Please note a minor errata is now in effect for Henry Moran.
His wording is now as follows
If Henry is unbooted when you ‘would’ reveal an illegal draw hand during lowball, boot Henry, discard the illegal hand, and reveal the top five cards of your deck as your hand instead.
This is just to clarify that his trait is a replacement effect
To add, this is effective immediately for the upcoming Summer events (Euros, Epitaph, Gencon). As following recent trend of promos, an updated version is in the works.
You better find a damn good artist!
I actually have a piece in mind already 
The word “would” can be treacherous. There is sufficient evidence to prove that if something “would” happen, it never actually does, even though it “could” or possibly “should” - As such it is to be avoided when otherwise using technical language to communicate. So what about:
…
Henry Moran
Immediately before you reveal an illegal draw hand during lowball, if Henry is unbooted, boot him to discard the illegal draw hand and replace it with the top five cards of your deck instead.
Do you have an example in mind of such a game state?
No.
But to see what I mean, take off your “English First Language” hat and put on your “English Second Language” hat, and then read the proposed languages again.
I feel that while wearing the second hat, the “when” of the timing window can get lost.
Your proposed wording has been taken into consideration, many thanks for your feedback
Luckily that’s why we have forums like these where anyone can clarify what things mean
The timing of the ‘when’ part of it is exactly when you are about to reveal (so immediately prior to revealing, or when you would go to reveal). So if you’re the Henry Moran player, and you and your (non-henry moran) opponent are at the stage of revealing your hand, your opponent reveals their hand and you go tand discard the illegal hand, then reveal the top 5 cards of your deck as your hand instead.
Totally. My concern springs from teaching new players primarily, who for all practical purposes wear the “2nd hat” as concerns navigating the game language of DTR.
In my experience, Henry already disrupts the flow of a game, and I think having the trigger “Immediately before you reveal” be the first thing you read on his card will go a long way towards smoothing over this hiccup while minimizing trips to the rules forums to clarify.
This errata doesn’t seem necessary to me. Henry’s timing is pretty clear as written and using “would” as a game term seems like it just makes the wording harder to parse.
To me, the “…and reveal the top five cards of your deck as your hand instead” part makes it clear that you aren’t “revealing” a second draw hand. You are revealing one draw hand for lowball and if it was initially cheating, Henry replaces it before the game considers the hand to be "revealed’.
However, if this does help new players and reduce confusion regarding The Moran, I’m all for it.
I think Henry was designed with the intent that his trait would always fire first.
But, since it is a trait, which have their own timing window, there are corner cases (mostly Law Dog stuff) where that may not be the case.
The errata is to change “upon revealing” to “before revealing” which cuts out any discussion as to whether other “reveal” traits get to go first. I really support the change for that reason.
As a matter of fact, every other Seedy card happens well before “revealing” (even as far back as “after anteing”), so as far as there is mechanical similarity for this keyword, the errata restores him to it.
A promo version of a card that I end up including in a lot of starting posses?
Even though I think the current Henry is pretty clear, I’m not about to look a gift horse in the mouth.
The errata is in line with the current rules and design intent of the card, so while not completely necessary, it’s being done so more for clarification, as we knew this is something that would come up at the European Championship this weekend. Also yes, we want to give you more copies, so perfect opportunity for a promo!
We were discussing this over on Discord, but to sum up my thoughts:
I thought the entire point of the word “instead” was very clear in the rules that it is a replacement effect (which goes before other effects) and essentially makes that first effect never actually have happened. So with henry, that illegal hand gets replaced, and can’t be responded to in any way because it may as well have never actually happened.
Are we going to add the word “would” on all replacement effects now? Because if not, isn’t that more confusing with all other cards that use the word ‘instead’? If Henry has it, and others don’t, I see more room for confusion.
Instead, I think answering the Henry Moran question should just reference the timing/replacement rules, with a quick and helpful summary of “The word instead is a replacement effect, and changes the original effect so that for all intents and purposes never happened, and can never be responded to. Replacement effects happen before other types of effects, so cards like Philip Swinford (who is NOT a replacement effect, therefore goes AFTER Henry) never have the chance to react, because that original illegal hand never happened.”
Once you have that knowledge of how the word ‘instead’ works, you can apply it to all other cards and hopefully have clearer rules knowledge and less rules questions
Based on David O’s response in this thread: Multi-player (Q2) - Definition of "your shooter" when collaborating - #6 by davido4015
I think the answer might be that Pine Box is not aware of, or at least does not acknowledge as “official”, the major rulebook revisions that AEG made, which included the overhaul and clarification on the timing of React windows. Frankly, this bothers me because PBE was careful to give the impression that they are picking up where AEG left off. But if they are ignoring AEG’s rulebook, how can that be true?
Pr0digy is absolutely correct, reading AEG’s updated React timing rules makes Henry’s effect very clear.
This errata honestly concerns me a little - it gives the impression that PBE treats errata like its no big deal and that they will add/subtract/change a word here and there willy-nilly, because it might give clarity for people who don’t understand the rules of the game. It also gives the impression that PBE would rather errata cards than attempt to update their rulebook in a way that clarifies a card’s use.
And Pr0digy makes a good point about using the word “would” - will more cards be getting errata to add that word? Does Arnold McCadish need errata now?
React, Pull, Boot: When a dude would be discarded (not aced) as a casualty in a shootout, if the pull is higher than the dude’s value, send that dude home booted instead.
or Warren Graves?
React: When a shootout play would ace, would discard, or would send another of your dudes home booted, send them home booted instead. Warren joins the posse (moving if necessary).