Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Thanks for your answer and for pointing out 2)!
  2. Hi everybody, i just saw the new spoiler for Calm over Westeros: Venegeance for Elia. That card reads Martell loyal, Event, 2 Gold Interrupt: When claim is applied for a challenge in which you are the defending player, choose an opponent. That player must satisfy the normal claim effect instead of you as if he or she were the defending player. Now i am wondering how this interacts with claim replacement, e.g. Seastone Chair or Mirri Maz Duur. Short version: Is Vengeance for Elia Claim replacement or not? Long version: Situation 1: The attacking (and winning player) is first player. So the attacking player triggers let's say Seastone Chair and the defending player wants to play Vengeance for Elia. What happens? a) The defending player can't play Vengeance for Elia since the "normal claim effect" was replaced. Therefore it has no target or wouldn't change the game state. b) The defending player is allowed to play VfE. The attacking player has to satisfy the normal claim effect. The defending player has to satisfy no claim. c) The defending player is allowed to play VfE.No player has to satisfy claim. d) The defending player is allowed to play VfE. Both players have to satisfy claim. My comment: If VfE counts as Replacement Effect for the claim I guess the case is settled and b) is correct with page 18 of the Rules Reference. But in my opinion it VfE does not replace the claim but targets another player. Situation 2: The defending (and losing player) is first player. So the defending player triggers VfE and the attacking player wants to trigger let's again say Seaston Chair. What happens? a) The attacking player can't trigger SC since he is the target of the claim. b) The attacking player can trigger SC. The defending player has to satisfy claim. The attacking player has to satisfy no claim. c) The attacking player can trigger SC. No player has to satisfy claim. d) The attacking player can trigger SC. Both players have to satisfy claim. My comment: Same as for Situation 1. The more I think about it the more i find myself confused. I would be happy if someone could help me with this!
  3. There a some cards like Kingdom of Shadows, Bay of Ice, Kingroad that state "kneel all copies in play". As far as i know if one copy is already knelt the effect wont happen. But do the remaining locations kneel?
  4. Sry for the confusion and thanks for the answer! I should read the FAQ more carefully
  5. Maybe i should have started a new topic since my question doesnt relate to meera but meereen. But the statement of Bomb lead me to that question: The situation is as follows: Player A controls Drogon and Meereen (Challenges: Kneel Mereen to choose 1 participating Dragon character you control. Until the end of the phase, that character gains "Immune to opponents' trigggered effects." If you win the challenge draw 1 card for each participating Dragon character you control.) Player B controls Bitterbridge. 1. Player B uses Bitterbridge and targets Drogon. So there is a lasting effect resulting from a triggered effect. 2. Player A declares drogon as attacker and uses Meereen to give Drogon "immune to opponents triggered effects" The question is: Does that mean that Drogon is now immune to the lasting effect of Bitterbridge and can now trigger his ability?
  6. How does this work if a character gains "immune to triggered efffects"? Lets say i have coreset drogon and my opponent uses bitterbridge on him. Now i declare drogon as an attacker and target him with Mereen. Does the lasting effect of Bitterbridge still apply?
  7. Hi! Situation as follows: I have some characters in play and Harrenhal. Then i play Coldhands and target character A on my side and character B on my opponents side. He tries to cancel it with some effect. Now i try to cancel his cancel with Harrenhal and choose character A to die. So the questions are: 1) Can i do so? 2) If i can do so, does Coldhands still resolve? The solution we came across was: 1) I can choose char A to die for Harrenhal because he isn't moribund:out of play at the time i want to cancel. 2) Because character A was targeted when trying to resolve, Coldhands still resolves and puts char B out of play. Is this ruling correct? Thanks for helping in advance!
  8. First of all thanks for your quick answers ktom. But i would be happy about some more clarifcation: So „instead of killing“ is a fixed expression for total replacement? Let’s say i would change septa s text to „If doubting Septa would be killed, instead put it on the bottom of your deck and draw 1 card instead of killing her.“ Does that mean the same rules (no legal target for harrenhal and no response ) apply to her? To me „instead of killing“ reads like a clarification. So i saw the problem with bronns ability in the change from moribund:deathpile to non-moribund during step 4 of the action that killed the chosen character. And finally: Does total replacement even mean that i cant use the character chosen by bronn use to satisfy military claim (if bronn is kneeling)?
  9. I am still confused about Core Set Bronn's "instead" and what consequences follow from not removing the chosen card from play after it is killed. So can i use the chosen card for Harrenhal? And can i trigger responses that need that card to be killed?
  10. Thanks so far! But that answers lead me to another question: Same situation but now not hoster tully has Banner for the north attached but another character in play. Can i attach Banner for the north to Hoster Tully to give him stalwart before he dies?
  11. Situation as follows: I've got Hoster Tully (Conquest and Defiance-Version) in play and Banner for the North attached. I somehow manage to give him an military icon and use him to succesfully defend an military challenge but my opponent has an participating character with deadly and i have none. 1) Am i able to reattach Banner for the north to an other character before Hoster Tully dies? 2) If it is possible and i do so, does he lose stalwart? 3) If Hoster Tully keeps his stalwart can i draw himself with his response? I am quite sure 2) is a yes and 3) a no but i would be happy about confirmation. Thanks
  12. the rules state in matter of support "if the defending player declares no defenders, you may declare any number of your own eligible characters as defenders to that challenge". the question is: is zero covered with "any"? the specific situation was: player A attacks player B with a power challenge in which player B doesn't declare defenders. player C supports player B due to titles and declares support with zero defenders in order to lose and trigger some effect after losing. is he allowed to do so?
  • Create New...