Mexican Standoff, Possible? how you would pull it off? Options

[bibliophile20]

Okay, I was doing a bit of reading earlier when I came across a scene with the old classic, the Mexican Standoff.

So, of course, once I was done reading the scene, my mind immediately thought of other instances of Mexican Standoffs that I had seen in fiction over the years, and then I wondered "Hey, wouldn't it be cool to do to my players?"

However, there are a few issues with Mexican Standoffs in Shadowrun (or any RPG when you have a roll for Initiative), that being, Initiative itself. With a set order for people to act in, there's no chance for the everybody-acting-at-the-same-time-and-drawing-and-pointing-guns-in-each-others-faces scene that comprises a Mexican Standoff to be set up.

So, thoughts, ideas, other points to make?

[Jaid]

yes. handle it like a surprise test.

[pestulens]

Theas usually only ocure when no one is sure what happened so no one want's to be the first to open fire. and remember that very few people actually survive when the shooting starts.

[fistandantilus4....]

I think I remember there being a rule somewhere (note: I am be pulling this out of my ass, or a house rule) that if someone has a weapon drawn, trained, and finger on the trigger, they go first if you still need to bring a weapon in line. basically they've got the drop on you.

Bring that in to a standoff and , well, you'd better kill them with your first shot, or they're shooting back.

Think about this: there's no way to knwo when that other person is going to shoot, unless you're very good at reding body language or actually see the finger move. First shooter gets the shot off and nails the sweet spot right between the eys, the other guy isn't firing back. but if he donesn't get one shot one kill, the other guy is going to shoot back. Kinda like a game of chicken.

[ornot]

I'd be inclined to call for composure tests to resolve a mexican standoff.

But if you were instead asking how one could set up a mexican standoff, it would probably take some kind of RP. Perhaps a PC could be threatening an NPC with a gun. The NPC's bodyguard points his gun at the threatening PC, but daren't shoot in case the PC shoots NPC1 in the face. A further PC points a gun at NPC2 etc. etc.

Basically the way I see it, there is usually some poor shmuck in the middle of the standoff without a gun, and any number of other guns being pointed hither and yon.

If you do manage to come up with a scenario, let us know. I know I'd love to hear about it!

[fistandantilus4....]

We've had a few, basically where people were not quite ready to shoot, but pulled guns, and so guns were pulled by others in response. IIRC, it usually starts with the PCs pulling guns, but not always. That's been my experience at least. Really messy when the shooting starts.

[mfb]

i almost think you'd have to come up with new rules. a Mexican standoff is basically a test of wills, similar in theme to an old west quickdraw shootout or an iaijutsu duel.

one way you could do it is to stack up modifiers on both of the shooters' tests--make it basically impossible to get a solid shot off, even with edge. in combination with keeping close track of both shooters' ammo (making sure they're both very low, in other words), you create a situation where individual shots count. both shooters will want to aim carefully, creating time for conversation.

alternatively or in combination, you could make it so that shooting it out is the second choice for both participants. maybe shooter A wants shooter B to switch sides, and shooter B wants shooter A to deliver a message to A's boss. basically, use story elements to nudge both participants towards not shooting each other, a task made somewhat easier by virtue of the fact that you, as the GM, likely control one of the participants.

to ratchet up the drama, you could introduce Lot5R-style tests of will. while trading quips, each participant is rolling Intimidation or Negotiation or something; the winner of each test imposes some sort of initiative modifier on the other guy, who is reacting more slowly or with less control because of the winner's words.

[Demerzel]

Just to be clear:

The Mexican Stand-Off is a group of people all pointing guns at eachother and noone shooting.

The Mexican Stand-Off does not involve shooting, because once there is shooting it is no longer a stand-off.

So what we're curious about is how to handle when everyone starts shooting? What to do for that first initiative pass?

[bibliophile20]

At the moment, a possible scenario that I'm leaning towards is as follows:

PCs are going to go have a "talk" with someone at a local bar for some information.

When the target becomes reticent, one or more of the PCs decides to pull a gun and get the intimidation bonus to the dice pools.

Guns clears the holsters and I tell the PCs that they hear the sounds of multiple guns being cocked behind them.

And suddenly their target isn't looking as worried anymore. :)

Or, another possibility is to borrow a page from the Matrix Revolutions--3 or 4 PCs, a room full of goons and the mafia don; minor tussle ensues and suddenly everyone, including the Don, has a gun to the head.

[Demerzel]

So the question is how you resolve when the shooting starts again? Or how to get into the situation?

[bibliophile20]

[Demerzel]

I have basically handled it in the past like this:

Combat is going on or something like that and I’ll initiate a Standoff by having one of the NPCs delay their action while pointing their firearm at a PC. They get a free action even though they are delaying so they can make a short statement. Like, “Hold it”. And I’ll usually say something like, “The goon with the pink hair and the MP-5 is pointing it at your head and says, ‘Don’t move!’” Now when the PC has an opportunity to act, what he does will dictate if the goon uses his delayed action and pops him one, or if a standoff ensues, The PC has his gun out and someone is pointing it somewhere, and other PCs may train guns on other people.

Then roleplaying happens. During this time everyone has held actions, and basically I assume all the dialogue occurs with the Free Actions everyone gets every turn. Those free actions may involve more guns coming to bear by people who already have guns drawn, but unarmed people don’t get to draw without setting off the action again. I consider it cinematic license; it always happens in the movies that the guys in the stand off are moving their guns between targets or holding two guns etc.

If/When the fight restarts I let everyone have a simultaneous action, all those held actions occur simultaneously. Then roll new initiative.

It’s about the closest thing I can come up to in the rules. It’s nearly the only time I can get my players to really roleplay. They seem to have to have their lives on the line or else they roleplay like, “My character threatens the goon.”

[WhiskeyMac]

Actually SR4 (and SR in general) really made it difficult to read someone's body language to tell when they're going to shoot with the introduction of the smartlink mental firing command. You don't even have to have a trigger on your gun anymore to be able to fire it. Sure, some people won't have them but those who do will have a drop on the others.

I'd have the PCs roll initiative and then just have the NPCs holding their actions until the PCs go. My PCs don't (or shouldn't) know the NPCs stats so they don't know if the NPCs beat them or not. When 1 PC pulls the trigger, all 5 of the NPCs pull theirs with a simultaneous action. If the PCs have enhanced reflexes then have them make a Perception test to detect the striking of the hammer or ignition of the gunpowder and then let them fire their weapons too.

[mfb]

[Thane36425]

[hyzmarca]

A good Mexican Standoff works like so.

Character A draws weapon, takes aim, issues a verbal warning, and delays a simple action until the other character makes an aggressive move.
Character B has a weapon drawn, issues a verbal warning, takes aim, and delays a simple action until the other character makes an aggressive move.

This continues so long as neither character actually attacks. Free actions are spent talking and a single simple action is spent taking aim. The take aim action is very important because there is no upper limit on the dice pool bonuses it produces. The longer the standoff goes on the better chance the person who shoots first has to kill in a single shot. There comes a point where you can simply use your take-aim dice to buy a certain kill.

Every (Willpower) combat turns the characters make a composure test. If this test is failed the character loses his aim and has to start over again. This is the very best time for the other character to attack.


When one character attacks, the other characters may or may not be forced to make a surprise test. If they pass this test they can choose to use their delayed action to fire or discard it and use an interrupt action for full defense. If they fire the action is considered to be simultaneous with the attacker's shot. If they fail then they can still defend or use full defense but they cannot fire until the attacker's shot is resolved. Being shot negates one's take-aim bonus.

During a Mexican standoff, social skills can be used without losing take aim bonuses.

This system favors the attacker but it doesn't favor the attacker so much that any character would shoot without hesitation.
In particular, you don't want to the other guy to pass the surprise test after you've both had 50 take aim actions. He'll die, yeah, but so will you.

[mfb]

the problem i see, hyz, is that both characters have to want a Mexican standoff to make it work. there's no mechanic for having one happen spontaneously, which is what i think some people are looking for.

[hyzmarca]

Well, yes, but that's true of actual Mexican standoffs. The first person has to delay an action and the second person has to not want to risk getting shot by the delayed action.

The best way for a GM to facilitate A Mexican standoff is the double-surprise test with heavy penalties. If both fail the test you end up in a situation where both characters can ready weapons but none can attack the other, making delaying an action the best tactic for both characters. And both will know that the only almost certainly delayed an action, thus creating the standoff.

There are, of course, many Mexican standoff geometries. Each geometry possesses its own unique entries and solutions.

In edition to the traditional 1-1 standoff, you have The chain, in which a single character is ambushed and held hostage and the hostage-taker is ambushed by the hostage's teammate and has a gun held to his head. Then the hostage-taker's teammate and ambush the ambusher to add another link and so on out into infinity. You've also got The Box, in which the original hostage points his gun at the last member of The Chain.

My favorite Mexican Standoff is The Triangle, in which three individuals, each opposing the other two, meet in a standoff. It is the most stable configuration because whomever shoots first will certainly be killed. The only reasonable option is to surrender, which turns the standoff into a standard 1-2 and give the surrenderer a change to regroup while the other two are shooting at each other.

[mfb]

er, well, i meant more that the players have to want a Mexican standoff. probably should have said that. the rules definitely support acting instead of waiting; unless the players know ahead of time that there's a good reason to not start shooting, they're more likely to roll init and start blazing than actually listen, even if the other guy gets a solid drop on them.

[Demerzel]

Speaking a phrase kills your take aim. Also,

[Garrowolf]

I think that a composure test makes more sense because a certain amount of the reason for a mexican standoff is fear.

Whenever people hold action I require that they declare a trigger that will cause them to act. If that trigger doesn't occur then they can do something else their next action or change their trigger. Once their trigger occurs then they have to make a reaction test against the person who triggered them. This means that a normal guy who gets the drop on a street sammie is still facing someone who is MUCH faster then them.

I think that part of the problem is that there is no hit location mechanic in this system. As it stands a PC can just decide that they will ignore the stand off because they have enough armor on to survive anything but a high success roll. I think that there needs to be some kind of mechanic to cover point blank shots so that this is still dangerous.

On the cinematic side of things I have a skill called redirect. It is a martial arts skill (I have several) which allows you to do a partial grapple to cause a weapon to go in to or get pointed at another target.

Imagine a triangle standoff. Street Sammie decides to go. He redirects one person's pistol away from his head and towards the other person. Let's that person fire and shoots the shooter.

Part of getting the initiative in my game is the ability to let another character go and interrupt even after one simple action (or a free action for that matter).

[Ravor]

I might be misunderstanding the question, but I personally don't really see a problem with handling a Mexican Standoff under the rules.

Once multiple characters have delayed their actions, then they are considered to act at the same time when they do act, so your original Initiative Score no longer matters.

I'd personally say that pointing your gun at the other guys head was classified as a Called Shot for extra DV and/or ignoring armor.

And even if you did call the bluff and open fire, then he can still use the Dead Man Trigger rule and possibly shoot you/his hostage even if you did one-shot him.

So I can see a Mexican Standoff happening where people don't really want to open fire because even if you pull the trigger first, you might still bite the big one.

[mfb]

Ravor, the problem is getting the characters involved in a Mexican standoff in the first place--making pointing their gun at someone and not shooting somehow more desirable than shooting.

[Clyde]

It seems that Mexican standoffs usually result from a lapse in judgment, a reluctance to actually shoot, or lots of participants with unexpected weapons. One way to encourage the PCs to roleplay it out is to give them an in game reason to believe the bad guys won't actually shoot. For example, the Yakuza leader says "these shadowrunners are under my protection and I will have the head of any of my people who harm them." Later the hot headed Yakuza enforcer (who hates the PCs) draws a pistol while in an argument with them. The PCs will have to be a little nervous, but at the same time they have reason to believe they are safe. Another option, when you happen to have the drop on the players through a high initiative or successful surprise check, is to have the NPC point a gun and yell for the PC to freeze. The PCs know there is a delayed action in there, and any overly aggressive move could get somebody shot. Cops who are in a decent neighborhood probably won't shoot for no reason, either, although the surgeon general has determined that pulling guns on the 'Star may be hazardous to your health. :grinbig:

[kzt]

The other drawback you run into, that nobody seems to have mentioned, is that the team mage is going to be able to act without any obvious actions. Like inviting any bound spirits he has to the party, or summoning one if he foolishly didn't have his force 5 air elemental on standby.

The effective "mass invisibility" of a large spirit's concealment power can really mess up any plans for a standoff.