Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

[condor]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Why do you keep writing about Ready Maneuvers

Because they solve very elegantly the two problems this topic began with.

1) The slicing the pie - take a series of Ready maneuvers.
2) Dead-end alley situation. Take move maneuvers until you are, say, 5 meters from your foe. Than, Wait (trigger, if he falls within reach, I strike) "for the right moment" (10 secs?, 20 secs?), and take a surprise step ("If he keeps where he is, I take a Ready maneuver, stepping forward). Again. And again.

I'm just trying to understand the rules coherence.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

Because I believe this Maneuver, being the wildcard for small physical actions, is the very breach the rules allowed for small physical actions to be used with Wait maneuver.

Which is slightly less novel and noteworthy than pointing out that water is wet.

Yes, you can make small physical actions as the action of a Wait maneuver. Why are we supposed to find this statement interesting?

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

Wait means you spent your turn reacting. The rules have some coherence, since if you are reacting, you are entitled to small physical actions, through Ready Maneuvers, or a regular Step and Attack, an AoA, or a Feint - but not Move, Move and Attack,

How the heck is All Out Attack small?

Oh, sure, All Out Attack (Determined) for ranged attacks, while choosing not to move, might seem small. But All Out Attack lets you do a lot!

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

nor Concentrate (because you're supposedly paying all your attention to react instantly to your triggering condition).

Uh, the Concentrating would start when you react to the triggering condition. Not before. If there's any real logic to Concentrate being disallowed, it might be related to the idea of Concentrate requiring a full second. Which also would go for Move, except Battle Drills torpedoes that.

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

At least, not in a time frame of less than 1000 mS. The example you gave is of a trained unit in formation. It allows you perform actions that would require more than 1 second very fast.

There's no requirement that more than one person be in the formation, nor do the rules cease to apply if your 'drill' doesn't actually involve anything that could be called a formation.

Most of the rules for Battle Drills are useless if you don't have multiple people in some kind of formation, but the particular bit in question works just fine for a loner.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

Because they solve very elegantly the two problems this topic began with.

1) The slicing the pie - take a series of Ready maneuvers.
2) Dead-end alley situation. Take move maneuvers until you are, say, 5 meters from your foe. Than, Wait (trigger, if he falls within reach, I strike) "for the right moment" (10 secs?, 20 secs?), and take a surprise step ("If he keeps where he is, I take a Ready maneuver, stepping forward). Again. And again.

I'm just trying to understand the rules coherence.

So, because you're very excited about a Maneuver other than Attack that allows a Step?

That's both utterly trivial, and solving a problem that I think most people wouldn't consider to exist in the first place.

EDIT: Really, does anyone have a problem with the proposition "you can use a Maneuver to take a step and not do anything else"? Anyone?

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

GURPS TS, p. 37 - the book itself says you must use Ready to form up, only taking Steps, as I mentioned.

It says that you use the ready to form up, which includes monitoring the position of your squadmates. I'd call that something. Where do you see that it says that Ready is a generic maneuver that can be used to do nothing at all?

No logical reason? Are your saying that Able's friend utters Go!, Able sees it and react in less than 1000 mS? More than that, in less than 1000 mS he is already at the door? In a realistic game?

Bad Guy has Basic Speed 6. Abel has Basic Speed 5.75. Ben has Basic Speed 5.00. Abel is 15 yards away from a door. Ben is behind the door loading a MG (or whatever).
Bad Guy: Attack (Throws a grenade between Able and the door with a three second fuse).
Abel: Move (Runs toward the door). 10 yards from the door.
Ben: Ready (loads MG turn 1).
Bad Guy: Ready. Readies a pistol. Two seconds left on the grenade fuse.
Abel: Move (Runs toward the door). 5 yards from the door.
Ben: Ready (loads MG turn 2).
Bad Guy: Attack. Shoots at Abel, who dodges.1 second left on the fuse.
Abel: Says, "Dude! Open up!" (Free Action).

Now by RAW what Abel can't do now is Wait for Ben to open the Door and then run through it even though he's been running right at it for two seconds already. Is this realistic?

RAW version:
Abel: All Out Defense (Increased Dodge).
Ben: Ready (Opens Door).
Bad Guy: Shoots at Abel and misses. Grenade blows up.

Not RAW:
Abel: Wait ("I run through the door as soon as it's open!")
Ben: Ready (Opens Door). Abel's Wait is triggered.
Abel: Move (Runs through the door).

Do you see the issue I have with this now?

I don't agree that there is no logical reason. Again, in a cinematic game, ok. But it is a choice you and your players make.

By RAW it's not okay even in a cinematic game. There's no optional rule that allows Wait triggered Move even in the Chambara movement rules.

[condor]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

So, because you're very excited about a Maneuver other than Attack that allows a Step?

That's both utterly trivial, and solving a problem that I think most people wouldn't consider to exist in the first place.

EDIT: Really, does anyone have a problem with the proposition "you can use a Maneuver to take a step and not do anything else"? Anyone?

Again, there is a difference between the event and the model.

Taking a step (event) is not the problem. The problem is what maneuver to use (model) when basically, all you do, is taking a Step and make small physical actions.

The problem is that most posts confused the model with the events all the time. There is not a maneuver called Step (model) - but I must take a step (event), and make little physical actions.

[condor]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Now by RAW what Abel can't do now is Wait for Ben to open the Door and then run through it even though he's been running right at it for two seconds already. Is this realistic?

You are taking one turn out of context and demanding it to be realistic alone. It is not fair with GURPS model. Events happen continuously; in GURPS you must take turns.

To me, the whole problem seems to be that talking is not a free action in the events - the model admittedly allows it for fun. So, Abel should have shouted before, and Ben, in his second turn, would open the door.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

You are taking one turn out of context and demanding it to be realistic alone. It is not fair with GURPS model. Events happen continuously; in GURPS you must take turns.

If events swing on a single second, and they often do, that second shouldn't be arrant nonsense.

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

To me, the whole problem seems to be that talking is not a free action in the events - the model admittedly allows it for fun. So, Abel should have shouted before, and Ben, in his second turn, would open the door.

Your theory is that if you say anything in a second, you can't do anything else?

[condor]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

If events swing on a single second, and they often do, that second shouldn't be arrant nonsense.

Why? Organizing events this way is just a characteristic of the model , not of the events. Of course that it is neat when there is big adherence between (turns) model and reality (events) on a second by second basis. But sometimes, you must run "forward" to go backward.

Not event the physicists have a single model to explain reality - why should a game be demanded to adhere to perfection?

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Your theory is that if you say anything in a second, you can't do anything else?

No. Only that saying something, being understood, and having what you want done amidst a shootout may well take more than 1 second.

[condor]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

It is merely odd that it specifies that the mobile shooter didn't take a Wait, if the mobile shooter cannot take a Wait.

It addresses a corner situation, it doesn't say you are the moving part. You could be the one stopped, waiting for a foe.

EDIT: You may hear a sound and decide to stop your movement and Wait.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

Why? Organizing events this way is just a characteristic of the model , not of the events. Of course that it is neat when there is big adherence between (turns) model and reality (events) on a second by second basis. But sometimes, you must run "forward" to go backward.

Not event the physicists have a single model to explain reality - why should a game be demanded to adhere to perfection?

Because players saying "I got my character blown up by a grenade because the combat rules are total nonsense" is a pretty serious failure mode for a game.

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

No. Only that saying something, being understood, and having what you want done amidst a shootout may well take more than 1 second.

This is a completely silly sidetrack. Suppose, if it helps, that this door sequence was planned out in advance between the two and requires no signal at all to set up.