So I sent a message to Nate French a while back, but he never responded.

Here is Shiba Tsukune:



I fully understand the intent of the card, and I doubt anyone would question it. However, technically you don't resolve rings as the attacking player unless you win the conflict.

Should the wording actually be "Resolve the ring effects of up to 2 unclaimed rings as if you won a conflict as the attacking player"?

No, the wording is fine. There's nothing stopping you from resolving ring effects outside a conflict, however ring effects are defined in relation to attacking and defending players. The Earth ring is defined as "The attacking player draws a card, and the defending player discards a card", for instance. The "as if you were the attacking player" is there to tell you how to resolve the ring effects since there are no attacking or defending players when Tsukune's ability resolves.

What GoblinGuide said

In the Rules Reference page 21 - Resolve Ring Effect - If the attacking player won the conflict, that player may now resolve the ring effect.

Tsukune simply states "resolve the ring effects" This is the exact same command you get when you win as attacking - then you go to the Ring Effect.

I can see where you guys are coming from, but I ponder then why Display of Power has the clause "had won".



If what you're saying is true, then the "you had won the conflict" part is superfluous. If not, then doesn't Shiba Tsukune require more text than she currently has?

Display of power is stealing the ring effect from the player who actually won the conflict. Shiba Tsukune is resolving the rings outside of a conflict. There's nothing superfluous here, they're different circumstances.

5 minutes ago, deraforia said:

Display of power is stealing the ring effect from the player who actually won the conflict. Shiba Tsukune is resolving the rings outside of a conflict. There's nothing superfluous here, they're different circumstances.

Well, not quite. What it actually does is cancel the initial ring effect. Then, it starts a separate resolution of that ring effect. If it were a flat steal, it would be worded differently. Not that it ends up being any different functionally.

Therefore, I believe the question about whether it's superfluous or not still stands.

Edited: Changed "a" to "that"

22 minutes ago, GoblinGuide said:

The "as if you were the attacking player" is there to tell you how to resolve the ring effects since there are no attacking or defending players when Tsukune's ability resolves.

This part does explain the need for "attacking player". Thanks for that!

However, the follow up question on Display of Power still stands.

Is it superfluous? Sure. Maybe FFG thought it would help clarify the ability due to its timing, since Display of Power's ability is triggered within the conflict resolution framework, rather than outside of the conflict. I would compare it to the much more concise ability of Crab's province, Defend the Wall:

Quote

Reaction: After you win a conflict at this province - resolve the ring effect of that conflict as if you were the attacking player.

If we applied that same wording to Display of Power, we would instead have: "R eaction: After you lose an unopposed conflict - cancel the ring effect of that conflict. then, you resolve that ring effect as if you had won the conflict as were the attacking player. Claim that ring."

To me at least, this change makes no difference in the interpretation of the ability. There is also the possibility though, that they word it the way they do specifically because you lost the conflict, and they're saying "well, you lost, but you're going to resolve the ring effect as if you had won instead, and as if you were the attacking player."

23 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

Is it superfluous? Sure. Maybe FFG thought it would help clarify the ability due to its timing, since Display of Power's ability is triggered within the conflict resolution framework, rather than outside of the conflict.

I don't mind the clarification, but I feel as though it had the opposite effect on me. As resident rules guy for most board and card games, most minor wording changes signify nuanced differences as opposed to clarification.

I think questions like this are best compared from the card to the rules - rather than from the card to the card. On the surface Tsukune and Display of Power may seem like they are the same abilities, in that they both grant you the ring effect - but look at when they do it.

For Tsukune she does it at the end of the turn. She stipulates you are the attacker because the ring ability denotes the effects by "attacker" and "opponent." Nothing else is really happening in her ability.

Then look at Display of Power - When are you actually playing this card?

RR page 21 - 3.2.4 - apply unopposed

This step is when you play the card - because this is when unopposed is applied. Technically your opponent hasn't activated their ring effect yet, but they have won it because 3.2.3 decides who is the winner.

So why the wording "as if you had won the conflict" ? Because ring effects don't activate until 3.2.6 which is after a very KEY window - 3.2.5 - Break Province

Without this wording you could use Display of Power when your Stronghold Province breaks to activate a Ring of Air to steal your opponent's last honor and win before the province break is applied...

But the wording is here - sorry Phoenix, you cannot steal my win because my dishonorable Scorpion broke your Stronghold unopposed with the Ring of Air when I'm at 1 honor.

So there is the answer - its because you don't actually activate it immediately from the card ability, but still wait to the appropriate window to activate it "as if you had won"

3 minutes ago, shosuko said:

I think questions like this are best compared from the card to the rules - rather than from the card to the card. On the surface Tsukune and Display of Power may seem like they are the same abilities, in that they both grant you the ring effect - but look at when they do it.

For Tsukune she does it at the end of the turn. She stipulates you are the attacker because the ring ability denotes the effects by "attacker" and "opponent." Nothing else is really happening in her ability.

Then look at Display of Power - When are you actually playing this card?

RR page 21 - 3.2.4 - apply unopposed

This step is when you play the card - because this is when unopposed is applied. Technically your opponent hasn't activated their ring effect yet, but they have won it because 3.2.3 decides who is the winner.

So why the wording "as if you had won the conflict" ? Because ring effects don't activate until 3.2.6 which is after a very KEY window - 3.2.5 - Break Province

Without this wording you could use Display of Power when your Stronghold Province breaks to activate a Ring of Air to steal your opponent's last honor and win before the province break is applied...

But the wording is here - sorry Phoenix, you cannot steal my win because my dishonorable Scorpion broke your Stronghold unopposed with the Ring of Air when I'm at 1 honor.

You actually bring up a really good point, but there's something I somewhat disagree with.

As I was going through the timing windows just yesterday, I came across a different question relating to "Spies at Court" and "Pride". Namely, can you trigger Spies at Court before you trigger Pride? This way, you could dishonour an already honoured character, then rehonour them with Pride.

In order to find the answer, I went looking in the rules for when exactly Keywords trigger during the conflict. To my dismay, I found no such reference. A Game of Thrones had the mnemonic D.U.C.K; that is, Determine Winner, Unopposed, Claim, Keywords. This was easy to remember and quite clear as to when everything triggered. It is important to note, however, that reactions to winning or losing, not unlike Display of Power's exact wording, triggered in the first step; that is, Determine Winner.

Now, as it turns out, L5R has a very similar structure in the rulebook: Compare Skill Values (a.k.a Determine Winner), Apply Unopposed, Break Province, Resolve Ring Effect, Claim Ring. It seems as though Display of Power would trigger during the Compare Skill Values, as this is the exact moment you "lose" the unopposed challenge. If you want an equivalent from A Game of Thrones, Burning on the Sand is the card I'd point to.

If Display of Power does indeed resolve during the Compare Skill Values step, then I'm curious why the other abilities would resolve later in the conflict. If it ends up being that it resolves after the Award Unopposed, I'd again question the wording on the cards.

I'm not being difficult for the sake of being difficult, and I'd love for an official ruling on it explaining exactly why it works the way it does. I do think whether you resolve the ring effect during the normal window or immediately upon resolving Display of Power is actually really important, given the example you mentioned with Ring of Air.

15 minutes ago, shosuko said:

So why the wording "as if you had won the conflict" ? Because ring effects don't activate until 3.2.6 which is after a very KEY window - 3.2.5 - Break Province

Without this wording you could use Display of Power when your Stronghold Province breaks to activate a Ring of Air to steal your opponent's last honor and win before the province break is applied...

If it ends up being the case that the reason for the "As if you had won the conflict" wording is exactly what you said, I'll accept that.

12 minutes ago, shosuko said:

I think questions like this are best compared from the card to the rules - rather than from the card to the card. On the surface Tsukune and Display of Power may seem like they are the same abilities, in that they both grant you the ring effect - but look at when they do it.

For Tsukune she does it at the end of the turn. She stipulates you are the attacker because the ring ability denotes the effects by "attacker" and "opponent." Nothing else is really happening in her ability.

Then look at Display of Power - When are you actually playing this card?

RR page 21 - 3.2.4 - apply unopposed

This step is when you play the card - because this is when unopposed is applied. Technically your opponent hasn't activated their ring effect yet, but they have won it because 3.2.3 decides who is the winner.

So why the wording "as if you had won the conflict" ? Because ring effects don't activate until 3.2.6 which is after a very KEY window - 3.2.5 - Break Province

Without this wording you could use Display of Power when your Stronghold Province breaks to activate a Ring of Air to steal your opponent's last honor and win before the province break is applied...

But the wording is here - sorry Phoenix, you cannot steal my win because my dishonorable Scorpion broke your Stronghold unopposed with the Ring of Air when I'm at 1 honor.

Not to play devil's advocate here, but...can Display of Power actually cancel the ring effect before it is triggered in 3.2.6, seeing as cancel abilities are considered interrupts? Because the use of the word "Then" in the ability effect indicates that you couldn't trigger activating the ring for yourself until after the initial ring effect has been canceled (interrupted). If my understanding of the timing for interrupts (and therefore cancel abilities) is correct, you wouldn't be able to trigger the ring effect until after 3.2.5 anyways.

1 minute ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

Not to play devil's advocate here, but...can Display of Power actually cancel the ring effect before it is triggered in 3.2.6, seeing as cancel abilities are considered interrupts? Because the use of the word "Then" in the ability effect indicates that you couldn't trigger activating the ring for yourself until after the initial ring effect has been canceled (interrupted). If my understanding of the timing for interrupts (and therefore cancel abilities) is correct, you wouldn't be able to trigger the ring effect until after 3.2.5 anyways.

Am I the devil you're advocating for?

I agree that the wording of the cancel is strange. It seems as though what you're actually doing is cancelling the ring effect that's going to happen in a future phase, OR Display of Power is actually supposed to be played during the Resolve Ring Effect step, in which case, again, the wording is really strange.

7 minutes ago, Zesu Shadaban said:

Not to play devil's advocate here, but...can Display of Power actually cancel the ring effect before it is triggered in 3.2.6, seeing as cancel abilities are considered interrupts? Because the use of the word "Then" in the ability effect indicates that you couldn't trigger activating the ring for yourself until after the initial ring effect has been canceled (interrupted). If my understanding of the timing for interrupts (and therefore cancel abilities) is correct, you wouldn't be able to trigger the ring effect until after 3.2.5 anyways.

4 minutes ago, theaficionado said:

Am I the devil you're advocating for?

I agree that the wording of the cancel is strange. It seems as though what you're actually doing is cancelling the ring effect that's going to happen in a future phase, OR Display of Power is actually supposed to be played during the Resolve Ring Effect step, in which case, again, the wording is really strange.

You are doing exactly that - notice that it reads "cancel the ring effect for this conflict." Meaning the pending ring effect that is started in 3.2 when you declare the element for the conflict. It then adds to the queue a new one for "resolve the ring effect as if you had won."

11 minutes ago, theaficionado said:

You actually bring up a really good point, but there's something I somewhat disagree with.

As I was going through the timing windows just yesterday, I came across a different question relating to "Spies at Court" and "Pride". Namely, can you trigger Spies at Court before you trigger Pride? This way, you could dishonour an already honoured character, then rehonour them with Pride.

In order to find the answer, I went looking in the rules for when exactly Keywords trigger during the conflict. To my dismay, I found no such reference. A Game of Thrones had the mnemonic D.U.C.K; that is, Determine Winner, Unopposed, Claim, Keywords. This was easy to remember and quite clear as to when everything triggered. It is important to note, however, that reactions to winning or losing, not unlike Display of Power's exact wording, triggered in the first step; that is, Determine Winner.

Now, as it turns out, L5R has a very similar structure in the rulebook: Compare Skill Values (a.k.a Determine Winner), Apply Unopposed, Break Province, Resolve Ring Effect, Claim Ring. It seems as though Display of Power would trigger during the Compare Skill Values, as this is the exact moment you "lose" the unopposed challenge. If you want an equivalent from A Game of Thrones, Burning on the Sand is the card I'd point to.

If Display of Power does indeed resolve during the Compare Skill Values step, then I'm curious why the other abilities would resolve later in the conflict. If it ends up being that it resolves after the Award Unopposed, I'd again question the wording on the cards.

I'm not being difficult for the sake of being difficult, and I'd love for an official ruling on it explaining exactly why it works the way it does. I do think whether you resolve the ring effect during the normal window or immediately upon resolving Display of Power is actually really important, given the example you mentioned with Ring of Air.

You would activate both Pride and Spies at Court from the same trigger, which is 3.2.3. Because Reactions (page 13) states that when a triggering condition resolves a reaction window is opened for that triggering condition. Within the reaction window the first player has first choice to play a reaction - so if 1st player has a chance to react to winning / losing a conflict they get to react first before the 2nd player will. Opportunities to play eligible reactions continue until both players pass. At this point the reactions of both Spies at Court and Pride can be triggered in either order. Keywords have no priority over any other reaction - they are essentially a Reaction: XXX ability in short hand.

As for when you play Display of Power - it does not actually react to "when you lose a conflict" at 3.2.3, but actually 3.2.4 Apply Unopposed. This is what you are reacting to. I don't think there is a more eloquent way to put it other than "when you lose an unopposed conflict." The card's effect is not to activate the ring at that moment, but to create a pending ring effect for when you would resolve ring effects in 3.2.6 as we've discussed.

Just now, shosuko said:

You would activate both Pride and Spies at Court from the same trigger, which is 3.2.3. Because Reactions (page 13) states that when a triggering condition resolves a reaction window is opened for that triggering condition. Within the reaction window the first player has first choice to play a reaction - so if 1st player has a chance to react to winning / losing a conflict they get to react first before the 2nd player will. Opportunities to play eligible reactions continue until both players pass. At this point the reactions of both Spies at Court and Pride can be triggered in either order. Keywords have no priority over any other reaction - they are essentially a Reaction: XXX ability in short hand.

Is Pride a Reaction ? I get that it's worded the way a Reaction would be, but I believe there's a difference. I don't like doing this, but I'd point to Game of Thrones as an example. Some Keywords trigger "When you win a challenge", but they actually resolve much later than Reaction: "After you win a challenge..." abilities do.

2 minutes ago, shosuko said:

As for when you play Display of Power - it does not actually react to "when you lose a conflict" at 3.2.3, but actually 3.2.4 Apply Unopposed. This is what you are reacting to. I don't think there is a more eloquent way to put it other than "when you lose an unopposed conflict." The card's effect is not to activate the ring at that moment, but to create a pending ring effect for when you would resolve ring effects in 3.2.6 as we've discussed.

I think we're going to butt heads back and forth on this won. My history with Game of Thrones, which has a lot of parallels with L5R, leads me to think it would actually apply in 3.2.3, despite Unopposed not being awarded until 3.2.4. You think otherwise, and that's fine. I'm not trying to argue or start a fight. I just don't personally don't see any evidence why it would trigger in 3.2.4 and not in 3.2.3, while precedent in another game by the same company had it trigger in the equivalent of 3.2.3.

2 minutes ago, theaficionado said:

Is Pride a Reaction ? I get that it's worded the way a Reaction would be, but I believe there's a difference. I don't like doing this, but I'd point to Game of Thrones as an example. Some Keywords trigger "When you win a challenge", but they actually resolve much later than Reaction: "After you win a challenge..." abilities do.

Both the abilities of Pride and Spies at Court are "after you win a conflict" so they do have the same timing in reaction.

There is a difference between "when" and "after" in other games, but I think L5R has tried a new route. In L5R there are Interrupts and Reactions. Interrupts (page 10) occur when a Triggering Condition (page 16) becomes imminent (step 2) you may then use cancel interrupts like Way of the Unicorn, or Shiba Yojimbo. Then we go to forced interrupts and then optional interrupts (step 3) like The Art of Peace. After this the action actually happens if it hasn't been cancelled. Then (step 5) we process any forced reactions like a Dishonored character leaving play causing a 1 honor loss, and finally we may play any optional reactions like Pride and Spies at Court. After this the triggering condition has completed, and the reaction window is closed (step 6.)

In this way we don't have the "when" and "after" which has long been a bane of game terminology...

2 minutes ago, theaficionado said:

I think we're going to butt heads back and forth on this won. My history with Game of Thrones, which has a lot of parallels with L5R, leads me to think it would actually apply in 3.2.3, despite Unopposed not being awarded until 3.2.4. You think otherwise, and that's fine. I'm not trying to argue or start a fight. I just don't personally don't see any evidence why it would trigger in 3.2.4 and not in 3.2.3, while precedent in another game by the same company had it trigger in the equivalent of 3.2.3.

The thing about Display of Power is that it does not react to you winning. In step 3.2.3 the game doesn't know if you are unopposed or not so you can't very well react to winning or losing unopposed. The game framework of applying a 1 honor penalty hasn't even been assessed, and NOTHING takes precedence over game framework lol. The ability isn't reacting to "when you lose a conflict" but "when you lose a conflict unopposed ." Semantics is literally everything, you can't omit a single word and re-interpret the card. Step 3.2.4 states "If the attacking player won the conflict and the defending player controls no participating characters, the conflict is considered "unopposed." The game hasn't forgotten who has won or lost, but NOW it notes whether that was unopposed or not.

If you want a good ruling to chase though - did you see the one about Hotaru and Toturi? They do not include the "as if you were the attacking player" clause... They can trigger the ring when they win in defense, but who is the attacker is still the same in the ring effect... I wonder if this will receive an errata.

19 minutes ago, shosuko said:

Both the abilities of Pride and Spies at Court are "after you win a conflict" so they do have the same timing in reaction.

There is a difference between "when" and "after" in other games, but I think L5R has tried a new route. In L5R there are Interrupts and Reactions. Interrupts (page 10) occur when a Triggering Condition (page 16) becomes imminent (step 2) you may then use cancel interrupts like Way of the Unicorn, or Shiba Yojimbo. Then we go to forced interrupts and then optional interrupts (step 3) like The Art of Peace. After this the action actually happens if it hasn't been cancelled. Then (step 5) we process any forced reactions like a Dishonored character leaving play causing a 1 honor loss, and finally we may play any optional reactions like Pride and Spies at Court. After this the triggering condition has completed, and the reaction window is closed (step 6.)

In this way we don't have the "when" and "after" which has long been a bane of game terminology...

The thing about Display of Power is that it does not react to you winning. In step 3.2.3 the game doesn't know if you are unopposed or not so you can't very well react to winning or losing unopposed. The game framework of applying a 1 honor penalty hasn't even been assessed, and NOTHING takes precedence over game framework lol. The ability isn't reacting to "when you lose a conflict" but "when you lose a conflict unopposed ." Semantics is literally everything, you can't omit a single word and re-interpret the card. Step 3.2.4 states "If the attacking player won the conflict and the defending player controls no participating characters, the conflict is considered "unopposed." The game hasn't forgotten who has won or lost, but NOW it notes whether that was unopposed or not.

If you want a good ruling to chase though - did you see the one about Hotaru and Toturi? They do not include the "as if you were the attacking player" clause... They can trigger the ring when they win in defense, but who is the attacker is still the same in the ring effect... I wonder if this will receive an errata.

I'd heard about the Hotaru/Toturi ruling, and that to me, while consistent with the wording, is a garbage ruling overall, unless the intent was for it not to work on defence. I expect it would receive errata.

As a linguistics major, I too agree that semantics is everything. The word "unopposed" is not actually omitted in my example, and I made specific reference to it. For reference, here is the Game of Thrones card in question:



Notice the wording of the condition is identical , except "Conflict" and "Challenge".

After looking at the two rules documents, the only difference I can find is that "unopposed" is defined in the equivalent of step 3.2.3 in AGoT (despite the benefit not being awarded until the equivalent of step 3.2.4), whereas in L5R unopposed is mentioned under 3.2.4, but seems to be calculated during 3.2.3.

To quote:

If the attacking player won the conflict and the defending player controls no participating characters (in step 3.2.3), the conflict is considered “unopposed.”

Despite the fact that this appears under the entry for 3.2.4, it appears as though unopposed is actually determined during step 3.2.3.

Happy to be wrong on this, but I would prefer to wait for an official clarification of all the steps of Display of Power.

EDIT: In fact, also from the rulebook:

A conflict is unopposed if the attacking player wins the conflict and the defending player controls no participating characters at the time the conflict winner is determined.

In that case, you actually DO lose the unopposed conflict during 3.2.3, which would appear to be the time when Display of Power's reaction triggers.

13 minutes ago, theaficionado said:

Notice the wording of the condition is identical , except "Conflict" and "Challenge".

After looking at the two rules documents, the only difference I can find is that "unopposed" is defined in the equivalent of step 3.2.3 in AGoT (despite the benefit not being awarded until the equivalent of step 3.2.4), whereas in L5R unopposed is mentioned under 3.2.4, but seems to be calculated during 3.2.3.

To quote:

If the attacking player won the conflict and the defending player controls no participating characters (in step 3.2.3), the conflict is considered “unopposed.”

Despite the fact that this appears under the entry for 3.2.4, it appears as though unopposed is actually determined during step 3.2.3.

Happy to be wrong on this, but I would prefer to wait for an official clarification of all the steps of Display of Power.

EDIT: In fact, also from the rulebook:

A conflict is unopposed if the attacking player wins the conflict and the defending player controls no participating characters at the time the conflict winner is determined.

In that case, you actually DO lose the unopposed conflict during 3.2.3, which would appear to be the time when Display of Power's reaction triggers.

I pulled up agot rulebook and noticed that same thing - but you're right. Page 17 defines Unopposed, Unopposed Conflict as being determined at the time you determine the winner, so Display of Power is a reaction to 3.2.3. I was too focused on the phase breakdown at the end of the book to search for unopposed as listed earlier. Good call.

1 minute ago, shosuko said:

I pulled up agot rulebook and noticed that same thing - but you're right. Page 17 defines Unopposed, Unopposed Conflict as being determined at the time you determine the winner, so Display of Power is a reaction to 3.2.3. I was too focused on the phase breakdown at the end of the book to search for unopposed as listed earlier. Good call.

You and I both, brother. I was looking at that and that alone until I decided "Hey, maybe the other section that defines terms has something!"

I guess that now leaves the following questions:

1. Given that Display of Power is played during the Reaction window in 3.2.3, do you immediately cancel the ring effect that would occur during 3.2.6, or is it cancelled during 3.2.6?
2. Do you resolve the ring effect during the resolution of Display of Power or during the window of 3.2.6?
3. Given that cancelling ring effects does not prevent claiming of the ring by the winning player, does the player playing Display of Power claim the ring before the attacking player does (during Display of Power's resolution in 3.2.3), preventing them from claiming it as it is no longer contested (based on interpretation of Rules Reference p14 " When a player wins a conflict, that player claims the contested ring and places it into his or her claimed ring pool") or is it claimed after the attacker has already claimed it?

I believe the most logical conclusion, based on the wording of the rules, is the following:

1. Display of Power initiates during 3.2.3.
2. During resolution, Display of Power cancels the initiation of the "Resolve Ring Effects" framework 3.2.6.
3. Next, Display of Power immediately resolves the effects of the ring whose effects were cancelled.
4. Finally, the player who played Display of Power immediately claims the ring.
5. Return to Reactions window in 3.2.3.
6. 3.2.4 occurs, and the defending player loses 1 honour.
7. 3.2.5 occurs, and the province may or may not be broken.
8. 3.2.6 is cancelled due to Display of Power.
9. 3.2.7 still resolves, but as there is no contested ring, no ring is claimed.

Now I don't like my answer. You cancel the ring effect - then you resolve that ring effect - claim the ring. When a card tells you to do things, you follow those instructions. There is no way the card actually delays the ring effect until 3.2.6, idk how I thought it did lol. I'm blonde sometimes.

What does it mean by "as if you had won" ? I don't think its about timing, but something else. I think it might be about choice.

When you resolve a ring effect - you simply resolve it. The ring effects themselves are not optional "may" abilities, but are forced. If you resolve the effect of the Ring of Void "The attacking player chooses a character and removes 1 fate from that character." Sometimes this can create a dilemma where you may be the only player who controls a character with fate, and since that is the only option that can effect the game state you must select it!

I am thinking the wording "as if you won the conflict" is actually restoring that choice because 3.2.6 "If the attacking player won the conflict, that player may resolve the ring effect of the contested ring." Resolving the ring effect "as if you won" may be to give choice to the player to cancel the opponent's effect, but also not actually trigger the ring themselves. They then claim the ring well before their opponent leaving no ring for the opponent to claim in 3.2.7

That would be odd though - as the ability could just say "then, you may resolve the ring effect as if you were the attacking player. Claim that ring."

I would say - final ruling for the night - Yes, Phoenix can dishonor me out of the game if they let me crush their stronghold unopposed in a Ring of Air conflict by playing Display of Power when I have just 1 honor remaining.

11 minutes ago, shosuko said:

I am thinking the wording "as if you won the conflict" is actually restoring that choice because 3.2.6 "If the attacking player won the conflict, that player may resolve the ring effect of the contested ring." Resolving the ring effect "as if you won" may be to give choice to the player to cancel the opponent's effect, but also not actually trigger the ring themselves.

I feel like we've gone full circle, and we're back to my original question: Why does it say "as if you had won"?

If indeed it is because what Display of Power does is basically transform 3.2.6 and 3.2.7 into you being the winning player, why then does it initiate in 3.2.3? Why not word it so that it clearly resolves in 3.2.6?

Despite it being more convoluted, wording along the lines of "Interrupt: Before a ring effect would resolve during an unopposed conflict which you lost - resolve the ring effect as though you had won the conflict as the attacking player instead. Claim that ring". That is, if the intention is as I stated above.

In fact, more questions arise because of this: Do Hotaru and Toturi's abilities resolve in 3.2.3, or do they result in an extra resolution in 3.2.6. I feel as though common sense would dictate the answer is in 3.2.3. If that's the case, then is Display of Power different because of the extra wording "as if you had won the conflict as the attacker"?

In all honestly, I suspect that this is a classic case of "FFG Wording"; I suspect all of these effects are actually supposed to resolve during the same window, but they've all been worded differently for no apparent reason, except now they'll be ruled the way they're worded (fair enough, but silly sometimes) as opposed to the way they were intended, until they receive errata.

EDIT: Ignore the bit about Hotaru and Toturi.

1 minute ago, theaficionado said:

I feel like we've gone full circle, and we're back to my original question: Why does it say "as if you had won"?

If indeed it is because what Display of Power does is basically transform 3.2.6 and 3.2.7 into you being the winning player, why then does it initiate in 3.2.3?

In fact, more questions arise because of this: Do Hotaru and Toturi's abilities resolve in 3.2.3, or do they result in an extra resolution in 3.2.6. I feel as though common sense would dictate the answer is in 3.2.3. If that's the case, then is Display of Power different because of the extra wording "as if you had won the conflict as the attacker"?

In all honestly, I suspect that this is a classic case of "FFG Wording"; I suspect all of these effects are actually supposed to resolve during the same window, but they've all been worded differently for no apparent reason, except now they'll be ruled the way they're worded (fair enough, but silly sometimes) as opposed to the way they were intended, until they receive errata.

Well - Hotaru and Toturi's abilities react to you claiming the ring. They certainly don't pop until 3.2.7.

Just now, shosuko said:

Well - Hotaru and Toturi's abilities react to you claiming the ring. They certainly don't pop until 3.2.7.

That's what I get for making up examples without looking at the cards. I thought they were after you win.