How exact should a wait maneuver be?

[oneofmanynameless]

The wording says "exactly" and the description includes maneuver, target, and weapon, but not the attack mode or if specific techniques or gambits are going to be used (although basic set doesn't really have gambits, does it?) So what all should be included? If you want to swing vs. thrust should that be included? If you want to telegraph should that be included? If you want to use a technique? Is maneuver, target, and weapon sufficient?

[swampthing]

Martial Arts answers this question. You have to specify the weapon and maneuver, but you can decide on any other attack options when you attack, e.g. "you could choose to disarm, stab to the vitals, make a Rapid Strike, etc."

[Taneli]

How exact should the target be?

If you specify the first creature that comes through the door, do you have to hit the friendly peasant that comes through first?

If you specify the first goblin that comes through the door, are you not able to hit the orc that comes through first?

If you specify the first hostile creature that comes through the door, do you have to hit the hostile but nearly harmless tiny dog that comes through before the two-headed hostile cave troll?

[MrFix]

Originally Posted by Taneli

How exact should the target be?

If you specify the first creature that comes through the door, do you have to hit the friendly peasant that comes through first?

If you specify the first goblin that comes through the door, are you not able to hit the orc that comes through first?

If you specify the first hostile creature that comes through the door, do you have to hit the hostile but nearly harmless tiny dog that comes through before the two-headed hostile cave troll?

If you wish for it to be specific, you must take a -2 to your attack roll to assess the target.

If you specify the first creature that comes through the door, do you have to hit the friendly peasant that comes through first?

Yes, unless you explicitly state that you assess the target before attacking. If you assess the target via Per roll that it is friendly, you don't have to attack. If you assess it as hostile, you can attack at -2.

Engaging without assessing is at +0.

It's best to think that for purposes of attacking from wait, everyone is a hex-wide cloud of black smoke, regardless of being goblin or orc or peasant, until you assess them by taking -2 and making a Per roll. That is, if you're lying in wait to attack a target that has not yet appeared.

[Taneli]

Originally Posted by MrFix

If you wish for it to be specific, you must take a -2 to your attack roll to assess the target.


Yes, unless you explicitly state that you assess the target before attacking. If you assess the target via Per roll that it is friendly, you don't have to attack. If you assess it as hostile, you can attack at -2.

Engaging without assessing is at +0.

It's best to think that for purposes of attacking from wait, everyone is a hex-wide cloud of black smoke, regardless of being goblin or orc or peasant, until you assess them by taking -2 and making a Per roll. That is, if you're lying in wait to attack a target that has not yet appeared.

Oh yes, the -2 for checking the target with a Per-roll, thank you, I had forgotten that :)

[coronatiger]

What happens if you fail the Per roll? Does it depend on who comes through the door?

Friend, Per success => no attack
Foe, Per success => attack (at -2)
Foe, Per failure => no attack
Friend, Per failure => attack (at -2) ???

The first two cases follow directly from what's been said in this thread. The third also feels right, but the fourth seems like something that should only happen on a critical Per failure.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by coronatiger

What happens if you fail the Per roll? Does it depend on who comes through the door?

Friend, Per success => no attack
Foe, Per success => attack (at -2)
Foe, Per failure => no attack
Friend, Per failure => attack (at -2) ???

The first two cases follow directly from what's been said in this thread. The third also feels right, but the fourth seems like something that should only happen on a critical Per failure.

I think it would depend on the character's intent. I'd generally assume they wanted to attack the first known hostile, but the first target not known to be friendly is an option.

If in doubt, tell the player "a target" appeared, and the result of the Per roll determines whether the decision to attack comes before or after further details are recognized.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by coronatiger

What happens if you fail the Per roll? Does it depend on who comes through the door?

Friend, Per success => no attack
Foe, Per success => attack (at -2)
Foe, Per failure => no attack
Friend, Per failure => attack (at -2) ???

The first two cases follow directly from what's been said in this thread. The third also feels right, but the fourth seems like something that should only happen on a critical Per failure.

Any attack you make after specifying that you'll try and distinguish the target's type before attacking are at -2 doe to the delay while you decided whether or not to attack.

[Varyon]

Originally Posted by coronatiger

What happens if you fail the Per roll? Does it depend on who comes through the door?

Friend, Per success => no attack
Foe, Per success => attack (at -2)
Foe, Per failure => no attack
Friend, Per failure => attack (at -2) ???

The first two cases follow directly from what's been said in this thread. The third also feels right, but the fourth seems like something that should only happen on a critical Per failure.

If there's no way for the player to know what is coming through the door, you can just say "Something comes through the door, but you can't determine if it's friend or foe - do you attack or not?" If the player does know what's coming through the door (possible if you're using a battlemap, if other characters are aware of what's going on, if it's another player coming through, etc), it's probably best to ask when the player declares the Wait (including the "I'll take the -2 to check targets") what they'll do if they can't determine the nature of what comes through the door, and hold them to it.

Of course, there's also the option of handling it more heroically. If the character fails the Per roll and it's an enemy, let them attack anyway - but at an additional penalty equal to MoF (or just use the worse of MoF and -2), as they initially failed to identify the target and thus hesitated longer than they should have. If the character fails the Per roll and it's someone they'd rather not attack, let them check themselves - this might mean the character commits to an attack, realizes "Hey, I don't want to hit that guy" and purposefully misses, or the character doesn't realize that but conveniently misses anyway, wasting the attack but not hitting the target. Alternatively, maybe the character stops sooner than that and doesn't waste the attack, but rather is in a more awkward position when an enemy does come through, and suffers the same penalty as above, based on how badly they failed the roll to identify their ally (and if the character fails the roll to identify the enemy, combine the MoF's - or maybe use the worse, or use the worse in full and half the other, or whatever).

[Curmudgeon]

Originally Posted by coronatiger

What happens if you fail the Per roll? Does it depend on who comes through the door?

Friend, Per success => no attack
Foe, Per success => attack (at -2)
Foe, Per failure => no attack
Friend, Per failure => attack (at -2) ???

The first two cases follow directly from what's been said in this thread. The third also feels right, but the fourth seems like something that should only happen on a critical Per failure.

It feels like something that should only happen on a critical failure because you seem to be reading too much into what is happening.

This isn't a case of "I'm taking a full second to identify who it is and then attacking or not, in accordance with that identification." It isn't even using a full maneuver to make that identification, which we might suggest devotes as much as half a second to the process of identification. It's not much more than a quick glance.

As such, it isn't "I looked, saw it was John and then attacked him by mistake," in the fourth case.

It's much closer to, "I was waiting for the first orc through the door, I saw someone about orc-sized come through the doorway, well, I sort of saw who it was, but I couldn't immediately put a name to the face and you know what a homely guy John is, and in the heat of the moment, well, he looked orcish, so I took a swing, and just about the time I finished swinging my sword into his face, I made the connection, 'Gee, that orc looks an awful lot like John', and then it hit me, 'you know that's probably John whose face you're slashing, you should tell him you're sorry.' Of course, John knows me about as well as I know him, and getting a sword in the face, he wasn't really in the best mood to hear my apology, so we ended up going at it for a bit but since he didn't hurt me too much, and I stopped trying to hurt him, he calmed down after a bit and we were both good, so we decided to move on and find new dancing partners. And yes, John, I really am sorry about the whole mistaking you for an orc thing and I don't think it's likely to ever happen again. Still, you might want to paint a white dot on your helmet, or something, just to make it a bit easier for me to sort out friend from foe."