Then it needs to be errata'd. That is not what extreme prejudice means.

Further, if the offhand attack "action" of TWF is not subject to EoME, then any caster can automatically beat EoME by choosing to cast an interruptible spell and abandon it next tick. Starting the cast of the 7+ tick spell counts as an action, and the effects are not resolved until the beginning of your next action. As soon as he starts the spell, he wakes up from EoME and can choose to abandon it.

Ultimately, it takes 2 actions to perform an interruptible action or spell. If the effects of EoME would have the caster complete the spell, then EoME would have a character with TWF to strike with both hits.

"Extreme Prejudice" means to kill, destroy, or assassinate with deadly force. That would translate to game terms as using your most powerful attack possible to try and kill your target.

John

No, it doesn't. I have had its definition spelled out to me by a marine. Your orders would be "'kill' with extreme prejudice" or "'pursue' with extreme prejudice". The "to kill" order must be specified. You act upon the order regardless of civilian casualties. If the target runs into a busy intersection and you have a fully loaded assault rifle, you fire to kill even if you kill several bystanders. If the target runs in front of the emperor and the caster would elect use of AoE, the emperor will be hit. It sounds like "deadly force", but "deadly force" must be specifically specified.

This means a character compelled by EoME does not automatically burn his 1 per scene "Smite Infidel" and "Avalanche Rune" under orders of EoME.

I'm guessing that whoever wrote the spell did not consult with marines on it and used the generally accepted term that when it says to "attack (read: kill) with extreme prejudice" meant that you wanted them dead (They've already been prejudged) and to do that would use the attack most able to do the most damage or hurt them the most. I would seriously question any GM or Player who did not interpret it this way in the shared campaign. Given that a caster will take up to 8 damage themselves to do this, it seems reasonable.

This doesn't mean the target can't use something like Sweeping/Mighty Swing to get not only their target but their 'true' enemies as well, but it does mean you can't do something that can immediately be broken. That's not in the spirit of the spell.

John

Ok, before this gets any more heated, let me suggest that we wait for an official answer or clarification in the errata. I think the opinions otherwise are fairly firmly entrenched and unlikely to be swayed.

Respectfully and with a sweep of his hat,

Paul

I miss the simpler, innocent days of attacking with extreme predigest.

seeing I wrote the spell..

the hero must attack the target in the best, most damaging way possible, regardless of their own safety... and it's a single attack, so you will use the best attack you can which will deal the most damage.. right now...

TWF is two actions, so you will only attack with your main hand weapon... but seeing that you must use the most damaging attack possible, the attacker would default to the most powerful single attack they possess... be it spell or maneuver.

people are over thinking this spell... take it at face value with the implication that you will attempt to kill your target withe extreme hatred

Thanks Pedro. That's how I've always adjudicated it.

John

Therefore a caster can claim their best spell takes at least 7 ticks and can abandon it. AOE Elemental Bolt would be extreme hatred, and for the elorii that is an interruptible spell. For other casters, their most damaging spell would have several die bumps, and with "extreme hatred" they would try for that spell which will have a high chance of failing. With extreme hatred, they won't care if they can't cast it.

Pedro, you don't understand what you wrote.

Until you make an attack the spell of EoME isn't broken. So I don't understand the argument that a caster under EoME is going to abandon a long casting even if his or her spell becomes interruptable.

A spell you only have a 10% chance of getting off isn't your best attack IMHO either. Generally I think you're going to stay at your passive casting value. Yes, several bumps of some sort might be applied by a caster in Tier 2 or above. If there is a corner case where this wouldn't be true I generally trust GMs to make a good call.