Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

What is written in p. TS 37, is that you can solve little steps while forming up through the Ready maneuver.

It really doesn't say anything of the kind. In fact, it doesn't say anything about Steps at all, unless you look in the third bullet point, which has nothing to do with Ready maneuvers.

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

And what is written in p. BS 364 is that, when you take Move, you can do nothing but free actions, which are exaustively listed: talk, maintain spells and psi, drop an item and crouch. A military rehearsed approach to a corner doesn't seem to qualify.

What are you proposing that you do during that approach that doesn't qualify?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

And what is written in p. BS 364 is that, when you take Move, you can do nothing but free actions, which are exaustively listed: talk, maintain spells and psi, drop an item and crouch. A military rehearsed approach to a corner doesn't seem to qualify.

What do suppose a shooter is doing when he's slicing the pie? Futzing with his weapon in some vague way? It's just a kind of movement to contact. I rehearsed individual, team, and squad rushes a hell of a lot more than I ever rehearsed slicing the pie. It's definitely a drilled military movement. What maneuver do you suppose that you rush with if not Move?

But in raw, it seems to be solved through Ready.

As Doug says, nobody in the Tactical Shooting playtest thought it was a Ready. It doesn't make any sense as a Ready. Movement is Move. Sighted shooting is All-Out Attack: Determined. Bringing a weapon from Alert to Ready is probably a Ready. Loading requires Ready (or Fast Draw). Walking (even tactical movement) isn't a Ready.

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I went back and looked at some of my records - the operation was originally written as a series of Step and Attack maneuvers. I no longer have my detailed access to the Tactical Shooting playtest, but it's possible that it was changed to Step and Wait to forestall the "I take step and attack, but there's no one there yet, then he comes around the corner and nails me, even though I was looking for this trouble!" issue that happens when you don't "hang" your action.

Yeah, that's how I remember it developing too. As it's written now though it really only seems to apply to a pre-combat situation where "whose turn it is" seems vague. I don't think it makes sense to use that Quick Contest otherwise. It certainly is way too clunky to use in the middle of an ongoing firefight!

Step and Wait would solve this problem more elegantly, IMO, and I wish I had noticed this back then.

[condor]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

What do suppose a shooter is doing when he's slicing the pie? Futzing with his weapon in some vague way?

I'm afraid that this is called "straw man" fallacy: you pick an argument, distorts it, and try to attack a position which is not the point. Besides a logical error, it is not very polite.

Anyway, what I said is that Ready seemed to be used as a generic physical maneuver. Despite most players thinking otherwise, the book and its supplements give actual examples that you don't have to Ready always "something". Want an example of Ready which is actually little more than coordinated walk?

TS p. 37 "If you opt in, you must take a Ready maneuver to get in position , check the positions of your team mates, etc."

Basically, according to what the 4th edition suggests, if the task is primarily physical, Ready is a wildcard for that, be it reading an statement aloud, a push-up, rope-skipping, hopscotch (barring throwing stones, this would be Throwing), or anything that prevents you to move more than a yard in one second. If the task is mental, otherwise, like reading a book, imagining a picture, solving a problem, you use Concentrate.

I imagine that during a Slice the Pie a guy is in a state of awareness, walking cautiously, a combination of mental and physical focus. It must be reactive but slightly slower than a guy which is dedicated exclusively to opportunity fire. It fits just like a glove in the old Step and Wait maneuver, and using it is not absurd.

I don't doubt that a lot of people tried to stick with the old rules during the tests. Everyone I know misses Step and Wait. And everyone I know use this house rule. But this post is not about house rules nor 3rd. It is about how to deal with this problem in 4th. without house rules. Is it such a big crime?

Originally Posted by acrosome

The obvious answer here is that this was just an editorial oversight. Hans used his verbiage because he thought that Step and Wait was possible- perhaps due to 3rd edition flashbacks- and it slipped past Kromm (MHLF) in editing.

Hm. Maybe. Maybe not.

I don't doubt that most people had a hard time to adapt to the new Wait maneuver. Most people play GURPS without even noticing the difference for years, including myself. But saying that it was just an editorial oversight takes the thing to a whole different level. At least, it raises some new questions:

1) Who made the mistake? The guys who wrote the text for the new maneuver, or the guys who kept things suggesting the old 3rd one?

2) Is it really necessary, or people just are too used to the old Step and Wait to think a different alternative?

3) Did the guys who develop the game share the same unanimous opinion respecting to how badly Step and Wait is needed? Or they quarreled just like we are doing?

4) Why this oversight has been lasting 10 years without a single errata?

EDIT: 5) And why the step portion was removed from Wait, to begin with?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

I'm afraid that this is called "straw man" fallacy: you pick an argument, distorts it, and try to attack a position which is not the point. Besides a logical error, it is not very polite.

I'm sorry that I seem to be making a strawman argument here. I think there's a misunderstanding. I don't understand what you think this Ready is for and why this isn't just movement. I've done MOUT operations (in Al Anbar province, Iraq during OIF 9) and I was a playtester for Tactical Shooting and I don't understand why you think a Ready has anything to do with it. Can you explain what you think the shooter is doing with a Ready that say a Move couldn't also do?

Anyway, what I said is that Ready seemed to be used as a generic physical maneuver. Despite most players thinking otherwise, the book and its supplements give actual examples that you don't have to Ready always "something". Want an example of Ready which is actually little more than coordinated walk?

TS p. 37 "If you opt in, you must take a Ready maneuver to get in position , check the positions of your team mates, etc."

Forming up for a battle formation is something other than movement. I believe the reason why a Ready was chosen there has more to do with the Communicate part of Move, Shoot, and Communicate, than the Move part.

Basically, according to what the 4th edition suggests, if the task is primarily physical, Ready is a wildcard for that, be it reading an statement aloud, a push-up, rope-skipping, hopscotch (barring throwing stones, this would be Throwing), or anything that prevents you to move more than a yard in one second. If the task is mental, otherwise, like reading a book, imagining a picture, solving a problem, you use Concentrate.

All those are doing something. You seem to be suggesting a Ready that does nothing. What do think this Ready is doing?

I imagine that during a Slice the Pie a guy is in a state of awareness, walking cautiously, a combination of mental and physical focus. It must be reactive but slightly slower than a guy which is dedicated exclusively to opportunity fire. It fits just like a glove in the old Step and Wait maneuver, and using it is not absurd.

Ready doesn't normally permit reactive actions, or opportunity attacks. Are you suggesting that it does, or should?

I don't doubt that a lot of people tried to stick with the old rules during the tests. Everyone I know misses Step and Wait. And everyone I know use this house rule. But this post is not about house rules nor 3rd. It is about how to deal with this problem in 4th. without house rules. Is it such a big crime?

It's not as elegant as Step and Wait, but the rules in Tactical Shooting do seem to have a solution. Nowhere in the section on Slicing the Pie is the shooter required to take Ready maneuvers (the weapon is assumed to be in Condition 1, and the shooter in a Ready stance already). By RAW the shooter moves by Slicing the Pie (note he's at Condition Orange and ready for threats in the room he's trying to clear; he's not yet in turn-by-turn combat but the GM is still using a battle map), if he encounters a lurking combatant then one of the following things happen:

If the lurker is expecting the shooter to come through that door (ie. he has a relevant Wait and is watching the door for Opportunity Fire):
Combat starts with the lurker's Attack or All-Out Attack.

If the lurker does not have a (relevant) Wait:
Roll the quick contest. Combat starts with the winner's first Attack or All-Out Attack.

Regardless, both shooters are now in Condition Red (baring some Fright Check putting them into the Black).

Hm. Maybe. Maybe not.

I can tell you that, as far as I can recall this issue did not arise during the Tactical Shooting playtest. I recall playtesting Slicing the pie as I describe above but that was fairly late in the process (and I had already submitted the Threat Recognition rules as they are now).

2) Is it really necessary, or people just are too used to the old Step and Wait to think a different alternative?

It's useful but hindsight is 20/20.

3) Did the guys who develop the game share the same unanimous opinion respecting to how badly Step and Wait is needed? Or they quarreled just like we are doing?

There was no discussion about it during the playtest, as far as I remember.

4) Why this oversight has been lasting 10 years without a single errata?

It's not errata. Slicing the Pie works as written as I described without Step and Wait. It does seem to suggest it's possible but it's not actually required.

[condor]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I don't understand what you think this Ready is for and why this isn't just movement.

I don't have military experience, but when you are Slicing the Pie, it seems that you are aware to a lot of different dynamic perception hints at the same time that you are trying to advance strategically for seeing into an unknown area. I thought it was not just about moving, but a coordination between movement and perception, the same level that an Attack maneuver takes. Maybe it is simple, and maybe as a soldier you do it as second nature. Nonetheless, you cannot accelerate the process, because you're not focused on your movement - you're focused on scanning the environment while walking in an arc, and "defend" yourself from your foe's eyes. That is why I tried to envelope these Steps in Ready maneuvers, even though you don't actually Ready your gun. You are actively seeing and listening, and therefore, doing something more than walk.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Ready doesn't normally permit reactive actions, or opportunity attacks. Are you suggesting that it does, or should?

I'm suggesting that Wait might not be necessary to solve these situations. Maybe you could solve them on a turn by turn basis and get consistent results. As you said, if your foe has a relevant wait, he acts first. If both are expecting trouble, there is a Quick Contest. If you know he is there (through a camera), you Attack or AoA. If he is smoking a cigarette, he will need to Ready his gun first.

I agree that allowing the moving part allow some relief during gameplay and it is a good solution. Just got really curious about why this has changed.

Maybe what the 4th edition rules suggest that Wait is only for very automatic event-triggering, those kinds of events that allow you to react before, say, 300mS. A soldier focusing on a very specific stretch of sidewalk may be entitled to the advantage of interrupting someone else's turn. But if he is facing a whole new visual field (turning a corner), maybe he doesn't react so fast, even when alert.

Or maybe it is just a misleading way to describe Wait maneuver in BS that didn't bother anyone before and was not corrected for ten years.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

I don't have military experience, but when you are Slicing the Pie, it seems that you are aware to a lot of different dynamic perception hints at the same time that you are trying to advance strategically for seeing into an unknown area. I thought it was not just about moving, but a coordination between movement and perception, the same level that an Attack maneuver takes. Maybe it is simple, and maybe as a soldier you do it as second nature. Nonetheless, you cannot accelerate the process, because you're not focused on your movement - you're focused on scanning the environment while walking in an arc, and "defend" yourself from your foe's eyes. That is why I tried to envelope these Steps in Ready maneuvers, even though you don't actually Ready your gun. You are actively seeing and listening, and therefore, doing something more than walk.

Why is that you think Ready does this when another Maneuver doesn't? Both Move and Ready allow Any Active Defense.

Your suggested use of Ready here is odd. I've never seen any suggestion that it works like this, nor have I ever seen a player request to take Readies in this manner in actual play (and I do actually play a lot of GURPS).

I'm suggesting that Wait might not be necessary to solve these situations.

It's not. As I said the rules under Turning Corners in Tactical Shooting do not actually require a Step and Wait as written. They actually don't require any Maneuvers at all, since they are intended for pre-combat movement to contact.

Maybe you could solve them on a turn by turn basis and get consistent results. As you said, if your foe has a relevant wait, he acts first. If both are expecting trouble, there is a Quick Contest.

Again, I'm fairly certain that the special Quick Contest that works like automatic Cascading Waits is not meant to be during turn-by-turn combat but rather only once at the start of it. If you extend it more generally, I think you are going to seriously break a lot of how combat works in GURPS. I suppose I could be wrong, and maybe Doug or Hans can clarify.

[condor]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Why is that you think Ready does this when another Maneuver doesn't? Both Move and Ready allow Any Active Defense.

Your suggested use of Ready here is odd.

You are right. Ready here is odd. And in the case of Slicing the Pie, maybe Move under special rules would do just fine.

But in the case you are closing in a foe in a three yard wide alley, sword in hand, which is the other problem that started this thread, there is still a problem. Suppose you Move until you are five yards from you foe. In raw, Wait does not allow Move, only Ready, Attack, AoA or Feint. You cannot use Attack, nor AoA or Feint, because he is not within reach.

Using just a Move maneuver, during your own turn, probably would allow him to escape. You need to Wait and attack, in order to be able to hit him in case he decides to run, but you need a maneuver that allows you a Step before you his next turn, or he would run past you. In old 3rd edition, you would simply Step and Wait a couple of times. But in 4th raw Tactical Combat you don't have this option.

The only solution I see to this case inside TC is allowing a combination of Wait and Ready maneuver to be triggered. The player would declare secretly "If he advances I strike", but sometimes "If he stands, I Step and Ready." Otherwise, both would be stuck in place.

Ready would represent a cautions move while paying attention to the environment and a breach in the guard. If the foe happened to guess the right instant you are more focused to step than strike, he would run past you, that is what evasion is about, intuition and right timing.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I ever seen a player request to take Readies in this manner in actual play

Nor did I. Just got curious about how this situation would be solved according to the new rules.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

Ready would represent a cautions move while paying attention to the environment and a breach in the guard. If the foe happened to guess the right instant you are more focused to step than strike, he would run past you, that is what evasion is about, intuition and right timing.

Regular Move already gives you just as much caution and attentiveness as Ready does.

I understand that it doesn't help your desire to find a RAW legalism that does something vaguely like what you want, but I think it's important to note that Ready adds nothing whatsoever in those respects.

[Captain Joy]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

Ready would represent a cautions move while paying attention to the environment and a breach in the guard. If the foe happened to guess the right instant you are more focused to step than strike, he would run past you, that is what evasion is about, intuition and right timing.

Wouldn't an Evaluate maneuver be even better?

Also, the fact that a Retreating Dodge allows a step is all the more reason to simply house-rule that a Wait maneuver allows for a step. It should so obviously be allowed that, IMHO, it's absence is an erratum.

I'd go further and allow someone to who chose All-Out Attack as their Wait option to move half their Move before the trigger. E.g. I run to the end of the hall and if/when an Orc is in range, I determined attack him.

[condor]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I understand that it doesn't help your desire to find a RAW legalism that does something vaguely like what you want but I think it's important to note that Ready adds nothing whatsoever in those respects.

Yeah, I agree with you, Ready doesn't add anything. It is odd, besides.
I'm trying to use it just as a generic maneuver to deal with what seems to be a gap. GURPS, as any system, is not fail proof. And, as in every system, you need a flexible maneuver that, in practice, means - "whatever is physical".

But this rule changed from 3rd to 4th, and there are some strange facts.

1) I didn't notice this change until very recently. Indeed, almost every player I know didn't notice this change.

2) Despite the description of the maneuver clearly forbidding any movement until the triggering condition, some phraseology seems to have been written with the old rule in mind, as p. B385, that says that "If you did not move at all on your turn, you may take a step and then strike."

3) p. B385 could be interpreted as if - if you didn't move at all on your turn (you can't), then
Option 1 - take the step, conditioned only to the (no) movement during your turn.
Option 2 - take the step and strike.

But it is a very strained reading. An errata to correct it would be: "If you did not move at all on your turn, you may take a step and/or take a step and then strike, as your maneuver would allow."