[TS] Slicing the pie, a question?

[Celti]

Originally Posted by Ultraviolet

But how is the timing against a Waiting and stationary target?

Martial Arts has rules for cascading Waits, p.108.

Originally Posted by Ultraviolet

However looking at TS p10 the box lists rules for "neither fighter has ready weapon" and "one party has ready weapon" - not "both have ready weapon"?

Both have a ready weapon is the 'combat is already in progress' case, and is resolved using the standard turn sequence.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Ultraviolet

The SWAT officer makes repeated Step-and-Waits around the corner, until he get LOS on a target. Assuming he maes his Per roll to spot the enemy, who shoots first?

Actually, when do you have to declare the nature of your attack on a Step and Attack? I think it would be most streamlined to simply say that you can Step and Attack and choose whether to attack after the step changes your LoS. If the step triggers a gunman's Wait (Opportunity Fire), maybe make a contest of Per, or Per based Soldier, with the waiting firer at some bonus, minus the penalties listed under Opportunity Fire (B548).

The mover would, I assume, take the same -2 penalty as a pop up shot if he shoots.

[Ultraviolet]

Originally Posted by Celti

Martial Arts has rules for cascading Waits, p.108.


Both have a ready weapon is the 'combat is already in progress' case, and is resolved using the standard turn sequence.

That may not work:

A is the SWAT guy slicing the pie of a hallway corner
B is the foul terrorist crouching behidn a desk with a Wait aimed at he corner.

Sequence:
B: Wait, opportunity fire at the corner
A: Step-and-Wait, no target presents itself, nothing happens
B: Still Waits
A: Step-and-Wait, no target presents itself, nothing happens
...[this may go on for several seconds, until:]...
A: Step-and-Wait, suddenly there is a target. BANG!
B: Was actually waiting for this so: BANG!


Now, since A was the one moving into LOS, is he the active party and shoots first? That sounds silly since B was Waiting for this very thing.

Do you only now look at Basic Speeds to see who goes first? Odds are that the SWAT guy is highly trained and faster so he always shoots first. So what is the effect of B's Wait?

TS p24 says you roll a quick contest *if neither chose a Wait manoeuvre*. But what if *both* did as in the example above?
Would that be the same? Make a roll for speed? That seems fair.
Sure, if only one guy was Waiting he shoots first.

[safisher]

Originally Posted by Ultraviolet

But what if *both* did as in the example above?
Would that be the same? Make a roll for speed? That seems fair.

You use Cascading Waits (p. MA108) for multiple fighters taking Wait. It's also modified by hip shooting and unsighted shooting in Fast-Draw situations, if applicable. As it says on TS24, it's a Contest of skill, but not necessarily Guns. If using Wait, you get bonuses for being faster, moving less, and having Combat Reflexes.

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Kromm

Done properly, this is somewhat slow and precise. The object isn't to rush, but not to get shot or grabbed. Moving quickly around corners is done when time is of the essence (bombs ticking, hostages dying, etc.), but that isn't the same maneuver. People trained to slice the pie will still move as if they were doing it and look where they're supposed to look – that's the power of training – but they'll be operating too quickly to be guaranteed the initiative if someone is waiting. In game terms, they'll be walking the same path but without a Wait against their enemies.

Allowing Wait and Step is a significant change to the dynamics of combat though! For example, it lets someone use Wait to close the distance with a longer weapon, instead of Evaluate or AoD. If this is supposed to be a general principle not a special case, it would have been proper to spell it out.

It also means that a "leading someone at gunpoint" situation gives the gunman a Wait, instead of allowing an uncooperative prisoner one turn to act before the gunman responds. That is a big mechanical change to a fairly common situation in fiction.

[Phoenix_Dragon]

Originally Posted by Polydamas

Allowing Wait and Step is a significant change to the dynamics of combat though! For example, it lets someone use Wait to close the distance with a longer weapon, instead of Evaluate or AoD. If this is supposed to be a general principle not a special case, it would have been proper to spell it out.

It's effectively a new maneuver, but not much of one. Normal Waits let you convert the Wait maneuver into, say, an Attack maneuver, which would let you step. A Step-and-Wait basically means you use that Step before the wait, and I would assume no longer have the step available for the triggered maneuver. It also makes perfect sense that someone could move very slowly (1 yard a second is a slow walking pace) would be able to wait and respond to a situation they are expecting quickly. I doubt you'll see many step-and-waits to close distance simply because the use of the step before the wait and the general uselessness compared to simply moving in is going to make it a fairly unimpressive option. Might be tactically useful at times, but it's pretty niche.

It also means that a "leading someone at gunpoint" situation gives the gunman a Wait, instead of allowing an uncooperative prisoner one turn to act before the gunman responds. That is a big mechanical change to a fairly common situation in fiction.

Yeah, reacting faster than someone who's walking you at gunpoint and intentionally prepared to shoot you if you do anything typically only works in fiction. The only way it works in real-life is when there is something to distract the guy's attention from that idea, whether it's carelessness, a lack of formed intent, hesitation, or a simple distraction. Cascading waits works perfectly well for someone being walked along and waiting for an opportunity (And on that note, they would also be doing a step-and-wait).

[vicky_molokh]

Sorry for the necro, but I'm interested in the situation as well. Here's what seems like an important nuance to me:

Originally Posted by Ultraviolet

A: Step-and-Wait, no target presents itself, nothing happens
...[this may go on for several seconds, until:]...
A: Step-and-Wait, suddenly there is a target. BANG!
B: Was actually waiting for this so: BANG!


Now, since A was the one moving into LOS, is he the active party and shoots first? That sounds silly since B was Waiting for this very thing.

Do you only now look at Basic Speeds to see who goes first? Odds are that the SWAT guy is highly trained and faster so he always shoots first. So what is the effect of B's Wait?

TS p24 says you roll a quick contest *if neither chose a Wait manoeuvre*. But what if *both* did as in the example above?
Would that be the same? Make a roll for speed? That seems fair.
Sure, if only one guy was Waiting he shoots first.

It seems very important what is the triggering condition.
Note that if it's a Step-And-Wait, then first A makes a Step, then A starts waiting for some condition to trigger an attack. So at the moment A shows up in B's FoV, A is not Waiting yet - merely Stepping in preparation to Wait.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Sorry for the necro, but I'm interested in the situation as well. Here's what seems like an important nuance to me:
It seems very important what is the triggering condition.
Note that if it's a Step-And-Wait, then first A makes a Step, then A starts waiting for some condition to trigger an attack. So at the moment A shows up in B's FoV, A is not Waiting yet - merely Stepping in preparation to Wait.

Alternatively, he could be Waiting and Stepping at the same time. Nothing prevents him from doing both!

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Langy

Alternatively, he could be Waiting and Stepping at the same time. Nothing prevents him from doing both!

Huh? In that case, nothing prevents Waiting and Attacking at the same time. Now, that doesn't seem to make sense.
A state-of-conditional-Waiting is when a character does nothing unless the trigger event registers. If you're placing the Step outside the conditional block of the turn, then it's not part of the conditional block.

Otherwise the following situation becomes possible:
Opponents both have a Reach 1 weapon.
A declares a Wait, opting to whack B if B steps into Reach 1.
B does a Step And Wait, with the wait condition being 'when A is in reach' and the action being 'whack A'.
As B Steps, B becomes in range, and B's Wait is triggered, allowing to contest A's priority.
This way, B gets the best of both worlds, with no drawback.

[Langy]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Huh? In that case, nothing prevents Waiting and Attacking at the same time. Now, that doesn't seem to make sense.
A state-of-conditional-Waiting is when a character does nothing unless the trigger event registers. If you're placing the Step outside the conditional block of the turn, then it's not part of the conditional block.

Otherwise the following situation becomes possible:
Opponents both have a Reach 1 weapon.
A declares a Wait, opting to whack B if B steps into Reach 1.
B does a Step And Wait, with the wait condition being 'when A is in reach' and the action being 'whack A'.
As B Steps, B becomes in range, and B's Wait is triggered, allowing to contest A's priority.
This way, B gets the best of both worlds, with no drawback.

What prevents Waiting and Attacking at the same time is that those are two separate maneuvers. Step and Wait aren't separate Maneuvers. They're something that can be done at the same time - just like you can Attack and Step at the same time, not having to Step prior to the attack or after it.

Also: Why do you think that A should automatically have priority in that situation? Making it a contest actually seems to make some sense as opposed to always prioritizing the person who gives up the initiative.