Knights & Knaves Alehouse

Nagora I believe you are incorrect.
The result of your idea that casting begins on segment one is contradicted in the actual rules as already pointed out and also leads to magic users not having to roll initiative because casting always starts on segment one of the combat round. They will almost always win.

It also aids the magic-user in that he can gamble with longer casting time spells since he knows he gets to start casting on segment one regardless of the initiative roll. I think it makes more sense to follow the actual rule and spell casting like most any action begins on a rolled segment. The magic-user will gamble with casting a fireball (3 seg.) versus a shocking grasp (1 seg.) if he is forced to start casting when his initiative roll dictates. Casting times and not knowing when spell casting will begin make spell casting a trickier business. It leads to longer casting time spells being more likely to be disrupted then if all casting starting on segment 1 of the round.

Ska wrote:Nagora I believe you are incorrect.
The result of your idea that casting begins on segment one is contradicted in the actual rules as already pointed out and also leads to magic users not having to roll initiative because casting always starts on segment one of the combat round. They will almost always win.

Hardly. I don't see how you could even estimate that so badly. Even with a 1-segment spell against a longsword, the magic user will be attacked before completion 16 out of 36 times (and 2 ties).

It also aids the magic-user in that he can gamble with longer casting time spells since he knows he gets to start casting on segment one regardless of the initiative roll. I think it makes more sense to follow the actual rule and spell casting like most any action begins on a rolled segment.

Other actions don't start on a rolled segment. That's just flat out wrong and there is no reference in the rules to that happening.

The magic-user will gamble with casting a fireball (3 seg.) versus a shocking grasp (1 seg.) if he is forced to start casting when his initiative roll dictates. Casting times and not knowing when spell casting will begin make spell casting a trickier business. It leads to longer casting time spells being more likely to be disrupted then if all casting starting on segment 1 of the round.

Only by adding other rules which do not exist in the text. For example, you are assuming that a spell that has not been started can be interrupted. Not only is that illogical, but there is no support in the text for such a rule. Nor is there any need for one, since spell casting - like movement - starts on segment 1. Indeed, ALL actions start on segment one, if you read the rules carefully. The difference with melee and missile combat is that there are various attempts to strike/aim before the one(s) that get the actual attack roll.

The point you raise is directly related to the thread - you have to invent new rules to support the mythical "add the d6" system in order to avoid creating an advantage for the losing side. The d6-delay system is a house of cards which disintegrates at the slightest touch of the rules as written.

Then everyone should play magic users since they are immune to initiative apparently.

Here's an interesting Q&A in Polyhedron regarding "Other actions don't start on a rolled segment."

Q: Do creatures with "spell-like powers"
need to cast the "powers" like spells?
Can you interrupt them, like with spellcasters,
and ruin the effects?

A: Spell-like powers are not spells, and
do not need to be "cast." They can be
produced in total silence, for example,
and in 1 segment of concentration. Thus,
they can only be interrupted if a blow
connects during that same segment -
and if the creature sees a swing coming,
it can easily delay a bit to avoid interruption.

Why would this answer be given if segments aren't tracked at all and nothing happens in a specific segment - only relative to each other in an abstract, changing order?

How is it even possible to give that answer conceptually if the other is true?

Nagora wrote:Other actions don't start on a rolled segment. That's just flat out wrong and there is no reference in the rules to that happening.

What do you make of this?

p65DMG wrote:Attacks directed at spell casters will come on that segment of the round shown on the opponent’s or on their own side’s initiative die, whichever is applicable.

I am not sure how to respond Nagora. I am not "estimating" anything when pointing out passages from the DMG that clearly show that spell casting begins based on initiative rolls of the various parties. The following quotes actually exist! I swear if you look you will see them. And no, I did not sneak into your home and place the following into your copy of the DMG to simply win this argument.

DMG Page 65
SPELL CASTING DURING MELEE
These functions are fully detailed in the PHB. Their commencement is dictated by initiative determination as with other attack forms, but their culmination is subject to the stated casting time.


DMG Page 61

ENCOUNTERS, COMBAT, AND INITIATIVE

4. Determine the results of whatever actions are decided upon by the party with initiative:
D. Discharge missiles or magical device attacks or cast spells...

5. Determine the results of whatever actions are decided upon by the party which lost the initiative (as per A through H above.)

Yes, many actions DO begin on a rolled segment ( a better way to look at it is an important action that can be successfully attempted begin on a rolled segment)
See DMG page 61 under paragraph 4 for a list of the many actions that can be attempted during your turn during initiative.

I am in no way assuming that a spell that has not been started can be interrupted, in fact I am saying the exact opposite.

I am at a complete loss as to what you are talking about when you wrote "The d6-delay system is a house of cards which disintegrates at the slightest touch of the rules as written."
This is a BTB discussion. Do not take this as an attack on how you like to play the game.

I've looked really carefully and I'm not seeing "add the result of the d6 to xxx" where "xxx" is anything at all. Nor is commencement linked to the score on the die anywhere. Nor is there any explanation of how to handle negative commencements due to high dexterity. Nor any reference to sub-round spells rolling over to the next round and how that interacts with subsequent initiative....etc.

Adding a d6 is not BtB. It's certainly a very common house rule due to the terrible layout of the actual rules. I'm not sure who originally proposed it but it's not in the books.

Ska wrote:I am in no way assuming that a spell that has not been started can be interrupted, in fact I am saying the exact opposite.

OK. Well, if you're saying that a spell caster starts casting on, say, segment 4, what happens if they're struck on segment 2? If the spell is not interrupted, then in what way does that not translate into an advantage for losing initiative? Where in the rules is this explained or dealt with? Because in my copy of the DMG interruption is very much an absolute - which makes sense if spell casting like everything else starts at the start of the round.

The BtB system is actually pretty simple at core: The side with initiative does its weapon attacks and these complete before any spells on the other side. The responding side's weapon attacks may or may not come before the winning side's spells (and other timed actions) as laid out on pp66-67 for melee weapons and p65 for other weapons; spells are resolved in order of time with initiative breaking ties due to some sub-segment delay in commencement as per the text. Everyone gets 10 segments of movement and spell casting (again, if there's any reference to getting a fraction of your movement or only 4 segments for spell casting, then you've indeed found a page that's not in my the DMG).

As you said, this is a BtB thread and I would say that the d6-delay system is a terrible system which is over-complicated and slow (although decades of use certainly would speed it up, I'm sure - we discarded it fairly quickly BitD after I read about it somewhere and tried it).

I've looked really carefully and I'm not seeing "add the result of the d6 to xxx" where "xxx" is anything at all. Nor is commencement linked to the score on the die anywhere. Nor is there any explanation of how to handle negative commencements due to high dexterity. Nor any reference to sub-round spells rolling over to the next round and how that interacts with subsequent initiative....etc.

Again, how is that Q&A conceptually possible under your interpretation? I'm curious how it will be explained as being purposefully vague when it would have been so easy to answer it specifically, if wanting to clarify actions aren't assigned any specific segment.

If all spell-like powers start at the beginning of the round, and all of them are 1 segment:

How is it determined that a blow happens in the same segment? Walk me through the mechanics of the DM knowing that the blow happened in the specific segment of the spell-like power.

I'll be curious if the interpretation gives low-"casting time" spell-like powers any advantage over normally-cast spells by mere mortals.

Nagora wrote:I've looked really carefully and I'm not seeing "add the result of the d6 to xxx" where "xxx" is anything at all. Nor is commencement linked to the score on the die anywhere. Nor is there any explanation of how to handle negative commencements due to high dexterity. Nor any reference to sub-round spells rolling over to the next round and how that interacts with subsequent initiative....etc.

Adding a d6 is not BtB. It's certainly a very common house rule due to the terrible layout of the actual rules. I'm not sure who originally proposed it but it's not in the books.

Ska wrote:I am in no way assuming that a spell that has not been started can be interrupted, in fact I am saying the exact opposite.

OK. Well, if you're saying that a spell caster starts casting on, say, segment 4, what happens if they're struck on segment 2? If the spell is not interrupted, then in what way does that not translate into an advantage for losing initiative? Where in the rules is this explained or dealt with? Because in my copy of the DMG interruption is very much an absolute - which makes sense if spell casting like everything else starts at the start of the round.

The BtB system is actually pretty simple at core: The side with initiative does its weapon attacks and these complete before any spells on the other side. The responding side's weapon attacks may or may not come before the winning side's spells (and other timed actions) as laid out on pp66-67 for melee weapons and p65 for other weapons; spells are resolved in order of time with initiative breaking ties due to some sub-segment delay in commencement as per the text. Everyone gets 10 segments of movement and spell casting (again, if there's any reference to getting a fraction of your movement or only 4 segments for spell casting, then you've indeed found a page that's not in my the DMG).

As you said, this is a BtB thread and I would say that the d6-delay system is a terrible system which is over-complicated and slow (although decades of use certainly would speed it up, I'm sure - we discarded it fairly quickly BitD after I read about it somewhere and tried it).

Nagora did you even bother to read the quotes I typed up from the DMG? No one is espousing adding a d6 amount of segments to anything. I can only think you are completely misunderstanding what combat rounds represent and what initiative dice represent.
When you roll for initiative you are not adding that roll to anything. The reason you find that nowhere is because it is not in the DMG. The rolls indicate when a material action can be taken by each side. It is not added to anything and I really have no idea what you are trying to convey.

Commencement by initiative rolls is a core mechanic of the game and is clearly spelled out as I (and others) have repeatedly demonstrated by reference and quotes from the original core rule books. If you cannot understand this I am not sure what else I can do except refer you back to my earlier posts and hopefully you will read what is written.

You might not like how the initiative system works but when you argue that what is written is either not written or does not say what it says then I am afraid no one will be able to explain how the game is actually supposed to be played.

It sounds like you are ignoring the rules of the game and playing a home rule version. This is fine, but not btb.

Please answer EOTB's question as I think it will either make you actually think and perhaps bring understanding or show that you cannot defend your position.
It would also be nice for you to explain how you get around the plain meaning of the cites from the DMG which spell out exactly how initiative is required for actions to commence.

To be fair to Nagora, he's referring to adding casting times to the d6 initiative roll to determine what segment a spell is cast.

I think all veterans of the DF initiative wars think in short-hand.

Negora are you saying this (I will use an example to get the point across):

An MU has become separated from his group, so he's on his own (trying to get back to it).

MU exploring a tunnel runs into a ogre with a battle axe (10 feet away).

1. Surprise is rolled, Neither is surprised.
2. Declare: MU chooses to cast x, ogre will attack with axe.
3. MU roles a 5 the DM/monster a 4. In your interpretation high role goes first, so MU wins.
(you feel this role has nothing to do with the time within the round meaningful hits take place, just "high role goes first".

If x had been Magic Missile, it goes off on segment 1 and hits first.
If x had been fire ball it would have gone on segment 3 (and beat the ogre also).
If x had been a 5 segment spell it would have gone off on segment 5 (in this case the ogre would get a chance to hit (because he rolled a 4) the MU before he casts the spell (that started on segment 1 and completed on segment 5). If he missed the spell would go off, if he hit the spell would be lost, and no other action could be taken by the MU).

Now lets suppose, the MU rolled a 3 and the monster rolled a 5. In this case the monster goes first (high role goes first) and he hits the MU (since the spell starts on segment 1 he is interrupted even if its a 1 segment spell).

Is this how you feel initiative and spell casting works together? If not please use the above example and show how you think it works. Thanks.

To make it clear what SKA (and others) are saying is BtB "you go when the other guy roles" (so you go when the DM roles (the 1d6 indicates the segment within the 10 segments of the round) and the DM goes when you role). This is pieced together (not clearly spelled out in the rules anywhere).

The Player/MU roles a 5 and the DM/ogre roles a 3. The MU goes first (because his first meaningful attack starts on segment 3 (of the 10 segment round). So the idea is that the Mu is maneuvering (perhaps dodging and jumping out of the way), getting his spell stuff together (and his wits) before he actually starts casting. The ogre won't get his meaningful blow in until segment 5.

If the MU cast MM he would hit the ogre first.
If mirror image, it would go off on segment 3+2(casting time)=5 (so they would tie)
If fire ball, it would go off on 3+3 (casting time)=6 and the ogre would get a chance to hit the MU before the spell would go off (if he hits he disrupts the spell).

If the Ogre had rolled a 5 and the MU a 3, the MU couldn't even start casting any spells until segment 5 (of the 10 segment round) so the monster wins (and gets his hit before the MU can start to cast). Thats why its important to have the MU declare what spell he will be casting BEFORE initiative is rolled (so he is married to the risk of going for the longer casting time, so as not to "game" the system).

However, lets say the ogre misses, and the MU wants to not cast the spell (he agreed to cast). What then? Personally, I would allow the PC to change his mind (after all the risk of being prone has passed). I would allow him to do another action (drink a potion of invisibility say, or use his dagger coated with death poison). But I wouldn't allow him to cast another spell (because now he's safe to cast longer and more deadly spells).

I know many don't agree with this interpretation. But for what its worth, EGG confirmed it. He also stated the only time the MU looses his dex bonus is when he is casting the spell (so if he starts casting on segment 2 and his fireball goes off on segment 5, and the ogre can attack on segment 4, that 18 dex bonus is not in effect (but is in effect on segment 1 and segment 6 (just before casting the spell and after casting the spell).

Just realized I did not answer your question about what if a magic user was struck on segment 2 when the magi-user can act on segment 4 and how is that bad for a magic-user.

My answer: If the magic-user is struck on segment 2 (prior to starting casting on segment 4) negative consequences would be the damage from the attack could kill or otherwise immobilize the caster preventing him from casting on segment 4. (Damage from attack, poison, etc.)
Yes, disruption is absolute if the caster is struck while casting a spell. This means if magic-user acts on seg 2 and begins casting a fireball which will go into effect on segment 4 and a fighter strikes him on segment 3 then the spell is gone.


I saw EOTB's last comment concerning adding spell casting time to the roll. The fact there are casting times and initiatives leads one to logically use both.
Why else would you have casting times? How else would you apply said casting times to the initiative rolls action sequence found in the DMG? Why does the DMG state you go through the same action sequence you just did for the winner, including casting spells, if all spells started on segment 1?

I really do not follow Nagora here. I am still waiting for him to answer EOTB's question and to explain the DMG writings.

I am convinced Nagora is confusing long used home rules with btb rules.

I can't believe you're all actually debating this yet again. The rules in the books are incoherent and contradictory, and when you add in secondary and tertiary sources it gets worse, not better. Decide what you want that works best for your games and use it and stop trying to convince everybody else that your preferred version is the "true" BTB version and that they've misunderstood or not studied it carefully enough or whatever.

Embrace the Dark Side Foster.

The back and forth irrelevance of common rules is killing my brain. Surprise always needs a situation not just proximity. Plus surprise and fireball being mentioned together seems very exceptional. This is why minimalists cannot handle new dimensions as this is the double talk that leads to "Williams'D&D". Don't overbake. Don't anticipate. Don't override DM. Just play it.