Altering the Initiative Order

[Figleaf23]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Waiting doesn't change your sequence ever, AFAICT.

Unless you interpret the rules that way.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Figleaf23

Unless you interpret the rules that way.

If you interpret the rules that way, you are confusing GURPS turns with D&D rounds, GURPS sequence with D&D initiative, and GURPS Wait with D&D Held Actions; unless I'm not understanding at all, which is likely. The last time we discussed this I was basically unable to make sense of the other position which is never a good sign for me actually knowing what I'm talking about. This is the second time this question has come up that I'm aware of; I wonder if it can get FAQ'd.

[OldSam]

At the beginning of a fight I'd always allow faster characters to set themselves at a lower speed if they want to (just like not taking you full move etc.) Changing the order (again) while the action is already taking place is another thing - it can't be that Player A goes last in Turn 1 and first in Turn 2 etc.

For teamwork wait-maneuvers I'd still require the wait to declare something to wait for. Maybe: I wait until he runs past me, then I step forward and block the way, trying a stop-hit on the pursuer. Of course an official clarification on that point would be nice.

Anyway I would allow the suggested house rule that a character can take a "do nothing" maneuver, adapting to the combat rhythm, and then set himself at a new position in the initiative order for his next turn. IMHO this is really fair and also realistic.

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by sir_pudding

Waiting doesn't change your sequence ever, AFAICT.

Waiting always changes your sequence, AFAICT.

GURPS turns are about a second, doesn't matter when they start, but they are a sec of action, and your next turn starts a sec after that.

Besides, if waiting didn't change your sequence you'd have people taking two turns in a row, which is clearly wrong.

[OldSam]

Maybe it is clearer with a different term...?
I'd say waiting interrupts the normal sequence.

Though a clarification by Kromm would be really good.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Waiting always changes your sequence, AFAICT.

GURPS turns are about a second, doesn't matter when they start, but they are a sec of action, and your next turn starts a sec after that.

Besides, if waiting didn't change your sequence you'd have people taking two turns in a row, which is clearly wrong.

Can't be true. I once thought as you did, however, if that were so, then certain terminology in the Wait wouldn't make much sense:

Do nothing unless a particular
event you specified in advance
occurs before your next turn

And moreover, if we're going to define a turn as "until you take your next action," and we state that wait delays that indefinitely, then we could cast a spell on ourselves that "lasts for one turn" and then keep it going by waiting forever.

I think a turn is better defined as "from your opportunity to choose your action to your next opportunity to choose your action." If it's your turn, my turn, and then Sir Pudding's turn, and you elect to wait, your turn comes around again after Sir Pudding and I choose our actions. You may elect to wait again, or you might have acted after one of our actions, but you always choose your next action before we choose our next action.

[ericbsmith]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Waiting always changes your sequence, AFAICT.

Originally Posted by p. B363

The "turn sequence" is the order in which active characters take their turns. It is set at the start of the fight and does not change during combat.

So, no, Wait doesn't change your order in the sequence. All it does is change the moment when you get to act for your current turn. Yes, this may lead to situations where someone seemingly "takes two turn in a row," but only if a) they use Wait and risk giving up their ability to act and b) the thing they're waiting for happens just before their next turn would begin.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Waiting always changes your sequence, AFAICT.

GURPS turns are about a second, doesn't matter when they start, but they are a sec of action, and your next turn starts a sec after that.

Besides, if waiting didn't change your sequence you'd have people taking two turns in a row, which is clearly wrong.

This is pretty much exactly the opposite of how I'm sure it works. In the other thread RPK answered and as far as I can tell he supported my position, but I really am confused as to how you guys even think it's supposed to work.

PCs Able, Betty, and Charlie are fighting NPCs Xander, Yolanda and Zed.

The sequence in order of Basic Speed from highest to lowest is:
Able
Betty
Xander
Charlie
Yolanda
Zed

Able (Turn 1): Move
Betty(Turn 1): Wait. If Yolanda moves close enough I attack her.
Xander(Turn 1): Attack Betty. Betty Defends.
Charlie(Turn 1): Move
Yolanda(Turn 1): Move
Betty's Wait is triggered and Betty gets to make her attack, Yolanda defends and so on. Since Betty used an Active Defense she's restricted to Maneuvers that allow them, she chooses a standard attack.
Zed (Turn 1): Move.
Able (Turn 2): Concentrate
Betty(Turn 2): Attack Xander. He defends.
Xander(Turn 2): Attack Betty. Betty Defends.
Charlie(Turn 2): Attack Betty. She Defends.
Yolanda(Turn 2): All out defense. Double Defense
Zed (Turn 2): Attack Betty. She Defends.

[Ze'Manel Cunha]

Originally Posted by ericbsmith

So, no, Wait doesn't change your order in the sequence. All it does is change the moment when you get to act for your current turn. Yes, this may lead to situations where someone seemingly "takes two turn in a row," but only if a) they use Wait and risk giving up their ability to act and b) the thing they're waiting for happens just before their next turn would begin.

Man, I keep finding I have more house rules all the time.

Since there's no realistic way to have people act twice by delaying their action, I'll just peg this as a bad RAW choice for supposed playability reasons.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by Ze'Manel Cunha

Since there's no realistic way to have people act twice by delaying their action, I'll just peg this as a bad RAW choice for supposed playability reasons.

Realistically everyone isn't standing still and waiting for their "turn", acting for precisely 1.00 second and then standing still again to wait for everybody else to go. Everybody is doing things all once in the same time, and turns are an abstraction.

If Able is faster than Zed, then it makes sense that Able can time his actions more to his advantage than Zed can. Able waits, Zed goes triggering Able's Wait: all of that happened in the same second. Able is faster. His next action starts before Zed can react. This is the advantage of being faster.