Extra Attack Maneuver

Extra Attack Maneuver
I've been all over the official L5R site and this one and apparently my search-fu is weak. So, I apologize if this is a positively ancient ruling. When a PC wants to raise for an extra attack per the extra attack maneuver, what exactly is required by the player? The book just says four raises must be called. I can see multiple interpretations: 1) Does that mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I get two damage rolls against my target? 2) Does it mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I am then entitled to make a second attack roll as normal? 3) Does it mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I am then entitled to make a second attack roll that also must be made with four raises? In addition, the RAW makes it clear that the extra attack must be directed at the same target, but does that count as a new attack for technique purposes? For example, Shiba Bushi 2 grants a number of free raises equal to the Bushi's school rank that may only be used for the Guard maneuver to each attack. So, if a Rank 2 Shiba Bushi attacks an opponent and successfully pulls off an Extra Attack maneuver (by whatever mechanism is correct) does that mean that the Shiba has two free Guard raises for each attack for a total of four?

It's either (2) or (3), and you'll find that a number of people here are split on the issue. The one thing that is clear is that you must make two attack rolls (thus eliminating (1)).

Extra Attack: "You can gain an extra attack against a single opponent if you make 4 raises and two successful attack rolls against that opponent. If either of these attack rolls fail, both fail. You may only attempt to gain an additional attack in this manner once per round, no matter how many attacks you have in a round. Keep in mind that your original attack and the additional attack must be diected against the same opponent." (page 168, 3rd Ed Rulebook) 1) Does that mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I get two damage rolls against my target? "You can gain an extra attack against a single opponent if you make 4 raises and two successful attack rolls against that opponent. If either of these attack rolls fail, both fail." No 2) Does it mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I am then entitled to make a second attack roll as normal? "You can gain an extra attack against a single opponent if you make 4 raises and two successful attack rolls against that opponent. If either of these attack rolls fail, both fail." No again :( 3) Does it mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I am then entitled to make a second attack roll that also must be made with four raises? If you say that you are using this maneuver, then both attacks have to succede with 4 raises. There is no way for you to succede on one attack and fail on another attack. Raises have to be declared before the attack roll and you must declare what they are for. This includes Free Raises. For example, Shiba Bushi 2 grants a number of free raises equal to the Bushi's school rank that may only be used for the Guard maneuver to each attack. So, if a Rank 2 Shiba Bushi attacks an opponent and successfully pulls off an Extra Attack maneuver (by whatever mechanism is correct) does that mean that the Shiba has two free Guard raises for each attack for a total of four? No. If the Shiba Bushi decides to try the Extra Attack maneuver as well as the Guard maneuver, he can use the Extra Raises from his Rank 2 technique, for the Guard maneuver, once per specific enemy. "If you have multiple attacks, only the attack with the greatest number of Raises remains in effect for any single enemy (though you may target multiple enemies, guarding your ally from each of them)." (page 168, 3rd Ed Rulebook)

If you say that you are using this maneuver, then both attacks have to succede with 4 raises. As I was just saying, this interpretation has not been agreed upon. While it is my prefered ruling, there is also a very strong case that for saying that only the first attack roll requires 4 raises.

Extra Attack: 1) Does that mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I get two damage rolls against my target? "You can gain an extra attack against a single opponent if you make 4 raises and two successful attack rolls against that opponent. If either of these attack rolls fail, both fail." No Ok, I didn't think this was the case. Way, way too easy to pile on damage. 2) Does it mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I am then entitled to make a second attack roll as normal? "You can gain an extra attack against a single opponent if you make 4 raises and two successful attack rolls against that opponent. If either of these attack rolls fail, both fail." No again :( 3) Does it mean that if I make one attack roll with four raises I am then entitled to make a second attack roll that also must be made with four raises? If you say that you are using this maneuver, then both attacks have to succede with 4 raises. There is no way for you to succede on one attack and fail on another attack. Raises have to be declared before the attack roll and you must declare what they are for. This includes Free Raises. Ok, this is where my question comes in. I have read the passage about the maneuver and I don't see why it obviously requires four raises on the second attack roll. I totally understand why you can't succeed on one and fail another. But the passage says "you make 4 raises and two successful attack rolls against that opponent." It omits any clause that says 'on both rolls.' This is where the confusion comes in. So, I guess my question now becomes, "why?" For example, Shiba Bushi 2 grants a number of free raises equal to the Bushi's school rank that may only be used for the Guard maneuver to each attack. So, if a Rank 2 Shiba Bushi attacks an opponent and successfully pulls off an Extra Attack maneuver (by whatever mechanism is correct) does that mean that the Shiba has two free Guard raises for each attack for a total of four? No. If the Shiba Bushi decides to try the Extra Attack maneuver as well as the Guard maneuver, he can use the Extra Raises from his Rank 2 technique, for the Guard maneuver, once per specific enemy. "If you have multiple attacks, only the attack with the greatest number of Raises remains in effect for any single enemy (though you may target multiple enemies, guarding your ally from each of them)." (page 168, 3rd Ed Rulebook) If that same Shiba Bushi wanted to, he could make raises for 2 attacks and use the Free Raises from Guard to protect an ally from two different enemies. But you can't protect them from two enemies with Extra Attack, as both attacks must be made against the same enemy. You have to wait until you get a second 'natural' attack. This does bring up another question though: If the Shiba uses Extra Attack to hit the same target twice, can he apply the guard raises to two different allies? That is, can he guard two allies from one attacker? What about techniques, katas or kihos that are triggered by being hit? Are they triggered twice if someone does a successful extra attack? If the technique, kata or kiho triggers on being attacked (regardless of success) is it triggered twice if some unsuccessfully attempts an extra attack?

This does bring up another question though: If the Shiba uses Extra Attack to hit the same target twice, can he apply the guard raises to two different allies? That is, can he guard two allies from one attacker? Most definitely! What about techniques, katas or kihos that are triggered by being hit? Are they triggered twice if someone does a successful extra attack? That depends entirely on the wording of the Technique, Kata, or Kiho being triggered. Any blanket statement would be prone to numerous innacuracies. That said, unless the Technique, Kata, or Kiho somehow indicates a limitation on how frequently it gets triggered, yes, you may use it repeatedly (note, most Techniques, Kata, and Kiho have some sort of limitation, it just may not be obvious for what it is at first glance). If the technique, kata or kiho triggers on being attacked (regardless of success) is it triggered twice if some unsuccessfully attempts an extra attack? See above.

Ok, this is where my question comes in. I have read the passage about the maneuver and I don't see why it obviously requires four raises on the second attack roll. I totally understand why you can't succeed on one and fail another. But the passage says "you make 4 raises and two successful attack rolls against that opponent." It omits any clause that says 'on both rolls.' This is where the confusion comes in. So, I guess my question now becomes, "why?" I agree, the sentence could be worded more clearly. But you can't protect them from two enemies with Extra Attack, as both attacks must be made against the same enemy. You have to wait until you get a second 'natural' attack. You are right. I got wrapped up in the sentence about extra attacks in the Guard maneuver and forgot that we were talking about the Extra Attack maneuver. I am changing the original post. This does bring up another question though: If the Shiba uses Extra Attack to hit the same target twice, can he apply the guard raises to two different allies? That is, can he guard two allies from one attacker? I see no reason why this would not work. What about techniques, katas or kihos that are triggered by being hit? Are they triggered twice if someone does a successful extra attack? If the technique, kata or kiho triggers on being attacked (regardless of success) is it triggered twice if some unsuccessfully attempts an extra attack? I am affraid that I cannot speculate without the 'real' wording of 'real' katas in front of me.

Ok, this is where my question comes in. I have read the passage about the maneuver and I don't see why it obviously requires four raises on the second attack roll. I totally understand why you can't succeed on one and fail another. But the passage says "you make 4 raises and two successful attack rolls against that opponent." It omits any clause that says 'on both rolls.' This is where the confusion comes in. So, I guess my question now becomes, "why?" I agree, the sentence could be worded more clearly. And that has been the problem. The wording is poor. The closest thing we have to an "official" response was from Shawn Carman saying basically that Rich Wulf was in charge of that section and because of that he wasn't 100% percent sure but his understanding was that the 4 raises were only needed on the intitial attack roll. There was also some backing on this as Shawn said in a post also that the Extra Attack's manuevers were independant from the original attack. For example you can use the Disarm manuever on the first attack and the knockdown manuever on the second. This makes a very good point for the arguement in favor of 4 raises for the first attack only as the 4 raises are the raises required to perform the manuever. You can't actually use the manuever on your second attack. The clarity issue is that the wording in the Extra attack manuever gives a possible interpretation that it applies to both attacks, however the wording isn't clear. Without an official clarification or errata on the matter, you could really interpret it either way.

There was also some backing on this as Shawn said in a post also that the Extra Attack's manuevers were independant from the original attack. For example you can use the Disarm manuever on the first attack and the knockdown manuever on the second. This makes a very good point for the arguement in favor of 4 raises for the first attack only as the 4 raises are the raises required to perform the manuever. You can't actually use the manuever on your second attack. I don't see how this backs the notion that the second attack doesn't require four Raises. It doesn't contradict it either, it's just irrelevant. I think Inu is saying that no two rulez lawyerz read any sentence in any RPG book the same way. He is just pointing out that there are a few interpretations on how this mechanic work and that AEG has not clarified it with a ruling or errata. LOL...There are times that I see things on the Forums and I ask myself, "was there even a question on how that worked?" But, sadly, RPG material usually isn't very precise in its wording.

He's saying the above argument "makes a very good point" for one of the two interpretations. I just don't see how it does that.

I was saying that you make raises in order to call a manuver and to get its effects. The effect of Extra Attack is to get a second attack that is dependent on both attacks succeeding. However when you make your Extra Attack it is a seperate attack roll with it's own raises(as per shawns clarification), you can not raise for the Extra Attack manuever more than once in a round so you can not call the manuever on your extra attack and indeed if you did you so you would be getting a Third Attack. My point was that you don't call the manuever on the second attack roll, so you don't have to make the raises unless the wording is to directly be interpretted that you must make the raises on both rolls even though the second attack isn't using the manuever. Shawn said that the raises for manuevers for both attacks were independant. You can actually interpret this a third way(a way that no one ever does), is that you have to make 4 raises to call the maneuever but the effects of the manuever require you to have made an additional 4 raises on both rolls. Ridiculous I know but it can also be interpretted that way by the way it is worded. This manuever is ambiguos. I wasn't trying to say that either interpretation was right, just that there was an arguement for both. Thus it is an ambiguos rule.

View Full Version: Extra Attack Maneuver