Just now, Avatar111 said:

Basically, a simple rule that says something along the line of; no check can interrupt another check and should be rolled after the initial check's is fully resolved (unless specifically stated), would probably fix a lot of bugs.

Yeah - I'd fully support that,

3 minutes ago, gareth_lazelle said:

Yeah - I'd fully support that,

which doesn't change the fact that the original post is fully legit;

"Concerning the Mirumoto Bushi, can such a series of techniques be allowed ...

Bushi is approached by another antagonist within range 0-1. He has two blades on him, but neither are readied. Something occurs so combat can begin and this Bushi gets to go first.

1. Use the Kata 'Rising Blade' which allows him to a) ready and draw his sheathed weapon with a one-handed, and strike.
2. Spend an Opportunity * from the Kata to ready a second sheathed weapon.
3. Use the Rank 6 Heart of the Dragon to make an attack with the second weapon in a one-handed grip since it was already readied and it has not been used to an attack action this turn? "

all of this works.
where I jammed was when @Ultimatecalibur started to mention his TN lowering shenanigan, which I think is non-legit as if you play it as such you open the door to a ton of weird/funky abuses and clunky gameplay.

26 minutes ago, Avatar111 said:

yeah it got errata, it is now TN=Vigilance of the opponent

Rather annoyingly this doesn't seem to have been added to v1.2 of the rulebook...

1 minute ago, gareth_lazelle said:

Rather annoyingly this doesn't seem to have been added to v1.2 of the rulebook...

To be fair, their errata pdf is also full of erratas (page numbers mostly). And it didn't get fixed since.

But that is another subject!

I sent off a couple of questions to the devs for clarification. We'll see if/when they get back to me.

I'm AFB - is there anywhere where it's stated that Opps are spent sequentially, rather than simultaneously?

Also, isn't the first weapon readied upon resolving the technique, and therefore he can't Two-Sword because he doesn't have two weapons readied until the technique resolves?

1 hour ago, JBento said:

I'm AFB - is there anywhere where it's stated that Opps are spent sequentially, rather than simultaneously?

Also, isn't the first weapon readied upon resolving the technique, and therefore he can't Two-Sword because he doesn't have two weapons readied until the technique resolves?

he didn't have any weapon readied during the activation phase of the technique. so he picked his weapon 1 to use Rising Blade.

he rolled, and used opportunities to draw weapon 2.

he used more opportunities to activate "heart of the dragon (or spinning blade)" with his weapon 2.

all legit so far. at least I think.

the only thing that kind of makes it weird is actually rolling the check for Heart of the Dragon before the resolution of the initial Rising Blade check.
but as we discussed, plenty of techniques that allows the opponent to resist before the resolution of the offensive check also make the sequence of resolution as per RAW a bit fishy because lots can happen during the opportunity resolution step during the opponent's resist check (and honestly overly complicated since you have to put rolls on "hold", and it can also screw up the attacker since he chose his die but then the TN can change, or the situation can change to make his initial attack fizzle).

basically, I think anytime an extra check is required before the resolution of an action (heart of the dragon for example, or simply a resist check from the opponent due to some technique usage) these checks should happen AFTER the initial check is fully resolved, and not interrupt the resolution of the initial check.
but that's just me.

1 hour ago, JBento said:

I'm  AFB - is there anywhere where it's stated that Opps are spent sequentially, rather than  simultaneously?

I don't see anything that specifies one or the other in the book or the FAQ/Errata document.

1 hour ago, JBento said:

Also  , isn't the first weapon readied upon resolving the technique, and therefore he can't Two-Sword because he do  esn  't have two weapons readied until  the technique resolves?

The ability only seems to require having a readied weapon that has not already been used for an attack action. It does not require having two weapons readied.

1 hour ago, JBento said:

I'm AFB - is there anywhere where it's stated that Opps are spent sequentially, rather than simultaneously?

Also, isn't the first weapon readied upon resolving the technique, and therefore he can't Two-Sword because he doesn't have two weapons readied until the technique resolves?

opportunities DO resolve before the technique resolve (as in the case of Hawk Eye kata that allows for longer range).

now, sequentially or not... hard to tell.

and if one of the resolving opportunity involve another check (either another check from the active player, or a resist check from the opponent) are these check made before the resolution of the technique (which creates weird stuff, but is unclear according to RAW).

1 hour ago, Avatar111 said:

opportunities DO resolve before the technique resolve (as in the case of Hawk Eye kata that allows for longer range).

now, sequentially or not... hard to tell.

and if one of the resolving opportunity involve another check (either another check from the active player, or a resist check from the opponent) are these check made before the resolution of the technique (which creates weird stuff, but is unclear according to RAW).

If it doesn't say, I'd default to simultaneous - after all, you don't apply each strife individually, either, you just get a block of them to the face.

So, WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENS is that you allocate all your Opps, then resolve all your Opps. We don't actually play this way, though, because doing one effect at a time means you have to track less stuff, but it means you can't use conditions generated by Opp expenditure to allow other Opp expenditures. In this case, you can't do the OP's tactic because you spend an Opp to ready a second weapon, but you don't actually resolve the effect, i.e., ready the weapon, until the step in which you allocate Opps has past, and therefore you don't fulfill the requirements for TSA until a point in which you can't actually allocate Opps.

23 hours ago, gareth_lazelle said:

Sure, but I think what @Avatar111 is saying is that the opportunity could be worded such that you buy the opportunity during Step 6.3, but that it is resolved after the ongoing strike,

Which is fine - the game has to allow you to do that, because you buy a critical strike during a strike action with **, but it requires the strike action to have succeeded to actually 'go off', which won't occur until the (later) success/failure step.

16 hours ago, gareth_lazelle said:

Actually, this is doubly important because many opportunities require success in order to use them - you may assess and resolve success at step 6 part 4, but it is clear that if you have the right number of successes at step 5 (choose kept dice) then the roll was a success ,

Well - you know the roll will be a success, anyway. But yes, if the criteria is "if you succeed" then the effect can't resolve until after the success step.

Which isn't inherently a problem; if you had a technique which says "*: at the end of your turn, the target explodes", then you buy the activation with opportunity but the trigger is still left hanging until it goes off at a later point in the scene.

2 minutes ago, Magnus Grendel said:

Well - you know the roll will be a success, anyway. But yes, if the criteria is "if you succeed" then the effect can't resolve until after the success step.

That isn't how the rules are worded though,

My point was that the implication of the wording there is that success is "locked in" at that point,

We may not have determined the consequences of success yet, but fundamentally the success of your roll was determined back when you where selecting dice to keep.

Quote

Which isn't inherently a problem; if you had a technique which says "*: at the end of your turn, the target explodes", then you buy the activation with opportunity but the trigger is still left hanging until it goes off at a later point in the scene.

I don't think that fits in with the ethos of the game - this is just my interpretation of the rules though,

I think that the way the rules, especially where die rolls are concerned, is heavily structured around the idea that if you buy some effect , then you get that effect - though quite how it will fit into the narrative may well take some work (note that some effect may be the chance of something occurring, as is the case with the elemental kata techniques discussed above),

A good example of this is how the rules around hidden TNs are presented, it is clearly emphasized that players should know what they're getting when they choose dice to keep.

In your example, the "trigger" was back when you spent the Opportunities - all that is left to resolve are the consequences of that, and work out how it fits together in the narrative,

Succeeding is not necessarily a requirement to something triggering.

In the case of the "heart of the dragon" ability. You don't need to succeed on your strike for it to trigger, but, I still really think the check for the heart of the dragon extra attack should be rolled after your initial check is fully resolved.

Same goes for the elemental kata. The opponent's resist check should be done after your initial check is fully resolved.

Now, edge case, if your strike delivered a critical strike on top of an elemental kata effect. And the opponent needs to do 2 resist checks (yes, this game is tedious like that). I think the order of resolution is according to the active player as per the rules.

Success or failure of your roll isn't determined until AFTER you use opportunities, because that's when you trigger successes. If something happens in the meantime to make the technique unusable (such as the target moving out of range) or increases the TN higher than the successes you kept, you fail.

1 minute ago, JBento said:

Success or failure of your roll isn't determined until AFTER you use opportunities, because that's when you trigger successes. If something happens in the meantime to make the technique unusable (such as the target moving out of range) or increases the TN higher than the successes you kept, you fail.

exactly why being able to spend opportunities during resist checks is a big design mistake.
especially when someone can roll 2 (or god forbid maybe even 3!) resist checks against your actions.

it just makes the whole thing very clunky.

1 minute ago, JBento said:

Success or failure of your roll isn't determined until AFTER you use opportunities, because that's when you trigger successes. If something happens in the meantime to make the technique unusable (such as the target moving out of range) or increases the TN higher than the successes you kept, you fail.

If that where the case then you could never trigger opportunities like critical strikes because they have success as a requirement in order for you to select them,

The TN was set before the dice where rolled,

Nowhere does it suggest that you reassess that at any point, and it's clear the game designers intended for the TN to be publicly known at the time you selected dice to keep,

I'm coming to believe that the movement thing is a red herring - you don't teleport, and no-matter how fast you can run, you don't outrun an arrow... My personal take on the range thing is that if the action was valid when you started it then it is now,

at this point, yeah, removing the ability to spend opportunities on resist checks (as per my houserules) fix almost all problems.

sure, it leaves stuff like "heart of the dragon" second attack resolving before your initial attack, and it is weird, but, it is rank 6 and pretty much an edge case.

so here is a potential solution; every check that is a "resist" check shouldn't allow for opportunity spending.
this fixes weirdness in resolving sequence and also makes the game much smoother/faster when people are throwing 2 resist checks on the opponent everytime they do an attack action.

though I'm curious to hear an official response on all of this. It definitely needs a bit of clarification (no mather how you, I, we, interpret it, there really isn't any clear ruling for something that is... I think quite important at higher ranks when people have multiple techniques and bigger dice pools).

Ooh,

On a related note, there is a Maho in the shadowlands book which specifically does something very like what is being discussed here - negating an attack in progress by swapping places with another character which then becomes the target,

But if memory serves (no book to hand), it explicitly changes the attacks target and it doesn't use opportunities as a mechanic to make it happen (and IIRC it's a once per scene effect, so it's very limited),

If regular opportunities where meant to do things like this it makes mobility opportunities very powerful.

So, I'm pretty sure that while you spend opportunities for a critical strike before you check for success, the actual critical strike doesn't resolve until the requirement is met, i.e. after you determine success. This makes sense to me, as we have other examples of opportunities having effects after the check resolves (providing assistance, for example).

3 minutes ago, deraforia said:

So, I'm pretty sure that while you spend opportunities for a critical strike before you check for success, the actual critical strike doesn't resolve until the requirement is met, i.e. after you determine success. This makes sense to me, as we have other examples of opportunities having effects after the check resolves (providing assistance, for example).

yup, if the opportunity usage mentions "if successful" then it is a no issue, as whatever the opportunity does happens AFTER the initial action.

I think the problem is the order of resolving opportunities when it triggers before the initial action's resolution (specifically when such opportunity usage requires the opponent to make a resist check, or the active player to make a new check).

9 hours ago, gareth_lazelle said:

If that where the case then you could never trigger opportunities like critical strikes because they have success as a requirement in order for you to select them,

The TN was set before the dice where rolled,

Nowhere does it suggest that you reassess that at any point, and it's clear the game designers intended for the TN to be publicly known at the time you selected dice to keep,

I'm coming to believe that the movement thing is a red herring - you don't teleport, and no-matter how fast you can run, you don't outrun an arrow... My personal take on the range thing is that if the action was valid when you started it then it is now,

Aren't those written as "Opp: If you succeed, then X"? If so, succeeding isn't a requirement to spending the opp. It just does nothing if you fail.

19 hours ago, deraforia said:

So, I'm pretty sure that while you spend opportunities for a critical strike before you check for success, the actual critical strike doesn't resolve until the requirement is met, i.e. after you determine success. This makes sense to me, as we have other examples of opportunities having effects after the check resolves (providing assistance, for example).

11 hours ago, JBento said:

Aren't those written as "Opp: If you succeed, then X"? If so, succeeding isn't a requirement to spending the opp. It just does nothing if you fail.

This.

Resolving happens immediately after resolving , so it's hard to imagine something interrupting to change the TN between spending for a critical and determining that the check is a success (which is when the critical effect 'goes off') but it is theoretically possible.

You really should be resolving success before actually inflicting the critical strike, even if the critical is 'floating there', waiting for a trigger, since the critical strike has the potential to destroy the target's armour, changing the target's resistance - which is a big deal in terms of the effect of the successful strike action, especially if wielding a razor-edged weapon.

20 hours ago, gareth_lazelle said:

Ooh,

On a related note, there is a Maho in the shadowlands book which specifically does something very like what is being discussed here - negating an attack in progress by swapping places with another character which then becomes the target,

But if memory serves (no book to hand), it explicitly changes the attacks target and it doesn't use opportunities as a mechanic to make it happen (and IIRC it's a once per scene effect, so it's very limited),

If regular opportunities where meant to do things like this it makes mobility opportunities very powerful.

The Skillful Ronin in the Core Rulebook has something similar:

SCHOOL OF THE WOLF
Once per round, when an Attack action check targeting the rōnin succeeds, the rōnin may suffer 3 fatigue to change the target to another character (other than the attacker) at range 0–1 of the rōnin.

This ability triggers at step 4 of the Resolve Symbols on Kept Dice stage, because that's when you determine success or failure. Which means you've already spent for a critical strike and the attack has already succeeded, but now somehow the target has switched to your mate, not the Ronin you were both trying to fight. If you don't delay the resolution, you can end up with the wierd situation where the Ronin staggers away missing an arm from a blow that hit someone else.

On 4/10/2019 at 3:32 PM, gareth_lazelle said:

If that where the case then you could never trigger opportunities like critical strikes because they have success as a requirement in order for you to select them,

The TN was set before the dice where rolled,

Nowhere does it suggest that you reassess that at any point, and it's clear the game designers intended for the TN to be publicly known at the time you selected dice to keep,

You assume that the rules as written work correctly. I don't think that assumption holds water. As written, @JBento is correct.

On 4/10/2019 at 3:27 PM, JBento said:

Success or failure of your roll isn't determined until AFTER you use opportunities, because that's when you trigger successes. If something happens in the meantime to make the technique unusable (such as the target moving out of range) or increases the TN higher than the successes you kept, you fail.

That is the correct timing going by the rules. You compare successes against the TN after resolving opportunities for that roll. That implicitly means the TN can change after you make the roll but before you determine success or failure. We can certainly debate whether that's how it should be or even is intended to be, but I don't see much room to argue whether that's how it is.

Changing the TN before the resolution of an action is one problem.

So can be changing position (water martial opportunities) before the resolution.

Check interrupting another check are, in general, the issue. I really don't think a check can be nested in another check, unless otherwise specifically stated (as in Finishing Blows).

But, without the designer's answer, all we can do is interpret it our own way as the rule itself isn't specifically clear about it.