Nazir, In cha'Allah order changed on purpose?

[Barfal]

Pardon my french, but shouldn't the 1635 version of the order as it says on the french cards translate into:

"Muslims allied to Nazir, except for himself, gain +2 DEF to a maximum of 6 at the next attack suffered (except explosions or blasts) for each affected warrior."

If I am correct, and I hope someone more capable at french than I am can tell me, that wouldn't limit the effect to the turn the order was given, but it would also increase the effect by each model affected and it would only wear off  by suffered attacks and not in a fight with a 0 CBT model. That would make the english card version wrong and with it the german one (wich is more wrong for the way the sentence is constructed   ).

[mzi]

Asmodee's French version was indeed not limited to the turn.
Maybe it has been changed on purpose, but this would make the order quite difficult to use (not very useful).

[Barfal]

bump this one time, because I kinda hoped to get an official answer by one of the Cipher boys...

[Balgin]

Six?! Six?! Nothing normnaly goes above Defence 5..... 

[Manba Rion]

Nazir's order overrides the "max 5 defence" rule

[Barfal]

So in the updated edition of the card the effect lasts until the next attack sequence the models are involved. Still no native frenchman here told me if the rest of my understanding of the french rule text is correct.

1) Does the effect increase by the number of models affected as what I understand "par chacun des combattants affectés" means?

2) Does the effect last on if in the following attack sequence/s the opponent's model doesn't make an attack roll for whatever reason (because it has 0 CBT or for other game effects) what I understand "attaque subie" means?

And if I am correct in my translation I would like to know wich version of the "In cha'Allah" order is official: the french one or the english one (from wich the german translation will spawn; a translation of a translation, the german rulebook should be a fun read to say the least).

[Manba Rion]

1) Does the effect increase by the number of models affected as what I understand "par chacun des combattants affectés" means?

That means that In cha'Allah is not gone an all warriors when You try to hit a single In cha'Allah affected warrior. But You have to try to hit every single In cha'Allah affected warrior in order to remove In cha'Allah effect from every warrior.

2) Does the effect last on if in the following attack sequence/s the opponent's model doesn't make an attack roll for whatever reason (because it has 0 CBT or for other game effects) what I understand "attaque subie" means?

Attaque subie is referred on any kind of attack Melee or Shoot.
You can try to get a hit with a Squamata War Disc and You will remove the In cha'Allah effect also if You did not hit.
You have to actually roll an attack die to remove In cha'Allah.

[Barfal]

1) Does the effect increase by the number of models affected as what I understand "par chacun des combattants affectés" means?

That means that In cha'Allah is not gone an all warriors when You try to hit a single In cha'Allah affected warrior. But You have to try to hit every single In cha'Allah affected warrior in order to remove In cha'Allah effect from every warrior.

Ah, ok. I thought that part referred to "gagnent".

2) Does the effect last on if in the following attack sequence/s the opponent's model doesn't make an attack roll for whatever reason (because it has 0 CBT or for other game effects) what I understand "attaque subie" means?

Attaque subie is referred on any kind of attack Melee or Shoot.
You can try to get a hit with a Squamata War Disc and You will remove the In cha'Allah effect also if You did not hit.
You have to actually roll an attack die to remove In cha'Allah.

Yeah, that's what I thought. The warrior under the influence of In cha'Allah has to actually be the target of an attack roll and not just the participant of an attack sequence and that includes shots. Of course, one could say that "one sided attack sequence" isn't the same as "attack sequence" and "involved" can't mean units in contact lending assists, but I have seen people argue over less.