# One D&D playtest, abilities that recharge when you roll initiative.



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

MarkB said:


> So, one thing I noticed:
> 
> EPIC BOON OF LUCK 20th-Level Feat Prerequisite: Expert Group Repeatable: No​Immediately after you roll a d20 for a d20 Test, you can roll a d10 and add the number rolled to the test. Once you use this benefit, you can’t use it again* until you roll Initiative* or finish a Short Rest or a Long Rest.​​No comment on the feat itself, but the bolded part is something I haven't seen before in 5e nomenclature, and is a more elegant way to implement per-encounter features than I've previously seen in the official rules. I hope it'll see some use outside of the Epic Boons.




This sounds like it would be useful for a great many things. What would you like to use it? I don’t think I’ve seen it before this test.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> This sounds like it would be useful for a great many things. What would you like to use it? I don’t think I’ve seen it before this test.



It is the basis for the return of stealth encounter powers.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> It is the basis for the return of stealth encounter powers.



This is a much better idea though. Imho.

It feels more organic and tied to in fiction action. Plus it doesn’t limit things to an “encounter”, potentially, just the pacing of them.


----------



## pemerton (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> It feels more organic and tied to in fiction action. Plus it doesn’t limit things to an “encounter”, potentially, just the pacing of them.



I don't get this. Rolling initiative isn't organic at all - it's a contrivance for managing turn-by-turn combat, and it's extremely unclear what, if anything, it corresponds to in the fiction.

There's also the issue that abilities that can't be refreshed until initiative is rolled become de facto combat-oriented abilities, further marginalising the non-combat aspects of the game.


----------



## Blue (Oct 2, 2022)

It's effectively "per encounter" powers but with non-combat utility stripped away.  It's basically a repackaging of the 4e idea, without the 4e terminology that might still be sensitive.


----------



## cbwjm (Oct 2, 2022)

Blue said:


> It's effectively "per encounter" powers but with non-combat utility stripped away.  It's basically a repackaging of the 4e idea, without the 4e terminology that might still be sensitive.



I think it is more the 4e idea without needing to have a short rest to reactivate them. Much better in my opinion.


----------



## niklinna (Oct 2, 2022)

I think it's great! I always wanted a new excuse to murder-hobo. "But officer, I needed to recharge my encounter powers—I mean, on-initiative abilities!—and so you see that man _had_ to die."


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

pemerton said:


> I don't get this. Rolling initiative isn't organic at all - it's a contrivance for managing turn-by-turn combat, and it's extremely unclear what, if anything, it corresponds to in the fiction.
> 
> There's also the issue that abilities that can't be refreshed until initiative is rolled become de facto combat-oriented abilities, further marginalising the non-combat aspects of the game.



What? It corresponds to someone starting a fight. In fiction.


----------



## Blue (Oct 2, 2022)

cbwjm said:


> I think it is more the 4e idea without needing to have a short rest to reactivate them. Much better in my opinion.



I don't see much differences, btu that may have just be the play styles of the tables I played 4e at.  Either an encounter was a continuation, or we could almost always take 5 minutes.  But I can see where the experience could be different.


----------



## cbwjm (Oct 2, 2022)

Blue said:


> I don't see much differences, btu that may have just be the play styles of the tables I played 4e at.  Either an encounter was a continuation, or we could almost always take 5 minutes.  But I can see where the experience could be different.



If a short rest was 5 mins or otherwise something inconsequential in 5e, then yes I'd agree, but at an hour they are very different to 4e's short rest.


----------



## pemerton (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> What? It corresponds to someone starting a fight. In fiction.



To me, the things the corresponds to starting a fight is making an attack roll. Initiative is just a metagame move-sequencing device.


----------



## aco175 (Oct 2, 2022)

It's like a switch.  I feel like a truck, like a machine, like I just rolled initiative.


----------



## Blue (Oct 2, 2022)

cbwjm said:


> If a short rest was 5 mins or otherwise something inconsequential in 5e, then yes I'd agree, but at an hour they are very different to 4e's short rest.



Sure, but I was talking about how it was bringing back in a 4e-like experience with a different terminology.  At no point were 5e short rests ever involved in what I was saying.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> This is a much better idea though. Imho.
> 
> It feels more organic and tied to in fiction action. Plus it doesn’t limit things to an “encounter”, potentially, just the pacing of them.



Encounter powers were organic and tied to in-fiction action in 4e: specifically, the short rest.


----------



## cbwjm (Oct 2, 2022)

Blue said:


> Sure, but I was talking about how it was bringing back in a 4e-like experience with a different terminology.  At no point were 5e short rests ever involved in what I was saying.



Fair enough, but I still feel like short rests in both 4e and 5e need to be considered if you're comparing the two editions and the expansion on rolling initiative gives you resources.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

pemerton said:


> To me, the things the corresponds to starting a fight is making an attack roll. Initiative is just a metagame move-sequencing device.



Attack rolls happen after initiative. There isn’t any reason to roll initiative unless a fight has started. IMHO.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Encounter powers were organic and tied to in-fiction action in 4e: specifically, the short rest.



And the encounter. 

The encounter power as a mechanic is tied to the encounter as a mechanic.

Edit: to be more clear, maybe.


----------



## pemerton (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> Attack rolls happen after initiative. There isn’t any reason to roll initiative unless a fight has started. IMHO.



Agreed there's no reason to roll initiative unless a fight has started. It's a mechanical step that is triggered by something happening in the fiction. But it doesn't _represent_ or _correspond to_ anything in the fiction. It's a metagame mechanic.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 2, 2022)

pemerton said:


> I don't get this. Rolling initiative isn't organic at all - it's a contrivance for managing turn-by-turn combat, and it's extremely unclear what, if anything, it corresponds to in the fiction.
> 
> There's also the issue that abilities that can't be refreshed until initiative is rolled become de facto combat-oriented abilities, further marginalising the non-combat aspects of the game.



At least some of the epic boons refresh when you roll initiative, or finish a short or long rest.


----------



## pemerton (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> And the encounter. You can’t have an “encounter power” without an encounter.



This isn't an accurate statement of the 4e rules, which are - as @Charlaquin posted - that those abilities recharge on a short rest.

The DMG2 (p 55) sets out some options for quicker and/or partial recharging. And I use a rule that an encounter power can only be used once in a skill challenge even if the skill challenge straddles a rest - but I don't remember the rulebooks ever flagging that one.


----------



## pemerton (Oct 2, 2022)

doctorbadwolf said:


> At least some of the epic boons refresh when you roll initiative, or finish a short or long rest.



Yes. But short or long rest isn't anything new. Whereas "roll initiative" makes them available again, regardless of rest, _for the next combat_. Which, as I posted, further weighs the focus of play towards combat rather than non-combat. ( @niklinna's post upthread was - I think - intended as a joke but expresses the same sentiment.)


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

pemerton said:


> Agreed there's no reason to roll initiative unless a fight has started. It's a mechanical step that is triggered by something happening in the fiction. But it doesn't _represent_ or _correspond to_ anything in the fiction. It's a metagame mechanic.



Rolling initiative IS the mechanic tied so directly to physical fights in dnd that you almost can’t have one without it.

It’s even real world slang to say “roll initiative” to mean “let’s fight”.

It absolutely represents a fight has begun, and corresponds to when things have become violent.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

pemerton said:


> This isn't an accurate statement of the 4e rules, which are - as @Charlaquin posted - that those abilities recharge on a short rest.
> 
> The DMG2 (p 55) sets out some options for quicker and/or partial recharging. And I use a rule that an encounter power can only be used once in a skill challenge even if the skill challenge straddles a rest - but I don't remember the rulebooks ever flagging that one.



What’s the definition of an encounter power?

Edit to add:

Wait, I think you misunderstood me or the other way round. I wasn’t talking about how it works.


----------



## doctorbadwolf (Oct 2, 2022)

pemerton said:


> Yes. But short or long rest isn't anything new. Whereas "roll initiative" makes them available again, regardless of rest, _for the next combat_. Which, as I posted, further weighs the focus of play towards combat rather than non-combat. ( @niklinna's post upthread was - I think - intended as a joke but expresses the same sentiment.)



It doesn’t really do that though, because it also come back with a short rest, and _because_ of the initiative refresh. You don’t need to worry about saving it for combat. Just use it when it makes sense to use it. If a fight happens, you’ll have it available.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> And the encounter. You can’t have an “encounter power” without an encounter.



But encounter powers weren’t actually tied to encounters in any way. They were just short rest recovery powers.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> But encounter powers weren’t actually tied to encounters in any way. They were just short rest recovery powers.



This is what the 4th edition players handbook says about encounter powers.

"You can use encounter powers many times during a day of adventuring, but you have to rest a few minutes between each use, so you can use them each once per encounter."

However I wasn't talking about how you use them, at least I only was talking about them as a mechanic, that their very existence and definition as a mechanic is tied to encounters as a thing.


----------



## Haplo781 (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> And the encounter. You can’t have an “encounter power” without an encounter.



Apparently I've been playing 4e wrong for the past 14 years


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Haplo781 said:


> Apparently I've been playing 4e wrong for the past 14 years



Ok, Ok, maybe I should have worded that better.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Haplo781 said:


> Apparently I've been playing 4e wrong for the past 14 years



Though you know there are people out there that will say just that.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> This is what the 4th edition players handbook says about encounter powers.
> 
> "You can use encounter powers many times during a day of adventuring, but you have to rest a few minutes between each use, so you can use them each once per encounter."



Right, so literally their use is tied to short rests, not to encounters.


darjr said:


> However I wasn't talking about how you use them, at least I only was talking about them as a mechanic, that their very existence and definition as a mechanic is tied to encounters as a thing.



Except it isn’t in any way tied to encounters, they just have the word encounter in their name. It’s ironic that you think the “recover when you roll initiative” mechanic is a better idea because it’s linked to an in-fiction action whereas encounter powers are tied to encounters, when literally the exact opposite is the case.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Right, so literally their use is tied to short rests, not to encounters.
> 
> Except it isn’t in any way tied to encounters, they just have the word encounter in their name. It’s ironic that you think the “recover when you roll initiative” mechanic is a better idea because it’s linked to an in-fiction action whereas encounter powers are tied to encounters, when literally the exact opposite is the case.



It's ironic that "Encounter Powers" are not actually encounter powers.


----------



## GMforPowergamers (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> It is the basis for the return of stealth encounter powers.



I would love that.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Right, so literally their use is tied to short rests, not to encounters.
> 
> Except it isn’t in any way tied to encounters, they just have the word encounter in their name. It’s ironic that you think the “recover when you roll initiative” mechanic is a better idea because it’s linked to an in-fiction action whereas encounter powers are tied to encounters, when literally the exact opposite is the case.



Initiative from the PHB.

"Initiative determines the order of turns during combat. When combat starts, every participant makes a Dexterity check to determine their place in the initiative order."

Tied to a moment in time in the game, in the fiction.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)




----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> Initiative from the PHB.
> 
> "Initiative determines the order of turns during combat. When combat starts, every participant makes a Dexterity check to determine their place in the initiative order."
> 
> Tied to a moment in time in the game, in the fiction.



Right. The moment when an encounter starts. Meaning that these features cannot be used outside of encounters; you might say their existence is intrinsically tied to encounters. Whereas 4e encounter powers can be used in or out of combat, and recover when the characters take a short rest - an in-game action they decide to take.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Right. The moment when an encounter starts. Meaning that these features cannot be used outside of encounters; you might say their existence is intrinsically tied to encounters. Whereas 4e encounter powers can be used in or out of combat, and recover when the characters take a short rest - an in-game action they decide to take.



I actually do not know if any or all of these 5e features are limited to combat. Are you saying they are? I think they are all boons which I don't think have that limitation. I'll have to look.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

@Charlaquin

Yea, you're wrong if you meant the 5e boons, at least not all of them. Here is the Epic Boon of Luck.

EPIC BOON OF LUCK           
20th-Level Feat
Prerequisite: Expert Group Repeatable: No
Immediately after you roll a d20 for a d20 Test, you can roll a d10 and add the number rolled to the test. Once you use this benefit, you can’t use it again until you roll Initiative or finish a Short Rest or a Long Rest.

Note that there are combat only ones like the "Epic Boon of Combat Prowess" that don't have the Short or Long Rest recharge.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> It’s even real world slang to say “roll initiative” to mean “let’s fight”.




“And I have my thumbs inside my fists so you’d better watch out!”


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> “And I have my thumbs inside my fists so you’d better watch out!”



You just gave me flash backs to when I was learning how to hook grip. erg.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> @Charlaquin
> 
> Yea, you're wrong if you meant the 5e boons, at least not all of them. Here is the Epic Boon of Luck.
> 
> ...



That recovers on a short rest (exactly like 4e encounter powers do), not on rolling initiative (which is what you were praising as superior design to 4e encounter powers).


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> That recovers on a short rest (exactly like 4e encounter powers do), not on rolling initiative (which is what you were praising as superior design to 4e encounter powers).



I wasn’t pressing it as better. I said I liked it better.

And read it again.

Edit to add: OK I did say I thought it was better. But praising it is a little strong.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> I wasn’t pressing it as better. I said I liked it better.
> 
> And read it again.



Ok.


darjr said:


> UngainlyTitan said:
> 
> 
> > It is the basis for the return of stealth encounter powers.
> ...



No “I like” to be found here.


darjr said:


> It feels more organic and tied to in fiction action.



Like a short rest?


darjr said:


> Plus it doesn’t limit things to an “encounter”, potentially, just the pacing of them.



Like rolling initiative?


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Ok.
> 
> No “I like” to be found here.
> 
> ...



Up look at my edit we crossed. And yes the boon recharges on initiative, just like I said. Also on a short or long rest.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> Up look at my edit we crossed. And yes the boon recharges on initiative, just like I said. Also on a short or long rest.



Then it isn’t really appropriate to contrast with a 4e encounter power, is it?


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Then it isn’t really appropriate to contrast with a 4e encounter power, is it?



Of coarse it is.

I wasn't lamenting the recharge on a short rest. I think you folks brought that up.

You also said they couldn't be used out side of combat, and that the text didn't have rolling on initiative. Both of which are wrong.

The 4e encounter power that isn't actually an "encounter" power has it's first definition in the PHB describing it as being about encounters.

I don't know why you dig in so deep on these things. It's really tiring.

Yes I like it better. Its definition is tied better to in fiction things, imho, being tied to initiative also makes it clearer what they are for, especially the ones that are combat oriented.

Yes are they very much like 4e encounter powers, sure, a more refined version imho. It is in my opinion more fiction first vs mechanics first.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> Of coarse it is.
> 
> I wasn't lamenting the recharge on a short rest. I think you folks brought that up.



There’s no folks. Please engage with me when you’re engaging with me, not with everyone you imagine holds a similar position to me.


darjr said:


> You also said they couldn't be used out side of combat, and that the text didn't have rolling on initiative. Both of which are wrong.



Features which recharge on rolling initiative can’t easily be used outside of combat. The  Epic Boon you quoted is not an example of such a feature, since it also recovers on a short or long rest.


darjr said:


> The 4e encounter power that isn't actually an "encounter" power has its first definition in the PHB describing it as being about encounters.
> 
> I don't know why you dig in so deep on these things. It's really tiring.



It says they can be used once per encounter, which is true. They are not, however, defined in relation to encounters, as you claimed, because neither their usage nor their recovery are tied to encounters. That’s why I dig in: because your critique is inaccurate. If you think it’s tiring that I “dig in on these things,” try to imagine how it must feel when critiques of a thing you enjoy are consistently factually inaccurate.


darjr said:


> Yes I like it better. Its definition is tied better to in fiction things, imho, being tied to initiative also makes it clearer what they are for, especially the ones that are combat oriented.
> 
> Yes are they very much like 4e encounter powers, sure, a more refined version imho. It is in my opinion more fiction first vs mechanics first.



But it literally is the opposite. 4e encounter powers are factually tied to an in-fiction thing, and 1D&D features that recover only on rolling initiative are factually tied to combat encounters. That is exactly the opposite of the reasoning you are using to praise the latter in contrast to the former.

You’re allowed to like these features better than 4e encounter powers but your stated reasoning for doing so is counterfactual. You might want to reconsider why you actually like these better, but moreover, please stop perpetuating misinformation about 4e.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> There’s no folks. Please engage with me when you’re engaging with me, not with everyone you imagine holds a similar position to me.



There are "folks", but OK.


Charlaquin said:


> Features which recharge on rolling initiative can’t easily be used outside of combat. The  Epic Boon you quoted is not an example of such a feature, since it also recovers on a short or long rest.



That feature I quoted says this "you can’t use it again until you *roll Initiative* or finish a Short Rest or a Long Rest." It recharges on both, and can be used out side of combat. Easily, just make a non-combat test. I didn't limit to only initiative and I don't now. I don't know why you are except to arbitrarily constrain the discussion.


Charlaquin said:


> it says they can be used once per encounter, which is true. They are not, however, defined in relation to encounters, as you claimed, because neither their usage nor their recovery are tied to encounters. That’s why I dig in: because your critique is inaccurate. If you think it’s tiring that I “dig in on these things,” try to imagine how it must feel when critiques of a thing you enjoy are consistently factually inaccurate.



The very definition of Encounter Powers talks about Encounters. I'm not talking about whether or not it can or can not be used during an encounter. I've said this several times now.


Charlaquin said:


> But it literally is the opposite. 4e encounter powers are factually tied to an in-fiction thing, and 1D&D features that recover only on rolling initiative are factually tied to combat encounters. That is exactly the opposite of the reasoning you are using to praise the latter in contrast to the former.



And this. I don't get the disconnect here. 

How is the start of violence not in fiction? It's violence *in the fiction* that triggers the rules for initiative.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

@Charlaquin Also I'm done.

If it makes you feel better I'll change the title of the thread.

This is not a 4e thread.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> That feature I quoted says this "you can’t use it again until you *roll Initiative* or finish a Short Rest or a Long Rest." It recharges on both, and can be used out side of combat. Easily, just make a non-combat test. I didn't limit to only initiative and I don't now. I don't know why you are except to arbitrarily constrain the discussion.



Recovering on a short or long rest is what 4e encounter powers do, so since you were contrasting initiative recovery with encounter powers, the Boon you quoted is not an example of that.


darjr said:


> The very definition of Encounter Powers talks about Encounters. I'm not talking about whether or not it can or can not be used during an encounter. I've said this several times now.



You’re focusing on prose instead of how encounter powers _actually function_. Which is pretty typical of critiques of 4e - entirely focused on aesthetic nitpicks, completely ignoring actual gameplay function.


darjr said:


> And this. I don't get the disconnect here.
> 
> How is the start of violence not in fiction? It's violence *in the fiction* that triggers the rules for initiative.



Rolling initiative is a thing that occurs in the fiction, both in 1D&D and in 4e. But for some reason you critique 4e encounter powers for being tied to encounters (even though they aren’t) in the same breath that you praise 1D&D initiative recovery powers for… being tied to encounters.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

He actually blocked me!


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> He actually blocked me!




At some point it is the healthiest option. Better for both of you.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

UngeheuerLich said:


> At some point it is the healthiest option. Better for both of you.



Sometimes disengaging is the healthiest option, sure, but he didn’t indicate that he wanted to do so. He could easily have just said he didn’t want to continue the discussion with me and asked me to drop it, and I would have done so. But instead he quote replied to one of my posts, even saying in the post that he didn’t understand a point of disconnect in the discussion (which to me seems to imply inviting an answer to where that disconnect lies) and blocked me before I even finished writing my reply back.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 2, 2022)

@Charlaquin

He wrote a short note but maybe blocked you faster than you could read it. 

And he might unblock you after he has calmed down. Maybe he needed it to disengage from the discussion.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 2, 2022)

Bite the bullet.
say that short rest is 5 minutes long.


----------



## Stalker0 (Oct 2, 2022)

For combat focused abilities its fine. For abilities that already have a short rest recovery and now get an initiative recover as well, that's cool. Its only on abilities that "should" recover on a short rest but only recover on initiative what would be wonky.


----------



## MarkB (Oct 2, 2022)

Wow, this thread spiralled out of control fast. I'm glad I missed that part.

I did like @Haplo781 's suggestion of having the Battle Master's Superiority Dice refresh upon rolling initiative.


----------



## pemerton (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> Tied to a moment in time in the game, in the fiction.



Yes. But it's pure metagame. It doesn't represent anything happening in the fiction. I mean, earning XP in AD&D is tied to something happening in the fiction - taking gold out of the dungeon. But it's a metagame mechanic too.



darjr said:


> Yes are they very much like 4e encounter powers, sure, a more refined version imho. It is in my opinion more fiction first vs mechanics first.



On this I'm 100% with @Charlaquin - I'm baffled that you regard _recover by resting_ as _mechanics first_, whereas _recover when an artificial roll is made to establish the sequencing of actions in the combat turn-by-turn resolution framework_ is _fiction first_.

I mean, if they said "recover when hostilities break out" that would be fiction first - and would also drive home that they are further increasing the weight given to the combat aspect of the game.


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> Rolling initiative IS the mechanic tied so directly to physical fights in dnd that you almost can’t have one without it.
> 
> It’s even real world slang to say “roll initiative” to mean “let’s fight”.
> 
> It absolutely represents a fight has begun, and corresponds to when things have become violent.



Your desire to hate on 4e doesn't require pretending that Initiative is anything other than a metagame mechanic meant to establish combat encounter turns. Intiative is pretty blatant "mechanics first" and NOT "fiction first." You may like recharge on Initiative better than 4e's per Short Rest Encounter Powers, but if you do so, it's because of some other reason and NOT because it is "fiction first," which it is not.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> Your desire to hate on 4e doesn't require pretending that Initiative is anything other than a metagame mechanic meant to establish combat encounter turns. Intiative is pretty blatant "mechanics first" and NOT "fiction first." You may like recharge on Initiative better than 4e's per Short Rest Encounter Powers, but if you do so, it's because of some other reason and NOT because it is "fiction first," which it is not.



I do not believe that @darjr hates 4e, I think he was quite excited at the notion that something akin to encounter powers was returning to the game.  The source of this mechanic actually recharges on rests and on initiative.


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> *I do not believe that @darjr hates 4e,* I think he was quite excited at the notion that something akin to encounter powers was returning to the game.  The source of this mechanic actually recharges on rests and on initiative.



I base my assertion on past discussions where he has been quite openly hostile to and about 4e. Past words color present ones.


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Oct 2, 2022)

There were times when it was problematic in 4e that something recharged every 5 minutes (like Eladrin teleports)... So on the face of it, an hour between uses (without taking away from its combat availability) is actually an improvement on 4e.

With the caveat that it encourages meta stuff like, 'I pick a fight with a squirrel/kid/hobo' if the abilities _are_ something that would be useful out of combat.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> I base my assertion on past discussions where he has been quite openly hostile to and about 4e. Past words color present ones.



Was he? I have not noticed but I thought you opening was a bit hostile. 

If he is hostile to 4e but likes the idea of a power that recharges on a long rest, short rest or on an initiative roll should that not be encouraged as it would, functionally, allow the return to encounter powers (which I quite liked) to D&D?


----------



## Minigiant (Oct 2, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> There were times when it was problematic in 4e that something recharged every 5 minutes (like Eladrin teleports)... So on the face of it, an hour between uses (without taking away from its combat availability) is actually an improvement on 4e.
> 
> With the caveat that it encourages meta stuff like, 'I pick a fight with a squirrel/kid/hobo' if the abilities _are_ something that would be useful out of combat.




D&D needs 3 rests.

A 5 minute rest for a quick breather
A 1 hour rest for a short activity
A 8 hour rest for a full collapse of activity

with optional 1 week and 1 month rests for downtime


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

Minigiant said:


> D&D needs 3 rests.
> 
> A 5 minute rest for a quick breather
> A 1 hour rest for a short activity
> ...



What would you have the rest do?


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> Was he? I have not noticed but I thought you opening was a bit hostile.
> 
> If he is hostile to 4e but likes the idea of a power that recharges on a long rest, short rest or on an initiative roll should that not be encouraged as it would, functionally, allow the return to encounter powers (which I quite liked) to D&D?



I'm fine with anyone liking recharges on Initiative roll, but liking recharge on Initiative doesn't require hating on 4e's encounter powers and spreading misinformation about 4e to do so.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

@Aldarc I do take issue with your hostility. I’m not hating on 4e.

Actually I recently posted on Twitter that Ranger abilities as spells is kinda like 4e powers if you squint.

And yes I like that better. And yes for many of the same reasons.

Even though I recognize the problem many have with a magical Ranger.


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> @Aldarc I do take issue with your hostility. I’m not hating in 4e.
> 
> Actually I recently posted on Twitter that Ranger abilities as spells is kinda like 4e powers if you squint.
> 
> ...



Okay, though I may quibble with your other points here, I will retract my assertion that you are hating on 4e.


----------



## Krachek (Oct 2, 2022)

It’s a game, I can manage that.
I have think about giving « legendary power » to my players, with a restriction: You can only use this power once per session! 
So a recharge on initiative, is fair enough to be usable.


----------



## Bagpuss (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> What? It corresponds to someone starting a fight. In fiction.




So pretty much the same as an 4E's Encounter powers then, but limited to only combat situations.

If you think "rolling for initiative" represents something in the fiction, I'm not sure how you can say 4E's short rests (which aren't the same as 5e's) don't represent something in the fiction either? It's that moment you get your breath back after a fight and the adrenaline dies down.


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 2, 2022)

Bagpuss said:


> So pretty much the same as an 4E's Encounter powers then, but limited to only combat situations.



This IMHO moves the game closer to revolving around combat rather than otherwise. This switch is interesting because it's fundamentally _Recharge per Combat_ rather than _Recharge per Rest_. 

I don't mind, but it's hard to imagine how recharging on rolling Initiative* as an isolated mechanic is somehow less "video gamey" than 4e's encounter powers that recharged based on rest. 

* Combat starts. Roll for Initiative! The video game combat music plays. The pixelated characters get in their swaying combat poses. The abilities have now recharged.


----------



## Galandris (Oct 2, 2022)

niklinna said:


> I think it's great! I always wanted a new excuse to murder-hobo. "But officer, I needed to recharge my encounter powers—I mean, on-initiative abilities!—and so you see that man _had_ to die."




Bob: "Did you manage to open the lock?"
Jack: "No, it proved too hard, I'd need to retr...
Jill: "Inefficient moron! Why am I surrounded by incompetent hirelings... Fear the wrath of my destructive Meteor Shower of Doom spell!"
Jack: _braces for the impeding disintegration_
DM: err? roll for initiative?
*Bob, Jack and Jill all do a high-five.*
Jack: I resume working on the lock, using my Epic Boon of Luck.

[They apparently created a warlord in One, though it wasn't exactly how I envisioned the motivating aspect of the job].


----------



## Reynard (Oct 2, 2022)

It seems to me that the "recharge on initiative" mechanism is an attempt to create space for "once per combat" abilities that do not come with the bundled difficulties inherent in 1 hour short rests (checking for wandering monsters, counting torches, weird in fiction resulting from stopping for lunch mid dungeon, whatever).

As far as that goes, it is fine. But really, D&D just needs to stop using hamfisted resource management tools when they have essentially eliminated the value of resource management from the game.


----------



## Dausuul (Oct 2, 2022)

darjr said:


> How is the start of violence not in fiction? It's violence *in the fiction* that triggers the rules for initiative.



Except that when initiative is rolled, no violence has happened yet. And it might not happen at all. The classic example is the hidden assassin who tries to start combat with surprise (for the auto-crit), then gets a natural 1 on initiative, and decides not to risk it.

Furthermore, tying effects to "rolling initiative" means you can't use initiative _except_ for combat. Last night, we had two PCs (in a noncombat situation) both trying to act at the same time, so the DM had us roll initiative to determine what happened. This is something I've seen many times--initiative is a useful tool any time you have several people acting concurrently and you need to determine whose thing happens first.

If WotC wants an effect to trigger at the start of combat, they should just say "at the start of combat."


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> Except that when initiative is rolled, no violence has happened yet. And it might not happen at all. The classic example is the hidden assassin who tries to start combat with surprise (for the auto-crit), then gets a natural 1 on initiative, and decides not to risk it.
> 
> Furthermore, tying effects to "rolling initiative" means you can't use initiative _except_ for combat. Last night, we had two PCs (in a noncombat situation) both trying to act at the same time, so the DM had us roll initiative to determine what happened. This is something I've seen many times--initiative is a useful tool any time you have several people acting concurrently and you need to determine whose thing happens first.
> 
> If WotC wants an effect to trigger at the start of combat, they should just say "at the start of combat."



Given that the mechanic that tiggered this discussion was something that could be used in any D20 test and also recharged via rest once per initiative is functionally close enough to "start of combat" unless WoTC bring in mechanic that involves initiative out of combat. Which would be fine by me.


----------



## Reynard (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> Given that the mechanic that tiggered this discussion was something that could be used in any D20 test and also recharged via rest once per initiative is functionally close enough to "start of combat" unless WoTC bring in mechanic that involves initiative out of combat. Which would be fine by me.



Isn't "initiative" defined as a Dex ability check that happens specifically at the beginning of combat?


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

Reynard said:


> Isn't "initiative" defined as a Dex ability check that happens specifically at the beginning of combat?



Pretty much but as originally conceived skill challenges in 4e were to be done in initiative order. Now, personally, I do not see any advantage in initiative order as distinct from round robin, but it is not inconceivable that WoTC could introduce some non-combat thing that is done in initiative order. 
There is one other thing, a thing that occurs at the start of combat may be adjudicated as before initiative is rolled, and can affect the initiative roll itself, but a thing that occurs after initiative is rolled cannot affect the initiative roll itself.


----------



## Dausuul (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> Given that the mechanic that tiggered this discussion was something that could be used in any D20 test and also recharged via rest once per initiative is functionally close enough to "start of combat" unless WoTC bring in mechanic that involves initiative out of combat. Which would be fine by me.



Why do we need something that is "functionally close enough" to the start of combat, when it could be _exactly equal to _the start of combat, simply by saying "at the start of combat?"



Reynard said:


> Isn't "initiative" defined as a Dex ability check that happens specifically at the beginning of combat?



That is how the rulebook defines it. Yet the rulebook also makes it clear that it happens right _before_ combat, because no one has actually done anything yet. And it is possible, if rare, for the people involved to make choices that result in combat not happening. It's a mechanic that works smoothly in most cases but gets wonky under close examination, and the more rules effects are hung on it, the more close examination it will have to bear.

Furthermore, hanging a lot of effects on the initiative roll means there are now significant consequences for using it "off-label," so to speak--as a tool for determining the sequence of events in a noncombat situation. While that use of initiative is not an official rule in 5E, it's a very helpful option to have.

As things stand, I don't think it's a big deal. Aside from things which modify the initiative roll itself, there aren't any "when you roll initiative" effects below 18th level in the current playtest packet. By the time you hit level 18, sorting out the precise meaning of "roll initiative" is the least of the DM's problems. But I hope they don't start using this mechanic more broadly.


----------



## Reynard (Oct 2, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> Yet the rulebook also makes it clear that it happens right _before_ combat, because no one has actually done anything yet.



Per the SRD:
----------
Initiative determines the order of turns during combat. When combat starts, every participant makes a Dexterity check to determine their place in the initiative order. The GM makes one roll for an entire group of identical creatures, so each member of the group acts at the same time.

The GM ranks the combatants in order from the one with the highest Dexterity check total to the one with the lowest. This is the order (called the initiative order) in which they act during each round. The initiative order remains the same from round to round.
----------
It is just a procedural, metagame thing that happens "as" combat starts -- meaning there isn't really a before or after in this context. The GM declares combat is starting based on some action the PCs take or other change of state in the fiction, and part of that transition is the players rolling Dex checks for initiative order.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> Why do we need something that is "functionally close enough" to the start of combat, when it could be _exactly equal to _the start of combat, simply by saying "at the start of combat?"



In the case of the epic boon that tiggered this thread, it is a D10 roll that can be added to any D20 test and recharges after initiative is rolled, or on a long or short rest. 
This feature is worded in this way to ensure that if you have not discharged the ability and a roll for initiative is called for you can roll the D10 and add it to your initiative roll but if you have discharged the ability previously and not had a rest to recharge it you cannot use it on the initiative roll but it will recharge for use in the combat.

The Feat in question is the Epic Boon of Luck.


Dausuul said:


> That is how the rulebook defines it. Yet the rulebook also makes it clear that it happens right _before_ combat, because no one has actually done anything yet. And it is possible, if rare, for the people involved to make choices that result in combat not happening. It's a mechanic that works smoothly in most cases but gets wonky under close examination, and the more rules effects are hung on it, the more close examination it will have to bear.
> 
> Furthermore, hanging a lot of effects on the initiative roll means there are now significant consequences for using it "off-label," so to speak--as a tool for determining the sequence of events in a noncombat situation. While that use of initiative is not an official rule in 5E, it's a very helpful option to have.
> 
> As things stand, I don't think it's a big deal. Aside from things which modify the initiative roll itself, there aren't any "when you roll initiative" effects below 18th level in the current playtest packet. By the time you hit level 18, sorting out the precise meaning of "roll initiative" is the least of the DM's problems. But I hope they don't start using this mechanic more broadly.



Here I agree with @Reynard in this post above.


----------



## darjr (Oct 2, 2022)

Looked around and there is a Lair action that causes initiative to be rerolled during combat. That of the Sphinx.

The flow of time is altered such that every creature in the lair must reroll initiative. The sphinx can choose not to reroll.
I think that's tied to the fiction though since it is tied to a thing happening in the fiction. The sphinx reset time to the beginning of combat, sort of, but that's just one interpretation.

Are there other things like that?

Also a mount can change its initiative but doesn't reroll.

The only other time after combat starts when initiative is rolled is when a new combatant enters the combat. To me that's when the violence starts for them.

P.S. I'm stealing lair actions from the sphinx for Endelyn.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> In the case of the epic boon that tiggered this thread, it is a D10 roll that can be added to any D20 test and recharges after initiative is rolled, or on a long or short rest.
> This feature is worded in this way to ensure that if you have not discharged the ability and a roll for initiative is called for you can roll the D10 and add it to your initiative roll but if you have discharged the ability previously and not had a rest to recharge it you cannot use it on the initiative roll but it will recharge for use in the combat.
> 
> The Feat in question is the Epic Boon of Luck.



The thread is “abilities that recharge when you roll initiative,” of which there are multiple in the UA, not just Epic Boon of Luck. Arguably, Epic Boon of Luck is a poor example for discussion of the “recharge on initiative” mechanic, since it also recharges at other times. Darjr cherry-picked it to try and refute my argument that initiative recovery ties a feature inherently to combat.


----------



## UngainlyTitan (Oct 2, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> The thread is “abilities that recharge when you roll initiative,” of which there are multiple in the UA*,* not just Epic Boon of Luck. Arguably, Epic Boon of Luck is a poor example for discussion of the “recharge on initiative” mechanic, since it also recharges at other times. Darjr cherry-picked it to try and refute my argument that initiative recovery ties a feature inherently to combat.



All are Epic Boons and two of them are Recharge on Initiative or Long/Short Rest and Two on Initiative only.
However, in the very First post in this thread @darjr quotes this post


MarkB said:


> So, one thing I noticed:
> 
> EPIC BOON OF LUCK 20th-Level Feat Prerequisite: Expert Group Repeatable: No​Immediately after you roll a d20 for a d20 Test, you can roll a d10 and add the number rolled to the test. Once you use this benefit, you can’t use it again* until you roll Initiative* or finish a Short Rest or a Long Rest.​​No comment on the feat itself, but the bolded part is something I haven't seen before in 5e nomenclature, and is a more elegant way to implement per-encounter features than I've previously seen in the official rules. I hope it'll see some use outside of the Epic Boons.




I responded with


UngainlyTitan said:


> It is the basis for the return of stealth encounter powers.



That is the basis of my response.

Now, I agree that formally in 5e initiative is only called for to sequence combat. But I have seen DMs use initiative, informally, to sequence anything where the order of actions may affect the outcome.
I will also note that initiative was also called for in skill challenges in 4e.


----------



## MarkB (Oct 2, 2022)

UngainlyTitan said:


> Now, I agree that formally in 5e initiative is only called for to sequence combat. But I have seen DMs use initiative, informally, to sequence anything where the order of actions may affect the outcome.



That's fair. I've used initiative in such situations - for instance, if a character is reduced to 0 hit points as a result of falling damage or a trap, and their allies can't necessarily reach them immediately to provide medical assistance.


----------



## Dausuul (Oct 2, 2022)

Reynard said:


> It is just a procedural, metagame thing that happens "as" combat starts -- meaning there isn't really a before or after in this context. The GM declares combat is starting based on some action the PCs take or other change of state in the fiction.



Except that, if the action is something hostile like swinging a sword or casting a spell, it isn't actually taken until _after_ initiative is rolled. And depending on the result of the roll, and what other combatants do, the PCs might choose to do something else.

This is particularly an issue when combat is started by a hidden attacker, which is fairly common. And if the would-be assassin rolls really badly, they might decide not to attack after all. At this point, the assassin is still hidden. If the enemy fails to locate the assassin, combat doesn't happen.

So long as initiative is just a sequencing tool, this outcome may feel a little odd, but it isn't a problem. But when rolling initiative recharges abilities, then these scenarios become an issue.

In the original 5E rules, most "when you roll initiative" effects don't kick in until high level, and the same is true in the playtest (so far), so it's not a big deal. By levels 15+, you're basically playing Calvinball anyway. But I would not want to see these effects show up at lower levels where normal games happen.


----------



## Reynard (Oct 3, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> Except that, if the action is something hostile like swinging a sword or casting a spell, it isn't actually taken until _after_ initiative is rolled. And depending on the result of the roll, and what other combatants do, the PCs might choose to do something else.
> 
> This is particularly an issue when combat is started by a hidden attacker, which is fairly common. And if the would-be assassin rolls really badly, they might decide not to attack after all. At this point, the assassin is still hidden. If the enemy fails to locate the assassin, combat doesn't happen.
> 
> ...



I mean, this is why we have GMs. Initiative is rolled, per the rules, at the start of combat. But like all other rolls, it is up to the GM to decide if a roll is needed. As such, one doesn't get to hide behind "we rolled Initiative but the assassin never struck" because there is literally no combat unless the assassin strikes. Therefore, in that example,  the assassin strikes and THEN combat begins and Initiative is rolled.


Now, I often use a kludge: if a PC or NPC is instigating combat and there is no reason to believe combat would start without their initiating action, everyone but them rolls Initiative and they go first. In the context of the rule being discussed in the thread, I would say their initiating act counts as "rolling Initiative" for any associated Initiative dependent abilities.


----------



## cbwjm (Oct 3, 2022)

Reynard said:


> Now, I often use a kludge: if a PC or NPC is instigating combat and there is no reason to believe combat would start without their initiating action, everyone but them rolls Initiative and they go first. In the context of the rule being discussed in the thread, I would say their initiating act counts as "rolling Initiative" for any associated Initiative dependent abilities.



I do something similar, but I have them roll and just start at their initiative. Which now that I think about it, might skew things a little as, if they have a terrible initiative roll, the people with higher initiative will be going later than those with a low initiative. I might have to take your idea and grant them the highest initiative +1.


----------



## pemerton (Oct 3, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I mean, this is why we have GMs. Initiative is rolled, per the rules, at the start of combat. But like all other rolls, it is up to the GM to decide if a roll is needed. As such, one doesn't get to hide behind "we rolled Initiative but the assassin never struck" because there is literally no combat unless the assassin strikes. Therefore, in that example,  the assassin strikes and THEN combat begins and Initiative is rolled.



This seems to make impossible a fairly classic fantasy trope (I'm thinking especially of REH's Conan): the assassin strikes but the hero sense the strike coming, turns and cuts down the assassin.

Mechanically, that looks like: the action 'I strike" is declared for the assassin; then initiative is rolled, imposing whatever penalty for surprise is appropriate; despite the penalty, Conan's player wins the initiative roll and Conan whirls and cuts down the assassin.

I'll admit that @Dausuul's approach has a different issue: that the action can be declared for the assassin that triggers the initiative roll, but they don't follow through when their turn comes around (yay stop motion resolution!).

These problems with initiative systems and turn-by-turn resolution are one of the reasons I regard them as metagame frameworks rather than as corresponding to something in the fiction.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 3, 2022)

pemerton said:


> This seems to make impossible a fairly classic fantasy trope (I'm thinking especially of REH's Conan): the assassin strikes but the hero sense the strike coming, turns and cuts down the assassin.
> 
> Mechanically, that looks like: the action 'I strike" is declared for the assassin; then initiative is rolled, imposing whatever penalty for surprise is appropriate; despite the penalty, Conan's player wins the initiative roll and Conan whirls and cuts down the assassin.
> 
> ...




In a similar vein, I didn't chime in on the recent discussion about monsters "metagaming" the opportunity attack rules...e.g. after a PC has used their reaction to make an OA, the other monsters knowing that the PC can't make more OAs...but what I imagine in the fiction is that it's all simultaneous, and the other monsters are thinking, "He's distracted trying to stab Larry; now's my chance!"


----------



## darjr (Oct 3, 2022)

I’d think that a hidden attacker wouldn’t be surprised while their targets would be, essentially giving the hidden attacker the real first action in combat.

Being surprised they can’t move or take actions or reactions. It’s not just that they can’t go it is also, on occasion, to simulate that the hidden attacker did indeed act first, sorta. No need to force an initiative order or assign an initiative to give them the first slot in initiative order.

In fact if you have a situation where a participant absolutely acted first but may be lower in initiative you could rule that everyone else is surprised.

I’d have to look but I think lair or legendary actions are considered “actions” here. Though I’d leave that up to the DM depending upon the lair or legendary action.


----------



## Andvari (Oct 3, 2022)

Initiative in the fiction represents who acts first when it becomes clear the opponent is hostile. Perhaps he lifts his sword in preparation for a strike, but you roll higher on initiative and stab him in the chest with your dagger before he can swing. It was perhaps simpler to understand in early editions, like B/X when both sides would declare actions each round before rolling initiative?

Anyway, I'm not sure it's a good idea to refresh abilities based on whether you are in combat or not. DM can of course object to strike down abuse, but potentially you could refresh abilities by starting harmless duels with another party members or by attacking trivial opponents. Seems better to tie it to something like a short rest to me.


----------



## MarkB (Oct 3, 2022)

darjr said:


> I’d think that a hidden attacker wouldn’t be surprised while their targets would be, essentially giving the hidden attacker the real first action in combat.
> 
> Being surprised they can’t move or take actions or reactions. It’s not just that they can’t go it is also, on occasion, to simulate that the hidden attacker did indeed act first, sorta. No need to force an initiative order or assign an initiative to give them the first slot in initiative order.
> 
> ...



Worth noting, there are indications in the playtest package that Surprise may be being changed to simply "you gain advantage on initiative rolls".


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 3, 2022)

MarkB said:


> Worth noting, there are indications in the playtest package that Surprise may be being changed to simply "you gain advantage on initiative rolls".



More specifically, it seems like there won’t be a single Surprised status, but various features that represent having an edge due to catching your opponents off-guard will grant advantage on initiative, and various features that represent being on the back foot due to having been caught off-guard will impose disadvantage on initiative.


----------



## CleverNickName (Oct 3, 2022)

Eh, I'm not a fan.  Combat abilities that "turn on" whenever combat starts might as well just be at-will abilities and balanced accordingly, as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Reynard (Oct 3, 2022)

pemerton said:


> This seems to make impossible a fairly classic fantasy trope (I'm thinking especially of REH's Conan): the assassin strikes but the hero sense the strike coming, turns and cuts down the assassin.
> 
> Mechanically, that looks like: the action 'I strike" is declared for the assassin; then initiative is rolled, imposing whatever penalty for surprise is appropriate; despite the penalty, Conan's player wins the initiative roll and Conan whirls and cuts down the assassin.
> 
> ...



In that case Conan wasn't surprised (probably can't be surprised).


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Oct 3, 2022)

Seems to me that every experienced player of D&D runs their initiative rules just slightly differently.  As a result... we shouldn't take any of our opinions at face-value when using them in trying to decide the proper way to write a rule on something like this-- especially when it comes to worrying about the vagarities of in-game or metagame indication.

I mean other than some people who don't treat them the same for whatever their personal gaming reasons are... "at the start of combat" and "rolling initiative" are the same thing.  At the start of combat you roll initiative, as shown by @Reynard above.  So for any new players who are experiencing this for the first time you could write the rule either way and it would indicate the same timing window.  I would imagine though that for D&D specifically they go with initiative because "Roll for Initiative" is an iconic phrase in D&D... one which new players will learn quickly and hear most often.

At the end of the day the effect is the same... your PC gets a special ability to use once every new combat begins, regardless of when or how often actual Rests have been taken.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Oct 3, 2022)

Reynard said:


> In that case Conan wasn't surprised (probably can't be surprised).




Fundamental difference. Once or twice per combat != at-will.

I would however also prefer recharge on a breather (1 min rest). Abilities should not be balanced around the fact, that a combat needs to start.


----------



## TwoSix (Oct 3, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> This IMHO moves the game closer to revolving around combat rather than otherwise. This switch is interesting because it's fundamentally _Recharge per Combat_ rather than _Recharge per Rest_.
> 
> I don't mind, but it's hard to imagine how recharging on rolling Initiative* as an isolated mechanic is somehow less "video gamey" than 4e's encounter powers that recharged based on rest.
> 
> * Combat starts. Roll for Initiative! The video game combat music plays. The pixelated characters get in their swaying combat poses. The abilities have now recharged.



Yea, I have no problem with ability recharge being metagame (honestly, I think it works better for a lot of abilities), but it's hard to argue that initiative is not metagame.


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 3, 2022)

TwoSix said:


> Yea, I have no problem with ability recharge being metagame (honestly, I think it works better for a lot of abilities), but it's hard to argue that initiative is not metagame.



The other weird thing about this though is that this puts the recharge in the hands of the DM rather than players. Players may decide when they want to at least try to rest. Players do not get to decide when they roll initiative. They may try to trigger it through violence, but the DM makes the call when players roll for initiative. So the DM gates when player abilities recharge. That's kinda funky to me.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 3, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> The other weird thing about this though is that this puts the recharge in the hands of the DM rather than players. Players may decide when they want to at least try to rest. Players do not get to decide when they roll initiative. They may try to trigger it through violence, but the DM makes the call when players roll for initiative. So the DM gates when player abilities recharge. That's kinda funky to me.




The flip side to that is that taking a rest in order to recharge an ability is very meta-gamey. Not saying there’s anything wrong with that, but it’s there.


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 3, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> The flip side to that is that taking a rest in order to recharge an ability is very meta-gamey. Not saying there’s anything wrong with that, but it’s there.



Initiative is a meta-game mechanic that establishes turn order for combat. Resting is a mechanic reflecting the characters taking time to rest and recuperate. I'm not sure how the latter is more "very meta-gamey" than the former unless its some sort of guilt by association with something that 4e did.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Oct 3, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> Initiative is a meta-game mechanic that establishes turn order for combat. Resting is a mechanic reflecting the characters taking time to rest and recuperate. I'm not sure how the latter is more "very meta-gamey" than the former unless its some sort of guilt by association with something that 4e did.



I suspect he means it from the player's perspective.  The player says they want to rest in order to regain an ability for their character, not that the character wants a rest because in-game the character is tired.

I mean honestly all Rests and such are metagamey, as it's never taken because the character thinks they need it, it's always when the player thinks they need it to regain their character abilities.  No one "in-game" would take an 8-hour "long rest" in the middle of the afternoon... they'd always take it at night and go to sleep like normal people (excepting the few times in a campaign when a night-time raid of something was required.)


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

darjr said:


> This sounds like it would be useful for a great many things. What would you like to use it? I don’t think I’ve seen it before this test.



It existed.  Battle Masters and some other classes had the ability.

"RELENTLESS
Starting at 15th level, *when you roll initiative* and have no superiority dice remaining, you regain one superiority die."


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 3, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> I suspect he means it from the player's perspective.  The player says they want to rest in order to regain an ability for their character, not that the character wants a rest because in-game the character is tired.




Yes, this.  Initiative is a metagame construct, but players aren't making decisions of when to use it.  I suppose a better comparison would be the new feat that lets a player swap initiative with another player.



DEFCON 1 said:


> I mean honestly all Rests and such are metagamey, as it's never taken because the character thinks they need it, it's always when the player thinks they need it to regain their character abilities.  No one "in-game" would take an 8-hour "long rest" in the middle of the afternoon... they'd always take it at night and go to sleep like normal people (excepting the few times in a campaign when a night-time raid of something was required.)




I sort of agree here, but there's also an in-game narrative of "We're beat; we need to rest."  That even makes some sense for short rest spells.  "I'm fried; I need to meditate."  So it really depends, in my mind, on what the ability is.

Again, I'm not really saying there's anything wrong with this.  I play with these sorts of metagame decisions all the time.  I'm just offering this in response to @Aldarc's comment about the DM deciding when the characters get to refresh their abilities: I'm not sure either version is better/worse.


----------



## Reynard (Oct 3, 2022)

What is the purpose of limited resources,  from a design intent I mean? If it is make the big fights cooler because the players will save their strongest abilities for the BBEG, it's terrible design. Players don't like losing and sometimes "easy" fights go bad, so there's no guarantee those big guns won't come out against the little fish. There are alternative systems you could use to better ensure the big fights are cooler.

The adventuring day and resource management are so estranged from the most common playstyle that I think now is the time to quietly kill it.


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 3, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> I suspect he means it from the player's perspective.  *The player says they want to rest in order to regain an ability for their character, not that the character wants a rest because in-game the character is tired.*
> 
> I mean honestly all Rests and such are metagamey, as it's never taken because the character thinks they need it, it's always when the player thinks they need it to regain their character abilities.  No one "in-game" would take an 8-hour "long rest" in the middle of the afternoon... they'd always take it at night and go to sleep like normal people (excepting the few times in a campaign when a night-time raid of something was required.)



Does an in-game character ever feel tired? Is actual PC tiredness reflected in any way mechanically in D&D? 



Bill Zebub said:


> Yes, this.  Initiative is a metagame construct, but players aren't making decisions of when to use it.  I suppose a better comparison would be the new feat that lets a player swap initiative with another player.



No, but it does put the mechanic in the GM's hands as the GM calls for initiative rolls, so the resource management side of things for players is pretty non-existent if that too is going to be handed over to the GM. 



Bill Zebub said:


> I sort of agree here, but there's also an in-game narrative of "We're beat; we need to rest."  That even makes some sense for short rest spells.  "I'm fried; I need to meditate."  So it really depends, in my mind, on what the ability is.
> 
> Again, I'm not really saying there's anything wrong with this.  *I play with these sorts of metagame decisions all the time. * I'm just offering this in response to @Aldarc's comment about the DM deciding when the characters get to refresh their abilities: I'm not sure either version is better/worse.



Yeah, I don't mind metagaming, but I also use metagame as a term used to describe game play beyond the level of rules rather than as a blanket term for "cheating." The rules of the NBA say that a player fouls out after five personal fouls. The metagame is about teams managing those fouls, whether drawing fouls or making fouls, and using them to manipulate play. Likewise, a big part of how Texas Hold 'Em poker is played at the professional level entails the metagame of poker outside of the prescribed rules: e.g., bluffing, card counting, etc. I see players metagaming in tabletop games along these lines. 

But I think that it's important to recognize how Initiative Refresh shifts the dynamic of PC recharge from something that players can initiate to something that the GM initiates.


----------



## Xamnam (Oct 3, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> Does an in-game character ever feel tired? Is actual PC tiredness reflected in any way mechanically in D&D?



Running out of hp, hit dice, action surges, second winds, spell slots, ki points, and so on all read to me as manifesting to the player characters as: I'm spent/I'm out of energy/I need to rest if I'm going to be a competent member of this group. Functional tiredness, not being able to push yourself past the basics, if albeit not necessarily being "sleepy."


----------



## Zaukrie (Oct 3, 2022)

I didn't read the entire thread, as I just couldn't.....

I endorse the return of encounter powers (which these are close to). I understand some had issues with those, as they didn't think it made sense with fiction....but I always thought of it as an opportunity. You have an opportunity to do things once and awhile, and encounter/daily/etc. powers reflect that. You rarely have an opportunity to do that one thing in a fight, the rules saying you can do it once in a fight reflects that opportunity.

Anyway, this is much simpler than forcing short rests.....


----------



## Zaukrie (Oct 3, 2022)

Dausuul said:


> Except that when initiative is rolled, no violence has happened yet. And it might not happen at all. The classic example is the hidden assassin who tries to start combat with surprise (for the auto-crit), then gets a natural 1 on initiative, and decides not to risk it.
> 
> Furthermore, tying effects to "rolling initiative" means you can't use initiative _except_ for combat. Last night, we had two PCs (in a noncombat situation) both trying to act at the same time, so the DM had us roll initiative to determine what happened. This is something I've seen many times--initiative is a useful tool any time you have several people acting concurrently and you need to determine whose thing happens first.
> 
> If WotC wants an effect to trigger at the start of combat, they should just say "at the start of combat."



I see nothing that says you can't use initiative outside combat at all. Where does it say that?


----------



## Reynard (Oct 3, 2022)

Zaukrie said:


> I see nothing that says you can't use initiative outside combat at all. Where does it say that?



The definition of initiative is specific to combat in the rules as written. One could certainly use dex (or other) checks to determine turn order when needed, but by definition that is not initiative if it isn't rolled "as combat begins."


----------



## Zaukrie (Oct 3, 2022)

Reynard said:


> The definition of initiative is specific to combat in the rules as written. One could certainly use dex (or other) checks to determine turn order when needed, but by definition that is not initiative if it isn't rolled "as combat begins."



Fair, I must not be fully awake at this point. I use it for more than that, but sometimes I forget I've been playing forever, and that I do things that aren't RAW.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 3, 2022)

Reynard said:


> What is the purpose of limited resources,  from a design intent I mean? If it is make the big fights cooler because the players will save their strongest abilities for the BBEG, it's terrible design. Players don't like losing and sometimes "easy" fights go bad, so there's no guarantee those big guns won't come out against the little fish. There are alternative systems you could use to better ensure the big fights are cooler.
> 
> The adventuring day and resource management are so estranged from the most common playstyle that I think now is the time to quietly kill it.



I personally dislike the “game” of deciding which encounters are important enough for me to expend my best resources. It’s why I avoid casters. My favorite mechanic is Reckless Attacks; I can use it as often as I want but it’s risky to do so. 

More like that, please.


----------



## Zaukrie (Oct 3, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> I personally dislike the “game” of deciding which encounters are important enough for me to expend my best resources. It’s why I avoid casters. My favorite mechanic is Reckless Attacks; I can use it as often as I want but it’s risky to do so.
> 
> More like that, please.



More risk/reward powers would be great. 

Want to upcast a spell? Temporarily consume half your hit points until the beginning of your next turn. That might be a great idea, or it might get you "killed".


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> With the caveat that it encourages meta stuff like, 'I pick a fight with a squirrel/kid/hobo' if the abilities _are_ something that would be useful out of combat.



The DM is not obligated to combat if there's no chance of losing or using up resources.  

Player: "I pick a fight with a kid."
DM: "You handily beat him senseless in front of a crowd of witnesses.  The cry goes out for the sheriff and several bystanders go running towards the jail."

Initiative happens when the DM calls for it. Not when the player tries to cheese it.


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I mean, this is why we have GMs. Initiative is rolled, per the rules, at the start of combat. But like all other rolls, it is up to the GM to decide if a roll is needed. As such, one doesn't get to hide behind "we rolled Initiative but the assassin never struck" because there is literally no combat unless the assassin strikes. Therefore, in that example,  the assassin strikes and THEN combat begins and Initiative is rolled.



That's not how it happens in 5e, though.  How it happens in 5e is that the assassin *goes to strike*(not strikes*)*.  Then initiative is rolled and if the assassin loses he is seen coming out of hiding before he can actually take the swing.  Since his victim has great reflexes and won initiative, he goes first.  

Initiative is rolled when hostilities begin, not when an attack happens.


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

pemerton said:


> I'll admit that @Dausuul's approach has a different issue: that the action can be declared for the assassin that triggers the initiative roll, but they don't follow through when their turn comes around (yay stop motion resolution!).



I don't see an issue here.  The assassin jumps out and is slashed at by Conan before he can strike.  Realizing his predicament, the assassin veers off instead of striking and attempts to flee. That's pretty fluid and not stop motion at all.

It's the hostile situation that triggers initiative and combat, not the action itself.


----------



## MarkB (Oct 3, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> I don't see an issue here.  The assassin jumps out and is slashed at by Conan before he can strike.  Realizing his predicament, the assassin veers off instead of striking and attempts to flee. That's pretty fluid and not stop motion at all.
> 
> It's the hostile situation that triggers initiative and combat, not the action itself.



What if the assassin doesn't leap out, but instead prepares to loose a crossbow bolt from hiding? If the act of attacking is what reveals the assassin, and the assassin decides to forego attacking when it comes to their turn, is the assassin still revealed?


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

darjr said:


> I’d think that a hidden attacker wouldn’t be surprised while their targets would be, essentially giving the hidden attacker the real first action in combat.



That's literally how 5e works. 

If you are hidden and are not noticed prior to initiative, you get surprise on the other side who you can see.  The hidden attacker wouldn't be surprised.

Both sides have to be being stealthy and fail to notice each other in order to both be surprised.  In the case of the hidden attacker if he doesn't notice the stealthy group and the group doesn't notice him, they won't even see each other so no combat or initiative happens at all.


----------



## Horwath (Oct 3, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> I don't see an issue here.  The assassin jumps out and is slashed at by Conan before he can strike.  Realizing his predicament, the assassin veers off instead of striking and attempts to flee. That's pretty fluid and not stop motion at all.
> 
> It's the hostile situation that triggers initiative and combat, not the action itself.



I really like 3.5e take on this.

You missed your perception/insight check to notice danger?

you can roll initiative after you remove the axe from your head.


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

MarkB said:


> What if the assassin doesn't leap out, but instead prepares to loose a crossbow bolt from hiding? If the act of attacking is what reveals the assassin, and the assassin decides to forego attacking when it comes to their turn, is the assassin still revealed?



The hostile act triggers it.  The creak of assassins leather boot as he puts weight on it just before firing.  Slight motion as he leans to get the best shot.  Whatever it is, the victim will notice something before the shot happens and if he wins initiative, will react before that shot goes off.  If he loses initiative to the assassin, then the assassin was in the perfect position and just had to fire.


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

Horwath said:


> I really like 3.5e take on this.
> 
> You missed your perception/insight check to notice danger?
> 
> you can roll initiative after you remove the axe from your head.



I did, too. I don't hate 5e's version, but I prefer 3e's.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Oct 3, 2022)

Aldarc said:


> Does an in-game character ever feel tired? Is actual PC tiredness reflected in any way mechanically in D&D?



Sure, but that's not the point from my perspective.  From my perspective the point is that players only request to take Rests when it makes mechanical sense for them to do so.  If there's no mechanical benefit, then they don't.

If the DM narrates a six-day road journey, no one ever says "Oh, by the way, obviously my PC is going to get tired during those six days of travel, so I want to take two Short Rests at 11am and 3pm, and then a Long Rest each night" in order to "play their character".  Nope... those rests are just ignored completely and becomes an assumed thing that just happens during the "You've traveled for six days" narration and not something the player-as-PC needs to announce.

The only time players actually announce that they want to take a Short or Long Rest is when the game mechanics require that announcement by made in order to refresh.  Which means the rests the players make are due to a metagame consideration and not a narrative one.

I mean not that it matters either way.  Whether a Rest occurs because the player genuinely emotionally feels their character is just worn out, or because they have a bunch of game mechanics they want to refresh for the next leg of the journey... the results are the same.


----------



## MarkB (Oct 3, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> The hostile act triggers it.  The creak of assassins leather boot as he puts weight on it just before firing.  Slight motion as he leans to get the best shot.  Whatever it is, the victim will notice something before the shot happens and if he wins initiative, will react before that shot goes off.  If he loses initiative to the assassin, then the assassin was in the perfect position and just had to fire.



That's a reasonable interpretation, and I think it's fair enough to have the higher-initiative character be aware that something is off. But until either they or the hidden character does something that ends the Hidden condition, it will still be in effect for the assassin on their turn, and they can still choose what actions to take, or not take, on that turn.


----------



## Aldarc (Oct 3, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> Sure, but that's not the point from my perspective.  From my perspective the point is that players only request to take Rests when it makes mechanical sense for them to do so.  If there's no mechanical benefit, then they don't.
> 
> If the DM narrates a six-day road journey, no one ever says "Oh, by the way, obviously my PC is going to get tired during those six days of travel, so I want to take two Short Rests at 11am and 3pm, and then a Long Rest each night" in order to "play their character".  Nope... those rests are just ignored completely and becomes an assumed thing that just happens during the "You've traveled for six days" narration and not something the player-as-PC needs to announce.



Characters also generally never announce that they are going to the toilet or relieving themselves nor would they unless there was a mechanical reason to do so. As @Xamnam says, the character needing/wanting rest is implicitly tied to their mechanical resources (e.g., HP, spells, abilities, etc.).


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

MarkB said:


> That's a reasonable interpretation, and I think it's fair enough to have the higher-initiative character be aware that something is off. But until either they or the hidden character does something that ends the Hidden condition, it will still be in effect for the assassin on their turn, and they can still choose what actions to take, or not take, on that turn.



It depends on how you view combat.  

If you view it entirely as discreet turns where nobody else goes(outside of specific exceptions) until a person's turn is done, then that works out fine.  

If you view it as partially(it can't be entirely due to turn based rules) simultaneous, then the assassin and hero are both moving at the same time or close to it, so the assassin can partially move, make noise, or whatever before initiative is rolled to see who actually gets to act first.  

The hidden condition isn't even a thing if we're seeing which side can act first.  If the victim is unaware of the assassin before initiative he is surprised. That means that he cant act or move, so the best he can hope for is to win initiative and avoid giving the assassin advantage and an auto crit on the assassins attack.


----------



## MarkB (Oct 3, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> It depends on how you view combat.
> 
> If you view it entirely as discreet turns where nobody else goes(outside of specific exceptions) until a person's turn is done, then that works out fine.
> 
> ...



So, what would you be telling the assassin's player when he says, before initiative is rolled, that he's going for a shot? Would you be saying that he's committed to attacking on his turn, regardless of the initiative roll or what his target does on their turn, or would you be saying that, regardless of whether or not he chooses to take the shot, he'll be considered to no longer be hiding after his turn? Or is he revealed on someone else's turn if they win initiative?

I can get behind the it's-all-basically-simultaneous bit, it's when that presupposes a character's action that it gets hazy for me.


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

MarkB said:


> So, what would you be telling the assassin's player when he says, before initiative is rolled, that he's going for a shot? Would you be saying that he's committed to attacking on his turn, regardless of the initiative roll or what his target does on their turn, or would you be saying that, regardless of whether or not he chooses to take the shot, he'll be considered to no longer be hiding after his turn? Or is he revealed on someone else's turn if they win initiative?



When he says he's taking the shot, he takes the shot if the target doesn't know that he is there.  Surprise  happens, initiative is rolled and the best the target can hope for is to win and turn it into a normal shot by noticing the assassin right before the trigger is pulled on the crossbow or something.  If he loses, the assassin PC gets advantage and crit if he hits.

Now if the target makes his perception roll, then he knows the assassin is there prior to initiative being rolled. When initiative is rolled if the target wins, then he gets to act first as normal and the assassin might not want to take the shot on his turn.  There's no reason to hold the assassin to the action of taking a shot when it was predicated on surprise which isn't there.


----------



## MarkB (Oct 3, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> When he says he's taking the shot, he takes the shot if the target doesn't know that he is there.  Surprise  happens, initiative is rolled and the best the target can hope for is to win and turn it into a normal shot by noticing the assassin right before the trigger is pulled on the crossbow or something.  If he loses, the assassin PC gets advantage and crit if he hits.
> 
> Now if the target makes his perception roll, then he knows the assassin is there prior to initiative being rolled. When initiative is rolled if the target wins, then he gets to act first as normal and the assassin might not want to take the shot on his turn.  There's no reason to hold the assassin to the action of taking a shot when it was predicated on surprise which isn't there.



Okay, but if the target wins initiative, fails his perception check, and the assassin chooses not to take the shot (because the player knows his Assassination ability won't trigger, or because the target wanders out of line-of-sight), does the target know he's there? And if not, can this 'combat' end without there having actually been any hostilities? That's what I was trying to get at in the first place.


----------



## darjr (Oct 3, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> When he says he's taking the shot, he takes the shot if the target doesn't know that he is there.  Surprise  happens, initiative is rolled and the best the target can hope for is to win and turn it into a normal shot by noticing the assassin right before the trigger is pulled on the crossbow or something.  If he loses, the assassin PC gets advantage and crit if he hits.
> 
> Now if the target makes his perception roll, then he knows the assassin is there prior to initiative being rolled. When initiative is rolled if the target wins, then he gets to act first as normal and the assassin might not want to take the shot on his turn.  There's no reason to hold the assassin to the action of taking a shot when it was predicated on surprise which isn't there.



The target doesn’t get a perception roll. Not generally. He’s surprised. No actions on their turn. That’s determined at initiative. He had a chance with his passive.

Though I will add that in the players turn they could decide not to attack, but I’d consider that a retcon, your mileage may vary, still as DM id allow it because not to isn’t raw or fair. Imho

Edit: oh wait, I think i misunderstood you.


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

MarkB said:


> Okay, but if the target wins initiative, fails his perception check, and the assassin chooses not to take the shot (because the player knows his Assassination ability won't trigger, or because the target wanders out of line-of-sight), does the target know he's there?



The assassin has no way of knowing that he lost initiative since the target hasn't moved or acted. There isn't a sign up in the air that says, Target 19, Assassin 14. The target may get lucky and notice something in time to prevent a crit or advantage, but that's it.  The assassin has surprise and takes the shot.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 3, 2022)

DEFCON 1 said:


> I suspect he means it from the player's perspective.  The player says they want to rest in order to regain an ability for their character, not that the character wants a rest because in-game the character is tired.



Obviously the character is too tired to use that ability again until they’ve rested.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 3, 2022)

Reynard said:


> What is the purpose of limited resources,  from a design intent I mean? If it is make the big fights cooler because the players will save their strongest abilities for the BBEG, it's terrible design. Players don't like losing and sometimes "easy" fights go bad, so there's no guarantee those big guns won't come out against the little fish. There are alternative systems you could use to better ensure the big fights are cooler.
> 
> The adventuring day and resource management are so estranged from the most common playstyle that I think now is the time to quietly kill it.



Resource management is the primary source of challenge in D&D gameplay. Individual encounters (combat or otherwise) are almost never particularly challenging; the challenge is in managing your limited resources; some over the course of an encounter, some over the course of an adventuring day, and some over the course of an entire adventure.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 3, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> I personally dislike the “game” of deciding which encounters are important enough for me to expend my best resources. It’s why I avoid casters. My favorite mechanic is Reckless Attacks; I can use it as often as I want but it’s risky to do so.
> 
> More like that, please.



The neat thing is, if you spend your best resources on an unimportant fight, you will finish it faster, and be left with more of your other resources that the fight would otherwise have consumed, which you’ll then be able to use to get through the important fight you were worried about saving your most important resources for.

Resource management games are a lot less stressful and a lot more fun when you shift from thinking about how best to _conserve_ your resources to thinking about how best to _use_ them. And it’ll make you better at them to boot. Any spell slots you have left when you start a long rest are spell slots wasted that adventuring day.

EDIT: That said, I would also like more at-will powers that come with a risk or tax you in some way! Variety is the spice of gameplay.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 3, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Resource management is the primary source of challenge in D&D gameplay. Individual encounters (combat or otherwise) are almost never particularly challenging; the challenge is in managing your limited resources; some over the course of an encounter, some over the course of an adventuring day, and some over the course of an entire adventure.



Which is why I play a lot of rogues.

It’s funny because I enjoy managing/conserving torches, rations, arrows, even HP. 

But spell slots? I hate it.


----------



## DEFCON 1 (Oct 3, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Obviously the character is too tired to use that ability again until they’ve rested.



Oh of course, that's the in-game narrative reason for the rest and I'm right there with you.  But I believe (unless I've lost track of the original thread point along the way-- entirely possible)... the question was whether Rests in the game were called for due to narrative or due to metagame considerations.

And in that regard my point was that when players call for rests, my personal take is that its due in that moment to the need to refresh abilities (with the "oh, my PC is tired" narrative dressing it up)... as opposed to players feeling in character in the moment "Wow, I'm exhausted, and I have these cuts and bruises... let's take a few moments to clean ourselves up before moving on."  And the reasoning I gave is that players don't request to take Short Rests just after arbitrary moments of the day when they have no mechanics to refresh but it "makes sense" in the story... it's only when they have the need to refresh mechanics that all of sudden they now need to take one.

Other people might very well say that it's only the incidents that cause the loss of mechanical options that become the indication that the PCs are tired... but I personally find that awfully coincidental and thus am less willing to suspend disbelief.  From my perspective in that regards... a party of PCs could march for 8 hours straight but not be tired and have no need to rest after it... but then get into a combat right after where they lose some hit points and _now_ they're suddenly tired and need a short rest?  Heh heh... that seems kinda squiffy to me.

Might not bother other people or that they find the justification absolutely okay.  Which is cool... folks like what they like.  But me?  That just seems a forced justification to avoid saying it's a metagame consideration.  But you know... if others don't see it as a force justification then it's not surprising nor incorrect when they say it isn't a metagame consideration either.  We just see it differently, with neither side being right and neither side being wrong, it's all just perspective.


----------



## fluffybunbunkittens (Oct 3, 2022)

Horwath said:


> I really like 3.5e take on this.
> You missed your perception/insight check to notice danger?
> you can roll initiative after you remove the axe from your head.



3.x's flat-footed just encouraged ambush-alphastriking even more... I don't think that's a healthy gameplay loop, because similarly, if you do it to the players, they are dead. Except the Wizard, who had contingencies and stoneskin and whatever going.


----------



## Maxperson (Oct 3, 2022)

fluffybunbunkittens said:


> Except the Wizard, who had contingencies and stoneskin and whatever going.



Celerity was the bomb.


----------



## Reynard (Oct 3, 2022)

Maxperson said:


> That's not how it happens in 5e, though.  How it happens in 5e is that the assassin *goes to strike*(not strikes*)*.  Then initiative is rolled and if the assassin loses he is seen coming out of hiding before he can actually take the swing.  Since his victim has great reflexes and won initiative, he goes first.
> 
> Initiative is rolled when hostilities begin, not when an attack happens.



No. Initiative happens when the GM says combat starts. That is an important distinction. As GM, if the PC is unaware of the assassin then you can call for combat to begin AFTER the assassin strikes.


----------



## Reynard (Oct 3, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> Resource management is the primary source of challenge in D&D gameplay. Individual encounters (combat or otherwise) are almost never particularly challenging; the challenge is in managing your limited resources; some over the course of an encounter, some over the course of an adventuring day, and some over the course of an entire adventure.



I don't think that's true from a modern perspective. Not only do people generally not play it that way, the actual systems in play don't really support it (at least not to the degree earlier editions did).


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 3, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Which is why I play a lot of rogues.
> 
> It’s funny because I enjoy managing/conserving torches, rations, arrows, even HP.
> 
> But spell slots? I hate it.



I get that. I’m not a big fan of spell slots either. IMO the problem is when most of your combat power is managed on an adventuring day basis. If you’ve got a few daily powers, and a few encounter powers, and a few at-will powers, managing the daily ones isn’t such a burden. When you’ve got a ton of daily powers and little to nothing else, it’s a pain.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 3, 2022)

Reynard said:


> I don't think that's true from a modern perspective. Not only do people generally not play it that way, the actual systems in play don't really support it (at least not to the degree earlier editions did).



I think the systems of 5e absolutely do support it, if you play them as written, though I agree it seems the majority of people do not. Maybe they’ll try to change 1D&D to more closely match typical 5e play patterns in that sense, but I suspect the resource management cow is too sacred to slaughter.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 3, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> I get that. I’m not a big fan of spell slots either. IMO the problem is when most of your combat power is managed on an adventuring day basis. If you’ve got a few daily powers, and a few encounter powers, and a few at-will powers, managing the daily ones isn’t such a burden. When you’ve got a ton of daily powers and little to nothing else, it’s a pain.




Yeah, daily combat powers suck.  I think daily works better for powerful out of combat utility, e.g. scrying, removing curses, comprehending languages, etc.


----------



## Charlaquin (Oct 3, 2022)

Bill Zebub said:


> Yeah, daily combat powers suck.  I think daily works better for powerful out of combat utility, e.g. scrying, removing curses, comprehending languages, etc.



I don’t mind a few daily combat powers. It’s when they’re all (or mostly) daily that it’s a pain IMO.


----------



## Bill Zebub (Oct 3, 2022)

Charlaquin said:


> I don’t mind a few daily combat powers. It’s when they’re all (or mostly) daily that it’s a pain IMO.




I have actually always sort of liked Berserker Frenzy, which is _sort of_ a daily power, except that you can push it when you want to.  There isn't an artificial hard stop at once/day.


----------

