Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Twn2dn

Deceit and Immune-while-Attacking Euron

Recommended Posts

If I play Deceit on Euron before he attacks (at which point he would be immune), I remove his renoun and move it to a character I control. Because Deceit is a lasting effect that ends at end of phase, I'm wondering whether I would also remove his stealth if Euron attacks. And if yes, would my character then gain stealth as well?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This may not help because I was one of the judges in conflict with the ruling but the way I interpret "loses all keywords" is that it literally means one of each keyword is lost even if it is not currently active on that character. So that character will now have -1 of each keyword.   "Gains all keywords lost in this way" is literally checking if the card actually had the keyword before Deceit robbed the character of that keyword and it no longer has that functional keyword anymore.  This is done only at the time of Deceit's resolution. 

 

So, if Euron now has -1 Stealth even though he did not actually lose it as a functional keyword.  Him gaining +1 Stealth will simply cancel out with the -1 Stealth... which means he still won't have it until he somehow gains it again.

 

Granted this is just me interpreting how the FAQ talks about "loses all keywords", so if anyone thinks that is not how it works with Deceit, then I'm hoping we can clear it up.  :lol:

Edited by Bomb

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd hold up CS-Arya Stark as the counter example. We know that when she says to lose "those keywords" (stealth and renown), a character with only stealth does not get "-1 renown," and Arya certainly doesn't gain Renown if the chosen character gains it after her ability has been triggered.

 

I don't see anything wrong with Bomb's application of the "loses all keywords" entry in the FAQ, but based on past rulings, I tend to lean toward the "loses all of it's keyword..." application and interpretation in situations where keywords are being "stollen" (i.e., simultaneously lost by one character and gained by another) like Arya and Deceit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK so I think where we are netting out is that we think Bomb is right, but aren't quite sure due to past precedent. Does that mean I should email FFG, or am I misunderstanding?

Thanks again guys, this stuff is confusing, and as Bomb noted, we had four co-judges weigh in on this and were evenly split as to how it worked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes. Send it to FFG for official ruling because, as Bomb points out, the FAQ entry on "loses all keywords" implies one outcome while past handling of cards like Arya (and Deceit before the FAQ entry, I might add) implies another.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the original question: this Euron (A Song of Silence) is never immune to events, he prevents opponents from playing events while he is attacking (which is definitely not a keyword). Euron (Kings of the Sea) is always immune to events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The real question here is what is the definition of losing?

 

Here we have a character without a keyword (stealth). Deceit is played on that character, causing it to lose the keyword (stealth) that it does not have.

 

That character then "gains" the keyword (stealth), but the result is going from -1 instances of stealth (rounded to 0) to 0 instances of stealth.

 

So, is going from 0 instances of stealth to -1 instances of stealth considered losing a keyword? Is going from -1 instances of stealth to 0 instances of stealth considered losing a keyword?

 

That's the ultimate question. What is the specific requirement for a keyword to be considered lost such that it can be alterantely gained by Deceit and CS Arya's effects? Right now, gaining an instance of stealth and then subsequently losing it (1 to 0) would meet this effect, but losing an instance of stealth and then subsequently gaining (-1 to 0) would not, which is slightly absurd considered that the exact same number and types of effect are affecting the character. The only difference is timing and is timing even technically considered for two lasting, constant effects?

 

Edit: I would personally prefer it that if all negative effects were ignored and a character would have a given keyword or trait, if negative effects are applied and that character loses that keyword or trait due to the negative effects the keyword or trait is considered lost. This would mean going from 2 to 1 would not be a lost keyword, but going from -1 to 0 would be a lost keyword.

 

Edit 2: No one even said they sent it to FFG, so we might still need to send this. I don't send anything to FFG as I've never successfully gotten a response from them.

Edited by mdc273

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When an effect cares about a keyword, icon, trait, etc(I'm calling them card properties so I don't have to repeat myself each time) that are lost(like Arya and Deceit), it is checking to see if the the card previously had that property and now no longer has it.

 

So, let's say I have a tricon character out and I attached Dany's Favor to it(this attachment gives +3 STR and one of each icon).  So, now the character has 2 instances of each icon.  If I use an effect that removes an INT icon from this card, and there is a effect in play... like a hypothetical "Response: After a character loses an icon, choose a character to gain +2 STR.".  This response cannot be triggered because the character did not actually lose the icon.  The icon is still there even though I used a card effect that removed an INT icon.

 

So, in order to trigger a response to losing a property or in order to fulfill the remainder of an effect that depends on that lost property, like Arya Stark Core and Deceit, the property needs to be actually lost.

 

It needs to go from:

 

"Did it have the keyword before the effect resolved?" 

Yes.

 

to:

 

"Does it still have the keyword?"

No.

 

all from the effect that takes away the keyword(or property).

 

Any other answers to the above will keep effects from having the criteria met that need the keyword to have been lost in order to do something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What?  What I said?

 

I don't believe my explanation is in the FAQ, but why does it need to be?  The icon/keyword/trait etc is either still there after the effect or it's not.  If it's still there, it's not lost.  If it's no longer there, it's lost. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...