After thinking on this for a bit, I also think that these two characters should receive errata to say "as if they were the attacking player". Given their status as clan champions, i don't think that this ability is too powerful when used on defense especially when considering that they still will not have bowed yet in regards to the water ring.

I definitely do not support changing the rings themselves to be used as the defender. The ring effects incentivize you to be aggressive and if you could just defend and claim those effects while trying to honor or dishonor victory, the time length of the average game could very well double.

15 minutes ago, twylite said:

After thinking on this for a bit, I also think that these two characters should receive errata to say "as if they were the attacking player". Given their status as clan champions, i don't think that this ability is too powerful when used on defense especially when considering that they still will not have bowed yet in regards to the water ring.

I definitely do not support changing the rings themselves to be used as the defender. The ring effects incentivize you to be aggressive and if you could just defend and claim those effects while trying to honor or dishonor victory, the time length of the average game could very well double.

The reason you can remove the "Attacker" from the ring description is because the step in the conflict that checks for ring resolution checks for attacker, a secondary check in the ring ability itself is not needed.

1 hour ago, RandomJC said:

I'd argue Lion's Pride Brawler. Courtier trait for specific cards like For Shame!. And her ability can kick both Pol clan champs to their knees. She's a very strong card for Politics.

Well, obviously since I'm making that statement I disagree with this. I wouldn't replace Altansarnai for Shoju, as a Uni player, and I wouldn't replace Toturi for Shoju as a backup Lion.

By your logic, Shoju is terrible in Scorpion (and Crane), because he just helps them win conflicts they are already designed to win. We can sit here and suck on Shoju's ability like its god's gift, but that doesn't mean he works for every clan.

Edit: To clarify on my opinion on Shoju, his ability is only attractive because of the kill action. the ability to just ping off 2 pol points is okay, while his 7 stat is awesome. But as a Phoenix player, you could declare a Void Pol attack and Isawa Atsuko would do a far better version of that ability.

Lion's Pride Brawler is, no doubt, an intimidating force, particularly against high political skill characters (that generally have low military skill), but in terms of performing in political conflicts, she's not all that flexible.

Definitely a great card, but I don't know if I would classify her as a great political character, since she needs help breaking most provinces even when honored.

Just now, Joe From Cincinnati said:

Lion's Pride Brawler is, no doubt, an intimidating force, particularly against high political skill characters (that generally have low military skill), but in terms of performing in political conflicts, she's not all that flexible.

Definitely a great card, but I don't know if I would classify her as a great political character, since she needs help breaking most provinces even when honored.

This is true, but my view is as a control character who can shut down all your heavy hitters, even if she isn't the best at breaking politically. But I'm also slightly biased. I think Eiji and Historian are great pol characters as well. (As well as Deathseeker, in her own way.)

4 hours ago, ForceM said:

So, FFG, just get over with it and Errata the 2 cards asap.

Of course they can say now that everything works as intended. And indeed what Nate French wrote makes sense rules wise. But i don't buy that this wording was intentional. Do you?

The game isn't even out yet... so errata can come when it comes. I certainly don't believe the intention was to limit it to attack only, or else it would have been worded as such.

I don't think they need to issue any type of apology, or admit they were "wrong" here. This is normal procedure, rule on the situation according to the rules - if this isn't what you want, prepare and release an errata to fix it. This isn't some grave injustice, the game isn't broken and if they need to fix it they can. Some people are acting like this breaks the game forever... Its been like, a week since this was uncovered, and the game doesn't release for over a month still...

1 hour ago, shosuko said:

The game isn't even out yet... so errata can come when it comes. I certainly don't believe the intention was to limit it to attack only, or else it would have been worded as such.

I don't think they need to issue any type of apology, or admit they were "wrong" here. This is normal procedure, rule on the situation according to the rules - if this isn't what you want, prepare and release an errata to fix it. This isn't some grave injustice, the game isn't broken and if they need to fix it they can. Some people are acting like this breaks the game forever... Its been like, a week since this was uncovered, and the game doesn't release for over a month still...

This is the Internet! Honorable forumers have no need of such Scorpion deviousness as "reason" and "patience"!

4 hours ago, TheItsyBitsySpider said:

Shoju is the most powerful dynasty card in the game

Hardly. It all depends on context, what deck he's in, and what's happening on the board at the moment. It also depends on what you define "powerful" as; some people might reasonably say something that accomplishes a lot for less fate investment than Shoju is more "powerful".

Shoju is a very useful card, but hardly an instant win once you get him in play. Which is good; it means he's just like the other champions.

2 hours ago, shosuko said:

The game isn't even out yet... so errata can come when it comes. I certainly don't believe the intention was to limit it to attack only, or else it would have been worded as such.

I don't think they need to issue any type of apology, or admit they were "wrong" here. This is normal procedure, rule on the situation according to the rules - if this isn't what you want, prepare and release an errata to fix it. This isn't some grave injustice, the game isn't broken and if they need to fix it they can. Some people are acting like this breaks the game forever... Its been like, a week since this was uncovered, and the game doesn't release for over a month still...

A month or one week? Do you think they could errata that?

Just now, Shu2jack said:

A month or one week? Do you think they could errata that?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean...

This issue has been known for about a week. The game won't be released for another month.

Yes, this certainly can be fixed with errata. They only need to release errata that adds "as attacking player" and its done.

Just now, shosuko said:

I'm not sure exactly what you mean...

This issue has been known for about a week. The game won't be released for another month.

Yes, this certainly can be fixed with errata. They only need to release errata that adds "as attacking player" and its done.

I meant errata the release date.

Just gotta over these pages.

The Jade Rule in the rules reference makes the need to errata the cards entirely unnecessary. If there has to be something written about the two cards we would more likely see it put into a FAQ.

6 hours ago, Gaffa said:

Hardly. It all depends on context, what deck he's in, and what's happening on the board at the moment. It also depends on what you define "powerful" as; some people might reasonably say something that accomplishes a lot for less fate investment than Shoju is more "powerful".

Shoju is a very useful card, but hardly an instant win once you get him in play. Which is good; it means he's just like the other champions.

I'd agree. Some of the 1 drops in the game like the Bayushi Liar, Kaiu Envoy, etc. just do so much work for their respective clans. Even the best champion, and it's not Shjou, each need the support of the other cards in the deck to really function too.

7 minutes ago, Kubernes said:

Even the best champion, and it's not [Shoju], each need the support of the other cards in the deck to really function too.

So much this. I've beaten Shoju in a political conflict with Seeker of Knowledge. His ability sounds good on paper, but it really needs that synergy to work well.

7 minutes ago, Kubernes said:

The Jade Rule in the rules reference makes the need to errata the cards entirely unnecessary. If there has to be something written about the two cards we would more likely see it put into a FAQ.

The Jade rule has nothing to do with this...

The Jade rule is in place so that if a card says that you get to take 2 actions in a row, then the rules saying that you and your opponent take turns is ignored and you get 2 full actions in a row. If a card states that you do not lose the game if you reach 0 honor while that card is in play, then you don't lose if you hit 0 honor even thought he rules state you do.

The Jade rule is not about reading into the intended function of cards. Nothing about Hotaru or Toturi give a clear indication that they are intended to NOT properly utilize the ring in defense but we don't get to ignore the rules for it. We need to wait until there is errata to correct it, and until we get this errata the printed card, and rules reference dictate the function of that card - which is that you can trigger the ring's effect, but you aren't the "attacker" unless you were already the attacker in the conflict.

10 hours ago, Daigotsu Kai'Sen said:

"The attacking player" is in the Learn to Play PDF and is also in the actual hard copy of the L2P that comes in the boxes.

Yes, I understand. The problem is that whats on the Product Page Read More tab conflicts with whats in the L2P and RRG concerning the Ring descriptions. A simple edit on the Product Page would fix that I would imagine but its still there...

17 hours ago, BordOne said:

Except for 2 introduction articles that are supposed to accurately describe the playstyle of the clan.

As i stated i don't buy that these characters were intended to not trigger their abilities in defense (or at least not let the opponent pick the target). And i urge FFG to errata the cards by adding "as if they were the attacker" which would solve the entite problem and make the cards work as they were (most probably) intended.

But there have been many cases of Preview articles from FFG that were claiming stuff that new releases could do that were ruled out afterwards.

One such example was the K-Wing with SLAM in the X-Wing game. It was advertised in the preview it could lay bombs before doing the additional SLAM maneuver. Which it could not because you don't reveal a maneuver (required for bombs), you just choose it.

As it turned out the K-Wing was and is a pretty darn good ship nonetheless, but it shows that the article writers clearly don't always consult the game designers in such cases.

1 hour ago, ForceM said:

As it turned out the K-Wing was and is a pretty darn good ship nonetheless,...

Now apply this thought to both Hotaru and Toturi.

1 hour ago, Bayushi Shunsuke said:

Now apply this thought to both Hotaru and Toturi.

Well i don't think so. The effect was not the strongest to begin with, and there are not really any hidden qualities to the two. Shoju, Kisada, even Tsukune have much stronger and more reliable effects.

13 hours ago, shosuko said:

The Jade rule has nothing to do with this...

The Jade rule is in place so that if a card says that you get to take 2 actions in a row, then the rules saying that you and your opponent take turns is ignored and you get 2 full actions in a row. If a card states that you do not lose the game if you reach 0 honor while that card is in play, then you don't lose if you hit 0 honor even thought he rules state you do.

The Jade rule is not about reading into the intended function of cards. Nothing about Hotaru or Toturi give a clear indication that they are intended to NOT properly utilize the ring in defense but we don't get to ignore the rules for it. We need to wait until there is errata to correct it, and until we get this errata the printed card, and rules reference dictate the function of that card - which is that you can trigger the ring's effect, but you aren't the "attacker" unless you were already the attacker in the conflict.

Incorrect, the function of the Jade Rule is exactly what is written: if a card directly contradicts the ltp or rules reference, the card takes precedence.

23 minutes ago, Kubernes said:

Incorrect, the function of the Jade Rule is exactly what is written: if a card directly contradicts the ltp or rules reference, the card takes precedence.

The card doesn't contradict the rules in allowing the defender to have power in the resolution of the ring. Nothing on the card gives them that ability. The ring ability specifically call out "the attacker" which means Hotaru/Toruri on defense treats your opponent as if they are the one resolving the ability in how the ability pans out.

I'm sorry if this has already been addressed but what does "resolve a ring" mean if it does not mean that the resolving players reaps the benefit of that ring?

Just now, Manchu said:

I'm sorry if this has already been addressed but what does "resolve a ring" mean if it does not mean that the resolving players reaps the benefit of that ring?

In the natural course of events - when an attacking player wins a conflict (rr pg 21 part 3.2.6) they can choose to resolve the ring's effect. The Ring Effects (listed on the same page, but also pg 14) dictate what happens when they are resolved. Their effects dictate who can chose targets, and what the actions are. The Ring of Void states "The Attacking Player chooses a character and removes 1 fate from that character."

In a conflict the attacking player is the one who declared the conflict (pg 3). Because the Ring Effect gives control of choosing targets to the attacking player, the activation of a ring effect when you wouldn't naturally be the attacking player requires the "as attacking player" verbiage. You can see Display of Power which includes these words.

Without specifying to resolve "as the attacking player" Hotaru and Toturi still activate the ring, but the game then refers to the attacking player of the current conflict... and we run into confusion...

5 minutes ago, Manchu said:

I'm sorry if this has already been addressed but what does "resolve a ring" mean if it does not mean that the resolving players reaps the benefit of that ring?

The issue comes when you check out the Rules Reference section on Ring effectst that reads:

"Ring Effects:

Each time a player wins a conflict as the attacking player, he or she may resolve the ring effect associated with the contested ring’s element. The ring effects are as follows:

• Air: The attacking player takes 1 honor from his or her opponent, or gains 2 honor from the general token pool.
• Earth: The attacking player draws 1 card from his or her conflict deck and discards 1 card at random from his or her opponent’s hand. Fire: The attacking player chooses a character in play and chooses to honor or dishonor that character.
• Water: The attacking player either chooses a character and readies it, or chooses a character with no fate on it and bows it.
• Void: The attacking player chooses a character and removes 1 fate from that character."

By that reading even if the player controlling Hotaru or Toturi use the ring effect on the defense the attacking player would get the benefit. It makes no mention of the victor just the attacker.

@shosuko @Klawtu Thank you both for your replies.

Please forgive me if I am on the wrong track but it seems like there is a difference between resolving a ring and claiming a ring. Indeed, in the order of conflict, a ring is resolved before it is claimed. It seems like Hotaru allows the claimed ring to (potentially) be resolved again after it is claimed? Is that correct?

Reading very closely, it seems to me that if Hotaru's player wins a conflict while defending this is the sequence of events:

(1) the ring is not resolved because the attacking player did not win the conflict

(2) Hotaru's player claims the ring

(3) the claimed ring is resolved (because of Hotaru's reaction), according to the language in 3.2.6 that the "attacking player"/"the attacker" does something

The ring would still be resolved but the attacking player is the one who does it, according to 3.2.6 - so Hotaru's player claims the ring and then the opponent resolves it.

33 minutes ago, Manchu said:

@shosuko @Klawtu Thank you both for your replies.

Please forgive me if I am on the wrong track but it seems like there is a difference between resolving a ring and claiming a ring. Indeed, in the order of conflict, a ring is resolved before it is claimed. It seems like Hotaru allows the claimed ring to (potentially) be resolved again after it is claimed? Is that correct?

Reading very closely, it seems to me that if Hotaru's player wins a conflict while defending this is the sequence of events:

(1) the ring is not resolved because the attacking player did not win the conflict

(2) Hotaru's player claims the ring

(3) the claimed ring is resolved (because of Hotaru's reaction), according to the language in 3.2.6 that the "attacking player"/"the attacker" does something

The ring would still be resolved but the attacking player is the one who does it, according to 3.2.6 - so Hotaru's player claims the ring and then the opponent resolves it.

Yes resolving a ring and claiming a ring are different things. By the RR you resolve a ring after determining the winner and before a ring is claimed. Hotaru and Toturi both trigger when they claim the ring, which is still mid-conflict, but at a later window than when a Ring Effect would typically resolve.

Well - the Ring Effect doesn't refer to who resolved the ring. The Hotaru player is still the one that set the ring to resolve - but then the Ring Effect asks the "attacking player" to do something regardless of who resolved it.

I think its obvious to everyone discussing this that the wording on the card is problematic, and I don't see any way FFG could argue otherwise. It still needs to go through the QA process to review and finalize any change. We just gotta be patient, the game isn't public release yet anyway.

But would you agree just by reading the language on Hotaru's card and comparing it to 3.2.6 that Hotaru's player claims the ring and then the attacking player resolves it (assuming Hotaru's player chooses to use her reaction)?

It seems like this would make Hotaru's Reaction uniformly terrible for her player.