1 minute ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Wrong. Not in the case of the attack failing. Not when such a failure determines the Advantage cost to activate a weapon quality or even if that quality can even be activated . Those are determined by the GM. That means the GM and Player would need to be able to determine each and every source of the Failures rolled, and which Setback die resulted in the attack failing.

Uh, nope. This doesn't really address directly what I said. This is not how dice pools or narration work in this system. It's that simple. That's what we're talking about. Daeglan didn't say the Advantage cost of a failed Guided attack is different he's talking about HOW IT'S NARRATED .

You still haven't quoted any narration rules that claim what you say, each time you don't post it is just another concession that you're wrong on this particular point.

3 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Nope, that doesn’t work because only one of the sources of Setback caused the attack to fail, not all three.

Ok, Tramp lay out all (ALL) of your rules for what can be narrated.

(You of course know the follow up question).

9 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Nope, that doesn’t work because only one of the sources of Setback caused the attack to fail, not all three.

Do you realize you've totally broken the dice system in this game? You've set up a standard that makes dice pools not work at all (HINT: THE DICE POOL IS INTERPRETED AND NARRATION IS UP TO THE PLAYERS).

If I have a combat check pool with Boost from Aim and Boost from Accurate now I cannot narrate my roll. Did I hit because of Aim, Accurate, or was it my characteristic, or was it my skill? You've rendered pools impossible to resolve. These determinations are up to the players to interpret and describe. That's the fun of the game.

47 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Nope, that doesn’t work because only one of the sources of Setback caused the attack to fail, not all three.

Why not? where in the rules does it say that?

3 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Here's a prime example:

You're shooting at a Mandalorian wearing full Mandalorian armor ( Defense 1 ). It's misty outside ( +1 Ranged Defense ), and he's lying Prone ( Add one Setback to your Ranged attack . You're attacking with a guided micro-missile. have a 2 in Agility and one rank in Ranged Light (YG) and he's at medium range (PP). This gives you an dice pool of YGPPSSS. For sake of argument, you roll one Success and one Triumph on your ability and Proficiency dice respectively, one Failure on one of the Difficulty dice and one Failure on one of the Setback dice, totaling two Failures . These cancel out the Successes, which results in the attack failing . By RAW , Guided can only be activated if the attack misses . It can't be activated if the attack is deflected. The wording here is explicit. Guided only activates if the attack misses .

If you follow @Daeglan 's view that a "failed" Combat Check does not necessarily miss, then you must be able to keep track of each and every source of Setback dice in order to determine whether of not the failed attack was due to the armor deflecting the hit or the attack missed completely as a result of his lying prone or the mist obscuring him. In the example above you have three distinct sources of Setback dice, any one of which could have been the source of the final Failure symbol which made the combat check fail. You don't know . Did the attack bounce off his armor? If that's the case, Guided can't activate because that quality only activates on a miss , not on a deflected hit . Did the shot fly over his head because he was lying prone? if so, then Guided activates. Did the mist obscure him, causing you to miss? If so, once again, Guided can activate because the attack missed.

By contrast, if you follow my view, and that of @WolfRider , that a failed Combat check is always a complete miss , then it doesn't matter the source of the failures that caused the failed combat check. The attack missed , no contact was made , and thus, Guided can activate.

The same is true with Blast. In the example above, swap out the microrocket with a grenade, with the ranged attack being YGGGPPSSS, with the result being two Successes, and two Advantages on the positive dice, and one Failure on the Difficulty dice and one Failure on one of the Setback dice, cancelling out the two Successes. Once again, the source of the Setback that resulted in Failure becomes important if you take @Daeglan 's view that a failed attack doesn't necessarily miss. This is because, if the attack hits, but bounces off the armor, it should only cost two Advantages to activate Blast , which means he takes the Blast damage. However, if the attack misses , as a result of either of the other two sources of Setback, it costs three Advantages to activate Blast . That means you have to know if the Failure was because of the armor (meaning the attack hit but bounced off), if it was because he was lying prone, or if it was because of the mist (either of which means that the attack missed completely ). And that will determine whether or not you have enough Advantages to activate Blast or not . However, if you read the rules as I and @WolfRider , the attack itself misses completely, regardless of the source of the Setback die which rolled the deciding Failure. The Grenade landed without hitting the target, thus requiring three Advantages to activate Blast, and, since you only have two, you can't activate it, and thus, the Mando takes no damage.

Now, Did the attack miss completely or did it deflect off the Mandalorian's armor?

That example is rather easy to solve narratively. If they decided to activate guided then you narrate it as a miss which is then guided onto the target, or just narrate that it almost missed but didn't thanks to the guidance system. If they activate blast then you can narrate it as being a near miss that still did some damage thanks to the explosion that was triggered thanks to proximity. If they do neither of those because they spend their triumph on something else then you can narrate it as a hit that failed to gain any purchase on the slanted armor and harmlessly sailed away. There, issue solved.

A failed attack roll doesn't have to be a complete miss. Not even to keep blast and guided working.

3 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Now, Did the attack miss completely or did it deflect off the Mandalorian's armor?

It entirely depends on what the player throwing the grenade thinks is coolest or fits best for the story. It is subjective. This might actually be a worse system for you than D&D-based systems.

Yeah, basically what everyone else has said - whichever is coolest is what you narrate. That's the beauty of the system.

3 hours ago, Jedi Ronin said:

@Tramp Graphics

Another example that fails the Tramp test: You are the target of a successful Lightsaber check and you use Parry and negate all of the damage - but apparently you have to narrate it as having been actually hit by their lightsaber but taking no damage, you can't narrate that as a parry that caused their blade to totally miss you.

Well, that's obviously a hit, since it hits the weapon, which is an extension of the body, BUT, if the attack fails because of the setback dice from the weapon's Defensive quality, it's obviously a miss, since it hits the weapon, which is separate from the body.

LOGIC!

Been a while since someone (TRAMPUS STAMPUS) posted a semi-helpful armor video, so here's my best shot, from FULL METAL JOUSTING (full disclosure, a friend of mine was one of the coaches):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko3-iCZvnQk

Please forgive this joker's mispronunciation of "gorget" and his faulty assertion that there were not helms that interlocked with neck protection in the 1500s.

5 hours ago, BrickSteelhead said:

Been a while since someone (TRAMPUS STAMPUS) posted a semi-helpful armor video, so here's my best shot, from FULL METAL JOUSTING (full disclosure, a friend of mine was one of the coaches):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko3-iCZvnQk

Please forgive this joker's mispronunciation of "gorget" and his faulty assertion that there were not helms that interlocked with neck protection in the 1500s.

Plenty of good solid misses there!

15 hours ago, BrickSteelhead said:

Been a while since someone (TRAMPUS STAMPUS) posted a semi-helpful armor video, so here's my best shot, from FULL METAL JOUSTING (full disclosure, a friend of mine was one of the coaches):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ko3-iCZvnQk

Please forgive this joker's mispronunciation of "gorget" and his faulty assertion that there were not helms that interlocked with neck protection in the 1500s.

Nice video. What kind of lance they use ? Jousting lance are designed to break on contact, but when we see two guys jousting their lances don't break. They're just dismounted.

On the current topic, I won't argue and try to change anybody's opinion. I exposed mine. I don't care if people's opinion is at the opposite of mine.

23 hours ago, Jedi Ronin said:

Wrong @Tramp Graphics . Go ahead and quote the rule book on narration and show us where it says what you say.

See below.

23 hours ago, Jedi Ronin said:

Uh, nope. This doesn't really address directly what I said. This is not how dice pools or narration work in this system. It's that simple. That's what we're talking about. Daeglan didn't say the Advantage cost of a failed Guided attack is different he's talking about HOW IT'S NARRATED .

You still haven't quoted any narration rules that claim what you say, each time you don't post it is just another concession that you're wrong on this particular point.

I can quote several different rules which explicitly state that only a Successful combat check counts as a hit .

23 hours ago, Jedi Ronin said:

Do you realize you've totally broken the dice system in this game? You've set up a standard that makes dice pools not work at all (HINT: THE DICE POOL IS INTERPRETED AND NARRATION IS UP TO THE PLAYERS).

If I have a combat check pool with Boost from Aim and Boost from Accurate now I cannot narrate my roll. Did I hit because of Aim, Accurate, or was it my characteristic, or was it my skill? You've rendered pools impossible to resolve. These determinations are up to the players to interpret and describe. That's the fun of the game.

That's exactly my point!!!! If you follow @Daeglan 's logic, that a failed attack can still hit , you break the game because it creates situations like the scenarios I posted above. The rules are explicit. And I'll prove it here:

First, look at the Perform a Combat Check rules, Pool Results and Deal Damage (AoR CRB page 217):

Quote

3. POOL RESULTS AND DEAL DAMAGE
Once the player rolls the dice pool for his character, he evaluates the results. As with any skill check, the check must generate more Successes than Failures to be successful. When making a combat check, if the check is successful, each uncanceled Success adds + 1 damage to a successful attack. If the attack affects multiple targets, the additional damage is added to each target.

Now, read Two Weapon Combat last paragraph (AoR page 224):

Quote

If he succeeds , he hits with his primary weapon as normal. He may also spend two Advantages or one Triumph to hit with his secondary weapon as well. If both weapons hit , he may spend additional Advantages or Triumphs) to activate qualities from either weapon. Each hit deals its base damage, +1 damage per uncanceled success.

Note the wording of these two passages. They say the exact same thing, except Two-Weapon Combat uses the term "Hit" instead of "succeeds. Secondly, Two Weapon Combat explicitly says that in order to hit the target, you must Succeed in the Combat check.

Further, we have the Base Damage Weapon characteristic (AoR page 171):

Quote

The base damage the weapon inflicts. This is the minimum damage inflicted if the attack with this weapon hits. Each net Succcess generated during the attack check adds one point of damage to this base damage rating

Once again, the term "Hit" used to mean the same as Success.

Next, we have the Linked Item Quality (AoR page 170):

Quote

Some weapons, like the laser cannons fitted to the X-wing, are designed to fire together at the same target. This increases the possibility of a hit as well as the damage dealt. When firing a linked weapon, on a successful attack, the weapon deals one hit. The wielder may spend two Advantages to gain an additional hit, and may do so a number of times equal to the weapon's Linked rating. Additional hits from the Linked weapon being used may only be applied against the original target.
Each hit deals the weapon's base damage plus the total uncanceled & scored on the check.

Once again, only a Successful attack can deal a hit. A Failed attack cannot hit.

Finally, lets look at Autofire (AoR page 168):

Quote

A weapon with Auto-fire can be set to shoot in rapid succession and potentially spray an area with bolts, flechettes, slugs, or other types of projectiles. The advantage in using Auto-fire is that it has the chance to hit multiple targets or hit a single target multiple times.
Attacking with a weapon on Auto-fire is generally less accurate, and the attacker must increase the difficulty of the attack check by 4). The user may choose to not use the Auto-fire quality on a weapon; in this case, he cannot trigger the quality but also does not suffer
the aforementioned penalty.
If the attack hits, the attacker can trigger Auto-fire by spending two Advantages Auto-fire can be triggered multiple times. Each time the attacker triggers Autofire, it deals an additional hit to the target. Each of these counts as an additional hit from that weapon, and each hit deals base damage plus the number of uncanceled Success on the check.
T hese additional hits can be allocated to the target, or to other targets within range of the weapon. If the attacker wishes to hit multiple targets, he must decide to do so before making the check. Furthermore, if h wishes to hit multiple targets, his initial target must always be the target with the highest difficulty and highest defense (if this is two separate targets, the GM chooses which target is the initial target). The initial hit must always be against the initial target. Subsequent hits generated can be allocated to any of the other
designated targets.
Auto-fire weapons can also activate one Critical Injury for each hit generated on the attack per the normal cost ; the Critical must target the target of the specific hit.

Once again, this is essentially the same wording as under the Perform a Combat Check but replacing Success with Hit . And it further says that only a Successful attack hits.

The RAW is explicit. It requires a Successful Combat check for an attack to hit.

Next, let's look at Defense. The Defense rule does not say that it represents the ability of various defenses to deflect hits . It says it that it represents their ability to deflect attacks . as stated below (AoR page 220):

Quote

Defense, or more specifically, defense rating, is one of the factors determining how difficult it is to land
a successful attack during combat. Defense rating represents the abilities of shields, armor, or other defensive systems to deflect attacks entirely, or to absorb or lessen incoming blows.

It does not say deflect "hits". It says deflect attacks . Shields can deflect an attack before it hits, thus preventing the hit in the first place. The same is true of cover , and Defensive or Deflecting weapons . These can prevent an attack from hitting the target.

By contrast, The Defense Armor Characteristic (AoR page 183) explicitly says:

Quote

The armor's defense adds Setback equal to the defense rating directly to the attacker's dice pool. This reflects the armor's ability to deflect damage away from the wearer's body.

Note the difference here in the two passages. General Defense ratings can represent the ability of various defensive systems to potentially deflect an attack before it can hit, and thus make an attack miss. By contrast, the Defense Armor Characteristic it represents the ability of armor to deflect damage . Armor is not intended to prevent a hit .

And this is where the problem lies with armor Defense mechanically . If the attack roll is a Success overall, and thus hits , then the Armor's Defense rating works as intended. It potentially cancels out one or two extra net Successes, thus reducing the total amount of damage done before Soak is applied. And, if the Soak is high enough to cancel out the rest of the damage, the armor deflects the damage completely, and no damage is done.

However, by RAW , if the overall attack roll fails , the attack never touches the target at all. It is a miss . This is a problem if it is a Failure resulting from the Setback die applied by the Armor's Defense rating that causes the attack to miss since armor cannot prevent an attack from hitting . It can only reduce or deflect damage from a successful hit . That is both how armor really works and how the RAW itself says Armor Defense works. Thus, the only recourse is to conclude that it is the Failure(s) from the base difficulty dice which was the ultimate deciding factor in the attack missing, not the armor . The Failure symbol from the armor thus represents the probability that the armor would have deflected some of the damage if the attack had hit; but the poor accuracy of the attack, and actual difficulty of the shot , made the attack itself miss. By the same token, if there were multiple sources of Setback contributing to the attack, such as in the example I posted above, it is one of the other sources which causes the attack to miss, not the armor.

No matter what, it requires a Successful attack roll for an attack to hit . Period. This is explicitly stated in the RAW multiple times throughout the CRBs. A failed attack is always a miss . It does not make contact at all. It passes harmlessly by . The only time an attack can deal any damage on a miss is in the case of Blast damage. and that is because it is an area effect, though it requires more Advantages to trigger than if it was triggered on a hit.

Therefore, no, a failed attack cannot be considered a "Deflected hit", especially not when we're dealing with armor Defense. A failed attack is a miss . That is RAW . It requires a Successful attack roll for an attack to hit . Period.

30 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

The only time an attack can deal any damage on a miss is in the case of Blast damage. and that is because it is an area effect, though it requires more Advantages to trigger than if it was triggered on a hit.

And in the examples provided to you, it’s not dealing any damage. The “hits” are purely narrative description, taking the setback dice for the armor into the account in the narration. It’s not being described as a successful attack, it’s not even saying that it puts a cosmetic scratch on the armor. It’s just leaning into the narrative aspect of the system, taking note of the factors included in the dice pool.

And now, we can sit back to await the incoming wall of “emphasis.”

2 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

See below.

I can quote several different rules which explicitly state that only a Successful combat check counts as a hit .

I'm sorry but your just wrong. Here its talking about mechanics and says nothing about narration.

And since you like to be so literal, it never says a only a successful attack hits, like you claim it does.

Defence clearly says armor can lessen or deflect blows by setbacks. For a blow to be lessened by armor it has to hit narratively. It's right there in the writing.

*facepalm*

4 hours ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

I'm sorry but your just wrong. Here its talking about mechanics and says nothing about narration.

And since you like to be so literal, it never says a only a successful attack hits, like you claim it does.

Defence clearly says armor can lessen or deflect blows by setbacks. For a blow to be lessened by armor it has to hit narratively. It's right there in the writing.

*facepalm*

Ah, but see...Tramp will argue that the blow is lessened (sorry...for the sake of accuracy, I should probably say lessened ) by virtue of less damage (potentially) being done by the failure or threat on the setback die cancelling out a success (one less damage) or advantage (cutting into the ability to impose a crit).

To better drive home how it’s being handled narratively, it might be better to focus on the reference to deflected blows. Those deflected blows just plain don’t cause damage...by definition, a deflected blow bounces off...and to bounce off, it has to hit.

6 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

And now, we can sit back to await the incoming wall of “emphasis.”

7 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

A failed attack is a miss . That is RAW . It requires a Successful attack roll for an attack to hit . Period.

You have become a parody of yourself. I'd mock you, but I have no hope of matching your efforts in this department. You have cleared the threshold into unintentional comedy.

I treasure these rants, because any time I fell if made complete and utter fool of myself, I can come back and visit this thread to put it in perspective.

You might be a dishonest hypocrite, but at least it's amusing to watch you subject yourself to this embarrassment.

8 hours ago, Tramp Graphics said:

See below.

I can quote several different rules which explicitly state that only a Successful combat check counts as a hit .

That's exactly my point!!!! If you follow @Daeglan 's logic, that a failed attack can still hit , you break the game because it creates situations like the scenarios I posted above. The rules are explicit. And I'll prove it here:

First, look at the Perform a Combat Check rules, Pool Results and Deal Damage (AoR CRB page 217):

Now, read Two Weapon Combat last paragraph (AoR page 224):

Note the wording of these two passages. They say the exact same thing, except Two-Weapon Combat uses the term "Hit" instead of "succeeds. Secondly, Two Weapon Combat explicitly says that in order to hit the target, you must Succeed in the Combat check.

Further, we have the Base Damage Weapon characteristic (AoR page 171):

Once again, the term "Hit" used to mean the same as Success.

Next, we have the Linked Item Quality (AoR page 170):

Once again, only a Successful attack can deal a hit. A Failed attack cannot hit.

Finally, lets look at Autofire (AoR page 168):

Once again, this is essentially the same wording as under the Perform a Combat Check but replacing Success with Hit . And it further says that only a Successful attack hits.

The RAW is explicit. It requires a Successful Combat check for an attack to hit.

Next, let's look at Defense. The Defense rule does not say that it represents the ability of various defenses to deflect hits . It says it that it represents their ability to deflect attacks . as stated below (AoR page 220):

It does not say deflect "hits". It says deflect attacks . Shields can deflect an attack before it hits, thus preventing the hit in the first place. The same is true of cover , and Defensive or Deflecting weapons . These can prevent an attack from hitting the target.

By contrast, The Defense Armor Characteristic (AoR page 183) explicitly says:

Note the difference here in the two passages. General Defense ratings can represent the ability of various defensive systems to potentially deflect an attack before it can hit, and thus make an attack miss. By contrast, the Defense Armor Characteristic it represents the ability of armor to deflect damage . Armor is not intended to prevent a hit .

And this is where the problem lies with armor Defense mechanically . If the attack roll is a Success overall, and thus hits , then the Armor's Defense rating works as intended. It potentially cancels out one or two extra net Successes, thus reducing the total amount of damage done before Soak is applied. And, if the Soak is high enough to cancel out the rest of the damage, the armor deflects the damage completely, and no damage is done.

However, by RAW , if the overall attack roll fails , the attack never touches the target at all. It is a miss . This is a problem if it is a Failure resulting from the Setback die applied by the Armor's Defense rating that causes the attack to miss since armor cannot prevent an attack from hitting . It can only reduce or deflect damage from a successful hit . That is both how armor really works and how the RAW itself says Armor Defense works. Thus, the only recourse is to conclude that it is the Failure(s) from the base difficulty dice which was the ultimate deciding factor in the attack missing, not the armor . The Failure symbol from the armor thus represents the probability that the armor would have deflected some of the damage if the attack had hit; but the poor accuracy of the attack, and actual difficulty of the shot , made the attack itself miss. By the same token, if there were multiple sources of Setback contributing to the attack, such as in the example I posted above, it is one of the other sources which causes the attack to miss, not the armor.

No matter what, it requires a Successful attack roll for an attack to hit . Period. This is explicitly stated in the RAW multiple times throughout the CRBs. A failed attack is always a miss . It does not make contact at all. It passes harmlessly by . The only time an attack can deal any damage on a miss is in the case of Blast damage. and that is because it is an area effect, though it requires more Advantages to trigger than if it was triggered on a hit.

Therefore, no, a failed attack cannot be considered a "Deflected hit", especially not when we're dealing with armor Defense. A failed attack is a miss . That is RAW . It requires a Successful attack roll for an attack to hit . Period.

Please site pages where your claims are backed up. because you claims are not backed up ANYWHERE. largely because you keep ingnoring huge swaths of rules because they are inconveniet to you wrong headed thinking. SO when you gonna message the devs to prove your self wrong.

7 hours ago, Daeglan said:

SO when you gonna message the devs to prove your self wrong

To be totally fair to Tramp...who'd answer? There's no RPG staff. 😢

3 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

To be totally fair to Tramp...who'd answer? There's no RPG staff. 😢

Im sure someone would answer...

As fun as lurking was in this thread, I think we should all agree, that it would be best to let it die. It's going in circles for nearly 30 pages, for Papa Palpatines sake...

But we can't help but watch the train wreck.

Should we take bets on the page count for when this debate finally ends?

22 minutes ago, Sturn said:

But we can't help but watch the train wreck.

Should we take bets on the page count for when this debate finally ends?

You're assuming it ever will..... 😔 😋

14 hours ago, Daeglan said:

Please site pages where your claims are backed up. because you claims are not backed up ANYWHERE. largely because you keep ingnoring huge swaths of rules because they are inconveniet to you wrong headed thinking. SO when you gonna message the devs to prove your self wrong.

I just cited the page numbers in the post you just quoted. So, I'm not the one ignoring swaths of rules. You are. You're ignoring the Defense armor characteristic. You're ignoring what it says under Two Weapon Combat. You're ignoring what it says under Linked, under the Base Damage weapon characteristic, under Blast, under Guided, etc. They all say the same thing . It requires a Successful attack roll for an attack to hit. And the rules explicitly say that Armor Defense "reflects the armor's ability to deflect damage away from the wearer's body" , not entire attacks. I'm not ignoring any of the rules; I'm looking at all of them, and none of them say the things you think they say. By contrast, several of them specifically say the same thing I have repeatedly said . And that is you can only hit on a Successful attack . The "generic" Defense rule intended to cover a wide variety of sources of Defense, does not say that "a failed attack can still hit." No rule in the book allows a failed attack roll to hit . In fact, the Blast quality is the only Weapon Quality to allow a missed attack to potentially deal any damage at all; and that is only because Blast is an area effect . So, no, It is not I who is wrong. It is not I who is ignoring "inconvenient" rules. It is you . The Rules are explicit: A Hit requires a Successful attack roll. You cannot hit on a failed attack roll. Period. A failed attack is always a miss . There is no rule in any of the books which allows a failed attack roll to count as a " hit ", be it mechanically, nor narratively. If you try to claim that a failed attack can potentially "still hit", because armor "deflected it", you run the risk of scenarios I mentioned above (where you have multiple sources of Defense being the potential source of the deciding Failure symbol), which break the system . Therefore, the rules are explicit. Only a Successful Combat Check hits at all. Hits that do no damage are handled by Successful attack rolls that had all of their damage reduced to zero by Soak , as well as by Failures provided by Defense that cancelled out extra Net Successes, but still leaving at least one Net Success . That is how a hit can deal no damage. That is a hit whose damage was deflected entirely. A Failed attack misses , though possibly by the slimmest of margins.

20 hours ago, CloudyLemonade92 said:

I'm sorry but your just wrong. Here its talking about mechanics and says nothing about narration.

And since you like to be so literal, it never says a only a successful attack hits, like you claim it does.

Defence clearly says armor can lessen or deflect blows by setbacks. For a blow to be lessened by armor it has to hit narratively. It's right there in the writing.

*facepalm*

No. IT is talking both . The mechanics and narration are linked and must coincide . They cannot be contradictory . For damage to be lessened , the attack first has to hit both mechanically and narratively. If the mechanics say the Combat Check misses, then narratively, the attack misses as well. The general Defense rules says that an attack can be deflected so as to prevent a hit completely. And this is true of Shields , Cover , and defensive weapons. Likewise, various sources of Concealment can also prevent a ranged attack from hitting, by obscuring the target, and lying prone can make the silhouette of a target smaller , making it harder to effectively target, thus making it harder to hit. But this is not true of armor . Armor cannot make an attack miss, unlike other forms of Defense. The generic Defense rule covers a wide variety of possible sources of defense, with just as wide a variety of ways those sources of defense can defend a given target. The Defense Armor Characteristic rule , however, is specific to armor , and it explicitly states that armor only deflects damage , not the attack entirely. The generic Defense rule also says that damage can be lessened. This is true of Shields, Cover, Defensive Weapons, and armor , as this lines up with the rules under Defense Armor Characteristic . However,this requires that the attack hit in the first place since only a successful hit can even potentially deal damage. And, for an attack to hit , the Combat Check must be a Success. A Failed Combat Check cannot hit . A Failed Combat check is a Miss .

Secondly, the Defense Armor Characteristic is talking both Mechanics and Narration. The Mechanics are that Armor's Defense rating provides one or two Setback dice to the attack roll's dice pool. That is the mechanics. Mechanically, this can result in one or two Failures on the Setback dice, one or two Threats, one or two blank faces, or a combination thereof. Narratively , and Mechanically , this reflects the armor's ability to deflect damage from a hit . It is not to deflect an attack . A "hit", both narratively, and mechanically , is defined as, ( and requires by RAW ) a Successful attack. The narrative and Mechanics must align . The problem mechanically, is that if enough Failures are rolled, regardless of what dice those Failures are rolled on, the attack misses . Armor, by RAW , and by physics cannot cause an attack to miss . It can deflect or otherwise reduce damage , not an attack . Thus, there is a cognitive dissonance.

21 hours ago, Nytwyng said:

And in the examples provided to you, it’s not dealing any damage. The “hits” are purely narrative description, taking the setback dice for the armor into the account in the narration. It’s not being described as a successful attack, it’s not even saying that it puts a cosmetic scratch on the armor. It’s just leaning into the narrative aspect of the system, taking note of the factors included in the dice pool.

And now, we can sit back to await the incoming wall of “emphasis.”

No. In the examples above, the attack doesn't hit at all . What House rules you use to narrate at your table, is not my concern. However, by RAW , it requires a Successful attack roll for an attack to hit at all. Mechanically, narratively, it doesn't matter . If the attack roll does not include at least one net Success, by RAW , it is a miss . It is not a "deflected hit", it is not "deflected damage". It is a miss . That is RAW . A hit has the potential to do damage. It does not mean that a successful hit will do damage. By RAW, a Successful hit does not always end up doing damage. This is because Soak can potentially negate all damage from a successful attack . if the total Soak rating of the target is higher than the damage done. That is a hit doing no damage. A failed attack roll caused by Failures rolled on Setback Dice is not a "hit that did no damage". By RAW , if an attack roll fails , that attack does not hit . The rules are explicit about that. Only a Successful Attack roll deals a hit . Only a Successful hit can potentially deal damage. That is what the rules say, and the rules say that Armor only deflects damage .

10 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

No. In the examples above, the attack doesn't hit at all . What House rules you use to narrate at your table, is not my concern. However, by RAW , it requires a Successful attack roll for an attack to hit at all. Mechanically, narratively, it doesn't matter . If the attack roll does not include at least one net Success, by RAW , it is a miss .

Narration in a narrative system is not a house rule.

I’m skimming through the EotE CRB’s sections on the dice, dice pools, and interpreting them. I see plenty of use of the terms “success” and “fail(ure),” but not “hit” or “miss.” A failed attack does not, inherently, mean a “miss,” particularly with setback dice imposed because of armor.