It says:" Attach to a target unit you control. This card enters play with 3 resources token on it. If attached unit is dealt damage, remove a resource token from this card instead."

Then, if someone deal 3 damage on that attached unit

1. remove 1 resource token to remove those 3 damage.

2. remove 3 resource token to remove those 3 damage.

which one is right?

The second question

If I have a Protective Spites(with 3 tokens) attached with a 2HP unit that declare as defender, then my oppnent deal 6 damage to me.

How many damage he can assign to my capital?

1. one damage

2. four damage

3. zero damage

which one is right?

1) I guess you only have to remove 1 token, else it would be specified "for each damage dealt to this unit, remove a token instead".

2) When you assign damage, you have to assign the necessary to kill that unit before damaging the capital. Therefore, you cannot kill it that way, so you'd have to assign all damage on that unit, and cannot deal damage to the capital (looks like it works the same as "Swordmasters of Hoeth").

Budmilka_fr said:

I have no doubt about the answer of question 1.

But some of my players consider the answer of question 2 is 4 damage.

Because the FAQ1.4

Q:How exactly does assigning combat damage to defending units work?
A: When assigning damage to defending units, the attacking player must assign enough damage to destroy the defending units before being able to deal damage on the opponent’s capital. This means that the attacker must take into account the unit’s hit points and any damage cancellation effects that are already active before damage is assigned . The attacker is allowed to assign more damage than is necessary to destroy a unit in anticipation of more damage cancellation effects if he so chooses.

They think this card's effect is not a damage cancellation effect(because it hasn't "cancel" this keyword), it's danage instead effect and it active after damage be assigned not before. so they think they can only assign the damage equal that unit's HP then assgin the other damage to capital.

Edit: according to FAQ1.4 page 6 Dealt Damage (v1.1)
A unit has been dealt damage, if at least one damage is applied to it after damage cancellation effects occur during the Apply Damage step .

Thats' why they think it active after damage be assigned not before.

This is a very confusing effect. It sounds like it is very open ended and not written completely. Remove a token to do what? Cancel the damage, heal the unit, what? It says "if attached unit is dealt damage". If I understand correctly, damage dealt is not the same as damaged assigned. So you can only take away a token in order to "heal" the unit after it has received less damage than it's hit points. That means that any damage still around after damage cancellation effects and the unit takes all of it's hit points as damage, should be assigned to the capital. I would also agree that the answer to the question is 4 damage.

Also, when I first saw the card, I thought: Shouldn't it be Protective Sprites, not Spites? Or is there such a thing as a Spite?

Titan said:

I think it can recieve equal or more damage than its HP and won't be destroyed.

FAQ1.4 page

All instances of “damage dealt” and “damage assigned” and “damage just assigned” on cards that redirect damage should read “damage that would be dealt.”

so I think it can recieve equal or more damage than its HP, then trigger the ability before apply damage to remove those damage by remove a resource token on it.

Well, if it can be triggered right before applying damage, then you need to put all damage on that unit to kill it, and none to the capital.

I guess it is worded differently, and it is the same as cancellation, because it happens at the same window.

Wow !! I just realized while I had a look at my own cards (French version), the text is not the same ! On my card is written :

If attached unit is dealt 1 damage, remove a ressource token from this card instead.

****... I should check the other cards...

LiouKen said:

When worded that way, yes, that makes very good sense. It is essentially a cancellation effect. Is this a fairly recent FAQ addition? I'm just wondering why they wouldn't put it on the card, if it is already there.

Budmilka_fr said:

Perhaps there is a mistake in the english version, omitting the 1 damage. By the way, is the name Protective Spites or Sprites in french?

The french card says "Farfadets protecteurs", so it is "sprites".

I don't think the mistake comes from the english version. French guys wouldn't know there is a mistake, and translate it the other way. But we'll see...

Budmilka_fr said:

Redirection happens at the same window as cancellation, but doesn't have to be taken into account when assigning damage to the capital. I would say that you only have to assign dmg equal to remaining HP in this case, though I really expect them to clarify this card greatly, and probably change it to "cancel". I'll send it in to Lukas though (if no one else has) because this card is worded so vaguely that I don't think we can figure it out without finding out what they intended.

Also, Titan, I think that FAQ section was put in in v1.3. I think this card was already in print at that point.

1. If the unit takes 2 damage, do you remove 1 or 2 tokens?

2. If this unit is blocking, do you have to consider the Spites when figuring out if you can assign any damage to the capital? I assume not, since its not a cancellation effect (it works like one, but doesn't say 'cancel').

3. If this effect and another "when this unit would be dealt damage, do something" effect are both on the same unit, how do you resolve them? i.e. if this was on Warrior Priests or War Hydra

Answers:

1. Protective Spites prevents all the damage dealt to the unit at the cost of 1 resource token. So even if it takes seven damage, you will only remove 1 token instead.

2. You do not have to take the Spites' ability into consideration when assigning damage.

3. Any effect that redirects or cancels damage will kick in first, since the Spites create a 'replacement' effect when the damage is dealt.

-Lukas

Budmilka_fr said:

There is a typo for sure here. Indeed spite in french means ''rancune'' and this doesn't fit well with the wood elves thematic.

This HUGE mistake makes me think that Fantasy Flight should really ''Whip to death'' their quality control management team.

But they are not alone to be guilty. If the cards are first made in english then translated (I' pretty sure its the case) then the english/french translator should have a meeting with his boss because the translation is clearly not accurate.

Here is the english text :

Protective sp®ites

''Attach to target unit you control. This card enter play with three resources counters on it.

If attached unit is dealt damage, remove a resource token from this card instead''

A literal translation should be :

Farfadets protecteurs

''Attachez à une unité ciblée que vous contrôlez. Cette carte entre en jeu avec trois pions ressources dessus.

Si l'unité attachée reçoit des dégâts, retirez un pion ressource de cette carte à la place''

That kind of mistake makes me worry about the quality of the translators. They probably barely play the game and do not understand fully the mechanics ,the concepts and its timing structure. Good players need only to read the card a few times to detect its combos, mistakes, flaws and possible loops.

For the typo, I think that there are people who didn't take their job seriously. Designers, Beta-testers and quality controllers should have seen it and at least ONE of them should have done something about it... Fantasy Flight is a big business and when you only edit 20 cards each month you should check them before sending them to the printers.

Still, the game is young and the design/testing/quality control budget is probably rather low but I guess we can hopes for better as the game progress if the sales are good. MTG also had his problems in the firsts years but through years the game got a lot of improvement until WOTC ran out of ideas and created stupids cards with stupids powers ( Indestructible is the reason why I sold all my MTG cards)...lets hope Warhammer Invasion will never get to this point.

It's and odd thing because I've noticed a couple of other spelling errors on this set. Ellyrian Knight is listed as Calvary instead of Cavalry and In Kairos Fateweaver's flavor text trivial is spelled trival. Those don't stand out nearly as much as a mispelled name on a card but when taken into consideration as a group, you can see that some things got by them.

they are referred to as SPITES In the Warhammer tabletop game. It's a term Games Workshop has used for a long time.

Doc9 said:

Ahhhh !! That makes quite a difference... still, the translator was a bad one.

Entropy42 said:

I've received an update to this answer:

The Spites should say

"If attached unit would be dealt damage, you may remove a resource token from this card instead."

-Lukas

So you choose which effect to resolve first. If you choose the Spites first, you remove a token and do not deal the damage. The redirect effect then has no effect. If you choose the redirect effect first, then the Spites can still optionally prevent the remaining damage from being dealt by removing a token. The addition of "you may" prevents you from losing a token if no damage is left after redirection effects.

Entropy42 said:

I think the last answer is better than this one.
But it's ok, it's not the first time(and will not be the last time) the designer is inconsistent in his views.
All we need to do is follow the will of The Creator.

Hope The next FAQ will add a comment like
Instead damage(v1.5)
Some card effects allow for damage to be replaced from damage to remove a token instead. Damage is always replaced after it is assigned but right before it is applied (this occurs during the same timing as Toughness).

It is important to note that playersdo not have to take card effects that replace damage from a unit into account when assigning damage to defenders during combat. This is because replace damage is not damage cancellation.

Then it'll be no problem.

To be fair, I posted the previous answer a bit prematurely. I wanted to just get the first two Q&As out to everyone as quickly as possible, and just shouldn't have posted the 3rd answer at all until it was completely settled. The current answer is what has to happen based on the rules for simultaneous effects. Both things trigger off "would be dealt damage", so they follow the flowchart.

Entropy42 said:

No offence, if you really do think so, then you should question it when you read the answer and not just post it out.

I read many topics in this forum and resolve many questions by your answer(answer to my question or other player's). Hope it would keep reliable. and thank you again.

Entropy42 said:

sry, but i do not fully understand this answer concerning the initial question about the Spites dealing with combat damage.

To pick up the example above:

LiouKen said:

and how much tokens are left when answer "zero damage" is correct?

In the example given, the attacker can assign 4 damage to the capital, because he doesn't not have to consider the Spites ability. In all cases, the number of tokens left is 2, since the removal of 1 token prevents all of the damage that would be dealt in any single application of damage (2 separate sources of damage would require the removal of 2 tokens).

sorry for digging out this old post once more, but im still unsure of how those spites are working correctly, so are my friends.

Entropy42 said:

according to this post, i do NOT have to destroy the unit to assign combat damage to the capital, is that correct?

and where is the difference between the spites and the sword masters of hoeth. as we have always been playing this card blocking all combat damage (even more than the units HP)

When assigned fatal damage to the blocking unit, you only have to include *cancellation* effects, which is what Swordmasters is. Protective Spites is not a cancellation effect, its a replacement effect, so you don't have to consider this effect when assigning damage to the capital.