Initiative & Spellcasting

[EOTB]

Yeah, I agree the key is whether the IL is engaged, or just unsurprised at range.

If it were an outdoor encounter at 100' away - everyone else in the party surprised, monsters charging but no where near - would you still require the IL to stand doing nothing? I wouldn't.

If melee distance occurs between high-reaction PCs and enemies, then all surprise time for these combatants is used/sped forward to no effect, until the 1st init roll. That's how I do it.

[Nagora]

Fingers crossed they make it worth your while.

Thanks.

Hope you get time to play and polish up some adventure content. It'd be nice to see more of the 1E longtimers showcasing their knowledge in modules as opposed to debates. (I'm not exempt from this either.)

The obsession with initiative grew out of writing down adventures and realising that what I thought was an interesting combat-encounter could be really changed/screwed-up by the differing ways of running initiative, especially how movement was handled in relation to spell-casting and spell-like powers.

Even Don, although that might require a good editor to scrub the Tourettes out of it.

I'm saying nothing.

I missed that you independently came to the same conclusion as DMPrata. That is worth something.

OK.

My point is neither system presented is supported well (or we wouldn't need to have this conversation), but I feel 1. not knowing precisely when the MU casts (but knowing when everyone else gets their attack in) is a major problem,

I don't actually know what you mean there. At the risk of starting the conversation up again, do you mean my interpretation doesn't say or that the book doesn't or just that this is a desirable characteristic of any solution?

and 2. the default is "spells begin on second 1 of segment 1" (if its a 1 segment spell which is the majority of spells used for the first 3 or 4 levels) when the party looses initiative (which is 50% of the time) otherwise the enemy wouldn't get a chance to interrupt the spell". I just don't think EGG would have intended this. Granted, that isn't evidence, its just my gut impression.

I guess it depends on how you view the rest of the system. I think it fits stylistically with the fact that no one (I believe) disputes that a cocked and ready crossbow is beaten by a two-handed sword swing if the latter wins initiative. Either way the system is more concerned with order than "realistic" timings. Realistically, casting an 18-second spell when someone's in melee range should end in your death pretty well automatically.

To be clear, I appreciate you and others showing up and discussing 1E. Even though this topic annoys many (I don't blame them), I did get some new information that (I believe) hadn't come up in previous discussions on this topic

I agree and I have modified my own interpretation about ties based on this thread. I think I've finally really groked that p61 is presented as it was intended and means what it says. So the core system is: High roll goes first unless someone is doing something slow; see below (pp65-67) for what happens in that case.

In particular, p61 means that in a tie, missile weapon attacks only coincide with 1-segment spells (because they tie with the latter's "commencement" - which is literally what the rules say but somehow I never grasped that!), and therefore, logically, anything longer than 1-segment automatically comes after weapon attacks in an initiative tie. I had previously put this case under p65 (segment 1-6) but while I was constructing part of my argument here I realised that didn't really work with the text.

I think what really knackered the DMG was the presentation of the combat examples. On the one hand, the fact that Gygax never thinks the actual numbers rolled is important enough to mention is very much against the d6+ system where they are pretty vital, on the other hand it doesn't argue very firmly in favour of any other specific system and we're still rather adrift. And the PHB example on p105 is a disaster all round for demonstrating anything (why is the sleep spell spoilt? for example). One complete example with the actual numbers rolled would have resolved everything from day 1.

As time has passed, though, I find that more and more of my assumptions are "the text just means what it says" and the problems are really about typography - it's just not clear enough which parts are sub-cases or clauses of others instead of being general global rules. Making p65 a special case of what's described on p61 just works but the big bold all-caps heading "SPELL CASTING DURING MELEE" gives entirely the wrong impression that p65 contradicts or over-rules p61 and the other general statements about what having initiative means. Looking at the contents page of the DMG, it's hard to guess what Mike Carr's method was for choosing which parts of combat got what level heading.

I also wonder if steps 1-6 on p61 were in fact the "Combat Procedure" section referenced later and the "see below" should have been "see above" and the whole thing got scrambled during a cut'n'paste rearrangement of the text. There would be a dry humour in the famous "missing section" actually being there all the time. We'll never know.

Typography matters, kids!

(Foster's pointing out likely omissions that should have been included before publication, for instance).

"Gary could have said this, which would have proved me right"? We could all say that.

Yeah, more time making modules and monster books would be a better use of our time for certain.

Well I have put some stuff up on my blog from time to time but I've been put in charge of moving 88 UK universities onto the Cloud™ (which I don't want to do, hence the job interview next week) and time is in very short supply. My posts on this thread was almost all the result of posting from the train on the way to and from work. And even then, I should really have been doing work-related stuff.

[Nagora]

This came up in tonights game (I wasn't DMing).

The party was attacked by lizard men, and was surprised for 2 segments.
The illusionist has an 18 dex and isn't surprised, but the other 3 PCs are surprised for 2 segments (so for 12 seconds they are under attack but the illusionist can't be attacked in that time. The question is, can the illusionist do anything for those 12 seconds? I would say yes, if he isn't under attack (he could move his location, take out a vile, perhaps even cast a non-offensive 1 segment spell (he isn't flat footed, and he's not attacking. This is a 2 segment period of time before normal combat begins after all).

In tonights game, the illusionist wished to cast change self (to disguise himself as a lizard man) during the 2 segments the rest of the group was attacked (in surprise). How would you have ruled on this?

This was something I tried to get across in the other thread when I was saying that in mixed-surprise cases like this, it's better to treat surprise as part of the first round of combat. Then it's pretty easy: the illusionist casts the spell while his friends dither (and incidentally lose the ability to cast this round as they're not ready to go on seg-1). Otherwise, the non-surprised character gets no real benefit from not being surprised (how little depends on what the DM allows). I don't believe that's the intention and I think you agree that its not a natural reading of the rules. If the gnome had a bow ready, what would the DM have done? Is it just spell-casting that he's crippling?

It's slightly odd how firm the DMG is about not needing to roll initiative if there is surprise and that step 4 follows step 3 without the latter having a GOTO instruction somewhere ("once surprise is resolved goto step 6") but it's one area I'm still not sure of, BtB.

[AxeMental]

Oh, your a super computer geek (and English)? Aha that makes sense....tat tat...details details.

So do you actually get to sit down and play 1E on a regular basis (face to face)? Do you have a group to game with that will play 1E?
That can be a challenge to find. Making modules is great (as well as supplemental cities, towns, monsters, etc. but IMO NOTHING beats actually sitting at the table and playing (DMing or as a PC). Gaming and having fun with real people is the point (as others have stated).

Yes, your correct it wouldn't have proved anything if EGG had mentioned rules were omitted, as he could have done the same if pressed about a different system, I still wish I had.

What I do find very interesting is that very early on EGG was having low role go first, you role for yourself and you start your meaningful action on the segment rolled. So if an MU in EGG's game rolled a 3 and the enemy rolled a 7 (on a d10) the MU would literally start casting on segment 3 (before that he was having to find his footing, his casting materials, get out of the way of comrades, get a clear target and factor in conditions (for instance, casting a web spell) etc.).

Literally for all we know there was supposed to be a paragraph in the DMG explaining that the initiative die determines the segment of the round on which actions occur (or commence), and Gary never realized it wasn't there, and that "note 2" on p. 65 was intended as a reminder of the general rule, not as a new rule. Even the mysterious "whichever is applicable" in the note could be explained if the hypothetical missing piece of corresponding text explained that initiative can either be roll-high with actions commencing on the segment indicated by the other side's die, or roll-low with action commencing on the segment of your own die.

This scenario is sure to be dismissed by those who are invested in the other interpretation, but it really is plausible - that a piece of text got lost between Gary's typescript and the layout, or was inadvertently cut for space/formatting issues, or was cut from one page and intended to be re-inserted somewhere else but wasn't. Things like this absolutely happened on multiple occasions with the AD&D rulebooks that we know of, and we can only speculate about how many times they happened that we don't.

Bold is mine. I know you feel like this is too much "fill in the blank" but to my mind is the most likely explanation, what else could it refer to? As I stated before, neither system is spelt out. This could have been intentional if EGG realized alot of disparity already existed between groups and DMs (related to how initiative was working), he could have put everyone straight, but he might have liked the variety. That such differences were the DMs perogative, as long as they went unnoticed from the eyes of the players). The primary reason for 1E was to unify the world setting under Greyhawk (with certain expectations) and prevent the game from becoming unrecognizable between tables (0E was too skeletal).


As to ties:

Yeah, logically the MU should loose ties. The spell takes the full six seconds to complete and goes off at the end of the segment, but all we know is that the guy attacking with a weapon (on a tie) gets his blow in some second within that 6 second segment of time (so 1-5 in 6 chance of beating the MU). To me the MU getting hit a few moments before completing his spell represents the MU carrying threw to completion, even if the blow killed him (ie. "as the light leaves his eyes with the two handed sword run completely threw his spine, he manages to make the last gestures and utter the sounds required to get off his burst of 3 MMs blowing half the fighters head clean off. Both fall dead to the ground". Kinda thing).

[AxeMental]

PS in the case of a cocked and ready crossbow, it depends. If he has the thing raised to his head and is aiming at the spot he thinks someone will appear at a door say, then yes, I'd let him go first.
If he's got this thing swung over his shoulder loaded. No, it would still be initiative.

[Nagora]

Oh, your a super computer geek (and English)?

Northern Irish, but living in England at the moment.

So do you actually get to sit down and play 1E on a regular basis (face to face)?

Time-to-time, rather than regularly. More online than face-to-face.

Do you have a group to game with that will play 1E?

Loosely speaking. There are people I know who are gamers and will play RPGs as long as they don't have to worry about the rules themselves.

What I do find very interesting is that very early on EGG was having low role go first, you role for yourself and you start your meaningful action on the segment rolled. So if an MU in EGG's game rolled a 3 and the enemy rolled a 7 (on a d10) the MU would literally start casting on segment 3 (before that he was having to find his footing, his casting materials, get out of the way of comrades, get a clear target and factor in conditions (for instance, casting a web spell) etc.).

I certainly don't dispute that, although I might dispute the idea that Gary ever had anything so grand as a system that he stuck to. In any case, d10s and low-is-good is clearly not DMG.

Literally for all we know there was supposed to be a paragraph in the DMG explaining that the initiative die determines the segment of the round on which actions occur (or commence), and Gary never realized it wasn't there, and that "note 2" on p. 65 was intended as a reminder of the general rule, not as a new rule. Even the mysterious "whichever is applicable" in the note could be explained if the hypothetical missing piece of corresponding text explained that initiative can either be roll-high with actions commencing on the segment indicated by the other side's die, or roll-low with action commencing on the segment of your own die.

This scenario is sure to be dismissed by those who are invested in the other interpretation, but it really is plausible - that a piece of text got lost between Gary's typescript and the layout, or was inadvertently cut for space/formatting issues, or was cut from one page and intended to be re-inserted somewhere else but wasn't. Things like this absolutely happened on multiple occasions with the AD&D rulebooks that we know of, and we can only speculate about how many times they happened that we don't.

Bold is mine. I know you feel like this is too much "fill in the blank" but to my mind is the most likely explanation, what else could it refer to?

It just seems very strange to bring in consideration for a completely different system in the middle of other stuff. There may be one exception, though. Thinking now about the mixed-surprise situation in the other thread - I mentioned that it seems odd to me how definite the DMG is about not rolling initiative when there is unequal surprise.

So, take your gnome illusionist who is the only member of a party not surprised by the lizard men.

The party rolls 2 and the lizardmen roll, say, 3. The gnome has DEX 17 (or better) and so not only is not surprised but if we follow the DMG and don't roll initiative but use the dice on the table then [edit: this is wrong since you don't get dex mod for initiative when spellcasting.

the gnome actually has initiative because his roll of 2 plus his modifier of +2 is 4
I've always suspected that when the book says "shown on the opponent's or on their own side's initiative die" that it really really literally means the number on the die, not any modified score. In this case, then, the better die to use for the gnome is the lizardmen's score of 3, not his own score of 2 and not his modified roll of 4. The reasons I think we don't use the modified scores is that it complicates things with having to worry about scores under 1 and at the other end raises the possibility that a score higher than 6 might result. The book seems firm on that 1-6 range being the only possibility if not dealing with melee weapons.

This method has a huge advantage in that the DM can always get his bearings by looking at the dice on the table. Once it's determined who has initiative all the details about modifiers can be forgotten he just has to give the advantage (the higher die) to the figures with initiative. With the size of parties Gary was DMing for, that's a non-trivial optimisation (to be super computer geeky about it).

It's a corner case, but it happened to you and it would have come up in any playtesting, given that dex modifiers are not that hard to get and are desirable for classes not allowed to wear armour.

Edit: end of wrong bit]

As to ties:

Yeah, logically the MU should loose ties. The spell takes the full six seconds to complete and goes off at the end of the segment, but all we know is that the guy attacking with a weapon (on a tie) gets his blow in some second within that 6 second segment of time (so 1-5 in 6 chance of beating the MU). To me the MU getting hit a few moments before completing his spell represents the MU carrying threw to completion, even if the blow killed him (ie. "as the light leaves his eyes with the two handed sword run completely threw his spine, he manages to make the last gestures and utter the sounds required to get off his burst of 3 MMs blowing half the fighters head clean off. Both fall dead to the ground". Kinda thing).

Well, that's actually what I'm saying. On a tie, weapon attacks can't interrupt a 1-segment spell but can result in mutual destruction. The logical extensions of that are:

1) A longer spell than 1seg could actually be interrupted in a tie, so that just the caster is killed/harmed. And
2) If the missile weapon wins initiative then it must either actually interrupt (as in prevent completion of) the same 1-segment spell (and therefore any longer spell) or strike before commencement. Since I can't see any way to shoehorn striking before commencement into either the PHB or DMG (or any other 1e text dealing with full spells), I'm left back where I started which is that spells start on segment-1 and any successful strike with initiative will interrupt any spell. QED

[AxeMental]

The lizard men don't know that there's a spellcaster with an exceptional Dex in the party. Normally, their tactic would be sound. They'd go with what is normally the best tactic. I don't think they'd not attempt surprise on anyone just because there might be an exceptionally dexterous spellcaster in any given group.

Thats a good point. And in most cases a party of lizard men would almost never encounter such a high dex caster (both are rare on there own, but together exceptionally rare).

That said, if you IRL invite 5 or 6 players to your house to role up PCs (and you role 4 d 6 descard low dice, place them as you will on attributes), probably out of that many roles 3 or 4 guys are going to role a natural 16 or 17 (and of those half might choose a race that gets a plus to dex). So its reasonable to expect a group of 5 players to have a spell caster with a 17 or 18 dex. If an MU always has a sleep spell memorized, and he knows he will tie all surprises (with his 18 dex)...I don't know, at that point it seems like gaming the system or something. The strategy of such a low level group (when encountering 1 HD or lower creatures) could be 1. always have a 17 or 18 dex MU with sleep memorized surrounded by fighters (so he can act, even if within melee range). 2. don't worry about surprise so much, because after taking it on the chin for 1 segment the MU will take out the bulk of the 1 HD foe. I think if thats the way we gamed already, I'd be doing that as a player (as shmucky as that sounds). PJ, I agree with the logic in everything your suggesting, and BTB it seems to make sense. I just don't know if EGG would have wanted (or intended) a high dex MU "always" getting off a sleep spell against a dozen orcs before initiative is rolled (even though the MU's side got surprised). As I stated, the orcs would be far better off not attempting surprise (thus having a 50% chance of beating the MU and being able to deal with him by throwing spears etc.). I guess I see my "defensive spell only" as some sort of compromise. As I stated the DM declared the caster could take no action (not even fleeing) suggesting the player's high dex PC was in some in between state I guess (not completely surprised, but having to wait for normal initiative to act).



Yeah, I get that Negora, in your system it would work that way. But for my understanding d6+1, the 2 segments of surprise have to come before the first round/minute (10 segments) of combat, for it to make sense.

[Nagora]

Yeah, I get that Negora, in your system it would work that way. But for my understanding d6+1, the 2 segments of surprise have to come before the first round/minute (10 segments) of combat, for it to make sense.

Yeah, but in the context of the gnome and the lizard men there is no surprise - they're having a normal first round of combat, no matter what way you run initiative generally, so whatever way you look at it the gnome should have been able to act normally, no matter what your definition of "normal" is.

The rules as written do allow high-dex characters to avoid being surprised most of the time - particularly if they're rangers. I can only assume that was intentional as it isn't that hard to get 17 dex which eliminates normal surprise, or 16 which eliminates it for rangers. Until you run into some elves in woodland and the surprise you for 4 segments, of course.

As I stated, the orcs would be far better off not attempting surprise (thus having a 50% chance of beating the MU and being able to deal with him by throwing spears etc.). I guess I see my "defensive spell only" as some sort of compromise.

You could look at it as counter-surprise. The orcs thought they had the drop on the party and discovered they had a quick-draw gnome on their hands. Think Superball-Yoda.

As I stated the DM declared the caster could take no action (not even fleeing) suggesting the player's high dex PC was in some in between state I guess (not completely surprised, but having to wait for normal initiative to act).

In what way was the gnome better off than the PCs who were not surprised, then? I'd put it down as a brainfart but I'd definitely ask the DM to explain what advantage the gnome is supposed to get from the high dexterity before the next session, just to be sure.

[AxeMental]

The advantage the DM gave the high dex illusionist was that he wasn't subject to being hit by the lizard men for two segments, where everyone else was (even if he had been in the front line he couldn't have been attacked in those 2 segments, he would have, I suppose avoided attacks by being able to react. Any lizard man who was targeting that individual would basically surrender his surprise (I would allow that lizard man to notice and switch attacks, but I could see a DM not allowing that).

Lets say a PC has an 18 dex (so +3 -4 AC). His group is surprised for 1 segment. The 18 dex guy doesn't get surprised, but does this + over and above the 1 segment help him go first (effectively winning surprise on the surprisers?)

I might be wrong, but to me the high dex thing is just a way of giving that PC a chance to avoid disaster (not necessarily gain an advantage). Likewise, if the 18 dex PC wins 2 segments of surprise, we don't give him an additional amount of surprise compared to his normal dex comrades.

If an 18 dex PC surprises an enemy fighter also with an 18 dex for 2 segments, do we negate the 2 segments (which is what the high dex allows for the surprised fighter with 18 dex) or do we counter that with the high dex of the PC who won surprise?

This might be one of those "its up to the DM to adjudicate" not sure. Personally, as DM I wouldn't factor in the 18 dex of the surpriser and allow the 18 dex surprisee to avoid being surprised (as the rules don't seem to give an advantage to surprise with high dex) and go to regular initiative.

So, the question is, if you had an an MU with an 18 dex and a memorized sleep spell and came upon 12 orcs (half with bows), would you rather loose surprise for the group or not be surprised and have it come down to initiative. If the former, why would you ever make a MU without taking a 17 or 18 dex if possible. And wouldn't all big groups have one?

[AxeMental]

Someone suggested rolling initiative between the unsurprised PC and the lizard men might be the best way to handle it. So, kind of what Negora is suggesting (make surprise part of the 10 segment round). Maybe thats what was intended (rather then segments of action before the main event). What I don't like about that is the ones that win surprise would get two attacks in one round (so a spell caster who won surprise would say get off his spell on segment 1, role initiative and then get another spell off on say segment 3). But it would solve the problem.

[Nagora]

The advantage the DM gave the high dex illusionist was that he wasn't subject to being hit by the lizard men for two segments, where everyone else was (even if he had been in the front line he couldn't have been attacked in those 2 segments, he would have, I suppose avoided attacks by being able to react. Any lizard man who was targeting that individual would basically surrender his surprise (I would allow that lizard man to notice and switch attacks, but I could see a DM not allowing that).

There is a bit of an analogy here with the fighter's multiple attacks per round against a group of goblins and an orc - how many attacks does a F4 get in that situation? I don't have a solution - the similarity just struck me.

Lets say a PC has an 18 dex (so +3 -4 AC). His group is surprised for 1 segment. The 18 dex guy doesn't get surprised, but does this + over and above the 1 segment help him go first (effectively winning surprise on the surprisers?)

Good question. The DMG is clear that initiative isn't rolled when there's surprise but it doesn't offer much help about what to actually do.

I might be wrong, but to me the high dex thing is just a way of giving that PC a chance to avoid disaster (not necessarily gain an advantage). Likewise, if the 18 dex PC wins 2 segments of surprise, we don't give him an additional amount of surprise compared to his normal dex comrades.

While that's true in this case, if we replace the spellcaster with a bowman then Dex does normally give an advantage even in initiative.

If an 18 dex PC surprises an enemy fighter also with an 18 dex for 2 segments, do we negate the 2 segments (which is what the high dex allows for the surprised fighter with 18 dex) or do we counter that with the high dex of the PC who won surprise?

No, in that case there is no surprise and we're told to actually roll initiative.

So, the question is, if you had an an MU with an 18 dex and a memorized sleep spell and came upon 12 orcs (half with bows), would you rather loose surprise for the group or not be surprised and have it come down to initiative. If the former, why would you ever make a MU without taking a 17 or 18 dex if possible. And wouldn't all big groups have one?

To answer that would be to discuss how initiative works, and I'm going to leave that alone other than to say that, just as having initiative should always be better than not having it, not being surprised should always be better than being surprised (assuming the enemy isn't).

[EOTB]

Lets say a PC has an 18 dex (so +3 -4 AC). His group is surprised for 1 segment. The 18 dex guy doesn't get surprised, but does this + over and above the 1 segment help him go first (effectively winning surprise on the surprisers?)

I might be wrong, but to me the high dex thing is just a way of giving that PC a chance to avoid disaster (not necessarily gain an advantage). Likewise, if the 18 dex PC wins 2 segments of surprise, we don't give him an additional amount of surprise compared to his normal dex comrades.

Pretty sure the phrasing "up to" is used at least in some of the many surprise cites that could occur. That's how I run it, anyway, cite or no cite.

Reaction helps mitigate you being surprised, but it doesn't help you surprise others.

[Philotomy Jurament]

There is a bit of an analogy here with the fighter's multiple attacks per round against a group of goblins and an orc - how many attacks does a F4 get in that situation? I don't have a solution - the similarity just struck me.

Here's how I handle that situation:

If a 2+ level fighter is engaged with only "normal" enemies (i.e., enemies of <1HD) he can use a number of attacks equal to his level. If a 2+ level fighter is engaged with any enemy of 1HD or higher, then he is limited to his standard number of attacks.

I go back to the Chainmail origins of the rule. In Chainmail, the melee is either "normal" or "fantastic." In a normal combat against normal men, a 4th Level fighter (Hero) would fight as four men (i.e., get four attacks). In fantastic combat (with other Heroes) he would get a single roll. I apply the same thinking to AD&D combat.

The way I think of it in AD&D is that when a 4th level Hero is engaged with a bunch of goblins he's free to fight with relative abandon, leveraging his superior abilities to their maximum. However, if the goblins are led by a hobgoblin, or have an ogre with them, the threat that monster represents forces the fighter to focus more attention on that superior threat and defending against it. He's not as free to attack with abandon.

In my game, it works the other way around, too. So if a 2nd level PC fighter is leading a group of 0-level men-at-arms and they encounter an enemy Hero, the PC fighter's presence "protects" the 0-level men-at-arms from being immediately mowed down by the 4th level enemy Hero (i.e., the evil Hero can only use one attack because of the PC's presence in the melee). If the enemy Hero dispatched the PC fighter, then the next round he's free to use 4 attacks per round on the 0-level men-at-arms.

[Philotomy Jurament]

Reaction helps mitigate you being surprised, but it doesn't help you surprise others.

Yes, that's BTB. Reaction adjustments never create surprise, they can only increase or negate it.

Dexterity reaction bonus for surprise never creates surprise in an opponent party or in an individual with regard to its penalty factor; it adds to existing surprise or detracts from it, and only as far as the particular individual is concerned, not for any other individuals concerned.

[EOTB]

The way I think of it in AD&D is that when a 4th level Hero is engaged with a bunch of goblins he's free to fight with relative abandon, leveraging his superior abilities to their maximum. However, if the goblins are led by a hobgoblin, or have an ogre with them, the threat that monster represents forces the fighter to focus more attention on that superior threat and defending against it. He's not as free to attack with abandon.

Good post overall, I agree with this - both in the context you use it, and also as a clearer way to express why I lock any enemy and reflex-benefiting PC within 10' of each other into a null circling that eats up the 1 or 2 segments of surprise. The parallels with 0-levels to surprised, hoboblins as high dex PCs, and the lesser sort of "protection" extended, through fewer advantaged attack rolls thrown.