How would you handle an enemy NPC firing on your group (unknown to them) of PC's with a sniper rifle from long/extreme range regarding initiative?

One of my characters has a high bounty on him and bounty hunters are after him. I have a setup where the NPC was setting up a place to get him from range, then pick him up to bring him in but the other PC's interrupted him.

I wanted to just do a free shot without rolling initiative because it would make sense for a free shot to be taken since no one knew about it. However, I think I should at least give them a chance to "sense" it or use something to help themselves before I announce "you're being shot at by an unknown source from an unknown location..."

Giving free actions to an NPC removes a players sense if agency and I don't want that.... How can I fix it so it works narratively?

This is one of the cases where Cool gets used for the attacker's initiative - he wants to pull off an ambush, but circumstances might conspire against the attempt.

My main problem with bothering to roll initiative in this situation is why would the players even know to get out of the way when nothing has happened and they haven't seen anything?

It's like they are walking down the street then yell "get down!!!" when absolutely nothing has happened yet. I would get it if they rolled a Force sense check, but none of them have the skill tree far enough to sense at long or extreme range.

If one or more of the players beats the attacker's initiative then they DO see something - or maybe the sniper misjudges the situation and pulls the trigger too soon or hesitates and pulls the trigger a bit too late. Alternately, some outside circumstance interferes with the attempt (someone else gets in the way/distracts the target/stumbles across the sniper/etc). Regardless, the ambush doesn't go off as planned.

Yeah, it'd pretty much be the sniper rolling their Cool for initiative, and the targets rolling Vigilance.

And yes, this very much means that it's possible for one or more the targets (PCs or NPCs) to clue into the notion they're about to be attacked, and can possibly react before the sniper actually makes a combat check.

There are plenty of ways to narrate this scenario, with some environmental factor giving anyone that gets to act before the sniper that something is up (snapping twig, rustling in the bushes, faint smell of gun oil, light reflecting off a lense or barrel, etc)

That being said, as the GM you could add setback dice to the targets' Vigilance checks to account for the sniper having done an exceptional job of hiding themselves, though unless the sniper made a Stealth check beforehand I'd limit it to one setback die, same for basic concealment.

Definitely intended to be handled with an initiative check, but not a standard Simple check.

In this situation I would be providing a Boost or even 2 to the attacker. The targets would be getting at least a couple of setback, possibly even a difficulty Upgrade to Easy as well.

Just because Initiative "starts" as a Simple check does not mean the situation and environmental effects won't come into play.

IF a target manages to win initiative then it is also important to give them the heads up on what is happening.

If you say "Congratulations you won initiative, but nothing is happening so just do whatever" then in effect you have nullified their great Initiative.

What you should do is say "Congratulations you won initiative, as the four of you are walking down the street you get the feeling of being watched. Just as your about to cross a road there is a glint of sunlight flashing of something on top of a building half way down the next block. You don't see anything obvious, but something must have moved up there."

You definitely roll the NPC's Cool. BTW, you don't have to stick with the adversaries in the book, I find they're mostly scaled towards beginning characters. A "Master" Bounty Hunter has Cool 2, Presence 3 (YYG), which can be (barely) threatening to characters fresh out of chargen, but is pretty tame once the characters hit a few hundred XP. Scale to your PC's abilities accordingly, give them Cool 4 and Presence 5 if you need to. Or give them Talents from key specs. Even the bounty hunter minions could be part of an elite group that have Cool as a skill, i.e.: the more there are, the more Cool they are.

You assign a Difficulty to the PCs when they roll initiative instead of just making it simple for them. This way they're very likely to all 'lose' the roll and the sniper gets the first shot. It also then extends to they're at distinct disadvantage as the combat unfolds which would be appropriate in a sniper attack. Being ambushed sucks.

My main problem with bothering to roll initiative in this situation is why would the players even know to get out of the way when nothing has happened and they haven't seen anything?

It's like they are walking down the street then yell "get down!!!" when absolutely nothing has happened yet. I would get it if they rolled a Force sense check, but none of them have the skill tree far enough to sense at long or extreme range.

Having seen it or not is based on their vigilance check. They literally make a check on that which gives them their init result. Some characters are very vigilant and notice the ambush in time to react first and other, well their init results might not as good.

You assign a Difficulty to the PCs when they roll initiative instead of just making it simple for them. This way they're very likely to all 'lose' the roll and the sniper gets the first shot. It also then extends to they're at distinct disadvantage as the combat unfolds which would be appropriate in a sniper attack. Being ambushed sucks.

To add to this, you can justify a difficulty, or even just a setback or two, for the PCs in a few ways: by having the NPC making a successful Stealth check prior; accounting for terrain, lighting, etc. A bounty hunter is going to pick a moment when their quarry is at a disadvantage, so pile them on.

I would give the PC's an opposed Vigilance vs. Stealth roll to notice the ambush early enough to allow them to roll initiative in the first round. Allow triumphs to warn another character (bringing them into initiative, even if they failed).

Would you guys allow a single NPC vs a single PC for an intiative check even if they are in a group if the NPC is only after the one PC?

Would you guys allow a single NPC vs a single PC for an intiative check even if they are in a group if the NPC is only after the one PC?

Not really, even if it is not aimed at you, you might notice the imminent attack and react based on it.

All the PCs roll. I might have the opposition do one roll if it's an ambush from concealment kind of thing.

Gotcha, I don't think I've ever had anyone roll am initiative check that wasn't simple so it makes sense to add a difficulty and setback or boost dice depending on the situation. Thanks everyone!

Would you guys allow a single NPC vs a single PC for an intiative check even if they are in a group if the NPC is only after the one PC?

I might be inclined to have the PC target roll an Opposed check of their vigilance versus the sniper's Stealth, but I've had snipers take potshots without initiative before and it worked out just fine. Since they were able to immediately react, and the shot came from a very long range from cover, there were no squabbles about lost agency or anything like that. It sure made them swim faster!

I would give the PC's an opposed Vigilance vs. Stealth roll to notice the ambush early enough to allow them to roll initiative in the first round. Allow triumphs to warn another character (bringing them into initiative, even if they failed).

I just want to point out that, in this case, the Vigilance vs. Stealth would be the Initiative. The standard initiative for walking into an alley and finding a bunch of armed mooks is Simple - you need to be Vigilant to come out ahead, but it's not as if they're doing anything to put you off the scent. In this case, it's just a measure of your innate level of awareness in that moment.

In this scenario, the sniper is trying to hide. You still roll Vigilance for initiative - the very skill you suggested - but this time, they've got to be passively aware enough to notice something's wrong .

The alternative is to have them roll this Vig v. Stealth check and then, if they succeed , roll another simple Vig. check to be entered into initiative order. The former is a perfect example of what 2P51, Richard, and others are suggesting. The latter is just too many rolls.

The RAW is that when you are ambushing, Cool is your initiative. My variation might be to first check whether the sniper is in fact concealed: Stealth vs. Vigilance. If the sniper succeeds, he could add the net successes to his initiative roll. Conversely, if the players spot the ambush, there should be some bonus to their side, such as adding a boost on the actual initiative check, or forcing the sniper to roll Vigilance now, since he has to react to being spotted. I like the idea of a Triumph to warn others, the benefit here might be to nullify a "Quick Strike" bonus against the party, even some of them have not acted before the sniper.

Would you guys allow a single NPC vs a single PC for an intiative check even if they are in a group if the NPC is only after the one PC?

I might be inclined to have the PC target roll an Opposed check of their vigilance versus the sniper's Stealth, but I've had snipers take potshots without initiative before and it worked out just fine. Since they were able to immediately react, and the shot came from a very long range from cover, there were no squabbles about lost agency or anything like that. It sure made them swim faster!

I ended up running it more like this when I played through this scenario on Saturday. They were walking down the street and no one was attempting to hide or be stealthy so I had the NPC sniper take a shot at the PC with the bounty at long range. It was a solid hit and he ducked into an alley afterwards to heal up and continue on, and from that point forward he was more aware of his surroundings...but he still managed to get back onto the street a little while later and once again stand around not doing anything so I knocked him out with a stun shot, but then the group picked up his body and took it inside for cover.

One player did mention that I didn't have anyone roll for initiative when I took that shot, I told him that in this case (at least to me) it made sense narratively to take a few pot shots to increase the tension of the scene and get everyone moving, but at the same time not start an actual fight. He agreed, but I wanted to revisit this so I could do it more like the rule book says in the future.

Thanks again for everyone's' ideas and examples of what you would do, it really helps having a community like this that shares ideas and points out things that I might have been missed.

One player did mention that I didn't have anyone roll for initiative when I took that shot, I told him that in this case (at least to me) it made sense narratively to take a few pot shots to increase the tension of the scene and get everyone moving, but at the same time not start an actual fight. He agreed, but I wanted to revisit this so I could do it more like the rule book says in the future.

I guess one could impose a Formidable or Impossible Vigilance check if one is actually making a roll to hit. Heck, you could just impose that sparingly at random times going forward just to keep them on their toes! It's a fine balance between maintaining player agency and giving them surprises and interesting situations.

One player did mention that I didn't have anyone roll for initiative when I took that shot, I told him that in this case (at least to me) it made sense narratively to take a few pot shots to increase the tension of the scene and get everyone moving, but at the same time not start an actual fight. He agreed, but I wanted to revisit this so I could do it more like the rule book says in the future.

I guess one could impose a Formidable or Impossible Vigilance check if one is actually making a roll to hit. Heck, you could just impose that sparingly at random times going forward just to keep them on their toes! It's a fine balance between maintaining player agency and giving them surprises and interesting situations.

This is very true! Only one of the PC's had a blaster rifle that would have been able to hit the NPC at long range so it would have honestly only been nearly impossible to find the person, much less shoot back! It played out well in the end and that's what counts, so I will still call it a win even if it wasn't RAW.

What they don't know is, in their haste to leave the system they now have a tracking module attached to the hull of the ship and they will be busy fighting off Imperials as well as bounty hunters in the future...hopefully they don't go straight back to their base otherwise it may be compromised!

Why not just add the snipers stealth skill as an opposed check on the players Vigilance check for the initiative check?

So initiative check for the sniper roll flat simple Cool, and the players roll Vigilance with a difficulty.

The sniper has really good odds of getting the first slot, but if the players do come out on top it'll make more sense that they spotted the glint of the scope, or a shadow or barrel or something.

I believe the most basic RAW be Cool vs Vigilance, however in a situation like this I've used more than one roll:

The Sniper setting up the Ambush would be a Survival, Warfare (AoR), or maybe even Skulduggery, vs a Difficulty Level based on the setting with Boosts and Setbacks based on the situation. The result would be how well the Sniper was able to set up their Ambush: A Success = the Sniper chooses the time, Range, and basic layout of the Combat Encounter and forces a Cool vs Vigilance check, they start with their weapon ready and in the best Cover etc.. Any Advantages (or Threats) generated can be spent to influence the Initiative roll. If the Sniper Fails then the Encounter begins normally with a Cool vs Vigilance and the Sniper not being properly prepared when the PCs arrive on the scene (are in the open or are seen getting into position, no Stealth checks, etc.).

If the Sniper lost the Initiative then something happened in the scene to give the Ambush away, the encounter set up remains the same its just that the Sniper gets his shot off after the PC(s) have their tern(s).

I wouldn't use Stealth for a Sniper Ambush, at least not at the start, until the target(s) tried to identify where the shot(s) was coming from, then I'd roll an Opposed check on the spot based on which PC was using their Action to search for the Sniper.

I believe the most basic RAW be Cool vs Vigilance, however in a situation like this I've used more than one roll:

The Sniper setting up the Ambush would be a Survival, Warfare (AoR), or maybe even Skulduggery, vs a Difficulty Level based on the setting with Boosts and Setbacks based on the situation. The result would be how well the Sniper was able to set up their Ambush: A Success = the Sniper chooses the time, Range, and basic layout of the Combat Encounter and forces a Cool vs Vigilance check, they start with their weapon ready and in the best Cover etc.. Any Advantages (or Threats) generated can be spent to influence the Initiative roll. If the Sniper Fails then the Encounter begins normally with a Cool vs Vigilance and the Sniper not being properly prepared when the PCs arrive on the scene (are in the open or are seen getting into position, no Stealth checks, etc.).

If the Sniper lost the Initiative then something happened in the scene to give the Ambush away, the encounter set up remains the same its just that the Sniper gets his shot off after the PC(s) have their tern(s).

I wouldn't use Stealth for a Sniper Ambush, at least not at the start, until the target(s) tried to identify where the shot(s) was coming from, then I'd roll an Opposed check on the spot based on which PC was using their Action to search for the Sniper.

I like this, especially in context that it forces the ambushed ones to spend at least one action to even just find out what the is happening and potentially even more as you are not guaranteed to succeed on your first opposed check.