Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-23-2014, 04:17 PM   #61
condor
 
condor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post

In GURPS, there's a very strong coupling.
In order to be realistic, GURPS' rules must yield results consistent with reality statistically. For instance, 95% people who take shots in the head die; so, it is fair that approximately 95% of the shots to the head kill players.

But GURPS maneuvers ARE NOT the reality they mean to represent. Sometimes you need to Ready the sand, or AoA moving forwards and making a semicircle that leads you back.

It's a good point what you put about the difference between Wait and turn sequence in the case of the door. Allowing Wait maneuvers, you allow players to decide more than characters in this case. Its a choice, and the most fun should be the priority (realist vs. cinematic mode).
__________________
Formerly known as marcusgurpsmaster.

No wind is favorable when you don't know where you are going to.
condor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 04:31 PM   #62
sir_pudding
Wielder of Smart Pants
 
sir_pudding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by corwyn View Post
If you mean that John can theoretically be home at some other time, then sure.but at that time you would word the statement differently to allow for that possibility. Since the gurps wording will always be the same, it will always mean A is not waiting AND B is not waiting. Always.
If there is a rule that says "If a character does not Wait" then it implies that the character could have Waited. If the mobile character cannot take a wait, why bother to say "If neither character has a Wait" at all?

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster View Post
How Able knows that Ben is about to open the door?
He says, "Dude, open the door!"
Quote:
Is there anything preventing his foes about seeing the same thing Able sees?
That's not relevant.
Quote:
Because if he runs after the door is open, his foes should be able to do the same thing.
Sure.
Quote:
Problem is, in Tactical Combat table everyone share your intentions, but combat is simulated on a second by second basis.
I'm not sure what this even means.
Quote:
Suppose they share a code, Able raises his thumb. Well, in this case, he would use Ready maneuver for making the signal, Ben would run in advance.
That's not the point. The point is that by RAW Able can't Wait to Move through the door when Ben opens it. Move is not an allowed maneuver for Wait.

Quote:
Otherwise, there is nothing wrong with the fact that his foes can take advantage of Ben opening the door.
They can only do so after Ben's turn. They can't Wait to do so either (unless they Wait to AoA Ben and then go through the door...).

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster View Post
It is not rules-lawyering: it is trying to understanding why a rule is written this or that way, in order to achieve realism.
It is rules lawyering to say "I Ready this weapon without actually doing anything (like working the action and thus ejecting a round) just so I can legally take a Step after a Wait that's not triggered".
Quote:
And it is not forcing players to take this maneuver just to take a step.
If you don't let him take a different maneuver and the maneuver he's taking is actually unnecessary, then yes, I think it is forced.

Quote:
The number of turns is not relevant in this case. If everyone Waits for the door to be open (Cascading Waits), or if everyone will act on their own turns, the order is what determines advantage. Again, there is a difference between the model and the events.
The number of turns is (usually) relevant because GURPS rewards the side in a combat that takes the most number of effective actions. If Able can get to the other side of the door on this turn, then he can do something else on his next turn.

What if there's a grenade in the room with Able that's going to go off immediately after Ben's turn?

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster View Post
But this kind of reply does not add much to the discussion:
I don't know if you've noticed, but you are attributing several quotes to yourself instead of me. Maybe you should just use the Multiquote button?

Quote:
Suppose I don't want to play just now, suppose I want to use Tactical Combat system to design a small castle: how many sentries should realistically put here and there in order to keep it well guarded, and without spending all the crown's money? How many guards in this corridor? How many in this battlement? Etc. What is the point in reading 600 pages, plus specific books, focused not on storytelling, but on how to realistically to simulate real situations, if I can't trust it even for doing simple tasks?
I wasn't objecting to using Tactical Combat, I use it myself all the time. I was objecting to your statement that it must be used. I've found that it's usually easier to understand GURPS rules if you assume that it's not being used. In this specific case I was pointing out that even while the map is in use, that it doesn't follow that shooters are necessarily in Condition Red. I think the Turning Corners Quick Contest is meant to be used when the shooters aren't yet in Condition Red (yet; they are being triggered by encountering each other). I could be wrong, but I'm reasonably confident that I'm not, because the rule doesn't make much sense if you are in "slow" time already.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Benj View Post
Move isn't a manoeuvre you can trigger from a Wait.
Yes, and I think there's a problem with that, as I'm trying to illustrate by this example. Unfortunately I seem to be doing a terrible job.
sir_pudding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 04:39 PM   #63
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_pudding View Post
Yes, and I think there's a problem with that, as I'm trying to illustrate by this example. Unfortunately I seem to be doing a terrible job.
I don't mind the example, but I'd point to Tactical Shooting page 37 as relevant...it makes Move and Move and Attack on Waits a benefit of the Battle Drills perk.

Which to me is a point in favor of using them in general, because I don't buy the particular constraints imposed there.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 04:44 PM   #64
condor
 
condor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_pudding View Post
The point is that by RAW Able can't Wait to Move through the door when Ben opens it. Move is not an allowed maneuver for Wait.
Not automatically. His friends needs to say, giving everyone else opportunity to go through the door. Next turn, Able goes. What is the problem with that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_pudding View Post
It is rules lawyering to say "I Ready this weapon without actually doing anything (like working the action and thus ejecting a round) just so I can legally take a Step after a Wait that's not triggered".
An Attack is a series of tiny events that you group inside a maneuver: I raise my foot, I raise my sword, I strike at him with my sword - and at the same time - I keep my shield, I keep an eye on his sword, etc. in a time frame of 1000 mS.

When raw allows a Ready maneuver with Wait in this case, I read it in broad sense: it seems that it can encompass any small physical actions, groups of events that, within a time-frame of 1000 mS, could be used with a Step.

Ok, I agree with you, the way I put it first was misleading (I keep my weapon ready and Step), but I'm trying to understand Ready as a small physical action here.
__________________
Formerly known as marcusgurpsmaster.

No wind is favorable when you don't know where you are going to.
condor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 04:51 PM   #65
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster View Post
Not automatically. His friends needs to say, giving everyone else opportunity to go through the door. Next turn, Able goes. What is the problem with that?
You're introducing lots of complications that have no actual reason to be there. No, Ben does not necessarily need to make a public announcement, or take a Maneuver, before Able will know Ben is going to open the door. It is trivial to devise circumstances where those complications are removed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster View Post
Ok, I agree with you, the way I put it first was misleading (I keep my weapon ready and Step), but I'm trying to understand Ready as a small physical action here.
Would it be possible to explain why you are bothering to do this? It doesn't seem to have any actual relevance to anything. Ready is a useful maneuver sometimes, but the only thing it seems to contribute here is a Maneuver including a Step that you're more comfortable using for a no-op than Attack.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 04:56 PM   #66
condor
 
condor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
I don't mind the example, but I'd point to Tactical Shooting page 37 as relevant...it makes Move and Move and Attack on Waits a benefit of the Battle Drills perk.

Which to me is a point in favor of using them in general, because I don't buy the particular constraints imposed there.
It is allowed only in an specific context, which is, military formation. That is why formation is an advantage, to begin with. But in a cinematic play, it would be a good thing to allow players to do it always.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Ready is a useful maneuver sometimes, but the only thing it seems to contribute here is a Maneuver including a Step that you're more comfortable using for a no-op than Attack.
Tactical Shooting itself uses Ready for maneuvers that take more than steps. In p. 37, it says:

"To use this, the team leader (who must have this perk!) orders the drill. This requires a Ready maneuver that counts as his form-up action, regardless of what others do. All other team members must choose on their first turn following the order: opt out or opt in. If you opt out, combat continues normally for you; you don’t get the perk’s benefits. If you opt in, you must take a Ready maneuver to get in position, check the positions of your team mates, etc."

Ready is used to instruct comrades into formation (what supposedly involves gestures, shouts, signs, etc.), and to "only step" into formation, as you say.
__________________
Formerly known as marcusgurpsmaster.

No wind is favorable when you don't know where you are going to.
condor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 05:01 PM   #67
sir_pudding
Wielder of Smart Pants
 
sir_pudding's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Ventura CA
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
I don't mind the example, but I'd point to Tactical Shooting page 37 as relevant...it makes Move and Move and Attack on Waits a benefit of the Battle Drills perk.

Which to me is a point in favor of using them in general, because I don't buy the particular constraints imposed there.
Yes, it seems odd that GURPS requires Able and Ben to practice opening doors and entering as a battle drill.

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster View Post
Not automatically. His friends needs to say, giving everyone else opportunity to go through the door. Next turn, Able goes. What is the problem with that?
Able loses a turn for no logical reason. The grenade blows up and kills him.

Quote:
When raw allows a Ready maneuver with Wait in this case, I read it in broad sense: it seems that it can encompass any small physical actions, groups of events that, within a time-frame of 1000 mS, could be used with a Step.
I think it's allowed so that you can for example draw your weapon if the enemy draws theirs or push a button if a light turns green, or whatever.

Quote:
Ok, I agree with you, the way I put it first was misleading (I keep my weapon ready and Step), but I'm trying to understand Ready as a small physical action here.
I'm fairly certain that you have to Ready to do something (specifically one of the three classes of things that Ready allows you to do).
sir_pudding is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 05:13 PM   #68
condor
 
condor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_pudding View Post

I'm fairly certain that you have to Ready to do something (specifically one of the three classes of things that Ready allows you to do).
GURPS TS, p. 37 - the book itself says you must use Ready to form up, only taking Steps, as I mentioned.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sir_pudding View Post
Able loses a turn for no logical reason. The grenade blows up and kills him.
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?

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.
__________________
Formerly known as marcusgurpsmaster.

No wind is favorable when you don't know where you are going to.
condor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 05:14 PM   #69
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster View Post
It is allowed only in an specific context, which is, military formation. That is why formation is an advantage, to begin with. But in a cinematic play, it would be a good thing to allow players to do it always.
Not quite. It is allowed in the 'specific' context that you have 'formed up', as defined within the Perk. Arguably, you can actually 'form up' with no other people, though doing so will look pretty stupid as you "order the drill" all by yourself.

It also justifies allowing Move and Move and Attack on Waits for specific reasons pertaining to operating in a formation. But it doesn't actually constrain how you can use the new Wait options.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marcusgurpsmaster View Post
Tactical Shooting itself uses Ready for maneuvers that take more than steps. In p. 37, it says:

"To use this, the team leader (who must have this perk!) orders the drill. This requires a Ready maneuver that counts as his form-up action, regardless of what others do. All other team members must choose on their first turn following the order: opt out or opt in. If you opt out, combat continues normally for you; you don’t get the perk’s benefits. If you opt in, you must take a Ready maneuver to get in position, check the positions of your team mates, etc."

Ready is used to instruct comrades into formation (what supposedly involves gestures, shouts, signs, etc.), and to "only step" into formation, as you say.
Okay, seriously. I am not talking about the merits of the Ready Maneuver in general. It is a fine Maneuver which does many things. My problem is that in this thread you keep talking about it for reasons that have nothing to do with what it does, as far as I can tell, except for offering a Step.

Am I wrong? Why do you keep writing about Ready Maneuvers?
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2014, 05:22 PM   #70
condor
 
condor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Default Re: Wait maneuver - differences from 3rd Edition

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Okay, seriously. I am not talking about the merits of the Ready Maneuver in general. It is a fine Maneuver which does many things. My problem is that in this thread you keep talking about it for reasons that have nothing to do with what it does, as far as I can tell, except for offering a Step.

Am I wrong? Why do you keep writing about Ready Maneuvers?
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.

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

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.
__________________
Formerly known as marcusgurpsmaster.

No wind is favorable when you don't know where you are going to.
condor is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
gurps 3e, gurps 4th, step and wait, wait

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.