Delay Action?, Does high initiative give a PC foreknowl Options

[TheScamp]

[Zazen]

Like I said, though, there's no check to see that his number is higher for "who goes first" rights. He just gets it because he delayed, that's all. If he needed to have a certain stat or score or something, it would have said so because that's what the examples are for. They explicitly indicate where to check for scores and stats and such.


I think this is getting complicated because we can't even seem to agree on what SR3 says, let alone what should happen. If you already use house rules (or different interpretations of canon or whatever else we can call it to be as diplomatic as possible ;)), then obviously my suggestion of a reaction roll is unecessary. I think that's all I really need to say about it. :)

[TheScamp]

[The White Dwarf]

Doooods read my previous post, its always crystal clear who goes first after a careful reading of the rules. The only situation calling for a check to break a tie has a specific procedure to follow, and in all cases the guy who wins is the guy who normally wouldve gone first anyhow, unless they really are completley tied and it comes to a roll off. If you delay cross pass to 'interrupt' someone acting before you in the first pass (and thus before you in the second pass as well), you are faced with the same situation as below. You can choose to act first, or during, the turn if you state you will do so. Only if someone else delaying were to also try to act would you even get to the 'tiebreaker' scenario. There is no real "interrupting" in SR, only stating what reaction will occur if an action takes place.

To MCB:
Close. The PC will have to not only delcare he is interrupting, but also state is action, before the NPC does anything at all. He can declare that his stated action will occur after the NPC, but he must state what that action will be before seeing what the NPC will do.

So it would go like, whip around the corner, mexican standoff, roll initiative. PC wins. PC delays hoping NPC will surrender. NPCs turn to act comes up. PC has a choice: choose to act this combat phase, stating his action and its time of occurance; or choose to let the NPC take his turn. He cannot wait to see what the NPC will do at all before declaring his intention to act, and what action he will take, and when it will occur.

If the PC wanted to wait on a surrender, he would likley declare something along the lines of "I will use a simple action to draw, a free action to say 'surrender!', and then delay my second simple action to shoot the NPC if he does anything but surrender." So hes stated his intent to act, the actions, and the time of the actions, all without seeing what NPC will do at all. Then NPC will act, drawing to fire, and the PC will intervene by shooting; not because he can interrupt but because he declared he would use his speed advantage to wait until the last possible second to fire, all before the NPC acted.

Make sense?

[mcb]

Excellent, that make more sense then my interpretation. That has the correct feel to me and does not give the higher inititive/delaying character foreknowledge of the NPCs action before the delaying character states his.

Thanks again
mcb

[Shockwave_IIc]

[Zazen]

That's what the example on page 103 says, too.