Re: mechanics of surprise

In article <nortt21s3vsqp0khff2q9v6r221n43qbfp@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Erol K. Bayburt  <ErolB1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:

>>In #1 I would feel quite perturbed if the unaware foe got to shoot
>>one of us before we got to shoot him. 

>Query: Is that "I would feel quite perturbed if the unaware foe got to
>shoot before the *first* shot from our side (but it's OK if the foe
>happens to be fast/lucky enough to shoot second, after our fastest guy
>shoots but before the rest of us)"? Or is it "I would feel quite
>perturbed if the unaware foe got to shoot before *all* of the guys on
>our side got our first shots in"?

I'd certainly feel perturbed if the enemy went before any of the
ambushers, but I could live with him going before some of the
ambushers--it's less realistic, but a lot more survivable, and that's
im****tant to me.

I really dislike "ambushes" where the ambushed side ends up going
before any of the ambushers, unless a successful ambush-spotting
roll is involved.  

>If you want the second case, then I'd say that you have contradictory
>desires for surprise - you want it to be severe enough that the
>slowest of your guys act before the fastest of theirs, but you also
>don't want it that severe because suprise that severe produces bloody
>slaughters. 

It may well be that my desires are contradictory.  I'd like surprise
to make a difference, but not such a large difference that surprising
the PCs means a TPK, or that surprise by the PCs means a walkover.

My GM, reading over my shoulder, says "In a match between even and
roughly similar forces, should surprise determine the victor completely?"
I think I'd be more comfortable if it did not, though at higher levels
that is very hard to arrange.  But I'd rather surprise were not totally
irrelevant either.

This is a lot easier in a system with a low speed of decision, because
then you can simply give the free round, and it will not be an
overwhelming advantage.  Mid- to high-level D&Dv3 is not such a system,
though.  I ran _Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil_ for a party
optimized 
on Initiative and immediate damage capability.  They always went first so
behaved rather like they always had surprise.  It was...impressive, but
not much fun for the GM.  (The player seemed okay with it, but I got
really tired of the pushover combats.)

My SCAP party is a lot less optimized but has still had some fights where,
for example, the rogue's ability to do an average of 93 pts to an unaware
target has completely changed the odds at the outset.  (She has so far
nailed a high-level mage and a mind flayer.)

So far, for v3.x the "partial round" mechanic works about as well as
anything, though it favors mages.  It's better in v3.5 than it was in
v3.0, partly because Haste is less of an issue.

Mary Kuhner mkkuhner@[EMAIL PROTECTED]