Skip to main content
Became Hot Network Question
Tweeted twitter.com/StackRPG/status/1242919315332042754
added 9 characters in body
Source Link
T.J.L.
  • 49k
  • 8
  • 187
  • 235

How interesting that after over 20 years of playing RPGs, new basic rule questions still crop up...:

So theThe PC group I'm DM-ing getsgot into a fight with 10two bugbears and eight goblins in a long 10-foot wide tunnel with corners, etc, where it's more advantageous for the gobos to shoot their short bows than go melee straight away.

I roll collective initiative for the monsters which is incidentally super high, so monsters come first.

Their starting position is all bunched up in adjacent squares. So on their initiative, I move the monsters one by one closer to their PC target. Each one, after his movement, fires their short-bow.

Here is where it gets tricky: Moving the monsters INDIVIDUALLYindividually on their COLLECTIVEcollective Initiative creates straight lines-of-sight to the first PC target, enabling MOREmore than just the two goblins who stand in the front row to shoot at the PC without incurring a penalty for cover (for being in the way of each other's lines-of-sight).

The players protest, saying that given the monsters all move on the same initiative, I should assume they move at the same time and maintain their initial formation, and therefore I should assume the goblins shoot before they move, giving all goblins, except the two standing in the front, partial cover penalties. Alternatively, I should roll initiative for each monster individually 🤦‍♂️ ...

I do admit that I probably should have probably separated the 2two bugbears formfrom the 8eight goblins, in this case, however, it would have made no difference in terms of the numbers being able to get a clear shot.

I hope I'm making myself clear? Am I not playing RAW? Am I unintentionally making a house rule here?

How interesting that after over 20 years of playing RPGs, new basic rule questions still crop up...:

So the PC group I'm DM-ing gets into a fight with 10 bugbears and goblins in a long 10-foot wide tunnel with corners etc, where it's more advantageous for the gobos to shoot their short bows than go melee straight away.

I roll collective initiative for the monsters which is incidentally super high, so monsters come first.

Their starting position is all bunched up in adjacent squares. So on their initiative, I move the monsters one by one closer to their PC target. Each one, after his movement, fires their short-bow.

Here is where it gets tricky: Moving the monsters INDIVIDUALLY on their COLLECTIVE Initiative creates straight lines-of-sight to the first PC target, enabling MORE than just the two goblins who stand in the front row to shoot at the PC without incurring a penalty for cover (for being in the way of each other's lines-of-sight).

The players protest, saying that given the monsters all move on the same initiative, I should assume they move at the same time and maintain their initial formation, and therefore I should assume the goblins shoot before they move, giving all goblins, except the two standing in the front, partial cover penalties. Alternatively, I should roll initiative for each monster individually 🤦‍♂️ ...

I do admit that I should have probably separated the 2 bugbears form the 8 goblins, in this case, however, it would have made no difference in terms of the numbers being able to get a clear shot.

I hope I'm making myself clear? Am I not playing RAW? Am I unintentionally making a house rule here?

How interesting that after over 20 years of playing RPGs, new basic rule questions still crop up...:

The PC group I'm DM-ing got into a fight with two bugbears and eight goblins in a long 10-foot wide tunnel with corners, etc, where it's more advantageous for the gobos to shoot their short bows than go melee straight away.

I roll collective initiative for the monsters which is incidentally super high, so monsters come first.

Their starting position is all bunched up in adjacent squares. So on their initiative, I move the monsters one by one closer to their PC target. Each one, after his movement, fires their short-bow.

Here is where it gets tricky: Moving the monsters individually on their collective Initiative creates straight lines-of-sight to the first PC target, enabling more than just the two goblins who stand in the front row to shoot at the PC without incurring a penalty for cover (for being in the way of each other's lines-of-sight).

The players protest, saying that given the monsters all move on the same initiative, I should assume they move at the same time and maintain their initial formation, and therefore I should assume the goblins shoot before they move, giving all goblins, except the two standing in the front, partial cover penalties. Alternatively, I should roll initiative for each monster individually...

I do admit that I probably should have separated the two bugbears from the eight goblins, in this case, however, it would have made no difference in terms of the numbers being able to get a clear shot.

I hope I'm making myself clear? Am I not playing RAW? Am I unintentionally making a house rule here?

removed system from title (it's redundant in many cases thanks to the system tag - relevant meta: https://rpg.meta.stackexchange.com/q/1346/33569)
Source Link
V2Blast
  • 50.3k
  • 10
  • 223
  • 306

D&D 5E Ranged-attack initiative and sequencing for monsters and NPCs

How interesting that after over 20 years of playing RPGs, new basic rule questions still crop up...:

So the PC group I'm DM-ing gets into a fight with 10 bugbears and goblins in a long 10-foot wide tunnel with corners etc, where it's more advantageous for the gobos to shoot their short bows than go melee straight away.

I roll collective initiative for the monsters which is incidentally super high, so monsters come first.

Their starting position is all bunched up in adjacent squares. So on their initiative, I move the monsters one by one closer to their PC target. Each one, after his movement, fires their short-bow.

Here is where it gets tricky: Moving the monsters INDIVIDUALLY on their COLLECTIVE Initiative creates straight lines-of-sight to the first PC target, enabling MORE than just the two goblins who stand in the front row to shoot at the PC without incurring a penalty for cover (for being in the way of each other's lines-of-sight).

The players protest, saying that given the monsters all move on the same initiative, I should assume they move at the same time and maintain their initial formation, and therefore I should assume the goblins shoot before they move, giving all goblins, except the two standing in the front, partial cover penalties. Alternatively, I should roll initiative for each monster individually 🤦‍♂️ ...

I do admit that I should have probably separated the 2 bugbears form the 8 goblins, in this case, however, it would have made no difference in terms of the numbers being able to get a clear shot.

I hope I'm making myself clear? Am I not playing RAW? Am I unintentionally making a house rule here?

Thx!

D&D 5E Ranged-attack initiative and sequencing for monsters and NPCs

How interesting that after over 20 years of playing RPGs, new basic rule questions still crop up...:

So the PC group I'm DM-ing gets into a fight with 10 bugbears and goblins in a long 10-foot wide tunnel with corners etc, where it's more advantageous for the gobos to shoot their short bows than go melee straight away.

I roll collective initiative for the monsters which is incidentally super high, so monsters come first.

Their starting position is all bunched up in adjacent squares. So on their initiative, I move the monsters one by one closer to their PC target. Each one, after his movement, fires their short-bow.

Here is where it gets tricky: Moving the monsters INDIVIDUALLY on their COLLECTIVE Initiative creates straight lines-of-sight to the first PC target, enabling MORE than just the two goblins who stand in the front row to shoot at the PC without incurring a penalty for cover (for being in the way of each other's lines-of-sight).

The players protest, saying that given the monsters all move on the same initiative, I should assume they move at the same time and maintain their initial formation, and therefore I should assume the goblins shoot before they move, giving all goblins, except the two standing in the front, partial cover penalties. Alternatively, I should roll initiative for each monster individually 🤦‍♂️ ...

I do admit that I should have probably separated the 2 bugbears form the 8 goblins, in this case, however, it would have made no difference in terms of the numbers being able to get a clear shot.

I hope I'm making myself clear? Am I not playing RAW? Am I unintentionally making a house rule here?

Thx!

Ranged-attack initiative and sequencing for monsters and NPCs

How interesting that after over 20 years of playing RPGs, new basic rule questions still crop up...:

So the PC group I'm DM-ing gets into a fight with 10 bugbears and goblins in a long 10-foot wide tunnel with corners etc, where it's more advantageous for the gobos to shoot their short bows than go melee straight away.

I roll collective initiative for the monsters which is incidentally super high, so monsters come first.

Their starting position is all bunched up in adjacent squares. So on their initiative, I move the monsters one by one closer to their PC target. Each one, after his movement, fires their short-bow.

Here is where it gets tricky: Moving the monsters INDIVIDUALLY on their COLLECTIVE Initiative creates straight lines-of-sight to the first PC target, enabling MORE than just the two goblins who stand in the front row to shoot at the PC without incurring a penalty for cover (for being in the way of each other's lines-of-sight).

The players protest, saying that given the monsters all move on the same initiative, I should assume they move at the same time and maintain their initial formation, and therefore I should assume the goblins shoot before they move, giving all goblins, except the two standing in the front, partial cover penalties. Alternatively, I should roll initiative for each monster individually 🤦‍♂️ ...

I do admit that I should have probably separated the 2 bugbears form the 8 goblins, in this case, however, it would have made no difference in terms of the numbers being able to get a clear shot.

I hope I'm making myself clear? Am I not playing RAW? Am I unintentionally making a house rule here?

Post Reopened by Akixkisu, Mark Wells, Oblivious Sage, NathanS, T.J.L.
edited tags
Link
NotArch
  • 125.7k
  • 40
  • 515
  • 809
improved clarity
Link
vlysses
  • 141
  • 6
Loading
improved clarity
Source Link
vlysses
  • 141
  • 6
Loading
Post Closed as "Needs details or clarity" by NotArch, doppelgreener
Source Link
vlysses
  • 141
  • 6
Loading