Wow. I just went to check the comp rules and look at the card text and this really does seem to be an issue. I don't know how it hasn't been brought up before now and why UDE hasn't fixed it already.

Affected cards:
Wonder Woman, Princess Diana (7)
Zatanna
Metamorpho
Nth Metal
Human Torch, Hothead

So do we have a ruling here? I thought that team attacking means 1 attack = 1 power up?

Where's docx?

Yeah, a player pointed this out yesterday in the rules forum---that the template had switched back to "defends" was obviously old news, and was advertised as part of the new set. But that the powers would functional work like older ones had been errataed to work was a surprise---it's actually astonishing that I hadn't seen the issue come up before.

For people asking about a ruling---as things exist now, there's no ambiguity at all. The rules and cardtexts make it clear that these trigger per attacker. If UDE wanted to change how it worked, they would either have to errata away the template, or they would have to modify the Comp. Rules; but barring one of those, I don't see that there's any need for official clarification, since the issue isn't really a gray area right now.

Btw, there are 6 cards using the Defends wording. The first to be printed was Human Torch from the FF starter, who might have led to the template change for JLA. While I don't think the rules team was unaware of the "defends" issue when the cards were templated, the fact that the rules must have been updated this way for Human Torch make it an easier point to debate. And if it's an oversight that they would want to "fix," so be it, but I don't think that should be the basic assumption as it seems it might be for some.

Of the other 5 cards, Glass Jaw doesn't matter very much, as multiple exhausts shouldn't be important very often. Nth Metal, Metamorpho, and Zatanna are interesting, to be sure. The one that's downright bizarre is the 7-drop Wonder Woman---she has a conditional trigger, which only works if it's the adjacent character's first time defending this turn. If they are defending against team attackers, does it trigger and resolve for each of them, or would only one end up helping her? My instinct is that each team attacker is still part of the first time defending, but the issue isn't exactly transparent in the rules right now.

And as I said in the other thread, it's not fully clearl how cards like Armed Escort and Clark Kent interact with the "defends" template.

Edit: Ah, that FAQ entry does make things a bit more interesting. Within the rules, the issue is still clear, but designer intent is much more in play. And whether or not players should have known about this...well, that's a bit murkier, too.

From the FAQ:

4. Whenever a character “defends”
With this expansion, powers no longer trigger whenever a character “becomes a defender,” but rather whenever a character “defends.” Five cards (Glass Jaw; Metamorpho; Nth Metal; Wonder Woman, Princess Diana; and Zatanna) have this text. Example: Metamorpho reads, “Whenever Metamorpho attacks or defends, you may choose one: Metamorpho gets -2 ATK / +2 DEF this attack; or Metamorpho gets +2 ATK / -2 DEF this attack.” His power triggers whenever he gains the attacker or defender characteristic.

So it sounds like they meant to change the comp rules ... but forgot .. or something.

People should know better? Come on man...

Let's say you're driving down a road. This road has had a speed limit of 40 for the last 50 miles, ever since you turned onto it about an hour ago. Now, the road seems to stay exactly the same, however, due to some houses built nearby, the Speed Limit drops to 25. However, due to poor signage, you never noticed and continued along your merry way at 40 MPH. Next thing you know, you're being pulled over and get a ticket. Your trip now officially sucks and your day is ruined.
Alternately, imagine that you had a friend in the car, who happens to pay anal attention to detail, and noticed the sign. He tells you, and you correct your speed, and continue along your day as normal.

I'll spare you the part-by-part comparison; use your imaginiation...
Let's get a UDE fix on this thing. Let's either change the speed limit back to 40, or add some "CAUTION: SPEED REDUCED AHEAD" signs to the road. It can only have a positive effect on the tournament experience for players.

Here's the UDE policy that proves that in fact players have to konw the rules. Novel huh?! I mean traveling metaphors aside, you can't say that the reason this might be a problem is simply because the players don't know the rules, when in fact the players have to know the rules.

6. Player Responsibilities
UDE players have the following responsibilities, whether they are currently involved
in a tournament or not:
• Know and follow the most current and applicable TCG rules and UDE
tournament policies.
• Follow instructions of any judge or tournament official.
• Ensure they only register for one UDE membership number.
• Act in a sporting and respectful manner at all times.
• Act responsibly and professionally while at, or near, the tournament site.
• Clearly communicate each move that they make during game play.
• Keep their hands and cards above the table during matches.
• Notify an opponent if he or she fails to follow any game rules or incorrectly
tracks game score or life totals during a match, regardless of whom the error
benefits.
• Avoid talking to any spectators during a match.
• Avoid swearing or using inappropriate language or gestures.
• Avoid wearing inappropriate or offensive clothing.
• Avoid making offensive comments to any player or official.
• Avoid insulting opponents or opponents’ strategies and play skills.
• Maintain accurate birth date and contact information for his or her UDE
membership account.
• Maintain an accurate tournament rating. If a player notices anything unusual or
incorrect about his or her rating, he or she must email [email protected]
immediately.

EvilBaby, read my above post. There is NO NEED to sustain an environment that is going to lead to people having an awful tournament experience, when an easy fix exists.
The FAQ and Comp Rules are contradicting each other. While the comp rules technically trump the FAQs, it is obviously not what UDE intended. Otherwise the FAQ would not read as it says.

And everyone knows that ultimately it is the players responsibility to know the rules. However, how "players are responsible for knowing the rules" is supposed to logically lead to "therefore, no action should be taken even if the company issued a document that leads players to believe that the rules work contrary to how they actually do" is beyond me.

I agree with Twanbon. I is just a negative experiance to have to go to the judge to have a rulling for a rule you know is true (like in this instance multiple power-ups for team attackers on a JLA w/Nth ally) then if both players knowing ehead.

But then again, some places like JonnyMono's store already know and apply the rule and don't complain with it...

I'm not saying that UDE shouldn't do something about this contradiction in their documents. I am saying that the rationalization for the change shouldn't be because some player that doesn't understand the rules is gonna get beat. Its the players responsibilities to know the rules and you seemed to be using the ignorance of players as your main argurment for the need of a speedy change. When in fact the better argument is that the contradiction makes it impossible to know the rules, or in this case that the two ruels that we konw don't agree with each other. This needs to be fixed because it is a mistake, not because some player is gonna get screwed because he wasn't keeping up with the latest buzz.

OK I am no rocket scientist especially when it comes to the rules, but how does what Nevest say contradict any of our thinking?

I am still understanding it to mean for each attacker attacking my Hawkman with Nth Metal powers up each time.

As for knowing the rules, yes, I play in sneak previews and Hobby League, just for that reason. I don't have the comprehensive rules memorized, but if you want to play on the professional level, you should. I will use my own metaphor:

You go all in with you pair of twos, your opponent shows his hand, a flush. You reach for the pot.....wait a second a flush beats that. You wouldn't play poker not knowing a flush beats a pair, would you?

That is my position as well. Evilbaby just expressed it better.

I have a problem with players complaining, "But I didn't know..." (I judge yugioh more than VS, so I think you can understand why.)

Well, I won't express my entire opinion on this as many other people have mentioned the same thing I would have said.

I'll just add that you should notice that after reading both documents that the JLA FAQ mentions that the ruling is a change from the old ruling. Meaning that effects like that don't trigger more than once. Now there are chances I read it wrong, but that's the only conclusion I can come to. I just see this as being a spot where the UDE Rules Team posted the new FAQ with the change noted, but forgot to update the same ruling in the Comprehensive Rules document.

Hey guys - thank you for pointing out this possible discrepancy. I am working with the rules team as we speak to resolve the issue. Expect an official update before week's end.

damn! and i had dreams of 4 drop spider-woman, enquipped with a nth metal with a lost city in play!

Thats a great feedback from UDE! Much better player-compagny relationship than Decipher!