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?
Full Version: Mexican Standoff
yes. handle it like a surprise test.
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.
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.
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.
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!
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!
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
So the question is how you resolve when the shooting starts again? Or how to get into the situation?
| QUOTE (Demerzel @ Mar 23 2007, 06:26 PM) |
| 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? |
Yeah, that's exactly it--how do you get to that stage when everyone has guns pointing at each other without someone having already pulled a trigger?
You can't handle it as normal combat, because that goes until resolved, and, since everyone has a different initiative score, you can't get the simultaneous action that you need to set up a good standoff.
Once someone decides to break the standoff, roll initiative as normal.
Edit:
| QUOTE |
| So the question is how you resolve when the shooting starts again? Or how to get into the situation? |
How to get into the situation; getting out of it is easy--all it takes is 1.25-5 pounds of pressure on a curved piece of metal.
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.”
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.”
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.
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.
| QUOTE (bibliophile20) |
| Yeah, that's exactly it--how do you get to that stage when everyone has guns pointing at each other without someone having already pulled a trigger? |
aside from strong in-character reasons, i don't see any way to do it beyond modifying the rules. again, i'd go with a test-of-wills type mechanic--maybe allow characters who are drawing a weapon, or pointing weapon at someone, to get a free Intimidation roll. for every success the intimidating character gets, the intimidatee takes a penalty on his initiative roll.
you'd have to be careful, though, because the PCs might start trying to Intimidate every random secguard they run into, in order to impose the initiative penalty.
| QUOTE (ornot) |
| I'd be inclined to call for composure tests to resolve a mexican standoff. |
I would agree with that. Follow that with Negotiations to try to prevent a shootout, since that would probably result in heavy losses.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Speaking a phrase kills your take aim. Also,
| QUOTE (p137 Core) |
| The maximum number of sequential Take Aim actions a character may take is equal to one-half the character's skill with that weapon, rounded down. |
And when I say speaking a phrase takes away your cumulitive aims,
| QUOTE (same) |
| the benefits are lost if the character takes any other kind of action—including a free action—at any time. |
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).
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).
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.
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.
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.
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. 
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.
The effective "mass invisibility" of a large spirit's concealment power can really mess up any plans for a standoff.
| QUOTE (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. |
Becuase if two people start shooting at each other at close range in the open, the most likely outcome is that they both die or, at the very least, are both seriously injured. Only the most hardcore of samurai would not consider that to be a pyrrhic victory at best.
If the PCs roleplay their characters as actually caring if they live or die, it works.
Unless you are an Agent Smith adept with buttloads of Combat Sense , having a firefight out in the open with no cover or vision modifiers is pretty suicidal. This is why Mexican Standoffs don't happen in trenches.
In extremely one-sided situations, a Mexican standoff is stupid. But, when both are evenly evenly matched and on equal footing, the outcome of combat is so questionable that it would be best to avoid combat altogether by any means necessary.
Ah, concealment. It give perception penalties. Using it when someone is looking right at you is about as effective as covering your eyes with your hands and going "peekaboo".
Imagine a ninja in a black outfit standing in front of a white wall in the middle of the day with hundreds of heavily-armed gunmen looking right at him declaring "I blend into the shadows".
| QUOTE |
| the benefits are lost if the character takes any other kind of action—including a free action—at any time. |
Wow. That just might be the most stupidly written rule, ever. My mind must have blocked it out. It does make sense until one considers that talking is also a free action. Logically, it should be limited to physical actions.
Chained mexican standoffs never seemed like they were an issue, as the initial draw in such things is probably less about making the guy dead and more about getting a bonus to intimidate checks. Other characters draw in turn, and thanks to held actions and the dead man's trigger rule it adds tension to what was already a tense negotiation, but the initial plan was to use the threat of violence rather than actual violence. Added tests to see if anyone loses their nerve can be added on top of this, but the actual scene can come about rather easily.
Mexican standoffs where each party has a gun to each other's head probably wouldn't come up all that often in a real game, for several reasons. Most of the time when they are shown in books/movies/etc. it's to show that two skilled characters facing off one-on-one are equally fast, but in a game like Shadowrun it's unlikely that both the player's character and their foe are running around as lone protagonists. (If nothing else, it's bad form to let individual characters routinely wander off while the rest of the players sit around as a passive audience.) That, and a regular rule for it would make it into a fairly regular occurrence, rather than a rare moment when the tension is racketed up as high as it can go. It might be an interesting alternative rule for one-on-one battles where there's an initiative tie, but as unlikely as those are it's probably not worth your time to flesh things out any more than that.
Mexican standoffs where each party has a gun to each other's head probably wouldn't come up all that often in a real game, for several reasons. Most of the time when they are shown in books/movies/etc. it's to show that two skilled characters facing off one-on-one are equally fast, but in a game like Shadowrun it's unlikely that both the player's character and their foe are running around as lone protagonists. (If nothing else, it's bad form to let individual characters routinely wander off while the rest of the players sit around as a passive audience.) That, and a regular rule for it would make it into a fairly regular occurrence, rather than a rare moment when the tension is racketed up as high as it can go. It might be an interesting alternative rule for one-on-one battles where there's an initiative tie, but as unlikely as those are it's probably not worth your time to flesh things out any more than that.
Well, part of the problem might be that a Mexican Standoff really isn't that good of a place to be, but here goes...
-----
*Dead Man's Trigger*
Bot rounds a corner and finds some corp suit holding a gun to his chummer Eddy's head. He instinctively draws his Predator and levels it at the goon, but before he pulls the trigger he realizes that if the corp so much as twitches after Bot introduces his brain to Ex-Ex then Eddy is a dead man, and then how would Bot ever collect that 100 Y?
Things really start going downhill when Bot hears a shotgun cock behind him as a deep voice orders him to drop his gun. And they will only get more complex when Rabbit levels her Super Warhawk at Mr. Shotgun's head.
After all, if anyone is going to threaten to kill that fragger Bot, then it is going to be her.
-----
*Is that your final answer?*
Rabbit needs some answers about what really happened in that two-week hole in her memories from the slitch who was pretending to be her girlfriend and she needs them right fragging now! Unfortunently when Rabbit gets pissed then quiet goes flying right out of the window and she kicks down the door to 'their' shared apartment and enters, leading with her Super Warhawk, only to find herself staring down the barrel of a Colt Manhunter held by her now ex-girlfriend.
For her part, the 'girlfriend' had tried to explain to her bosses that she was afraid that Jessica's deprograming might not fully take and that the deep cover personality of Rabbit might reinsert itself without the trigger code if they pressed her too hard.
-----
*The enemy of my enemy is merely my enemy's enemy, nothing more.*
Frag it all to hell! Bot knew that it wasn't a good idea to work with both Rabbit and Void on this job instead of his usual chums. Still, everything had been going as smoothly as it ever did while running the shadows until he had caught Void typing something into one of the ancient data-terminals, and now that crazy slitch Rabbit isn't sure who is being straight and who isn't.
Although Rabbit can never forgive Bot for what he had done and would normally trust Void with her life without a second thought, she must admit to herself that for all his faults she has never known Bot to over-react like this and that Void hasn't really been acting like himself lately.
So for now the three shadowrunners are caught pointing their weapons at each other until either Bot or Void can convince Rabbit that 'he' is the one telling the truth.
-----
I guess what the point of the stories are is that I don't believe that you really need any rules to make a Mexican Standoff happen, just enough of a motivation for someone not to pull the trigger right away. Because, at least in the movies that I remember, there was almost always a story reason why someone didn't just pull the trigger, whether it is afraid of the hostage dying from a finger twitch, needing some information from the other guy, or simply not knowing who to trust and who to shoot and that least in my opinion those type of things shouldn't be encoded into the rules.
-----
*Dead Man's Trigger*
Bot rounds a corner and finds some corp suit holding a gun to his chummer Eddy's head. He instinctively draws his Predator and levels it at the goon, but before he pulls the trigger he realizes that if the corp so much as twitches after Bot introduces his brain to Ex-Ex then Eddy is a dead man, and then how would Bot ever collect that 100 Y?
Things really start going downhill when Bot hears a shotgun cock behind him as a deep voice orders him to drop his gun. And they will only get more complex when Rabbit levels her Super Warhawk at Mr. Shotgun's head.
After all, if anyone is going to threaten to kill that fragger Bot, then it is going to be her.
-----
*Is that your final answer?*
Rabbit needs some answers about what really happened in that two-week hole in her memories from the slitch who was pretending to be her girlfriend and she needs them right fragging now! Unfortunently when Rabbit gets pissed then quiet goes flying right out of the window and she kicks down the door to 'their' shared apartment and enters, leading with her Super Warhawk, only to find herself staring down the barrel of a Colt Manhunter held by her now ex-girlfriend.
For her part, the 'girlfriend' had tried to explain to her bosses that she was afraid that Jessica's deprograming might not fully take and that the deep cover personality of Rabbit might reinsert itself without the trigger code if they pressed her too hard.
-----
*The enemy of my enemy is merely my enemy's enemy, nothing more.*
Frag it all to hell! Bot knew that it wasn't a good idea to work with both Rabbit and Void on this job instead of his usual chums. Still, everything had been going as smoothly as it ever did while running the shadows until he had caught Void typing something into one of the ancient data-terminals, and now that crazy slitch Rabbit isn't sure who is being straight and who isn't.
Although Rabbit can never forgive Bot for what he had done and would normally trust Void with her life without a second thought, she must admit to herself that for all his faults she has never known Bot to over-react like this and that Void hasn't really been acting like himself lately.
So for now the three shadowrunners are caught pointing their weapons at each other until either Bot or Void can convince Rabbit that 'he' is the one telling the truth.
-----
I guess what the point of the stories are is that I don't believe that you really need any rules to make a Mexican Standoff happen, just enough of a motivation for someone not to pull the trigger right away. Because, at least in the movies that I remember, there was almost always a story reason why someone didn't just pull the trigger, whether it is afraid of the hostage dying from a finger twitch, needing some information from the other guy, or simply not knowing who to trust and who to shoot and that least in my opinion those type of things shouldn't be encoded into the rules.
The best Mexican standoffs are the ones involving the blind girlfriend of one of the guys.
or Mexican girls ....
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| Wow. That just might be the most stupidly written rule, ever. My mind must have blocked it out. It does make sense until one considers that talking is also a free action. Logically, it should be limited to physical actions. |
1) Take Aim is a Simple Action. Call a shot is a free action, it's possible you're confusing the two.
2) "any other type of action" means that continuing to aim does not interfere as it is not an other type it is a same type.
3) Speaking is a physical action, it's distracting, and in order to be an effective communicator you have to more than mutter words, you make eye contact, you match rythims, you do a large variety of things.
The way I see it a momentary standoff is a opportunity to inject some roleplaying into your combat. The issue that it has to be some sort of evenly matched situation doesn't have to mean two equals.
You may not like the movie but the Matrix example when they break into the Merovingian's club and everyone is pointing guns at everyone. It's the mass in numbers.
As far as making a standoff happen consider that guards aren't all bloodthirsty killers. Most of them don't want to see your brains splattered across the wall. And those that would enjoy it probably won't enjoy the paperwork that comes with it.
So some guard hears you coming, or is informed by the spider, and waits. You bust around the corner gun drawn and come cheek to jowl with his Colt. He say's don't move. He still has two simple actions held in case you decide to be a blood stain. Now you chat...
This is a case where I agree with Ravor (Or he agrees with me), the rules are adequate. I find more often than not (barring the matrix), the rules are adequate to handle the situations they are designed to cover.
mexican standoff: last game
Sunday. Mr. Johnson -a PCs friend - was at a bank having a secret meeting with a contact. Three thugs broke into the bank trying to run a datasteal to find Mr. Johnson and his contact there. Security measures are activated: thugs, contact and Johnson are caught inside a sealed bank. The police gets involved -But I am not telling it here because it's irrelevant to this story. Eventually the runners break into the bank to find three thugs with guns ready to kill Mr Johnson and his contact. The thugs see three heavily armed and very professional looking fellows in gas masks coming in to get them. The characters did not surprise the thugs, and nobody knows who will go first.
Mexican standoff!
Ruleswise:
The thugs had heard the PCs coming before the PCs saw them. The PCs had heard the thugs before being seen. Everybody had actions ready by the time the two groups actually met. The runners had absolutely no ideas about the NPCs initiative and stats, except that they were professional criminals and one was supposed to be a hacker. The criminals didn't know about the PCs existence until they heard a security door opening and then saw a floating astrally manifested mage and two guys with camo suits, assault rifles and gas masks.
Thug A (leader): ready action; shoot Mr. Johnson in the head.
Thug B (samurai): ready action; shoot newcomers in the head.
Thug C (hacker): surprised -but nobody knew-
Character A (astrally projecting mage): could not affect thugs in panic room because of mana barrier, only runners new about that.
Character B (Blackhand, adept): ready action: Shoot Thug A in the Head
Character C (Cross, former Tir Ghost): ready action: Shoot Thug A in the head.
I allowed everybody to take free actions to talk and even use social skills at -2 until someone declared a shot. Everybody assumed that if a shot was taken, the most likely outcome would be a -dead man trigger- pass of simultaneous deadly shooting.
Runners, bank robbers, contact and Johnson all got to roll negotiation (persuasion), intimidation and composture, with heavy modifiers.
in the second pass of conversation Blackhand switched his ready action to shooting Samurai in the head, actually changing target. Used his free action to say something before everybody started shooting. Thugs rolled composture and passed, nobody shot. Negotiation continued.
What happened.
After a round of really anxious conversation, edge and sweaty fingers, the runners promised the criminals they would live and the criminals acceded to release their hostages, no shooting. Then everybody went their own way and tried to sneak past the police security curfew.
Great fun, and the best thing was that I had not prepared the scene in advance but came up spontaneously.
The outcome was the best for everybody involved -I guess that was the reason nobody shot.
Cheers,
Max
Sunday. Mr. Johnson -a PCs friend - was at a bank having a secret meeting with a contact. Three thugs broke into the bank trying to run a datasteal to find Mr. Johnson and his contact there. Security measures are activated: thugs, contact and Johnson are caught inside a sealed bank. The police gets involved -But I am not telling it here because it's irrelevant to this story. Eventually the runners break into the bank to find three thugs with guns ready to kill Mr Johnson and his contact. The thugs see three heavily armed and very professional looking fellows in gas masks coming in to get them. The characters did not surprise the thugs, and nobody knows who will go first.
Mexican standoff!
Ruleswise:
The thugs had heard the PCs coming before the PCs saw them. The PCs had heard the thugs before being seen. Everybody had actions ready by the time the two groups actually met. The runners had absolutely no ideas about the NPCs initiative and stats, except that they were professional criminals and one was supposed to be a hacker. The criminals didn't know about the PCs existence until they heard a security door opening and then saw a floating astrally manifested mage and two guys with camo suits, assault rifles and gas masks.
Thug A (leader): ready action; shoot Mr. Johnson in the head.
Thug B (samurai): ready action; shoot newcomers in the head.
Thug C (hacker): surprised -but nobody knew-
Character A (astrally projecting mage): could not affect thugs in panic room because of mana barrier, only runners new about that.
Character B (Blackhand, adept): ready action: Shoot Thug A in the Head
Character C (Cross, former Tir Ghost): ready action: Shoot Thug A in the head.
I allowed everybody to take free actions to talk and even use social skills at -2 until someone declared a shot. Everybody assumed that if a shot was taken, the most likely outcome would be a -dead man trigger- pass of simultaneous deadly shooting.
Runners, bank robbers, contact and Johnson all got to roll negotiation (persuasion), intimidation and composture, with heavy modifiers.
in the second pass of conversation Blackhand switched his ready action to shooting Samurai in the head, actually changing target. Used his free action to say something before everybody started shooting. Thugs rolled composture and passed, nobody shot. Negotiation continued.
What happened.
After a round of really anxious conversation, edge and sweaty fingers, the runners promised the criminals they would live and the criminals acceded to release their hostages, no shooting. Then everybody went their own way and tried to sneak past the police security curfew.
Great fun, and the best thing was that I had not prepared the scene in advance but came up spontaneously.
The outcome was the best for everybody involved -I guess that was the reason nobody shot.
Cheers,
Max
You might be interested in checking out the overawe rules from Deadlands (classic, I'm not sure if d20 has it).
| QUOTE (Demerzel) |
| This is a case where I agree with Ravor (Or he agrees with me), the rules are adequate. |
Aye, I was suprised by that also, I guess miracles never will cease.
...Seriously though, what I think happens is that people tend forget about the Dead Man's Trigger rule as something that doesn't really come up that often since according to RAW goons have a Group Edge, where-as in my games it comes up more often since everyone has Edge and both Damage Tracks, ect....
| QUOTE (hyzmarca) |
| Becuase if two people start shooting at each other at close range in the open, the most likely outcome is that they both die or, at the very least, are both seriously injured. |
not when it comes to PCs, honestly. more often than not, the PCs are going to be faster, better shots, tougher, and more able to negate modifiers such as darkness and wounds than their opposition. unless the PCs are aware that this opponent is as tough or tougher than they are, they probably won't hesitate to throw down.
and even then... my character and his buddy (adept and street sam) have, in the past, taken on really bad odds and come out on top through a combination of aggressiveness and a strong grasp of the rules. so depending on the player and character, even an equal or superior opponent might get jumped when he tries to start a standoff.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.