Positioning Intent

[donbaloo]

This may be lame but as I was reading back over Range and Cover and Fight! (for the umpteenth time, Burning Wheel System book has become my new Bible and is read every night before sleep...damn you guys and your seductive cult!) when something about Positioning struck me. The rules always push the idea of player intent and this brought me hurtling back to one of my previously posted concerns with scripted positioning.

I'm in Optimal striking range. I script Close, Maintain, Maintain because I want to get Inside and then stay Inside while I script Locks and Hilt Strikes. But I lose that first positioning test and am stuck in the next two volleys fighting to Maintain a position that I don't want to Maintain and never intended to Maintain. Everyone seemed to respond with the fact that that's the nature of the beast that is scripted combat and when you screw up you pay the price.

But now I wonder if this should be the case. When I made that script everything I scripted had an intention behind it. When I scripted Close my character isn't simply Closing for the sake of Closing, he's Closing with the intent of getting Inside. When he's planning to Maintain, he isn't just Maintaining to Maintain, he's Maintaining with the intent of Maintaining his inside position...not Maintaining whatever position he happens to be in. So when I fail that Close positioning test, but then succeed on my following Maintain...what should really happen considering my intent? I had to ask.

[Thor Olavsrud]

But now I wonder if this should be the case. When I made that script everything I scripted had an intention behind it. When I scripted Close my character isn't simply Closing for the sake of Closing, he's Closing with the intent of getting Inside. When he's planning to Maintain, he isn't just Maintaining to Maintain, he's Maintaining with the intent of Maintaining his inside position...not Maintaining whatever position he happens to be in. So when I fail that Close positioning test, but then succeed on my following Maintain...what should really happen considering my intent? I had to ask.

When you script, what you're actually doing is writing down your Intent across time, but you do it all up front. If you script Close, Maintain, Maintain, your Intent is to Close, Maintain, Maintain. That's your plan.

An exchange only lasts four or five heartbeats. It's fast! That's the idea. If it's extremely important for you to close that distance, you've really got two options: Either spend Artha on the Close Positioning test up front to make sure you get where you want to go, or forfeit an action later in your script in order to change your next positioning test.

That said, I think you're probably overly concerned about this. In most cases, even if you fail to Close, you'll still be in lunging distance and be able to pull off your scripted actions. It'll just be harder.

Here's the thing though, you can take these variations into account when writing your script in the first place. Be smart in writing your script! If you come up against an opponent and he has a spear and you just have a measily sword, take that into account when you script!

All other things being equal, he's going to have the positioning advantage on you. Maybe you ought to enlist one or two of your companions to script the same positioning maneuver and give you Helping Dice on your Close. Or if you have to go in on your own, maybe you should spend Persona on your Close. Maybe you're pretty strong and should try a Charge instead. Maybe you should have a throwing knife on hand so you can use it to give you and advantage and take away his.

At the very least, maybe you should script Close, Close, Close. Sure, you'll give yourself a bit of an Obstacle penalty to your actions, but hopefully you'll get lucky on one of those three positioning tests. And yeah, you run a risk of Getting Inside on him without intending to, but that's safer than the alternative when it comes to a spearman, yeah?

The point is, you can't script in a vacuum. Your script should always attempt to take the capabilities of your opponent into account. Aim to neutralize his advantages and enhance your own. Or better yet, take him out with a crossbow before he even realizes you're there.

[donbaloo]

Well spoken. I know its should be pretty obvious but I have to keep reminding myself of just how fast an exchange really is. You really are making a split second decision about what you're going to do for the next few seconds so there's not much time in there to be readjusting your plan. Forfeiting to change an action seems pretty reasonable in that light because it probably would take you a second to reevaluate whats happening and adjust your actions accordingly. When I force myself to consider the frame of time that we're dealing with, everything does seem to make pretty good sense. Like I said, I had to ask though. Thanks. Guess you guys get pretty sick of preaching how tight the rules are and then having to prove it too. :oops:

[Thor Olavsrud]

Heh! Not a problem man. That's why we have these forums. Also, I understand where the disconnect comes from. In D&D, a Round is a pretty abstract measure. Each roll assumes a number of strikes, parries and jostling for position. I may be wrong, but reaching back to my memories of AD&D1, wasn't a Round supposed to be about 1 minute each?

[donbaloo]

Yeah, it really has been tougher than I expected making the mindset switch to Burning Wheel. Not that I don't want to, its just that years and years of habits and understanding are hard to break. Yes, AD&D rounds were one minute. Now D&D rounds are six seconds. Its a big difference deciding on one overarching type of action for six seconds (D&D) and planning out each distinct micro-strategy within that six seconds (BW). I like Burning Wheels strategic combat more. Its much more connected to the player.