Jump to content



Photo

Condon/Trainning Vessel Timing Question


  • Please log in to reply
10 replies to this topic

#1 tjstyles

tjstyles

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 05:38 AM

We were playing a game yesterday in which there was a question of when Condon and Training Vessel resolved. I have a screen print of an explaination of the timing from ktom, and we used that to figure it out, but I want to make sure we did it right. The first scenario had a couple other effects involved (like Icy Catapult), which really muddied the waters, but I will keep it as simple as I can here to make sure we got the timing correct.

  1. Ser Kyle Condon was chosen for claim and became Moribund.
  2. Ser Kyle Condon's response was used to draw a card.
  3. A bunch of framework events/responses.
  4. Training Vessel's passive response triggered discarding the top card of the Stark player's deck.
  5. Reponses to winning/losing the challenge were triggered.
  6. Framework action ends and Ser Kyle Condon is placed on top of the draw deck instead of the dead pile for Stalwart.

Was that the correct timing for this scenario? Is there a scenario where Ser Kyle Condon can be discarded from the top of the deck in the same challenge he dies with Training Vessel? I believe it would have to be a subsequent challenge that uses Training Vessel to get Condon off the top of the deck, right?

Another quick question regarding Stalwart. The plot that removes keywords from non-unique characters or effects that blank the game text of characters; do they negate Stalwart or does Stalwart "trigger" after the card is out of play? If I remember correctly, cards with deathbound still went to the deadpile if they were discarded with blank textboxes, because deathbound triggered upon hitting the discard pile, and by then the card had it's text back. Does Stalwart work in this way or is it a replacement effect that happens before the card leaves play?



#2 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,416 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 06:46 AM

tjstyles said:

  1. Ser Kyle Condon was chosen for claim and became Moribund.
  2. Ser Kyle Condon's response was used to draw a card.
  3. A bunch of framework events/responses.
  4. Training Vessel's passive response triggered discarding the top card of the Stark player's deck.
  5. Reponses to winning/losing the challenge were triggered.
  6. Framework action ends and Ser Kyle Condon is placed on top of the draw deck instead of the dead pile for Stalwart.

On the one hand, you got the major thing correct - since Ser Kyle is moribund, he remains physically on the table until the action window closes. That means that both the passive discard and the draw Response have taken place before he himself goes to the top of the deck. 

However, there are a bunch of other things in that breakdown that are really incorrect. It seems like you are doing a bunch of things wrong, which ends up affecting which card is actually drawn in this scenario. The biggest problem is:

  • When you are resolving a challenge, you resolve all 4 framework events (determine winner, settle claim, award unopposed, award renown) before you trigger any passives or Responses to any one of them. The only exception to this are "save" or "cancel" Responses specifically interrupting one of those 4 framework events.

So, the fact that you are triggering Condon's Response and drawing the card immediately upon him being killed is very wrong. The sequence should have been:

  1. Greyjoy player wins the challenge (Stark loses).
  2. Ser Kyle Condon is killed for claim (Stalwart makes him "moribund:top of deck")
  3. Greyjoy player receives power for unopposed (if appropriate)
  4. Greyjoy player receives power on characters for Renown (if appropriate) 
  5. Passives to anything in 1-4 including discarding the top card of the Stark player's deck for Training Vessel
  6. Responses to anything in 1-5 including Condon's "draw a card" effect
  7. Challenge resolution framework action window closes, moribund cards go to their destination (Condon placed on top of Stark player's deck)

So you see, the card that was drawn in your #2 actually should have been discarded in your #4, then the next card should have been drawn in your #5 - where all responses to winning/losing the challenge, resolving claim, awarding unopposed, etc. should have been triggered.

The other confusing thing in your breakdown is #3 - "A bunch of framework evens/responses". Framework events and responses are very different and have very, very different timing (and play restrictions). It is a bit of a concern that you would equate framework events and responses.

tjstyles said:

Is there a scenario where Ser Kyle Condon can be discarded from the top of the deck in the same challenge he dies with Training Vessel?
Not the way you are thinking (where Condon dies for claim). However, if you kill Condon after he is declared as a defender but before the challenge resolves (with some sort of targeted kill like Incinerate - not a lot that meets the timing in Greyjoy), then Training Vessel could discard him when the challenge actually resolves. 

tjstyles said:

Another quick question regarding Stalwart. The plot that removes keywords from non-unique characters or effects that blank the game text of characters; do they negate Stalwart or does Stalwart "trigger" after the card is out of play?
No card text is active when the card is not "in play" unless is specifically says it does. If Stalwart is not "active" (because of blanking, removing keywords, etc.) when the card is killed or discarded, the card will not go back to the top of your deck. 

tjstyles said:

If I remember correctly, cards with deathbound still went to the deadpile if they were discarded with blank textboxes, because deathbound triggered upon hitting the discard pile, and by then the card had it's text back. 
You do not remember correctly. This was never true. Deathbound (and Stalwart) are both considered replacement effects.



#3 tjstyles

tjstyles

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:10 AM

I forgot that all of the responses happened at the end. I was thinking that the responses to things happened when those thing occurred. That is where #3 came from. I didn't want to outline each step seperately, so I just grouped all of those things (unopposed, renown, etc.) together with their responses. Glad you corrected that for me. Funny thing is that normally we don't play it like that, but for some reason when we had to "slow it down" to get the timing right for Ser Kyle Condon and the discard effect, we played it wrong. I actually remember an earlier game where someone wanted to respond immediately to someone dying for claim, and I told them they had to wait until the window for responses after everything was resolved.

For the Stalwart/Deathbound thing; was there any card in AGOT history that worked like that? Maybe The Great Host? It had multiple different clarifications/errata; was it ever able to bounce back to hand even with a blanked text box? Otherwise, I could be thinking of a different game. 

 



#4 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,416 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:56 AM

tjstyles said:

was there any card in AGOT history that worked like that? Maybe The Great Host? It had multiple different clarifications/errata; was it ever able to bounce back to hand even with a blanked text box? Otherwise, I could be thinking of a different game. 
Nothing the way you're thinking of.

What you may be half-remembering is that cards like CS-Khal Drog, LW-Catelyn Stark, or Horeseback Archers which have "Trigger: put into play; at the end of the phase, return to your hand" effects will still return to your hand at the end of the phase, even if blanked, because the "return to hand" is a lasting effect created s part of putting the card into play, not a separate effect that initiates off of the card at the end of the phase.



#5 tjstyles

tjstyles

    Member

  • Members
  • 33 posts

Posted 11 February 2013 - 08:19 AM

It must be a different game then. I recall some mechanic in some game that triggered "when the card hit the discard pile". 



#6 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,552 posts

Posted 12 February 2013 - 08:51 PM

I think you might be thinking about The Titan's Bastard. His two Responses have the play restrictions "After a card is placed in your dead pile" and "After a card is placed in an opponent's dead pile." Even so, these responses are triggered while the card in question is still in play moribund, which is also clarified in the FAQ. Some people find that illogical. I think it's just fine ;)



#7 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,397 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 12:51 AM

Can you tell me which section?



#8 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,552 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 01:09 AM

Khudzlin said:

Can you tell me which section?

Sure. Page 17.

A Moribund card (and its attachments) is
considered to have been killed, discarded,
returned to its owner's hand or deck, or moved
to its owner's shadows area, but only for the
purposes of triggering responses and passive
abilities. This includes responses and passive
abilities triggered by a card being placed in
the appropriate out-of-play area.



#9 ktom

ktom

    Member

  • Members
  • 7,416 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 02:13 AM

Ratatoskr said:

I think you might be thinking about The Titan's Bastard. His two Responses have the play restrictions "After a card is placed in your dead pile" and "After a card is placed in an opponent's dead pile." Even so, these responses are triggered while the card in question is still in play moribund, which is also clarified in the FAQ. Some people find that illogical. I think it's just fine ;)
I doubt this is the card he is thinking of that is able to use its printed abilities even when blank.



#10 Ratatoskr

Ratatoskr

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,552 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 02:21 AM

ktom said:

I doubt this is the card he is thinking of that is able to use its printed abilities even when blank.

I will admit that there's a slight possibility that it might be conceivalble that I could have read too much into his last post only, maybe without considering the context of the conversation in a sufficiently appropriate manner. That's all I will say on the matter without an attorney present. :)



#11 Khudzlin

Khudzlin

    Member

  • Members
  • 1,397 posts

Posted 13 February 2013 - 07:32 PM

Thanks for the pointer, Ratatoskr.






© 2013 Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc. Fantasy Flight Games and the FFG logo are ® of Fantasy Flight Publishing, Inc.  All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Contact | User Support | Rules Questions | Help | RSS