Wait Maneuver clarification

[DouglasCole]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I'm saying that if the spearman is making an AoA, distraction from other participants is no longer a relevant factor. So there'd better be some other reason than baked-in worrying about whether the ref will pull a gun for the swordsman being able to get the first shot.

Ah. I see what your getting at, and the reason baked in is that Mr Wait has forfeited his entire turn to find the right moment to step in on the spearman, who by virtue of failing to choose Wait himself and by stupidly attacking with no thought to his own defense, has left himself entirely open to this tactic. I just don't see how this is as big as a problem. I'd need to grab my computer and look at Stop Hit (which I think is an explicitly Wait-based move), but this just seems to be a case where people just say "the spear / long weapon is such a huge advantage that even if Mr Spearman chooses to deliberately forego all the things that will foil the Waiting character, he will still win" and that's not my experience in weapon sparring, nor do I think it's good game design.

I do think that giving a real defensive benefit to thrusting rather than swinging makes sense here, though. In my experience, getting inside as a swinger gathers his momentum to strike is EXACTLY parallel to what we're talking here, and it does, in fact, work. It works great. Walking into a thrust sword or spear? Not so much, and I think that's an easy fix. But expecting that to work when you deliberately choose an option that precludes defenses and do not choose a Wait of your own? No, that's just bad tactics.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

Ah. I see what your getting at, and the reason baked in is that Mr Wait has forfeited his entire turn to find the right moment to step in on the spearman, who by virtue of failing to choose Wait himself and by stupidly attacking with no thought to his own defense, has left himself entirely open to this tactic. I just don't see how this is as big as a problem. I'd need to grab my computer and look at Stop Hit (which I think is an explicitly Wait-based move), but this just seems to be a case where people just say "the spear / long weapon is such a huge advantage that even if Mr Spearman chooses to deliberately forego all the things that will foil the Waiting character, he will still win" and that's not my experience in weapon sparring, nor do I think it's good game design.

I get the feeling you're totally missing where I'm coming from here...

Originally Posted by DouglasCole

I do think that giving a real defensive benefit to thrusting rather than swinging makes sense here, though. In my experience, getting inside as a swinger gathers his momentum to strike is EXACTLY parallel to what we're talking here, and it does, in fact, work. It works great. Walking into a thrust sword or spear? Not so much, and I think that's an easy fix. But expecting that to work when you deliberately choose an option that precludes defenses and do not choose a Wait of your own? No, that's just bad tactics.

I brought up AoA specifically because you suggested that distraction accounted for the mismatch between expectation and rules. Not because I thought AoA was a good idea, but because if distraction were the problem AoA would be a good idea.

[Adversary]

I don't think the fact that there may be distractions really answers. Both people are subject to distractions. And while battle certainly is often going to be more complicated than a one-on-one fight in an open area, that is the simplest situation and the rules should be able to handle it.

He can't consistently touch you. He can consistently step right as you do and make the attempt to touch you, which you may defend against as usual.

This is true of course. But what he can consistently do is make the attempt to touch you, before you can make the attempt to touch him, regardless of who is faster or more skillful, and despite you having the longer weapon.

I too have done some training/practice on longer v. shorter, in my case a martial arts class where we practiced moving in bare-handed on an opponent with a stick. It can be done, but it takes 100% focus and good timing. It doesn't just happen automatically. I'd go so far as to suggest it is a special technique or maneuver of some kind. Is jamming the opponent's attack covered in Martial Arts somewhere?

In fact, I think such a move is better characterized as a defense than as an attack. The fighter with the stick steps and begins his attack. The unarmed fighter defends against that attack by aggressively stepping inside and jamming the swing. The unarmed fighter may strike as well--but if he is a judo stylist, this would also be the perfect time to go into a throw. This suggests that the move is actually a parry, a parry used to set up a throw.

But, all this said, incorporating retreat might be a reasonable fudge. Spearman steps in, swordsman steps to meet him, spearman retreats--getting +3 to defend--and then gets a shot on the swordsman. Given how fast this would all happen, it amounts to "swordsman can try to hit first, but he gives the defender +3 to defense."

Can the swordsman also retreat, though, when the spearman's attack comes around? Then they are both getting +3, and again the spearman gets no advantage for length. Plunging in the way you'd have to to cover the extra distance seems incompatible with immediately retreating. Perhaps the swordsman's move is some kind of committed attack? It certainly seems like a higher-risk, high-reward maneuver. Succeed and you are inside the spear's reach, nullifying it. Fail and you have charged into an attack.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Adversary

But, all this said, incorporating retreat might be a reasonable fudge. Spearman steps in, swordsman steps to meet him, spearman retreats--getting +3 to defend--and then gets a shot on the swordsman. Given how fast this would all happen, it amounts to "swordsman can try to hit first, but he gives the defender +3 to defense."

Can the swordsman also retreat, though, when the spearman's attack comes around? Then they are both getting +3, and again the spearman gets no advantage for length. Plunging in the way you'd have to to cover the extra distance seems incompatible with immediately retreating. Perhaps the swordsman's move is some kind of committed attack? It certainly seems like a higher-risk, high-reward maneuver. Succeed and you are inside the spear's reach, nullifying it. Fail and you have charged into an attack.

Yes, the swordsman can also retreat. The swordsman is not, in fact, doing anything exceptionally aggressive...just what the Attack maneuver allows, and one of the things it allows is a retreat.

Of course, if the reach 1 guy retreats from a spacing of 2 to a spacing of 3, he's too far away to press the attack on his turn without drastic measures. He's right back in position for another Wait, though.

EDIT: Note retreat is only +3 to dodge or to fencing weapons. Technically both the reach 1 and reach 2 weapons could be fencing weapons, but not if we're talking about a spear.

[DangerousThing]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

EDIT: Note retreat is only +3 to dodge or to fencing weapons. Technically both the reach 1 and reach 2 weapons could be fencing weapons, but not if we're talking about a spear.

Retreat is +3 to dodge and +1 to parry or block, unless you're using Karate, Judo, Boxing, or any fencing skill, in which case parry is also at a +3.

I've always thought a few other weapons should be included in the fencing weapons other than the traditional ones, such as a light staff.

[Varyon]

If we're allowing Step and Wait, then there's no longer the "swordsman always goes first" problem. If the spearman declares Wait "I'll attack him if he tries to move toward me" and Steps forward, the swordsman's Wait is activated and he moves forward to attack. As soon as he starts moving forward, the spearman's Wait is activated, thus leading to Cascading Waits, where the spearman is at a marked advantage on account of his longer Reach.

Of course, this means that trying to Wait in order to attack the spearman first requires the swordsman to have far greater skill than the spearman to be able to pull it off reliably, despite the fact that he should (for balance at least) have a decent shot even with equal skill... unless "Step and Wait" either requires the character to Step before declaring the Wait, or replaces the Wait with a Step once it "expires" - in either case, you have no Cascading Waits, because the spearman doesn't yet / no longer has a Wait. Then, however, the previously-mentioned spear-company tactics no longer work.


Personally, I feel the ideal solution would be to allow for "overriding" of a Wait with a large penalty to skill and a minimum of movement allowed (thinking further, I don't think Waits or Wait-overrides can allow for more than a Step, as I don't think anybody is going to react so slowly you will be able to move more than 1/5th Move before they react). To prevent abuse, using a Wait to "override" another Wait (such as the previously-mentioned waiting for a handkerchief to fall, or the above Step and Wait) would still use the override system, rather than Cascading Waits. Note the override comes into play once the Wait would be triggered. So, in the case of the spearman stepping toward and attacking, the Step (the resolution of which triggered the Wait) doesn't count against the spearman in the Quick Contest.

The override would be resolved comparably to Cascading Waits, but with a few modifications. First off, the character with the Wait that is being overridden automatically gets a +10 to the Quick Contest. Afterwards, each character takes the following penalties, based on the action they are taking (these could probably be adapted to Cascading Waits without much trouble):

Instant (pulling a trigger, pushing an in-hand button, etc): +0
Very Fast (fast-drawing*, sighted shooting**, thrusting attacks, pushing a button on an adjacent wall, taking a Step***, etc): -2
Fast (swinging attacks, pulling a lever, etc): -4
*If the character already had his hand on the weapon to fast-draw it, fast-draw is instead Instant
**If the character was already Aiming, or had opted for an Aim and Wait, sighted shooting is Instant
***For high Move characters, taking up to half a Step is Instant

Combine penalties if multiple portions apply. Only the first Instant action is at +0, apply -1 per additional Instant action. If the character is getting multiple attacks - due to Rapid Strike or AOA (Double) - each attack applies a penalty. If a character taking multiple actions loses, you can use Margin of Victory to determine what (if any) actions the character managed before being interrupted. In case of a tie, victory goes to the person Waiting. For example, let's say we have a Waiting character taking a Step (-2) and then Swinging twice (-4 each, bringing the total to -10, cancelling out his Wait bonus). If he ends up failing by 9 or 10, his opponent successfully acts before he takes a Step. If he fails by 5-8, his opponent acts after he takes a Step. If he fails by 1-4, his opponent acts after he takes a Step and takes the first swing. On a tie or any victory, he gets to act first. This can get complicated if both characters have multiple penalties, of course.

Optionally, for Waiting (only) characters with ETS, determine the total bonus/penalty normally, then double it if it's a bonus, halve it if it's a penalty.


EDIT: Another thought is that taking multiple actions should require multiple rolls, each with further penalties, rather than a single roll to determine everything. Say a character wants to Step (-2), Fast-Draw (-2) a broadsword, then Rapid Strike for 2 swings (-4 for each). So, you first do the Quick Contest with Fast-Draw at -4. If you succeed, you then actually roll your Fast-Draw attempt (on a success, go onward; on a failure, you managed to draw your weapon before the enemy acted, but are unable to attack). Next you do the Quick Contest (optionally, one or both initial rolls can be reused) with Broadsword at -8. If you succeed, roll to hit (probably at -6). Following this, you do another Quick Contest, this time using Broadsword at -12. If you succeed, make another roll to hit.
I've got some more ideas, like allowing the character to take a penalty to the "Action roll" (Fast Draw, Broadsword, etc) to make the action one "step" faster, but that's getting into the Grand Unified Initiative system I've been thinking up, so I'll probably hold off on suggesting that...

[Adversary]

I'll have to read Cascading Waits. If the way that works is a calculation that takes weapon length into account, but considers other factors like speed and skill as well, that could be a great solution.

Makes sense, too. It would basically mean treating Wait as the maneuver, and step as a mere accompaniment. Which makes sense, given that you can do a step with just about anything. No reason why Step and Attack needs to be a different maneuver than Attack; ditto Step and Concentrate, etc. Make the Attack, Wait, Concentrate, etc. the maneuver, and the step a free action that you can do along with.

Then the spearman can say "My action is Waiting. As I Wait, I will slowly step towards him."

[DouglasCole]

You may need to combine Cascading Waits with "A Matter of Inches," but between the two, and Wait and Step, that probably accomplishes what you want.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Adversary

Makes sense, too. It would basically mean treating Wait as the maneuver, and step as a mere accompaniment. Which makes sense, given that you can do a step with just about anything. No reason why Step and Attack needs to be a different maneuver than Attack; ditto Step and Concentrate, etc. Make the Attack, Wait, Concentrate, etc. the maneuver, and the step a free action that you can do along with.

The important thing with Step and Wait is that you forfeit the Movement of whatever Maneuver you take with the Wait.

On the other hand, in my real life experience most of these short versus long fights probably should be translated to GURPS as something like.

1. Short: Wait and Attack if he comes within reach.
2. Long: Step and Wait and Stop-Hit
3. Short's Wait is triggered by Long's Step. Which triggers Long's Wait.
4. Short Dodges or Parries (ideally with a Slip or Sidestep).
5. Short attacks at reach 1.

[Peter V. Dell'Orto]

FWIW, I allow Step and Wait, because I just can't see any issue that comes of it. Never had an issue with it in actual play, and we've been using them for years and years now.

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

[*]Long: Step and Wait and Stop-Hit[*]Short's Wait is triggered by Long's Step. Which triggers Long's Wait. Long wins Cascading waits.

A nitpick:
If Long is doing a Stop Hit, it has special rules - Long is specifically saying, I'll let Short strike first and attack into his attack to try to parry it and strike him in one, risky, movement. It has its own special rules to determine who goes first; it does not use Cascading Waits.