Generated Triggers and Wicked Disengaging Strikes

[Kharnage]

So, two questions out of Wicked. Hinamatsu, as an example, has Wicked, which reads as follows:
Wicked: When this model makes a successful y Action generated by an enemy model's Disengage Action, this model may resolve the Action's normal effects (including Triggers) instead of reducing the enemy model's Push distance.
My first question; Hinamatsu hits the target, with a mask, and generates an Onslaught attack. Does the generated attack go off before the disengaging model moves, as per the "resolve the Action's normal effects (including Triggers)" from Wicked, or does it work as per the "Actions Generated by Triggers" call out on page 12, which reads "If a Trigger generates an Action, that Action is an independent Action from the Action that generated it. The Trigger takes effect per its timing structure, but the model taking the Action cannot do so until all other effects (including other Triggers) have been resolved."?

My second question; Does the defending model get to declare defensive triggers now that Hinamatsu has decided to use Wicked, or does only Hinamatsu's action get to resolve triggers?

[Morgan Vening]

To the first, I'd say no. It's not definitive by the rules (because Wicked creates a potential exception), but I think that it'll be a case of the standard rules applying for generated Actions.

pg 23, 2nd Para, Actions Generated By Effects.
"When this happens, the new Action is always resolved after the previous Action is completely resolved, including any “After Resolving” effects, but before any other new Action can be taken."

                                                                     

To the second, I'm gonna side with Wicked.
"Wicked: When this model makes a successful Action generated by an enemy model's Disengage Action, this model  may resolve the Action's normal effects (including Triggers) instead of reducing the enemy model's Push distance."

"Disengage: One enemy model engaging this model (opponent’s choice) may take a  Attack targeting this model; neither model can declare Triggers as a result of this Attack. "

Now, it might not be intended as such, but the wording to me is clear. Wicked provides an exception for the model with Wicked. It does not remove the prohibition on Triggers entirely.
 

[solkan]

54 minutes ago, Morgan Vening said:

To the first, I'd say no. It's not definitive by the rules (because Wicked creates a potential exception), but I think that it'll be a case of the standard rules applying for generated Actions.

pg 23, 2nd Para, Actions Generated By Effects.
"When this happens, the new Action is always resolved after the previous Action is completely resolved, including any “After Resolving” effects, but before any other new Action can be taken."

I think you’re in the weeds on this one.  Because the disengaging strike (and it’s consequences) have to resolved before the movement occurs.  You have to resolve After Succeeding generated triggers before proceeding, otherwise there’s an endless number of degenerate timing sequences that occur for all of the “take an Action and then _____” effects.

 

[Morgan Vening]

6 minutes ago, solkan said:

I think you’re in the weeds on this one.  Because the disengaging strike (and it’s consequences) have to resolved before the movement occurs.  You have to resolve After Succeeding generated triggers before proceeding, otherwise there’s an endless number of degenerate timing sequences that occur for all of the “take an Action and then _____” effects.

Possibly. It's an issue with nested Actions generating Actions, that's for sure. 

[solkan]

7 hours ago, Morgan Vening said:

Possibly. It's an issue with nested Actions generating Actions, that's for sure. 

It shouldn’t be.

While there was deliberate rewriting of the timing to avoid having actions happen during the resolution of other actions (disengaging strikes are probably the main surviving instance), the M3E equivalent of the “After Step 5” step still exists.

If someone with Wicked gets a trigger that generates an action, and it needs to get FAQ’d for the timing, it’s most likely to be to clarify this:

Quote

When this happens, the new Action is always resolved after the previous Action is completely resolved, includ- ing any “After Resolving” effects, but before any other new Action can be taken.

as “but before any other new Action can be taken or the next effect can be resolved.”  

Because leaving dangly bits of actions hanging around unresolved just isn’t sanitary.   

[SEV]

Sorry to unburied this thread, but this situation came up in game yesterday. Do we have an official ruling for this? Is the community consensus is that onslaugh happens before the model can do is disengage push as @solkansaid?

Thank.

[Adran]

It wasn't mentioned in the FAQ. 

I am still of the opinion that you can not start a new action until the old actions are finished, so the push will happen before the Onslaught attack.  I don't have a problem with the rules adding the Onslaught attack on the end of the disengaging strike action because the push is still an effect to be resolved. 

ACTIONS GENERATED BY TRIGGERS (p23)
If a Trigger generates an Action, that Action is an independent Action from the Action that generated it. The Trigger takes effect per its timing structure, but the model taking the Action cannot do so until all other effects (including other Triggers) have been resolved.

[Maniacal_cackle]

I would say you do the push before the onslaught attack. Page 34 (timing) spells out actions generated by effects:

Quote

Many effects in Malifaux, (such as Actions, Abilities, andTriggers) can cause a model to take an Action. When this happens, the new Action is always resolved after the previous Action is completely resolved, including any “After Resolving” effects, but before any other new Action can be taken. Actions generated in this way follow the normal sequence for Actions and do not count against a model’s Action limit.

And page 35:

Quote

If multiple Actions are generated, they are queued and resolved one at a time in the order they were generated (whichever happened first or was listed first on the card). If an Action in a queue generates an Action, that Action happens before moving to the next Action in the queue.

So I would see it as you get to resolve the onslaught trigger, but all that does is queue another attack. Then the attack happens after the push.

For the initial attack, you get the special privilege of the disengage timing. I don't see why the onslaught attack would get that too. Same way that if you onslaught someone with an 'after resolving' trigger, your onslaught trigger resolves first, but the actual attack happens after their 'after resolving' trigger.