Quote Originally Posted by Coffee_Dragon View Post
No, I understood you then, if I understand you now. You're saying the DM is refusing to represent combat as having started until the initiative count reaches that of the aggressor(s), thereby robbing the non-aggressor(s) of any meaning in winning initiative, right? Which is nonsensical, since turns aren't consecutive chunks of time that together linearly make up the round. Every turn overlaps, and initiative decides who takes effective action first. Refusing those who win initiative to act even when they're not surprised reveals a misconception of the whole combat time abstraction and initiative mechanism.
ah, i get you. you were speaking in such absolutes it wasn't clear that you meant "efffectively" robbing them of their actions/initiative.

yeah, when a DM says roll initiative but doesn't clearly explain that the orc horde started to attack AND the party doesn't want to throw the first punch, then the DM is effectively robbing the party of their action.
When I was guilty of this as a DM, I didn't realize that is what I was doing.
It certainly didn't feel like I was robbing the players, cuz they could choose to attack. after all, in the meta game, the players knew they were being attacked.