Wait Maneuver and Multiple Scenarios

[supersaiyandoyle]

Does the wait maneuver work if multiple scenarios are declared by the person declaring the wait?

For example. if a player playing a swordsman was at a corner, and declared

Wait:
If someone heavily armored corners: I run
If someone lightly armored: I strike
If someone non-threatening: I act casual and pretend to belong here.

I would allow it, but the Basic Set says:

"Do nothing unless an event you specified in advance occurs before your next turn".

Key words being an event. It could be interpreted as only one declared action, or as any of a long list of actions.

I decided to check just to be sure; even if it's not RAW, I'd probably still allow it.

[Xplo]

"An event" doesn't necessarily imply you can specify multiple events and reactions, and at the absurd end, you could specify so many events and responses that Wait effectively becomes an excuse to react to someone's actions before they have a chance to complete those actions - in other words, to see slightly into the future. So no. You get one trigger and response. If you want to do something different, do it on your turn.

Also, it doesn't make sense to me that a Wait allows time for any kind of decision-making beyond identifying that the triggering event has occurred. It's basically an instant reaction, not a choice.

[corwyn]

Just like to point out that you can only convert a Wait to an Attack (including All-Out and presumably Commited/Defensive), Feint, or Ready.

[supersaiyandoyle]

Originally Posted by corwyn

Just like to point out that you can only convert a Wait to an Attack (including All-Out and presumably Commited/Defensive), Feint, or Ready.

But you can take a step during or after your wait if you didn't on the turn you made your wait, according to basic set. The step would be that movement away from the corner in that scenario.

[Phoenix_Dragon]

Originally Posted by supersaiyandoyle

I would allow it

I would not. Wait is intended to be a case of you waiting to do a specific action. Some examples of Wait (Opportunity Fire) even preclude making any judgment calls (At least, without penalty). The way you're suggesting, a player could basically "program" their entire behavior just by adding more and more conditions and reactions, which makes Wait far too flexible for something that's supposed to be a split-second reaction capable of interrupting other people's actions.

[Kuroshima]

I would only allow multiple scenarios for a waiting character if it had Compartmentalized Mind, and I would still restrict it to 1 additional scenario per level of CM. Doing so would preclude using the extra mental maneuvers that CM gives though. Enhanced Time Sense might also give you an extra scenario or two.

[Mathulhu]

There seems no way to surprise someone who is waiting at a corner like this, that seems wrong to me.
You should commit to the action before the person actually comes round the corner (swinging the sword when you hear the person moving up) or take a penalty to resultant action to allow yourself time to analyse the situation.

[Phoenix_Dragon]

I'd be tempted to extrapolate from the precedent created with Opportunity Fire: you can add a further evaluation beyond the basic trigger condition (One of my opponents attack, someone comes around this corner, etc), at a -2 penalty to the triggered action per additional evaluation (Such as the first enemy to come around this corner, much like Opportunity Fire does).

[Mr_Sandman]

According to Kromm here, the trigger for a wait and the reaction can be broad and complex, but not vague. One particular maneuver (Attack, AoA, Feint or Ready) must be declared that the Wait will convert to. Although the target can be conditional.

That, and the rules in Basic p. 366, indicate to me that you could not include the "run if someone heavily armored corners" option.

[hal]

Something you may want to consider: Perception rolls prior to making a wait declaration...

The thing to point out to the GM or for a GM to keep in the back of his mind, is that the five senses are continuously in operation. For instance, a man waiting around a corner for an opponent, may be listening INTENTLY to get an idea of who might be coming. He might be listening for the betraying clanks and jingles of someone in chain or plate approaching the corner. If someone has been running, turned the corner, and chose to wait for his pursuer to round the corner, that someone may decide he might try and hold his breath so that his pursuer can't hear his heavy breathing.

In addition, as a youngster, I met two individuals who were foreigners who for what ever reason, would not bathe. At the supermarket where I worked, the cashiers who could take a break, go to the restroom etc, would RUN from their stations in an effort to NOT have to be the one who checked the groceries out for these two individuals because the stench was that bad. If you were downwind of them outside, and didn't know by spotting them on the visual, they were spotted by their stench hitting your nostrils from a distance as far away as 10 yards easily. So, perhaps they could be noted by their stench (Not that it helps to determine whether they are wearing heavy armor mind you!)

So, how to translate this into GURPS terms? Request of the GM "Is the individual using stealth?" not because you have the right to know if he's using stealth or not, but because you want to remind the GM, that it is his job to give you all the data your character should be privy to. Don't neglect the details of SOUND as well as VISION. Remind the GM that if the guy isn't using stealth, that you should be given hearing rolls to detect the individuals. Unfortunately, as best as I can determine, there are no rules for what happens when the armor clad individuals are NOT attempting stealth, and at what level of sound, the armor is making per the SOUND rules in GURPS CAMPAIGNS. :(

Looking more closely at the rules in GURPS LOW TECH, I find that the stealth penalty for wearing armor is equal to 1/2 the DR being worn. In addition, it specifies that the Encumbrance penalty, if worse, should be used instead of the the above mentioned. Note however, that these penalties are for someone ATTEMPTING to use Stealth to round a corner! If they aren't using stealth, one wonders if the hearing roll made by the listener is "automatic".

Putting this into perspective - someone wearing plate armor that has a DR of 5, would have a penalty of -3 to their stealth as they attempt to round the corner. When they move stealthily, they have to move no more then 1/2 their movement and be TRYING to move quietly. Same is true regarding chain armor - at least a penalty of -2 is assessed, (assuming their encumbrance level isn't worse).

In the end, this is something that is going to have to be hashed out with the GM - preferably in a non-confrontational manner. Good luck.