As part of our ongoing efforts to make the Stargate Trading Card Game as fun as possible for all players, we are announcing errata to a small number of cards. We've received feedback from many players over the past weeks and months, and it strongly suggested that some card revisions were needed in order to "level the playing field," particularly on the tournament scene.

In total, six cards are being revised. Explanations of the changes are listed below, along with a little insight into the reasons for the change.

Frank Simmons, Government Adversary

His game text has been revised to read:

While Frank Simmons is assigned, to assign a character, your opponent pays 1 power for each other Political card at the current mission.

In short, Frank Simmons will no longer count himself. Player feedback is shown that it's very common for 3 copies of this adversary to appear in decks even when no other Political cards are present. This revision should help the card work more as it was originally intended, as a valuable player in a Political-themed deck, but not seen so often in other deck designs.

Aldwin, Tok'ra Agent

His Combat skill has been decreased from 2 to 1.

Team characters with a point value of 6 are intended to be less powerful than other options with lower point values. Playtesting of the SG-1 set indeed demonstrated that Aldwin's game text could be a double-edged sword: forcing your opponent to discard cards isn't always a bad thing for him. However, Aldwin was also the only 6-point team character that started with a total of 6 points in skills -- better than any other 6-point option. Over time, it has become clear that the sporadic effectiveness of the game text didn't offset the quality of those skills. As such, Aldwin's skills are being reduced to bring him more into line with other 6-point team characters.

Ishta, Leader of the Hak'tyl Resistance

His game text has been revised to read:

Each time Ishta earns a glyph she already has, you may destroy an adversary.

Much of what was said about Aldwin regarding the intended power of 6-point team characters applies here. In the original design of the game, the designers felt it appropriate for adversary destruction to be as effective as Ishta originally made it. Over time, however, players have shown that this level of threat against adversaries is too high. Adversaries should not be so vulnerable -- or at least, certainly not from a 6-point team character. As with Aldwin, a revision is being made to bring Ishta into line with other 6-point team characters.

Jack O'Neill, Dynamic Leader

The glyph requirements of his second paragraph of game text have been changed from "[Gemini] or [Orion]" to "[Gemini] and [Orion]." (The first paragraph is unchanged.)

This promotional version of Jack O'Neill (presently unavailable in the online version of the game) was intended to balance strong game text by reducing O'Neill's "normal" starting skill ratings. (In most of his other versions, Jack O'Neill begins with 3 Combat and 3 Ingenuity. Here, he must earn glyphs to achieve it.) The text has proven more powerful than the skill reduction, however, and so that text is being toned down a bit in this revision. As with other team characters like Bra'tac and M'zel, this version of O'Neill now has one piece of text that can be activated by a single glyph, and a second piece that requires two.

Canopic Jar

This sentence is being added to the end of the first paragraph of game text:

You can do this only if this gear isn't on an adversary.

With this revision, the Canopic Jar can no longer be moved to a new adversary after it has already been placed on one. This is actually the original design intent of the card. The ability to move it from adversary to adversary was an unintended effect that was regrettably overlooked until after the release of System Lords.

SGC Emblem

Cost changed from 3 to 4.

There was a discrepancy in cost between the versions of this card in the online game (which read 4) and in print (which read 3). This gear was extensively tested during the System Lords playtesting process, and 4 was found to be the appropriate cost for the card. As such, an errata is being issued to correct the print version.

Though we regret having to change the way cards play once players have already become familiar with them, we feel that these changes will be ultimately good for the game. They should encourage a greater variety of deck designs, and correct some of the frustrations players were expressing with specific cards. We thank you for your patience and understanding in this matter, and hope that you continue to have fun playing the game!