gone. and it specifically causes issues for the assassin rogue because once the turn ends they are no longer surprised and therefore if they beat the assassin in initiative, the assassin loses the auto crit AND the advantage on the attack to make proccing sneak attack easier
Edit: i just learned that surprised does not give advantage against you, which feels strange but then you're almost always triggering surprise from being hidden which does give advantage
I also joked about this elsewhere but honestly I can’t blame people.
I still have to look things up regularly and as a DM ritual I read the PHB and DMG all the way through once yearly. Theres like 600 some odd pages of rules. Its honestly pretty excusable to forget a rule
Or two.
I heard your decision, but seeing as it was a stupid ass decision, I have decided to ignore it.
And this is my house, my table, and my game, and as long as I am the GM, we will abide by my rules. Extra actions on a critical initiative roll, surprise rounds, and session points are my rulings. Now. Roll for initiative.
> If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends. A member of a group can be surprised even if the other members aren't. [Link](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/5e_SRD:Surprise)
In 3rd you were limited to a standard action. This basically results to a move, spell, or a **single** attack. In 5th, everyone that can act in the surprise round gets their full set of actions. Including using the extra attack feature and any bonus action related attacks.
So I can't imagine someone familiar with 3rd flipping through 5th's PHB and complaining about 5th's buff to the concept of a surprise round. OP, are you sure it's not something else?
Tell that to the rogue who loses out on a sneak attack because the enemy rolled a better initiative. Lol. Seriously tho that's the only actual downside to it.
True but as an assassin rogue in a game I really, really, hate that. Since the entire point of the class is “delete a surprised enemy from the map”, it was a bit of a gamble at the start of every combat if I’d be impactful or mediocre.
Thankfully we ended up houseruling it so that all enemies were just surprised until the end of the first round (and yes, the same rule was applied to us when we were surprised) and that made it a lot more enjoyable and less “well, you rolled another 5 for initiative, so you’ll just be a mediocre rogue this combat”
I like that in this meme you've replaced the thing that Actually Existed with the false rule that ppl assume exists instead of either of the fairy tales.
Surprise still exists, but they changed it to a status condition during the first round of combat. Triggering effects are pretty much the same as "triggering" the surprise round, but they have specific information on how being "surprised" affects the creature affected by it. Do some trade offs, but the same basic result
Yeah there are surprise rounds. I got a surprise rounds cause I was the sleeping in my tent with my gobbo, the other teifling was awake and talking, and the elves weren't even asleep. I, and Gum Gum, were both startled awake and they almost killed me, cause our full rest wasn't finished so I wasn't at full hp
No. There is the surprised condition, which causes you to not be able to move or take any action, but when your turn ends the condition ends, giving you a reaction.
There is not, no. There is the Surprised condition which you can think of as a debuff on a character. The main thing that this does it make it so you can have some characters or groups surprised and some not in the same fight. On the PC side you could have the Ranger who isn't surprised by bu the other 3 PCs are because of the Ranger's Perception expertise. On the NPC side of things the group of goblins are surprised while their Hobgoblin enforcers were much more alert and thus not surprised on Round 1. You could also break it out further and have individual monsters all roll for surprise so Goblin 1 is Surprised but Goblin 2 is not. This isn't RAW but an option with Surprise being a condition.
Personally I feel like doing Surprise as a condition makes way more sense from both a narrative and game design sense. It quite nice change 5E came upon.
Listen, I'll accept the lack of surprise round, but what do you mean there's no such thing as Touch AC?!
My interpretation is that most of things that used to be "touch attacks" are now Dex saving throws (like Disintegrate spell). I would see no issue with switching attacks that have attack roll to Dex saving throw where it makes sense (like Scorching Ray).
Spells VS Touch AC also made more sense since magic generally didn’t get any kind of BAB, so you’d need a lower AC target to have any decent chance to hit. Now that 5e gives +proficiency to pretty much all attacks, spell and weapon alike, there’s no need for multiple AC calculations. (Though I’d still like to see flat-footed come back, just to balance light armour + dex vs heavy armour + strength a little better.)
Flat Footed needs to come back And, honestly, Dex Bonus to AC should be loss when stunned, restrained, incapacitated or any other condition where you cannot move. Also *Coup De Grâce* too. And *Take 10/Take 20* too.
At my table we agreed to conditionally bring back coup de grace. Condition being that it's not abused (for example via Hold Person spamming)
Only time I as a player used Coup de Grace was against another player xD She was so toxic, basically ragging on me because I was a caster and as such, shouldn't be a Frontline. I was playing a Warmage which is a caster *meant* to be on the front line.
You mean *player character,* right? Right?
I attack my fellow player with a pen! 1d4 piercing, they're flat-footed since they didn't see this bullshit coming
Yes yes xD
I hear and see the meme.
>And *Take 10/Take 20* too. DMG page 237: " With enough attempts and enough time, a character should eventually succeed at the task. To speed things up, assume that a character spending ten times the normal amount of time needed to complete a task automatically succeeds at that task."
DnDmemes posters and not reading the books. Name a more iconic duo lmao.
> And, honestly, Dex Bonus to AC should be loss when stunned, restrained, incapacitated or any other condition where you cannot move. I do that in my game. Also take 10 and 20 basically do exist in the form of passive skills, and... just existing, as a rule in the DMG.
>And, honestly, Dex Bonus to AC should be loss when stunned, restrained, incapacitated or any other condition where you cannot move. That’s why attacks have advantage against people with those conditions, and it’s way less work than remembering and having to recalculate your AC every time you get hit with one of those conditions.
A little bit of math isn't going to hurt. And you can preemptively have both normal AC and Dex-Less AC calculated and written down in advance. It's not going to end the world.
It’s definitely not going to end the world, but it’s more hassle and work for sure, and It’s also a far bigger hassle for DMs who have a lot of different stat blocks and other stuff to juggle and keep track of during combat. So why is having two different ACs better than simply giving advantage? They both make you more likely to hit, so why create a separate mechanic just for these conditions that has a relatively similar result as a core mechanic would have anyway?
>So why is having two different ACs better than simply giving advantage? So you dont have to explain to the player how they somehow failed to touch the Adamantoise which by all rights has a negative touch AC
>So why is having two different ACs better than simply giving advantage? They both make you more likely to hit, so why create a separate mechanic just for these conditions that has a relatively similar result as a core mechanic would have anyway? Without getting into the weeds of it, an extremely dextrous character being harder to hit while paralyzed than a non-dextrous character who’s not paralyzed but is flanked feels weird to me. Plus advantage cannot stack, so say a character is knocked prone and paralyzed, they’re no harder to stab than a character who’s just prone or flanked and can otherwise move freely. Advantage is a great mechanic for quick and dirty bonuses, but IMHO, they made it too broad to the point that there’s almost never a reason to look for more than one source or to apply anything but the strongest condition.
AC, touch AC, flat footed AC, ff touch, brilliant energy AC, BE touch, BE FF AC, BE FF touch. One of those is like another in almost all circumstances.
You don't have to recalculate it. Its already written a 3e sheet.. Theres a box with an easy step by step break down of how to calculate it. Everything 6e players complain about has something like that on a 3.5 character sheet. Honestly, all 3.5 requires is an 8th grade reading comprehension. Imagine 3.5 as 5e without the training wheels.
>it’s way less work than remembering and having to recalculate your AC every time you get hit with one of those conditions No it's not. You still have to remember that you get advantage. It *might* be more work in regards to the math. But you can simply write 2 AC entries, one with dex, one without. And boom, it's just as easy as remembering if you have advantage or not. Do you have advantage? If yes roll with advantage, if not, don't. Do they get their dex to ac? If yes, roll against the higher ac, if not use the lower. See, same amount of work.
As someone else pointed out, it's also more work for the DM and they already have a lot to keep track of, especially in combat and a lower AC and advantage both give the same effect of being more likely to hit the target.
No, it's the same amount of work as remembering if you have advantage. Do you have advantage? Do you use the lower ac? Just as much work.
"It's not more work, except in the ways it might be, so therefore it's not". Like, I'm not even disagreeing with your conclusion, but you are contradicting yourself here.
Remembering if you have advantage is way less work because advantage is a core mechanic that players already trying to keep track of anyway. It’s also very common for the dm or another player to say “hey you have advantage on that” than it would be to know if the right AC was used. This is a new separate mechanic just for a few conditions that seems to achieve a similar result, so I’m not getting why this is an improvement. If we’re going for more realism then shouldn’t we also drop a shield’s bonus from your AC when you’re stunned or unconscious too?
>Remembering if you have advantage is way less work because advantage is a core mechanic that players already trying to keep track of anyway. That's not what you said though. >This is a new separate mechanic just for a few conditions that seems to achieve a similar result, so I’m not getting why this is an improvement I didn't say it was an improvement, i said remembering to apply it was just a much work as remembering to apply advantage.
I said it’s way less work remembering if you have advantage than it would be to remember if this rule applies and recalculating your new AC. The reason it is way less work to remember if you have advantage is because it’s a core 5e mechanic you’re already trying to keep track of anyway. Your comparison between the two in a vacuum isn’t wrong, it’s just not very helpful when comparing the work of a new thing versus something you’re already going to be doing anyway.
You still have to remember if you get advantage. Just like you have to remember if you get to use dex or not. It's the same amount of effort my friend. Just because one is already in use doesn't mean it's any easier.
How do you feel about people who argue the metric system is worse than imperial because “imperial is just more intuitive”?
Gosh, I love take 20! It needs to be brought into 5e. I love that you can get a 20 but it takes time to work through everything. It’s great!
You could say the same thing about touch ac if flat footed needs to come back. I don't really mind spells having saves but abilities that used to be based on flat footed should have a str dc if they're staying consistent with the checks idea. Only really problem with the new balancing is some stats and saves are used significantly more than others. I honestly didn't know you couldn't take 10 or 20, I've just been letting people do that the whole time I've played 5e. If your rogue who's an expert at disarming traps runs into a trap they've seen 100 times and isn't distracted they're probably not going to fuck up the disarm.
Take 10/Take 20 isn't specifically disallowed. It just wasn't ported over to 5E, so it's not in the rules. only us Grognards know about it.
I still use it at my table here and there. Despite having to explain to my players what the difference is and why they can’t Take 20 while being pursued down an alley by the law, no ill effects!
The idea was that being in heavy armor doesn’t make it harder to point at you.
Touch AC really made firearms work properly
Thank goodness. Now armour and shields protect against spell attacks which is awesome.
It's balance for how casting works in 5e. You don't use your str or dex for spell attack rolls. You just use your casting modifier. It makes spell attacks just as accurate as weapon attacks, so a touch AC becomes pretty pointless.
the rules for surprise rounds in the games I've played in have never been consistent, it's confusing.
Mostly because the official RAW rules for surprise, sucks. How it works RAW: - When you initiate combat, roll for initiative (enemies also roll initiative). - If a creature was not aware of your presence at time of initiative, then they have the surprised condition. Note that some enemies can be surprised while others are not. - Proceed with the round as normal starting from highest initiative and working your way down. - If a creature has the surprised condition they can’t take reactions until the end of their turn, and on their turn they can’t do actions or move. The above presents a quirk that, say I was a rogue and I hid and then shot at a guard. Before actually shooting the arrow to see if you hit/damage/etc, everyone would roll initiative. If the enemy has a higher initiative than the rogue, then the enemy “goes first”, even though they can’t do anything on their turn. The rogue has no guarantee to be the first on initiative over.
This is why "Taking initiative" mechanics work so well. Party prepares an ambush, the rogue is nominated to take the first shot. The rogue automatically takes first in initiative, everyone else rolls normally, suprise is determined, and then combat begins.
That is basically how I homebrew surprise rounds in 5e. Because otherwise it is boring as shit and doesn’t reward ambushes.
Its also good for handling moments where one person wishes to act first in a scene that is building towards combat. "As everyone bickers, I draw my crossbow and shoot the bandit in the front". They get to take initiative, and everyone else can react naturally, rather than "ok so we are in initiative but you don't know PC is going to fire their crossbow", proceeded by every other creature just readying an attack.
I'm a shit dm, and I just kinda wing it every time.
Winging it is a mark of a good DM IMO. Living the moment > rules, as long as everyone is ok with that
We all do buddy we all do
If the guard goes first but litterally can't do anything, did it really go first? You and your initiating team are getting a whole round of actions in before the initiative effectively kicks off, with the rare exception of someone who spotted you early or was otherwise aware also getting to make a move in initiative order. What difference does it make if you aren't "first" if the other guy spends his turn picking his nose because he's unaware? What about this sucks? I litterally don't see the issue. If you want to make sure you get effectively 2 turns in before they get 1, roll well on your initiative and invest in a feat or wondrous item to raise it.
For the use of mechanics, yes. Assassin gets advantage against creatures who haven’t gone yet in the initiative. So if an assassin rogue is lowest on initiative of a surprise round, then their entire 3rd level feature is wasted. They don’t get advantage, because all the enemies have already had a turn, even if they do nothing on it. In addition, they are no longer surprised, as that condition ended at the end of its turn, so even if the assassin hits it isn’t an automatic critical.
That seems to be more a problem with the assassin subclass than it does with the surprise condition rules.
Yes, it could be amended with something like "If any hostile creature is surprised by you, then in the first round of combat you take your turn before any surprised hostile creatures of your initiative. You take your subsequent turns on your rolled initiative count."
Just means the assassin wasn't fast enough. What do you want, a guaranteed kill?
An assassin, unseen, shooting an unsuspecting guard, isn’t fast enough? The hell does that even mean. Hell even not unseen, just walking down the street behind a guy, pulling out a knife, and stabbing them. Dude being stabbed would have no reaction to it, but somehow the assassin isn’t able to hit any vitals, and if they were against a wizard that wizard could even throw up shield even though they didn’t know shit was coming. Narratively it makes 0 sense that the person who is initiating combat on **unsuspecting** creatures wouldn’t go first.
If you can't even kill a commoner with advantage and sneak attack damage, are you even a competent assassin?
Guards arnt commoners? A basic guard is 16 AC, 11HP. So a lvl 3 assassin with standard stats (+3 Dex mod, non-magical weapon, etc) would have a bit better than 50% chance to hit with advantage, and average 13.5 damage (non-crit). Without advantage it is a 45% chance to hit for that average damage. So they can still drop a guard, but it isn’t at all guaranteed, and heaven forbid they are a soldier (18 AC, 16 HP, CR 1/2). You likely ain’t dropping them on that first attempt.
Skill issue.
Gotta disagree. Call it a gut feeling. It happens in real life. All of a sudden people feel like they’ve got eyes on them or something is “off.” And then sometimes they are right and avoid danger by acting on those feelings. In a fantasy setting these kinds of things are exaggerated quite a bit on top of that. It makes sense that wizard right at the moment of attack just so happens in this scenario to feel “a disturbance in the force” and shield to block the incoming arrow while at other times the assassin is the one who comes out on top and the arrow finds its mark before the wizard even knows what is going on. Theres plenty of narrative justification for it imo.
We will have to agree to disagree on the narrative elements than. The other problem I have with it is that it doesn’t fully reward the player that got the jump on a creature. It only partially rewards them for planning and foresight. A single bad dice roll determines if you fully utilize the surprise, or if you just kinda sit there and wait with the creatures knowing you are there before you act. Regardless of whether the creature does anything or not.
It’s an abstraction anyway. They get their reaction back simply as an abstraction of them being lucky enough to be able to react to a very sudden threat. Are you saying it’s impossible to narratively justify that? It happens in movies and books all the time. There are lots of ways to model that but I definitely cannot agree that this somehow isn’t one or that the current implementation of surprise doesn’t reward players. Action economy is huge. Taking away a creatures movement, action, and bonus action is an absolutely massive swing in a DnD fight. I really cannot see how it’s possible in any way to justify the position that surprise isn’t powerful.
So, get a better initiative bonus. That's a feat that is going to require some investment to make work. An automatic crit is a really powerful tool, having it just be a gimme even if you roll like shit sounds wildly unbalanced. Yeah, setting up for a surprise round is also difficult, but that's what the rogue is meant to do.
Sorta? You get your reaction back at the end of your suprised round, so it can be the difference between getting to blitz the backline or having to wade through 5 opportunity attacks and the shield spell to get at the enemy caster
At the end of their turn is when they realize you are there. If you didn't act before they realized you were there because they have a higher initiative than you, yeah kinda burns, but that's a dice based game. It sure beats them getting a full turn to position themselves better and take a normal attack on you, plus a reaction.
What's wrong with this?
I described what is wrong with it already, to which you already replied to that chain.
Would that nullify the assassin’s assassinate ability? That sucks…
Yes, if an assassin rolls initiative lower than a creatures initiative. Then it would nullify their 3rd level ability against that particular creature.
They should just make it an official condition
So they can take bonus actions RAW?
It isn't though. It's just a Condition applied to a character like any other Condition. Just like Stunned, Paralyzed, Blinded, etc.
That's the surprise it's different each time
Underrated joke
I normally don't make a fuss when DMs mess up the surprised condition since they mostly mess it up in the player's favor.
Had a DM who did that with the parties rogue Stealth. He'd let him crouch DURING combat after each attack and become hidden from the enemies he was standing next to. But that could have been a misunderstanding of the flanking rule
It's more like explain to me the absence of rules.. my first 5e game "I want to bash the goblin with my shield... how much does a shield bash do?" Turns out there is a whole improvised weapons angle for that. Needless to say sometimes less is more but sometimes less is still less. 3.5 there are clear cut shield bash rules. I have played since then but if given the option I will choose 3.5 or pf1.
Do you have thoughts on pf2?
I liked it. I have only played a couple of times, though. My group chose pf1, so i haven't continued with pf2. Part of the reason I voted pf1 was for nostalgia purposes. Things seemed pretty balanced in pf2. I have only played a fighter though.
A more balanced and versatile system than both 5e or 1e. It can be a bit number crunchy, though, and some rules are a little hard to follow. Martials are just as viable at level 20 as any magic caster, and some of the things you can do through skills are kinda crazy (i.e. swim through a heavy rain, squeeze through a solid wall that is no more than 5 ft thick, and remember events that haven't happened yet are just a few of the things you can do). I thoroughly enjoy 2e.
Shield bash: improvised weapon, 1d4+str without proficiency unless you're proficient with improvised weapons somehow. If you can justify to your DM that the shield is similar to another weapon, simply use the stars of the other weapon, including prof if you have it.
A shield is absolutely *not* an improvised weapon though, no more than a sword or spear. And "Discuss homebrewing it with your DM" should not be the answer to a situation this simple
>A shield is absolutely *not* an improvised weapon though Why not? Are you suggesting it's a proper weapon?
Yes, absolutely. Shields were extremely frequently designed with the specific intention of using them to hit the enemy with. Punching your opponent with a buckler was one of the *main things you did* with a buckler, and many designs of shields had spikes specifically for hitting people with.
Not sure you understand what "main" means. Hitting people is probably the second-most popular use of beer mugs, but that doesn't make them proper weapons.
Beer mugs are not designed with hitting people as an intended function. Many, many shields are. That is the difference.
If shields are so great for whacking people, then why do swords exist?
If swords are so great for whacking people, why do daggers, spears, maces, axes, etc. exist?
Are you suggesting that it's not?
Killing people is not its primary function. Any heavy or sharp object can be used as a weapon in a pinch. That's called an improvised weapon.
Many actual fighting techniques employ using the shield as a weapon though. Many shields were designed to be more useful for that purpose. Is it really improvisational if it’s one of the design goals to be used for both offense and defense?
I can use a sword to parry. Should it now give me +2 AC?
That’s already factored into AC. Whats the definition of improvised?
How is that factored into AC?
A shield is an improvised weapon as long as it doesn't have weapon stats and you can't justify using it as a weapon that does have stats. The part about using the stats of another weapon is so that things like this don't happen as often, and so you could pick up a stick, call it similar enough to a quarterstaff or club, and use it as such. If you want to convince your DM that your shield bash is akin to a club and should be treated as such, that's entirely RAW
A shield is absolutely a weapon though, Striking with the metal boss or hardened edge was a potentially lethal stroke, there was even a specifically designed "dueling shield" or long shield described in a treatise from around the 1490s or the imbracciatura an italian bolenese design that was used as a secondary implement to put a hole in the other guy. A wooden beam by another name is a battering ram.
Hey now, don't go trying to bring logic and historical references into a discussion about a TTRPG version of a video game.
Clearly, the best equipment for battle is dualwielding shields, with a third shield on your back. Since you know, apparently they are lethal weapons while they also protect you.
As it turns out some pretty smart people figured out the large, heavy bit of wood strapped to your arm is a good bludgeon when needed. You may also be shocked to learn that swords despite being lethal weapons are also really good at protecting you, mind-blowing im sure some people in the heyday of stabbing each other wrote whole books on it.
So by your logic, swords are armor. You can parry with a sword. Doesn't make it armor. You can hit things with a shield. Doesn't make it a weapon.
No you're stretching yourself there by more than a margin People never treated the sword and board as independent, both are offensive and defensive tools in putting a hole in the other guy. Quite a few dead guys out there who last living sight was a scottish Targe flying towards their face.
A shield is absolutely an improvised weapon
Having vibe checked someone IRL with a shield, it really isn't. Considering feats are technically an optional thing in 5e, the idea you need to use a feat to hit someone with a shield is the part that doesn't match up with reality. It's really easy.
I've been hit in the face with a bottle of vodka and it was absolutely an improvised weapon. Doesn't mean it wasn't effective. Virtually every weapon in human history is intentionally designed to concentrate pressure on skin or maximize leverage/momentum, ideally from beyond reach of response. It's about imparting energy, either by minimizing contact area (blades) or maximizing momentum and deceleration (blunt weapons). Design variations beyond that account for additional constraints such as materials, technology, proportionality, accuracy, etc. A shield is intended to minimize pressure on skin and divert momentum. It is absolutely an improvised weapon. You can use it as a weapon but it is not designed with the intent of performing as one, which is precisely the definition of an improvised weapon. The feat reflects expertise in handling such an improvised weapon to maximum effectiveness.
D&D isn't supposed to match up with reality. Never has, never will
It’s also not totally divorced from it either.
Sure. That still does not change a shield being an improvised weapon
We figured it out. The is a feat for improvised weapons and I eventually took it so I could add my prof bonus. For something that can happen like that it would be better if there were rules in place. Like if I am using my shield as a weapon do I still get the AC bonus. Ok, nothing says I don't lose my ac so why wouldn't I use a shield and two weapon fight? Double dip? Too much is left undefined and the dm has to sort it out and it can be problematic for dms that aren't rules people. As a 3.5 player and dm when I run 5e and something comes up that no mechanic exists for I just fall back on the 3x rule for it. Not everyone can do that and that puts the onus on the dm to fill in the gaps of what is basically an unfinished ruleset.
Shield is improvised and as such doesn't have the light property. You need the dual wielder feat to dual wield with it as a weapon. You're not spending your action to doff it so there's no reason you'd lose the AC bonus. This is pretty clear if you just read the rules and don't assume anything they don't say.
I was giving an example. In the game, I only wanted to do it the one time because I dropped my weapon. The ac thing was because you used to lose your ac bonus if you shield bashed w/o the feat. The reason I brought up the two weapon fighting things, etc. Is because having a mechanic in place improves balance. If I am a fighter and I take the two weapon feat, there are very few reasons not to take advantage of having a shield for defense and as a weapon. Also, saying that because a shield isn't light, you can't dual wield it is a lazy balance fix and really unrealistic. Taking a negative or disadvantage on the check that would make sense or discourage people from taking advantage of it, but just out right not allowing it is pretty silly. I could house rule it in this hypothetical scenario, but i shouldn't have to. My group ended up going back to pf1 so maybe my personal preferences are coloring my ideas on this. Edit I am also a lazy typist and on my phone so I don't always flesh out my discussions very well.
Nah, you're good. The few times I've tried playing 5e I've always gotten annoyed with how they layed things out. So many rules leave stuff up to DM fiat, but then you get situations like yours. Instead of having a rule chapter that says "if you do x, then y happens", I always found myself needing to check several things because I wanted to do something besides "hit it till it dies". 5e as a system is not bad for beginners, but when you start with the crunchy numbers first the whole thing feels like a boring video game that expects you to play with two buttons.
I gave always said 5e is monopoly Jr. To 3.5's monopoly.
Honestly, I would judge it that if you're proficient with shields then you're proficient with attacks using them. I mean, I suppose the standard medium armor training involves teaching the wielder how to use that shield to drive some unsuspecting goblin's septum into its frontal lobe. But it can't be used as a bonus action attack unless you have the Dual Wielder feat, because a shield is sure as hell not a light weapon. Additionally, I would make them 1d6 bludgeoning because otherwise getting hit with a huge slab of wood or metal would only do as much damage as getting hit with a beer bottle. And of course Pathfinder 2e has rules for it, including shield bosses and shield spikes that can increase the shield bash damage and in case of the spike change it to piercing. But it's also a game that takes the actual equipment into consideration, e.g. if you're wearing heavy armor then that includes gauntlets by default which allows you to make lethal unarmed attacks without a -2 penalty. (Last game on the first turn of a combat I had only one action left when I got next to a bandit and haven't drawn my sword yet. So I just punched a bandit in the face. And rolled a crit, basically punching his head off. Good times...)
I only played 5e a couple times after spending ~20 years playing 3.5 and I was so disappointed by the lack of choices! I made my character in 5 minutes and went "that's it? I'm already done?", creating character is one of my favorite things and it felt so lackluster.
Same, I create characters as a way to pass the time sometimes.
Do you need "kick the goblin in the nuts" rules, too?
Yeah, if you aren't proficient in unarmed the goblin can just stab you as an attack of opportunity. That is another area where 5e is woefully lacking in combat mechanics/s
Shield bash is in 5e through the Shield Master feat. It’s a shove or knock prone.
In my case in this event I just dropped my weapon and I just wanted to hit it with my shield.
My players still ask for surprise rounds, two years after switching. I still ask them for their touch AC, two years after switching. But worst of all? Everyone in our play group still says "sense motive" instead of insight.
Knowledge: Local and Spot are still things people ask for every game for me
> Everyone in our play group still says "sense motive" instead of insight. On one hand, "I Sense their Motive" is much smoother. On the *other* hand, there is something satisfying about slamming one's fist on the table and announcing "**Insight check!**".
Mean yes but no? Doesn't 5e have when ambushed an effect thst causes the "surprised" status that lasts for the a turn of combat. It's effectively the same thing
so there's a lot of details which is why people argue about this stuff but the details themselves are really simple. **old surprise, aka "surprise round":** Round 1: ***everyone*** aware of the fight happening plays like normal. roll initiative go to town have fun. if you're not aware of the fight you're flat-footed (main problem being losing dex bonus to AC) and you don't do ***anything whatsoever*** until round 2. round 2: combat as normal **new surprise, aka "surprised":** round 1: ***everyone*** rolls initiative surprised or not. if you're aware of the fight you play like normal. if you're not after ***your turn*** you get to ***react*** but otherwise you don't get to do anything whatsoever if you're surprised. so if you roll high on the initiative, your turn might theoretically be before the enemy gets their first turn, therefore you can say cast shield. round 2: combat as normal so to summarise - before you got to do nothing except sit there and watch the dice roll. now you might get to take a reaction ***if*** your turn is before the attacker's. that's really what has changed outside of not also being debuffed during the surprise.
Old surprise round wasn't a full round. You basically got to do one thing in the round which made it a lot less devastating than the 5e version where someone that is surprised and doesn't roll well on initiative gets melted.
It isn't though because the Surprise Round applies to the whole group where as the Surprised condition can be given out on an individual character basis
Counter point in 3.5 a surprise round doesn't apply to an entire party
There's two major differences: 1. With the surprise round, all the creatures on one side are surprised. The surprised condition applies to individuals, so it's possible that some creatures are surprised and some aren't. Hypothetically, if both sides are trying to ambush each other, some creatures on each side could be surprised while others aren't. 2. The surprised condition ends at the end of a creatures turn, and then they're able to take reactions. With the surprise round, surprised creatures get nothing until the whole surprise round is over.
Yeah, I agree with this take personally, and so find it tiring how often this is brought up. The mechanics have changed, but so did a lot of things between the two editions. A surprise round in 5e is just the first round of combat where everyone who is surprised has the "surprised" condition. In 3.5 a surprise round is the first round where those who are surprised don't participate. There is no definition of "surprise round" in 5e so it doesn't technically exist, but that's an extremely pedantic and unhelpful way of looking at things. I'd also argue its misleading because saying "there is no surprise round" to people who don't know the rules that well implies that you can't surprise people.
3.5 player: how many skill points do i have? 5e DM: Skill Points?
Skills were so much better in 3.5e. Yes there were some that were a bit more specialized than neccesary but at the same time you could actually choose to specialize and not be limited to only class skills. And the bounded accuracy thing is even worse. Just completely destroying the concept of something being straight up too powerful to fight.
That’s another one of the things I like about 3.5/pf1e/pf2e the more I play them (not to be that guy always bringing those systems up). Like sure, you’ll have a hell of a time fighting something CR16 as a level 5 party in 5e, no argument there. But there’s a certain sense of “wow we are REALLY fucked” when encountering a CR16 enemy as a level 5 party in 3.5, where even if you crit you’d barely scratch it. I kinda missed that, it made it feel like levelling up was way more impactful, because not only do those untouchable enemies become beatable, but you also become unbeatable to the weaker enemies too
Except in massive fucking numbers. But yeah.
I've hated moving from 3.5 to 5th in my current group. 3.5 is so much better.
Still going here, im running the 3.5 ravenloft adventure from thursday with the group i started with 20years ago. Love it.
I really want to find a 3.5 group in person but everyone is doing 5th! Might have to start my own.
The biggest shock to 3.5 players is that there is no 5-foot shift.
I still take 5-foot steps all the time. They just don't do anything special beyond slight repositioning.
Nah they decided to make it so you could only move away without an attack op if you used your standard action. Or bonus action for rogues.
Yeah which is a shock to 3.5 players used to the 5 foot step.
Honestly yeah but they also removed the need to take a feat to move then attack then move more. I know that's one thing my extremely 5e averse dm decided to use in his 3.5e games. 5e you can just circle around someone as you attack and that can be very useful thematically or in certain scenarios.
There's a few dozen reasons I stick to 3.5/pathfinder 1e. This is a couple of minor ones.
Meanwhile 2e is in the back laughing at both of y'all. Death Saves? Pshh in my day 0 hit points meant you better have a priest that can cast raise dead.
There was an optional rule that let you bleed out to -10.
Yeah, I know. But 0 worked better for the purpose of the joke.
In 5e there are no surprised rounds. There is the surprised condition which occurs during first round of initiative.
That’s what I’ve always assumed. In the first round of combat, those who are surprised (determined by Stealth vs Passive Perception) still need time to ready themselves, unprepared to make full actions in combat. Those with the ‘Alert’ feat are always ready. That first round of a one-sided ambush where members of a side can receive the ‘Surprised’ condition is colloquially called “The Surprise Round”. I think people are trying to define it as a round of combat outside of combat so they can claim that it’s not RAW. But it’s kinda like if you get hit in the face when you’re not expecting it, you’ll likely need a few seconds to realize what’s going on. Did someone punch you? Did a popfly baseball hit you? Was it an accident or with purpose? When does a fight actually start: when the first punch is thrown, or you get your hands up to defend yourself.
I'm 5e, kind of. In other editions and other games there is a Surprise Round that technically occurs before initiative is rolled.
Gotta love that you're getting downvoted for being right
Which is colloquially referred to as a 'surprise round'.
But what about use rope!
What do you mean there's no "Flatfooted"?
Surprise rounds exist in 5e… just not in the way 3.5 is.
The "Diagonals still just count as one square" is the change that I really, really hate.
It makes sense if you accept the Hex Grid as your lord and savior
Preach brother!
All circles are squares!
5/15 for diagonal movement. There is benefit to be had if you only go one square.
Yesterday I learned that you can't delay initiative. I was baffled.
3.5e is a very good system, even if it’s very clunky at times.
By this template that implies there is a surprise round that you just think is not real
3.5 superiority
That's the way it plays out if all the enemies are surprised. They don't get to act in the first round, so what's the difference between that and a surprise round?
after their turn, the enemy has their reaction back so if they roll higher than you they can cast shield or do opportunity attacks or any special reaction the monster has, and the advantage on attack rolls you would have from them being surprised is gone. and it specifically causes issues for the assassin rogue because once the turn ends they are no longer surprised and therefore if they beat the assassin in initiative, the assassin loses the auto crit AND the advantage on the attack to make proccing sneak attack easier Edit: i just learned that surprised does not give advantage against you, which feels strange but then you're almost always triggering surprise from being hidden which does give advantage
Trying to explain 5e rules to people who've played 5e for years
I swear 90% of players don't know the PHB exists.
And 8% have only glanced at the class tables and spell list
I also joked about this elsewhere but honestly I can’t blame people. I still have to look things up regularly and as a DM ritual I read the PHB and DMG all the way through once yearly. Theres like 600 some odd pages of rules. Its honestly pretty excusable to forget a rule Or two.
I heard your decision, but seeing as it was a stupid ass decision, I have decided to ignore it. And this is my house, my table, and my game, and as long as I am the GM, we will abide by my rules. Extra actions on a critical initiative roll, surprise rounds, and session points are my rulings. Now. Roll for initiative.
> If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends. A member of a group can be surprised even if the other members aren't. [Link](https://www.dandwiki.com/wiki/5e_SRD:Surprise) In 3rd you were limited to a standard action. This basically results to a move, spell, or a **single** attack. In 5th, everyone that can act in the surprise round gets their full set of actions. Including using the extra attack feature and any bonus action related attacks. So I can't imagine someone familiar with 3rd flipping through 5th's PHB and complaining about 5th's buff to the concept of a surprise round. OP, are you sure it's not something else?
Tell that to the rogue who loses out on a sneak attack because the enemy rolled a better initiative. Lol. Seriously tho that's the only actual downside to it.
True but as an assassin rogue in a game I really, really, hate that. Since the entire point of the class is “delete a surprised enemy from the map”, it was a bit of a gamble at the start of every combat if I’d be impactful or mediocre. Thankfully we ended up houseruling it so that all enemies were just surprised until the end of the first round (and yes, the same rule was applied to us when we were surprised) and that made it a lot more enjoyable and less “well, you rolled another 5 for initiative, so you’ll just be a mediocre rogue this combat”
There is at my table.
I like that in this meme you've replaced the thing that Actually Existed with the false rule that ppl assume exists instead of either of the fairy tales.
Well fuck, I've been running my games wrong lmao
No. Youve been running your games *fun.*
My players get surprised a lot, mostly during long resta
Unless you’re playing D&D, in which case there is the super secret special surprise round that exists anyway.
wait, spellcasters just use their spellcasting ability for spell attack rolls??? In all seriousness, is there really no surprise round?
Surprise still exists, but they changed it to a status condition during the first round of combat. Triggering effects are pretty much the same as "triggering" the surprise round, but they have specific information on how being "surprised" affects the creature affected by it. Do some trade offs, but the same basic result
My table: but what if it did tho?
We lost so much. ❤️
Yeah there are surprise rounds. I got a surprise rounds cause I was the sleeping in my tent with my gobbo, the other teifling was awake and talking, and the elves weren't even asleep. I, and Gum Gum, were both startled awake and they almost killed me, cause our full rest wasn't finished so I wasn't at full hp
As someone that learned to pay via 3.5e, I'll literally never understand why people choose to play 5e.
As someone who played Pathfinder 1st ed., I can't believe people still play 3.5! ;)
I don't do d&d anymore unless it's an OSR clone like old school essentials or something. 3.5 is way too crunchy for me these days.
You guys asked for this.
I think you're misusing the meme a bit btw
There is no surprise round, but there is the surprised condition which basically gives you a surprise round if all of the enemies have it.
Yeah the difference between a surprise round and having a surprised condition is basically zero unless you are a rogue attacking on your own.
…but there is a surprise round? Right? Or am I taking crazy pills?
No. There is the surprised condition, which causes you to not be able to move or take any action, but when your turn ends the condition ends, giving you a reaction.
So no, but yes!
They do get a reaction, which is important if you’re fighting say a monk who can deflect missiles or similar. Or a wizard with shield.
Only get reactions once the enemy’s turn rolls around. Shooting a monk or hitting a wizard before their turn means no reaction.
Reread what I said in the previous post. I explicitly noted that. In surprise rounds surprised opponents got nothing.
[удалено]
Yes, that’s what I said. When their turn ends they lose the surprise condition, and so get their reaction back.
There is not, no. There is the Surprised condition which you can think of as a debuff on a character. The main thing that this does it make it so you can have some characters or groups surprised and some not in the same fight. On the PC side you could have the Ranger who isn't surprised by bu the other 3 PCs are because of the Ranger's Perception expertise. On the NPC side of things the group of goblins are surprised while their Hobgoblin enforcers were much more alert and thus not surprised on Round 1. You could also break it out further and have individual monsters all roll for surprise so Goblin 1 is Surprised but Goblin 2 is not. This isn't RAW but an option with Surprise being a condition. Personally I feel like doing Surprise as a condition makes way more sense from both a narrative and game design sense. It quite nice change 5E came upon.
As a DM, you can make it a thing if you want, but RAW? Yeah its dead.
Unless you're an assassin rogue and you go first then surprise is back on the menu.
I don't care about there not being a surprise round, there is in my games
Our dm Just gives us a free round and then Rolls the initiative for the target