If King Robb's Host is already kneeling, can it be declared as a (Mil) attacker? ("King Robb's Host does not kneel to attack during Mil challenges.")

Similarly, if Ser Rodrik Cassel is already kneeling, can he be declared as a defender? ("Ser Rodrik Cassel does not kneel to defend.")

In a recent game, my first inclination was to say "Yes." But after looking up the core set rules again, I noticed that the rules describe the act of declaring an attacker/defender using two separate sentences, that seem to correspond to both a cost and a play restriction. So in that light, I ruled that the text on these cards removes the cost only, but not the play restriction -- and therefore, could not be declared if they were already kneeling.

Was this correct?

Arma virumque said:

Yes.

As you note, there are two separate considerations when declaring attackers/defenders; determining who is eligible and the actual mechanics of the declaration. In general, the text on the cards only "trumps" the basic rules of the game if they directly contradict one another. The phrase "this character does not kneel to attack/defend" directly contradicts the rule that when a character is declared in a challenge, it is knelt (the mechanics). So the card text takes precedence over the rule. But it does not contradict the rule that characters who are already knelt cannot be declared as an attacker/defender (the eligibility), so that part doesn't change.

Great. Glad to hear I got it right. Thanks for the confirmation.