Hi,

I have a question on event cards like Beguilded Bodyguard, Missing Recruit and Spy in Their Midst. In the CS rules is states that events are treated as neutral, my question is, when you play one of these cards which puts a 'character' into play are these 'characters' also neutral or do they assume the House affiliation and are they considered unique?

I am assuming they are neutral, which I am guessing means that MWNK can take control of them? In addition when one of these 'characters' is killed, does the card go to the discard pile (as an event card normally would) or the dead pile (where characters normally go)?

Many thanks

yup, nuetral (and MwnK-able), non-unique, and when 'die' go to discard pile because they 'revert' back to events.

All correct, but more specifically so as to generalize:

- As characters, the events are non-unique and have no House affiliation because their effect does not specify any of that. You assume nothing in this game; if the card effect doesn't say the event gains a House affiliation or is considered unique (or, of course, if the original event is not unique), then none of that happens. It's an easy impulse to want to assume the new "character" has its owner's House affiliation, but without text making it so, it does not happen.

- The card does not actually "revert" to being an event until it is physically in the discard pile and no longer in play. The reason the Reinforcement event goes to the discard pile instead of the dead pile when killed is because the FAQ specifies " If for any reason, a non-character card that is functioning as a character is killed, said card is placed in the discard pile instead. Effects that trigger from said card being killed may still apply " under the section titled " Card Type Changes to Character ."

Note that even though the card goes to the discard pile, you still Respond to a character being killed, not a card being discarded from play.

Thank you both for your reply, it seemed logical, but I assume nothing!! I believe I may actually start getting the hang of this great game.

ktom said:

And if you assume nothing, why are you assuming that no affiliation is equal to be Neutral?

I can´t find neither the rules nor the FAQ where that is stated.

Thanks.

Neutral means no affiliation. From rulebook:

"Neutral cards have a blank shield."

"...events are always considered neutral."

EDIT: also from FAQ: "Some cards (such as neutrals) have no House affiliation."

Rogue30 said:

Neutrals have no House affiliation. It doesn´t mean that every "no affiliation" card is neutral.

And the event create a Character card, so it´s no event everymore until it´s destroyed or discarded.

why are we trying to define nuetral and no affliation as different things? for card effects not related to this question?

Lars said:

I didn´t want to start a new thread, because my question is related to this one, since one of the questions is if no affiliated is neutral.

And it´s important, because Too proud to bow discard Neutral Characters. If nowhere is stated that every no affiliated character is the same that neutral Reins would be not discarded.

Happy?

just curious why you wnated the difference to be there.

Now that i understand the question i think that no affiliation = neutral for characters as they all have to have an affiliation (which there are 7 of, the 6 houses and neutral). I think the only time the different language is used is for when a card effect says "target a charcater without its house affiliation" is being broader than, but including, neutral.

Masi said:

Well, the rules of the game say:

"Cards with no shields and a tan-colored background are neutral cards and belong to no House." (From the Core Set rules under "House Cards.")

So "neutral" is not defined in terms of having "no affiliation;" it is defined in terms of belonging to no House . Hence, if a card does not belong to any House, it meets the definition of neutral. So actually, yeah, if a card has "no affiliation" - meaning it doesn't belong to any House - it is indeed neutral.

Masi said:

The event becomes a character and does indeed stop being an event. However, the card still does not belong to any House, it has "no shield" (not even a blank one) and a tan colored background. Looks like it matches the above definition on neutral ("Cards with no shields and a tan-colored background are
neutral cards and belong to no House") pretty well.

Anyway, the point is that neutral is defined in terms of not belonging to any House, not as having "no affiliation." That sets up for a different logical process. Since a card either belongs to some House or it doesn't, the only choices (since "no belonging" equals "neutral") affiliated or neutral. There is no room for an "all neutrals lack affiliation, but not all cards that lack affiliation are neutrals" argument.

Under "Card Anatomy Key" it says

2. House Shield: Indicates the House this card belongs to. The card’s background color also indicates this. Neutral cards have a blank shield .

The text you refer, previously talks about House shield, and so when it says cards with no shields are neutral cards it refers to House shields. It seems that "Neutral" refers only to Characters, Attachments and Locations, what have to be played, and it´s important because of cost penalties. If events are neutral or not is meaningless in almost all cases I remember except this one (I can´t remember if there´s any other case where a neutral card is affected, and it could affect an event in LCG. And I didn´t play when it was CCG... is there any case)

While I understand that in game terms, it´s easier if there´re 6+1 affiliations, and all non-house must be considered Neutral, the text in the reinforces should state the characters to be neutral. Maybe in a future FAQ...

PS: Sorry if my english is sometimes confusing...

Masi said:

But saying that neutral cards have a blank shield in no way invalidates the statement that cards with no shield are also neutral. These statements are not mutually exclusive and can both be true at the same time. Neutral cards have blank shields and cards with no shields whatsoever are also neutral. The blank shields are a visual element not shared by every card; they are not the definitive test for card neutrality (not belonging to any House is the definitive test).

I mean, if neutral cards must have blank shields, the Legacy format is going to be full of "non-neutral" characters, locations and attachments with tan backgrounds that do not belong to any House since the visual element of blank shields did not appear until ITE.

So while the blank shield indicates neutrality when printed on a card, the definition of "neutral" expands beyond the presence of that visual cue. Events are neutral, and when one card type turns into another, it does not change its alignment unless specifically says it does.

Masi said:

Actually, it is talking about more than that, referring to background color as well as shields. More to the point, it is talking about how to determine if a card belongs to a particular House alignment, saying that if it does not belong to any of the identified Houses, it is neutral. By trying to force it into a discussion of shields only, you are concentrating on the method rather than looking at the entire meaning.

Masi said:

Actually, that's not the way I'm looking at it. There are only 6 affiliations - and if a card does not belong to any of the 6, it meets the definition of neutral. "Neutral" is not an affiliation (and cannot be since neutrals are specifically said to have no affiliation). Rather, "neutral" and "not one of the 6 named/colored Houses" are the same thing.

I doubt you'll ever see anything on this in an FAQ because we have all the pieces we need to answer it now. The text on the reinforcements do not need to specifically state "they are considered neutral as characters" because the event card itself is considered neutral. Without a printed House affiliation or an effect creating a House affiliation, the card does not belong to any House and therefore counts as a neutral character. A reinforcement cannot be considered a "non-neutral" character because that would mean it does belong to some other House. Which one would that be?

But don't take my word for it. Send the question to Nate and see how FFG constructs the definition of neutral from the existing entries in the rules and the FAQ.

Does the character have the Reinforcements trait? The event's got it and it doesn't say anything about loosing traits, so I'm not assuming the Trait is lost.

eloooooooi said:

Correct. When one card types turns into another, it does not lose any of the card text or characteristics printed on the card - including traits - unless otherwise specified. This is important for something like, say, the Banner characters. Their Response text is still there while it is an attachment and you can actually jump Banners from one character to another because of that.

Hmm, isn't it a situation where text is replaced? I mean:

"as a Banner attachment with the text :"

suggests that you replace card's text.

So Summer and Winter Reserves have both the Reinforcements and the Army trait, right? Thanks!

Rogue30 said:

Nope. "with the text" says that the text is added when the card becomes an attachment by triggering the effect. It says nothing about replacing the existing text or blanking the attachment's printed text box. Remember, unless an effect specifically says to do something, you don't do it. So since the Banners do not say to replace the text, you don't do it.

Look at it this way. Suppose I had a card that said "treat all of your Lannister characters in play as if they had the text Any Phase: 'kneel this character to draw a card.'" Would that replace all the printed text on all my Lannister characters? Or would it add the ability? Same deal here. The printed text of the card is added to, not replaced.

ktom said:

~that would end world hunger

So I'm You Writ Small allow me to make someone deadly every round (while attached)?

Nope, just until the end of the phase it's been played.

Rogue30 said:

Not quite. The event-turned-attachment technically still has the "Challenge" ability text, but you cannot pay the required "cost" of playing it from your hand when it is attached to a character in play. The card-type may have changed from "event" to "attachment," but the nature of the effect (that it is supposed to be triggered from your hand) does not change.

The only reason the Banner characters actually work to jump from person to person when they are attached is because they specifically say "from play or from your hand."