The card reads: Response: After you win a challenge, you may attach Banner for the Storm (from play or from your hand) to a character as a Banner attachment with the text: "Attached character gains vigilant."

After it has been attached to a Barr character can you (or your opponent) move it to a non Barr character?

Yes. The "attach to a Bara character" is part of the triggered effect that turns the character into an attachment. It is not part of the attachment's constant text (the "attached character gains vigilant" bit in quotes). Since it is not part of the attachment's constant text, it is not an attachment restriction that must always be met. Therefore, something like Compelled by the Rock can move the character-as-attachment to a non-Bara character.

The attaching effect of the card cannot put it on a non-Bara character, but some other effect can since the attachment itself is not restricted to Bara characters.

Thanks ktom that is how i thought it would work.

Another question about Banner of the Storm.

When it is attached as a Banner attachment, the personality "Banner of the Storm" is considered to be leaving play?

Thanks.

Masi said:

No it´s not. It just isn´t any longer a charachter, but becomes an attachment. For more clarification see FAQ 7.0 (3.22) Card type changes to attachment and FAQ 7.0 (3.29) Changing control and leaving play.

~ So sorry pal, parting blow won´t work. ;-)

I read the LCG FAQ prior to post this, and as I didn´t find anythig clear to me I posted it.

The LCG FAQ in 3.22 (Card Type Changes to Attachment) says nothing about it. Only that a Character becoming an attachment lose the Character Type.

In 3.29 (Changing Control and Leaving Play) there is one paragraph...

When a card leaves play for any reason, it always returns to its owner's discard pile, dead pile, hand, or deck (depending on the specific circumstances).

So, If I play any Banner hability, it becomes an attachment, it loses the Character type, (thus not being a Character anymore) but the Character has not leave play as it is not in any pile, hand or deck. It has no sense as there is no character card in play in any case.

I agree there is no common sense in the faq 3.29 rules entry. It´s more a game definition possibly to stop abusiveness of cards that can change their game status and cards that response to cards leaving or entering play.

Such abusiveness could be done e.g. with the 5KE dragons (which all respond to charachters entering play in the challenge phase) and Gorold Goodbrother (Promotion) and some warships, and marine legion. And i think that´s the main reason why cards that are changing their status aren´t considered to leave play.

Masi said:

The "trick" is that you still have as many cards on the table after you use the effect as you did before. What you can USE those cards to do is different, but nothing has actually left play. So the fact that the card is still on the table, just transformed, becomes a judgement call as to whether the "character" left play since the card has not. FFG went with "no, nothing is considered to have left play."

So neither the character nor the card leaves play. (If FFG says so... but it´s more reasonable that the character leaves play but not the card...)

So there´s no combo Banner to the North - Icy Catapults...

nor would there ever be.

Icy catapult is

" [stark] character only"

Lars said:

~Maybe they delivered some missprints to Europe, but the "banner for the north " charachters i received were all house Stark charachters. :-P

Sorry, i couldn´t resist to do that. ;-) I also needed to take a second look to realize that the theme changed from "banner for the storm" to "banner for the north".

I'm with stupid

<---

thats what i get for thinking we were still on topic