I'm with Nathan and Sloth on this one. The response already happened when Saruman entered play, so Saruman dying or having his text box blanked would not retroactively invalidate the response.

It's like if you use Arwen's response to give someone sentinel and then she dies during questing. The sentinel still remains until the end of the round.

With the Wingfoot example, I believe you would still ready the hero.

Saruman dying should definitely invalidate the response because he is no longer in play.

What happens if Saruman dies and then you reshuffle your discard pile into your deck, draw him, and Sneak Attack him? Does that enemy that you previously chose go away AND you get to choose another one? If the effect is only tied to Saruman existing, then every time he exists the card you chose would have to be considered out of play. Due to this, his effect must be tied to his card text being active after you trigger his response. The second his card text becomes inactive (for whatever reason) his effect would cease to be present.

Arwen is different. It says "Until the end of the round" which has been ruled in the most recent FAQ to mean that it is a bonus that happens at the time of activation and any game state changes don't effect it.

Saruman and Wingfoot both don't say "until the end of X", although I can see the argument now and think that it is fine.

Since Saruman doesn't say "Until the end of the X" that means any time Saruman enters play the overarching effect that you activated however many turns ago is still active because technically, nothing has formally ended it??? That makes zero sense to me. It must be tied to his card text.

If Saruman returns to your hand or dies or whatever, and then enters play again, the effect does not reappear because the "new" Saruman is a different card for the purposes of the Response.

I'm now reconsidering and think the effect would persist... The effect is triggered and then stays in place regardless of the text. It's not like it's a passive ability like Dain's that would go away.

The Fog on the Barrow-downs did a better job handling this. One of the Treacheries says Actions and Responses can't be triggered, which I think is much more straight forward to interpret than a black text box.

After re-reading Saruman again, I agree the effect would stop if he died. I thought it said until end of round, but it's only while he's in play.

But yeah, the response already triggered, so even if his text box is blank, he hasn't left play.

I agree with Nathan that sneaking a new Saruman into play would not reactivate the previous response because it is considered a new card. I believe there are a few rulings on that for other cards (other than cards that say once per game).

I brought this up in a previous thread: https://community.fantasyflightgames.com/topic/192789-last-stupid-question-of-the-night-on-saruman/

I think NathanH said it best back then: whatever the literal card wording, for sanity's sake, Saruman's effect should expire when he leaves play and not come back if he re-enters (only the new trigger should apply).

If Saruman returns to your hand or dies or whatever, and then enters play again, the effect does not reappear because the "new" Saruman is a different card for the purposes of the Response.

Okay, this makes sense "While [this copy of] Saruman is in play..." which is supported by the ruling that cards that refer to themselves refer to only that copy combined with the rulings that state if a card leaves play and re-enters play it does not remember anything.

I'm still not convinced, though...both arguments could be valid. Do we know (for certain) of any cards that use the same terminology (or rather, absence of "until the end of X") as Saruman/Wingfoot where we have received a ruling definitely how to resolve them if the card text on them is rendered useless (in the case of Saruman) or if they are to be discarded (in the case of Wingfoot)?

If Sauraman died then obviously the enemy or location would no longer be considered out of play. The reason for this is not because Sauraman's text no longer applies, but because the original response specifically says the effect ends once he leaves play.

So, the only questions left are: 1) if his response had been written to cease at the end of the round how would that change things; 2) does the effect of the response cease if Sauraman's text box is blank.

The first question is, I think, obviously that in the hypothetical scenario the response would set up a trigger that would continue to persist regardless of whether or not Sauraman dies or had his text box blanked. This is similar to Ranger of Cardolan. If the ranger is put into play by his action, then has his text box blanked, he would still be shuffled into your deck at the end of the round, because the shuffle trigger is a part of the original action, not a requirement enforced by his text.

The answer to the first question then sets a precedence by which we resolve similar cases. By that principle the answer to the second question, IMO, is that Sauraman's response, when applied, creates a trigger that persists even if his text box is blank. The enemy/location will continue to be considered out of play until Sauraman leaves play.

If Sauraman died then obviously the enemy or location would no longer be considered out of play. The reason for this is not because Sauraman's text no longer applies, but because the original response specifically says the effect ends once he leaves play.

So, the only questions left are: 1) if his response had been written to cease at the end of the round how would that change things; 2) does the effect of the response cease if Sauraman's text box is blank.

The first question is, I think, obviously that in the hypothetical scenario the response would set up a trigger that would continue to persist regardless of whether or not Sauraman dies or had his text box blanked. This is similar to Ranger of Cardolan. If the ranger is put into play by his action, then has his text box blanked, he would still be shuffled into your deck at the end of the round, because the shuffle trigger is a part of the original action, not a requirement enforced by his text.

The answer to the first question then sets a precedence by which we resolve similar cases. By that principle the answer to the second question, IMO, is that Sauraman's response, when applied, creates a trigger that persists even if his text box is blank. The enemy/location will continue to be considered out of play until Sauraman leaves play.

Yes, I agree. I've been looking up cards and think I've found plenty of examples that support NathanH's (and this) position.

Edit: Black Arrow mostly...I don't think it matters what happens to it after you activate its ability and it doesn't say "until the end of X". Also, Blue Mountain Trader. If you activated its ability and during changing control its text box got blanked, the subsequent "Then," clause would still happen. Many more examples.

Edit 2: Caldara/Boromir (Tactics) heroes are the best example I can find. Would be funny if their text box got blanked from being discarded and then nothing happened

Similarly, cards like ally Hama and Beorn would still be discarded/shuffled at the end of the round after you trigger their ability, regardless of them being blank after the fact.

The only thing blanking Saruman would achieve would be to keep the chosen card "out of play" since Saruman would loose the text that discards himself at the end of the round.

I can't find any official comments or comparable cards that don't say "until the end of X," or "at the end of X." But, I also don't see how Saruman/Wingfoot's wording would change the fact that their effects already triggered and are lasting. Feel free to ask Caleb if you want an official response.

I can't find any official comments or comparable cards that don't say "until the end of X," or "at the end of X." But, I also don't see how Saruman/Wingfoot's wording would change the fact that their effects already triggered and are lasting. Feel free to ask Caleb if you want an official response.

There's no need. Caldara and Boromir make it fairly clear.