Oculon 0 Posted February 27, 2013 How are 2 conflicting constant abilities resolved? Eg: If Men of Pride is 'active' and a player also has The Free Folk giving stealth to Wildlings, do non-unique wildlings have stealth? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ktom 598 Posted February 27, 2013 There is no true conflict. When one effect says "gains X" and another says "loses X", they cancel each other out. It's no different than "gets +1 STR" and "gets -1 STR" on the same character. X + 1 - 1 = X. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Khudzlin 734 Posted February 28, 2013 Men of Pride Non-unique characters lose all keywords. The Free Folk Wildling characters you control gain stealth. However, since Men of Pride says "all" keywords, the end result is that your non-unique Wildlings will lose Stealth, even if they had it in the first place. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Oculon 0 Posted February 28, 2013 Khudzlin said: However, since Men of Pride says "all" keywords, the end result is that your non-unique Wildlings will lose Stealth, even if they had it in the first place. This is not the same as what ktom said though. If they merely cancelled each other out, it implies any original stealth would stay. Can I check which is actually the case please? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Oculon 0 Posted February 28, 2013 Also, if there's more than one constant effect on one 'side', what happens? Eg: Greyscale and Longclaw giving renown to a single non-unique character with Men of Pride active. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
-Istaril 157 Posted February 28, 2013 The last time this was asked (raised in the same thread by uncle joker which brought us the revised ruling on KotHH vs Burned and Pillaged), the wording "all keywords" or "all stealth" is an absolute, and you cannot regain the keyword no matter how many instances of it you then add. That's what Khudzilin was referring to, although prior to that the accepted ruling was as Ktom stated (that "all" was one instance of each). However, the wording "each" (which I don't think exists) would be -1 of each, and "loses stealth" would be one instance of the keyword, and would work additively as Ktom described. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
edrazpgh 10 Posted June 22, 2014 Can you guys site the rule(s) in the rule book that defines this? Thanks. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ktom 598 Posted June 22, 2014 Note that Khudzlin's comment and -Istaril's explanation of "all" and "each" from over a year ago are incorrect. When a card says that "all keywords" are lost or gained, only a single instance of each keyword is lost or gained, not as many instances as are necessary to make the card function without (lost) or with (gains) the keyword. This is outlined in FAQ 4.21: (4.21) Losing/Gaining "all" Traits or Keywords If a card gains or loses "all traits," it gains or loses 1 instance of each trait in the game. If a card gains or loses "all keywords," it gains or loses 1 instance of each keyword in the game. If a card loses "all instances" of a trait or keyword, it loses that trait or keyword an infinite number of times. A card cannot gain "all instances" of a trait or keyword. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butaman551 10 Posted June 23, 2014 (edited) Has there ever been a card that removed "all instances" of a keyword? Edited June 23, 2014 by Butaman551 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
