Surprise and sequence
 

Hi, I am pondering about a situation involving surprise but I have no clear idea how to play it.

Let say we have 3 Pcs A, C, D and an enemy b lurking in the shadows.

The normal sequence is A, b, C, D, but b is hiding and it wins the surprise via a stealth vs vision contest. Now the PCs are surprised and they are attacked by b.

So in the very First turn we have

A- acting normally (walking, looking around etc)
b- jumping out of hiding and attacking, forcing surprise on all the PCs
C- surprised and in mental stun. Do nothing + IQ roll
D- surprised and in mental stun. Do nothing + IQ roll

So do you confirm whoever b attacks (A, C or D) is suffering from mental stun with the -4 to defenses?

Second turn

A- surprised and in mental stun. Do nothing + IQ roll
b- second attack
C- Can act normally if on first turn succeeded on IQ check, otherwise surprised and in mental stun (Do nothing + IQ roll)
D- Can act normally if on first turn succeeded on IQ check, otherwise surprised and in mental stun (Do nothing + IQ roll)

if this is the correct way to play the scenario, it seems weird to me that the PC A who has the highest speed is actually acting behind his companions C and D..that is they have the opportunity to snap out of surprise BEFORE him.

Can someone explain the canonical interpretation of the rule?

Thanks!!!

Re: Surprise and sequence
 

In my understanding, there is no turn sequence before combat starts. So, there will be no turn where A will spend it "acting normally".

Combat starts by b jumping out of hiding forcing surprise on all the PCs, and the "First Turn" will proceed as follows:

A- surprised and in mental stun. Do nothing + IQ roll
b- attacking (whether b needs to Move and Attack or starts combat close enough to Attack, would be GM's call, maybe based on a Stealth roll)
C- surprised and in mental stun. Do nothing + IQ roll
D- surprised and in mental stun. Do nothing + IQ roll

So, A will not only have a chance to recover before C and D, but will have a chance to recover before b acts (but will not be able to actually do anything meaningful before b).

Re: Surprise and sequence
 

Thank you Finn.
I see that no other joined the discussion..this could be positive, in the meaning that yours is the "canonical" interpretation of the rule.
Sounds fine to me!

Re: Surprise and sequence
 

Pretty much, yes.