When using Furious Assault, does a successful evasion test or force field roll on the part of the defender prevent the attacker from being able to spend his reaction to gain a second attack? Also, does the phrasing 'with the same bonuses and penalties' imply that the use of the Killing Strike talent carries over to the second attack? Or must one spend an addtional infamy point to trigger it? Or is it just not allowed as it's technically not part of an All-Out Attack, just a free, special attack?

Terraneaux said:

No….When the players turn in initiative comes up and he attacks a defender with a force field and also has the parry skill and defends the damage by force field and also the initial attack by parring the attack, as long he first hits on a successful Weapon Skill Test, I would say the first attacker would get his reaction to the furious assault reaction and gain a second attack. First attack is parried and damage is absorbed by force field. Second attack is rolled and the defender would have to roll again on force field and parrying as well. In one turn however I would think he only gets one reaction to use the furious assault attack. Remember to check the force field over load chart as well.In using Killing Strike the player must call an all out attack as well as spend an infamy point to avoid the defender from using a parry or dodge skill and giving the attacker an instant hit. Force fields are unaffected or have no change.

Dramacydle said:

Okay… that wasn't particularly helpful. Do you have any evidence for your assertion that a parry or force field does not 'negate' a hit to the degree necessary to prevent the attacker from triggering Furious Assault, or is it just wishful thinking on your part? Also, Killing Strike obviously cares about force fields but that's not particularly relevant to my questions about it, which have to do with whether or not Killing Strike has a beneficial interaction with the free attack generated by Furious Assault.

I'm not saying that a force field or parry will not negate a hit. I'm saying that first a weapon skill roll has to be successful in order to use the furious assault talent. The evidence is one is supposed to roll a successful all out attack, of which can only be done I think with a melee attack. Once the initial attack is successful, the reaction gains a second attack to attack using the furious assault. I would say from logic that the defender character has a chance to avoid the first attack with a reaction parry skill move and also the force field. Because the initial first attack hit and if the furious assault attack hits then I would think that the defender character gains two chances at parrying and two chances at using the force field. As for the Killing Strike talent, the action to spend an infamy before calling out the All out Attack is needed to make the defender not be able to parry first attack and cut through force field but I would think Killing Strike only works once not twice for the first parry and attack through the force field. But on the furious assault reaction, it would give the player attacking a second attack chance and if successful the chance for the defender to roll a parry and use his force field. remember the first attack is a insta hit and only seems the Killing Strike Talent would work as one hit.

Is English not your first language?

Yes, you need to land the attack (dodge or field save prevents you from landing it) to be able to spend the Reaction to get an additional attack when using Furious Assault. Killing Strike should be carrying over with the additional attack as well Killing Strike is technically a bonus and the additional attack is part of the all-out attack action. It doesn't mention "to hit bonus", so it's all-encompassing. Of course, your GM could say otherwise if he wants to. But infamy points are rare so I don't see why it shouldn't.

Don't listen to Dramacydle, he's just rambling nonsense.

I agree that a successful use of Dodge or Parry prevents the attack from being successful, but I do not agree that a hit that does no damage because of a field is any less successful than an attack that does no damage because of AP/TB. A hit stopped from doing damage by a field is still a successful hit in my eyes.

HappyDaze said:

Ah, good point. Thanks for correcting me. I had a brainfart.

A field save (unless it's from a Displacer Field) would not prevent the additional attack as the hit lands on the person, just that there's a field in the way absorbing the damage.