| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1the_coming_curse2001Nov 15, 2009 18:07:34 | My buddies and I were recently playing 3rd edition D&D. I have a 6 Level fighter / 5 Level Bard and I was getting attacked by a Necromancer. The necromaner had mirror image on him and I droped him down to 3 images left when we got the same init on the next round. I rolled my first attack and hit him, not the mirror image. Did 38 points of damage with my weapon, he cast a power word stun. |
| #2mynameisjakeNov 15, 2009 19:37:55 | From the last FAQ for 3.5:Suppose a fighter and an archer go at the same Hope this helps. |
| #3sallaNov 15, 2009 20:12:40 | Well, one, you're doing initiative wrong; you roll once at the start of the fight and keep that result unless you change it via delaying or readying an action. Two, if two combatants roll identical initiative numbers, there's a method to determine who goes first (can't recall the 3e version); there's no such thing as simultaneous initiative. |
| #4Janx_14Nov 15, 2009 20:43:05 | And this is why you never houserule so that simo-initiative happens. It sounds cool at first, but opens up a boat of issues. |
| #5darkspartanNov 15, 2009 23:13:11 | Compare DEX scores is the way 3.x did that. In 4, I compare DEX, and then make them roll off with a d4 until the issue is settled. High roll gets the cake. -Sarena |
| #6greygrendelNov 16, 2009 15:53:33 | I have PCs go before NPCs (they are the heroes of the story after all) Then I just go by placement at the table, saves a lot of time that way with less die rolling. |
| #7boraxeNov 16, 2009 16:24:21 | I cannot for the life of my fathom why anyone would allow "simultaneous actions". In D&D all the action in combat happens at the same time. Breaking it down into individual rounds, and further by initiaitve order, is simply a metagame mechanic to allow play to proceed smoothly and without confusion. Allowing "simultaneous actions" affects nothing within the game itself and serves only to make playing the game more difficult and confusing. I can only assume any DM who allows it does so out of some misguided nod to "realism" without fully understanding its purpose and the consequences of changing it. |
| #8the_coming_curse2001Nov 16, 2009 17:56:41 | Sweet! Thanks guys. What about the Mirror image spell, would i know the real from the fake in this round, or would the DM have to roll for which one i hit for my second attack this round? And asuming i went first in the round would he have to roll a concentration to keep his spell? |
| #9mynameisjakeNov 16, 2009 19:13:01 | What about the Mirror image spell, would i know the real from the fake in this round, or would the DM have to roll for which one i hit for my second attack this round? Once you've hit the real target, you know which one it is for at least the rest of your turn. Once the caster's turn begins, he/she must move to confuse observers and regain the benefits of the spell. From the PHB: "While moving, you can merge with and split off from figments so that enemies who have learned which image is real are again confounded." The rules are silent on exactly what "move" means. Some DM's allow a 5' step to qualify (I do), others insist that the caster must travel farther and use a move action. Ask your DM. Also, the FAQ has a discussion of Mirror Image that you may want to read. And asuming i went first in the round would he have to roll a concentration to keep his spell? I'm pretty sure you can only disrupt a spell while it is being cast. If you get an AoO because the caster is casting in a threatened area, then you might disrupt the spell. Otherwise, you have to ready an action to do so. Damaging a caster in the same round, but before he casts the spell, doesn't disrupt. Hope this helps Edit: You might also consider posting future questions in one of the Previous Editions forum. It's perfectly okay to post 3.X questions here, but there tends to be more 4th Ed. people here, and more 3.X people there. |