Today I was playing with Nfxon, and noticed that defender says E: Discard one momentum: If this attack deals damage add one of your other cards from your cardpool to your hand.(Not exact wording but close.) So that implies that you have to have at least have to have two cards in your card pool, and it be your attack.(Due to the fact that it says "your other cards") What I don't get is how some one can use this effect and have only one card in there card pool, and on their opponents attack, this allows people to continuously block or play jank actions over and over. What I am getting to is that the wording is bad and needs a little tweaking. For example only playable if you have at least two cards in your card pool and only on your attack. This would make defender still playable and still quite good but not were people can never loose due to one card in there hand and two in there staging area. Example is defender and lord of the makai are in your staging area and you have rejection in your hand, you lord of makai then rejection, and finally defender, and then rinse, lather, repeat. I can see this as being a big problem in the future, if not resolved right away.

Just because you didn't see that the card could be used that way, doesn't mean it's SOOOOO BAAAAAAADDDDDDD that it CAN be used that way.

The card doesn't need errata.

There have been many examples in the past of a card having a non-obvious use, this is just one of them.

and yes, the card is degenerate but it's possible to deal with it in various ways.

tag is right sir. defender has been used in this way for quite awhile and has become common knowledge

So the fact that it does pretty much what rank did and makes the game not so enjoyable to play isn't broken then addes need to be unbanned and while were at it we'll reprint turbo.

I'm not saying change the text just add some clarification to the card because as of now the wording makes no sense. All I'm saying is add a line or two to the last part to make it clear because if we just go by what it says then it should work that way. English isn't fun I know.

GeneralReaction89 said:

If by common knowledge you mean to people who obsess over the game and what they do for fun is play test, and browse forums, and consider playing a child's card game a reason to miss work or even call playing it work, then yes it is common knowledge to those people.

As crazy as defender is, ive just learnt to deal with it. Past shrouded in mystery(if it can get through the wall of control these decks use) puts a stop to it real quick.

Wow just as I was getting used to no ban /errata this thread it pops up again sigh... But tag is right most decks if they rely on defender to win are fail so many way to stop it or lord of the maki every deck should be able to deal.

Scubadude said:

1) Type better.

2) Post example of ways or stop posting.

What symbols are you running and having such a problem against Defender with?

Also, I love how UFS was just called a "child's card game" when we have characters like Mai and Morrigan, not to mention R.Mika and Felica among others... yes, those characters are completely appropriate for kids >_> *sarcasm*

cant we all just get along?(sarcasm?)(people should stop acting like kids then it wouldnt be a childs game)

Homme Chapeau said:

There's been a topic going on for almost a week in regards to answers for Defender (the poster asked for air/water specific, at the time). It's a pretty interesting read, and I'd recommend checking it out: http://new.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=26&efcid=5&efidt=84591

But overall, the mechanic that Defender operates on is the same concept (more or less) that a lot of loop combos work on, so as a whole it'd be good to have a possible answer to loops in your deck (as many, if not all of them, consist of some form of card pool clearing or card drawing).

Wait....maybe im just so tired im losing my mind. You still need two mega spikes to loop right? You can't loop with just one.

Make no mistake - you CAN loop with one Mega Spike. I've done it myself many times. Play a useful action, say, Tag Along, then Mega Spike, Defender E to get Tag Along back. Handy for picking up the second Mega Spike from the discard pile if you don't already have it in hand.

Defender does not need an errata, especially one that would take away from its point - *defense*. Hybrid Style does something very similar - they're cards geared toward recursion only on your opponent's turn, and only if you take damage. An errata for Defender such as the one you suggested would mean that it would not be living up to its name (DEFENDer), and would limit its use to the obvious attack looping (which it does anyway).

if you want ways to get round it there is manifest, revenants calling, if your worried about rejection loop bitter rivals, for the main way of killing (mega spike) tiras contract, you could alway steal there momentum with miserable existence should i go on. Also this is coming from someone who hates the card they have over shadows seong minas awesome effect on the card.

In my opinion, the problem is not Defender itself, which has a cost, but Lord of the Makai, which makes that cost free if you can combo them.

Notice that you can also stop the megaspike loop by playing any damage reduction of at least potentially 3 with no minimum, like Amy's Assistance.

Lord Hamara said:

Just because you're behind the curve of common knowledge doesn't mean you are granted the right to lash out and belittle others.

LOL UFS

Lord Hamara said:

Um you do realize that UFS is not a childrens card game right? The term childrens card game came from games like Yugioh where the game is based off of a hit childrens television show...UFS is based of off a bunch of games that are rated T for teen meaning it is not for little kids...

And it's not that hard to look at a forum once in a while and look at the threads. The Defender Rejection loops have been talked about quite a bit in multiple threads so pretty much anyone that does moderate forum browsing should have known about it.

Archimedes said:

I agree with arch, what is with the lashing out? It has nothing to do with playtesting or anything, it really is common knowledge I've been doing it since I first started playing defender. Havnt you been rejection looped before? its the same concept. Also its pretty easy to figure out if you actually read the card, again I really just don't understand the point of attacking everyone who knew it but you (probably most of the ufs player base honestly)

And like the guy above me said, this isnt a childrens card game, its a teenagers card game and teenagers >_<

Lord Hamara said:

Your "clarification" WOULD be changing the text. The wording makes perfect sense. Let me break it down for you.

"If THIS ATTACK deals damage" - right off the bat, it's clear that it can trigger off your attack OR your opponent's attack.

"add one other card" - so not the attack currently enhanced

"from your card pool to your hand" - source to destination

nothing in that text IMPLIES anything at all, on its own. YOU simply made an assumption based upon how YOU had seen it used previously.

If it was ONLY meant to be used on your own attacks, it would say "if YOUR ATTACK deals damage", plain and simple, which it does not.

It does not need an errata, because it works as it is worded.

What it does need is banning. Even without LOTM, it is easy to generate enough momentum (and with a Realm of Midnight in play, control checks aren't much of an issue) to loop two of any throws, especially for Chaos.

Not only that, but for Water, looping a Rejection more than once is reason enough.

And Order is... just... Order. Seriously. BAN ORDER NAO!!!1!!one!

(Obviously not an advocate for banning Order, but Defender does need a look-see)

On a scale of 1-10, with 1 being worded like some horrible yugioh card, and 10 being clear as day... Defender is a 5... Its not worded really awesome. However, its worded clear enough that people can get it.

If I handed this card to any of my newer players that don't troll the forums of the 'internetz' then they would play it wrong probably... I can see how and why.

Also, I hate lord of the makai....

guitalex2008 said:

If you really want to get into this here (which I guess being a defender erratta thread is the right place)
Theres at least an answer to defender in almost every symbol as can be find in that other random thread, its a fragile loop

As for rejection looping it is because rejection is dumb, its not defenders fault.

guitalex2008 said:

I am, ban the balance. BAN IT. NOW.

FenMiHuo said:

Except that then we're forced to pack an answer to a single card in every deck if we ever want it to remain competitive, which kind of reminds me of a certain banned asset that shut decks down.

It is Rejection now, but at any point that any damage reduction actions are ever released, it will be them. While it's also true that Rejection does too much, ANY damage reduction action made between now and the moment when Defender rotates can and will be abused.

(Also let this be a warning for those who want You Will Not Escape back... Defender can loop it if you do pass the check for the attack), after Forethought and BRT)

If not that, then any block with Breaker. A Tag Along used to shut your character down. Really, anything.

Damage reduction actions are a lot more obvious uses, but it doesn't stop there. Addes had answers on most symbols as well, and it has them available now if it didn't back then, so why not unban it? For the same reason that Defender SHOULD be banned. Because no single card should affect the meta as much as forcing everyone to pack answers to it, thus losing consistency.