"Execution" Unplayable?

[botounami 0]

I was browsing some of the newer cards today and noticed Execution.

Dominance: After you win dominance, kneel 2 influence or kneel 1 Lord character to choose and kill a non-unique character.

Given that it is a Dominance Phase action, yet has to be played in a Response window, is this card even legal? I would hate to find that decks testing for the past few weeks with this card must be changed right before Worlds.

My apologies if this has been brought up before.
 

[Bomb 66]

 I don't view this as a response. I view it as a condition that has to be met as a play restriction. It certainly reads as a normal response would read, but that doesn't necessarily require it to be a response based on the templating. It could be intentionally this way to allow it to be played while Little and Less would normally keep it in your hand.

[radiskull 39]

 It really should be a Response.  This seems like a straight-up error.

[Bomb 66]

 Hmm. Think I am onboard now after looking several cards with responses that have a near identical template. I still don't think it needs to be a response but this could easily be an error. It may intentionally not be a response considering it is in the same cycle as Little and Less.

[radiskull 39]

 In that case, the templating should have been:

"Dominance: Kneel 2 influence or….  Play only if you won dominance this phase."

[agktmte 0]

 Well, if it were a response it would be "Response:" and instead it is a "Dominance:" meaning that you play it as a standard player action.  Yes the wording is weird as it says "after you win…", but it cannot be played as a response since it is a Dominance phase action, like Bear Island or Guilty!.

[radiskull 39]

 Right. That's what we're saying.  The text of the ability is not in line with the type of ability it is.  It is a Dominance phase action that is nevertheless worded like a response.

[agktmte 0]

 I guess I'm not sure why that would make it unplayable though?  Sure, it's bad wording, but that doesn't change the fact that by rule it is a triggered player action ability, so when triggered it meets play restrictions as long as you've won dominance.  But it is true that the previously mentioned wording would be more clear and match the desired effect better (Play only if you've won dominance.).

[ktom 598]

agktmte said:

Sure, it's bad wording, but that doesn't change the fact that by rule it is a triggered player action ability, so when triggered it meets play restrictions as long as you've won dominance.

OK, but the card doesn't say "after you win dominance this phase," does it? So doesn't that mean I have met the play restriction as long as I have won dominance sometime during the entire game? How long after you win dominance counts for "after"?

The "after…" wording has always meant "immediately after," as in "during the same action window" because of this little quirk with interpretation. "During the same action window" requires a Response. Technically, by the time you can trigger a Dominance action, it is too late to meet the "after you win dominance" play restriction. Either that, or every "after you win a military challenge" Response effect can be played in any Response step, provided that you won a military challenge earlier in the phase/game.

So you see, it really isn't as easy as saying "it still works as a standard dominance player action." 

Until official errata comes out making the trigger match the template, or the template match the trigger, you'll probably want to check with your TO as to which way they will rule. Because whether or not it is a response makes a huge difference.

[Khudzlin 734]

Like being cancellable with He Calls it Thinking or being prevented by Little and Less, I assume.

[Bomb 66]

Khudzlin said:

Like being cancellable with He Calls it Thinking or being prevented by Little and Less, I assume.

Exactly why it matters.  I can see it being a Dominance player action from this CP cycle for it being unaffected by Little and Less.

[dcdennis 39]

 Imagine how much this question would matter if the card was actually good!

[ktom 598]

It's a bad Stark card. It's pretty good as a Baratheon or Greyjoy, it's got some real potential. 

[dcdennis 39]

ktom said:

It's a bad Stark card. It's pretty good as a Baratheon or Greyjoy, it's got some real potential. 

if it does become an action though, old nan becomes that much better.

[Slothgodfather 270]

Has anyone submitting this question to see how it might be ruled at Worlds?   If not, where do you go for that?

[ktom 598]

The CP is not legal for Worlds, so the question is moot. 

[Slothgodfather 270]

The House of Black and White is on the Tournament Card Pool list.

[dcdennis 39]

ktom said:

The CP is not legal for Worlds, so the question is moot. 

wait, CP5 is illegal at worlds now? I thought 1-5 were legal and 6 was illegal.

[ktom 598]

My mistake. I thought it was in "Roll of the Dice." Ignore the previous post.

I "talked" to the Worlds TO. It's his opinion the event should be played as a Response.

[dcdennis 39]

 did you get 10 minutes with him at a bar?

[ktom 598]

Well, it's more like the guy is always in my brain…!

[Shadowcatx 0]

ktom said:

Well, it's more like the guy is always in my brain…!

Does it ever get lonely at the top?