Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I don't see that text. There's a reference to a Wait maneuver as a possibility on page 24, but that's for someone lurking.

...Is there more than one version of the PDF?

No, no I totally misremembered. Sorry.

Quite possibly...the Attack maneuver case would mean that somebody around the corner could always pop out on their turn and would get the drop on you. (Well, if you use the full rules, they couldn't, because they'd get an arbitrarily-dictated quasi-cascading-waits situation instead.)

Yeah that arbitrarily-dictated quasi-cascading-waits seems to be a fix for the same problem. I'm not convinced it's better, at all. It's certainly not simpler.

[The Benj]

You can't normally trigger a Move or Move and Attack, I think.

I allow people to take a Step first, but on the understanding that it uses up the Step from their manoeuvre AND that they can only trigger manoeuvres that give a Step.

[condor]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Ah-hah! In GURPS there is no "round" or "global turn" as in many other games, so that movement is during your own turn, and critically Wait doesn't reset your sequence (unlike say Pathfinder's Delay and Ready Actions which do change your Initiative). Is that what's confusing you?


This is totally fine as a house rule! This is what I will be using in THe Blight Years (for example):

"Step and Wait: You may take a Step when Waiting. This replaces any movement from the triggered action (so it’s pointless to trigger a Move or Move and Attack)."

It does sounds misleading.

There is no global round, that is fine. So, there is my turn, which is kind of divided in two parts when I take Wait maneuver: a first Do nothing part (which doesn't allow any movement as well), which kind of freezes my turn, and a second part, the chosen maneuver itself, that I'm entitled to continue as the triggered part of the maneuver.

But it is not stated anywhere, barring suggestions here and there, as in p. 385, that I can take a step in the "Do nothing" part of my turn.

In 3.4.2.22 "Is weapon reach important when Waiting?" there is a whole discussion here about the changes that took place from 3rd. edition, but none of it mentions the movement part, what may suggest that it slipped through everyone during the revising process.

Anyway, as far as I can see, this house rule is necessary.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by The Benj

You can't normally trigger a Move or Move and Attack, I think.

Yeah, a literal reading of the RAW seems to say that, but it has real problems. Imagine a situation where A is a in room and B is by the door. Why can't A go through the door when B opens it?

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

It does sounds misleading.
There is no global round, that is fine. So, there is my turn, which is kind of divided in two parts when I take Wait maneuver: a first Do nothing part (which doesn't allow any movement as well), which kind of freezes my turn, and a second part, the chosen maneuver itself, that I'm entitled to continue as the triggered part of the maneuver.

I think you are way over complicating things.
Player: I Wait. When the guy moves out from cover, I'm taking a AoA: Determined and shooting him.
GM: Okay. He moves.
Player: I shoot him.

There's no "Do Nothing" phase, needed. Just the Wait, and the triggered Manuever.

Anyway, as far as I can see, this house rule is necessary.

I don't think it's necessary. I find it useful. Really though it mostly will never come up, especially if you don't (as I gather most people don't) use the Tactical Combat rules at all.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

No, no I totally misremembered. Sorry.

So did I, until I re-examined.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Yeah, a literal reading of the RAW seems to say that, but it has real problems. Imagine a situation where A is a in room and B is by the door. Why can't A go through the door when B opens it?

I think that one has been called working as intended...though I don't really see how it can be justified when Tactical Shooting allows that restriction to be conditionally overruled by a perk.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I think that one has been called working as intended...

I really don't see how. I mean I can open a door, and somebody quick can walk through it, (and I have really crappy reaction times).

[condor]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

I don't think it's necessary. I find it useful. Really though it mostly will never come up, especially if you don't (as I gather most people don't) use the Tactical Combat rules at all.

I know that you can circumvent it through not using the Tactical System. Indeed, I use it very little.

Originally Posted by D10

Rules aside, I have always played and GMed with steping and waiting being allowed and I think it makes the game better.

D10 said it in the beginning of the post. Grouchy Chris brought Kromm opinion. I agreed.

Originally Posted by Grouchy Chris

Here is what Kromm had to say about it. The gist: RAW does not allow a Step with Wait, but it's entirely reasonable to allow it anyway.

But the post itself started with two very specific problems, in Tactical System :

1) The slicing-the-pie: what maneuver to use?, and

2) Guy A closing in foe B in a three-yard-alley: By raw, if he Waits, and his foe stays put, he cannot walk; if he steps, he spends his maneuver and his foe can Move past him. It is not a minor problem. Basic Set dedicates a third of a page on it, but instead of solving it, makes the thing more confusing.


The conclusions I arrived, within this specific discussion are:

About the "Slicing the Pie" situation:

You could consider the Steps proposed in TS p. 24 as Move maneuvers, restricted by special rules, Attack without a target on a turn by turn basis, or Ready (or keep the gun ready) and step, also on a turn by turn basis. Even Step and Wait. It makes no big difference in TS terms. Ulzgoroth said:

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

it won't give you any ability to react to what you find, because you took a Ready maneuver rather than a Wait.

I disagree. The thing here is that Wait maneuver makes the player fell safer, because he is entitled to interrupt his foe's turn, and because it sounds coherent. But if both guys are paying attention, it ends up in the same either if both took step and wait, Attack, Ready or just steps: initiative will be disputed under special rules. The first to attack, or to react, is the one who wins. If one guy is Moving fast or Moving and Attacking, he has a penalty in this dispute. Only Opportunity Fire has true priority in this case.

In the case of the dead-end alley situation:


1) Using Wait maneuvers with different, alternating clauses. One of them is "if foe B falls within reach, I strike him" and the other "if foe B stays put, I walk". This would generate some suspense, because foe B could try to guess when to run, but as there is no clear definition of time (stays put for how long? a turn?), it is lame - probably not even raw. Besides, it creates a dangerous precedent when thinking about odd Wait clauses.

2) Using Tactical System under special rules, and, in practice, allow Step and Wait only in these situations.

3) Allowing Step and Wait always. As when you take a Step in advance in a Wait maneuver, in most cases, you are in a disadvantageous position because you are committed with a future maneuver, I think this is no big deal.

4) Allowing the player who took a Wait maneuver the possibility of taking a step in the case his triggering condition don't take place, in the end of the turn.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

I disagree. The thing here is that Wait maneuver makes the player fell safer, because he is entitled to interrupt his foe's turn, and because it sounds coherent. But if both guys are paying attention, it ends up in the same either if both took step and wait, Attack, Ready or just steps: initiative will be disputed under special rules. The first to attack, or to react, is the one who wins. If one guy is Moving fast or Moving and Attacking, he has a penalty in this dispute. Only Opportunity Fire has true priority in this case.

If you actually use turn order (the slicing the pie rules do not), then after you use your Ready maneuver to step out, your opponent will get to shoot you on their turn before you can act again. That's in addition to shooting you immediately if they had a Wait in effect.

If you use the Slicing the Pie rules as written, you should remember that you're only half-way into combat, and little things like what maneuver you're using and whose turn is whose are ignored, unless they're not. And if you happen to engage in pie-slicing actually using the combat rules (say because you do it in the middle of a larger combat), expect inconsistent results.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster

1) The slicing-the-pie: what maneuver to use?, and

As written the rules for Turning Corners in Tactical Shooting aren't for situations where you are in combat and choosing maneuvers each turn.

[condor]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

If you actually use turn order (the slicing the pie rules do not), then after you use your Ready maneuver to step out, your opponent will get to shoot you on their turn before you can act again. That's in addition to shooting you immediately if they had a Wait in effect.

That's true.