the rules state in matter of support "if the defending player declares no defenders, you may declare any number of your own eligible characters as defenders to that challenge". the question is: is zero covered with "any"?

the specific situation was: player A attacks player B with a power challenge in which player B doesn't declare defenders. player C supports player B due to titles and declares support with zero defenders in order to lose and trigger some effect after losing.

is he allowed to do so?

No.

While zero is technically "any number," declaring zero defenders in support leads to no actual status change to "participating" for any character. Since the original player is still on the hook for claim, the supporting player has therefore taken on no risk or responsibility for the challenge. In game terms, by declaring zero defenders, his attempt to "support" is "unsuccessful," leaving the original defender as the challenge's defending player.

Curve ball variation!

If the defender declares no defenders and I support him, can I bring a Naval character in on the attacking side - but still declare no defenders

There can be reasons to add characters to the attacking side - e.g. I might want to screw up someone attacking with Rakharo by adding non-Dothraki attackers

Response: After you win a Military challenge in which every attacking character has the Dothraki trait, discard 1 card at random from the losing opponent's hand.

Not the best example but something I have considered previously (benefits of adding to the attacking characters)

No. You can't support ANYONE without declaring defenders to support them. You can't declare naval participants unless you are the attacking or defending player. So unless you declared a defender in Support of another player, you cannot declare a NAVAL attacker.

No. You can't support ANYONE without declaring defenders to support them. You can't declare naval participants unless you are the attacking or defending player. So unless you declared a defender in Support of another player, you cannot declare a NAVAL attacker.

Not sure if that works right. I thought you could only declare [naval] attackers/defenders if you are the attacking/defending player, and I'm pretty sure you aren't the defending player if you're supporting, since they are still required to pay the claim if you lose.

Same reason if you support with a renown defender and win, they don't claim power for participating.

I reserve the right to be wrong in my interpretation, but that's how I've understood it from past discussions on the subject.

I reserve the right to be wrong in my interpretation, but that's how I've understood it from past discussions on the subject.

You were wise to reserve this right. It has been clarified that as soon as you declare a character in Support of the other player, you become the defending player for all purposes -- except for claim. The supporting player is considered the winner/loser of the challenge, even though they would not be on the hook for claim, which means their characters get Renown and they get to trigger "after you win/lose a challenge" responses (not the original defender).

Supporting another player is considered a type of redirect, although not one that puts you in danger of being hit by claim effects.

Fun "Supports" question to illustrate:

- A attacks B (claim 1 plot)

- C supports B.

- B declares no defenders.

- C declares a defender in support of B

- A wins the challenge

- B's plot is Twist of Fate. C's plot is Loyalty Money Can Buy.

Q: What claim effect does B fulfill?

A: Since C is technically the defending player, Loyalty is the "against you" plot that is active here and A's claim value is reduced to 0. Twist does nothing.

Anyways, after you successfully support and become the defending player, you can "declare" Naval participants on either side -- but unless you declare at least one character in the normal way (after the original defender declared no defending characters), you do not successfully become the defending player and thus would not be allowed to declare Naval participants.

thanks ktom ... we certainly hadn't realised that the plot cards get affected too - the fact that this happens adds a lot a clarity to the whole support thing

I had pretty wel the same situation yesterday, but I was the one who had loyalty ... so now I was worried that someone would step in and "support" me ... which would have increased the claim again me

For complete clarity, can I just confirm that the original target of the attack cannot do "anything" except pay the claim - e.g. if the original target was a Martell deck and someone steps in to support but loses ... I take it the original Martell defender cannot play Red Vengence and cannot stand their characters for vengeful (or claim power for Taste of Blood)

I might be supporting Martell players a lot more than in the past!!!

Correct. When you Support, you lose the challenge - even though someone else satisfies the claim effect.

It's not so much that the original defending player cannot do "anything"as it is that they can't do anything that requires them to win/lose the challenge. They fulfill the claim effect because the rules say they do as part of the Support mechanic for redirecting the challenge, not because they themselves "lost" the challenge.