"... choose a character controlled by that opponent, and reduce its STR to 0 until the end of the round."

If later in the round some effect gives this character bonus +2 STR, then its STR is still zero, correct?

Rogue30 said:

By the usual templating conventions, no. A subsequent STR boost will increase the STR.

When you lower the STR to 0, you are putting a -X STR modifier into the mix, where X is what is necessary to make the total STR 0 at the time it is added in. When later modifiers are added in, the "X" doesn't change to compensate for the greater STR. This is because when the passive effect on the plot activates, it fixes the variable, which then continues through the effect's duration.

I understand where it is possible to read the effect as if the variable X is not fixed, and indeed updates for each STR check. But the usual application of lasting effects with a variable component doesn't actually work that way.

Hmm, after posting this question I checked tzumainn.com and I thought your answer there is clear. But now I'm confused. "Reduce" word is problematic here, I think.

I misread the question when it was asked (a year and a half ago...) on tzumain's site. I thought the STR boost in question was being added BEFORE Fury of the Dragon was being applied. That's the one thing about tzu's site; no "edit" feature....

You are correct that "reduce" is the important word here. That's where the templating convention comes in. In this game, when something is "reduced," a negative modifier is added into a check. Negative modifiers may persist as a lasting effect (as this one does), but they do not remain variable over a set duration; they are fixed at the time of application - or specifically worded so as to invalidate the check. For example, if a character "loses an icon of your choice until the end of the phase," you do not get to keep choosing which icon the character loses over the effect's entire duration. You choose once when the effect is applied, at which point the lost icon is locked in.

Consider the difference between "characters lose each keyword" and "characters lose all keywords." The first removes a single instance of each keyword and could be overcome with enough effects that add a keyword. The second, by specifying "all," essentially invalidates the keyword check and cannot be overcome.

That's similar to what is going on here. By "reducing" the character's STR to 0 until the end of the round, you are adding in a single modifier that can be overcome. If the plot said the character's STR becomes or is 0 until the end of the round, future STR checks would essentially be invalidated by the larger lasting effect "setting" the STR at 0.

Problem is, there is no cards example which say: "reduce character STR by X where X is its current STR", nor "its STR = 0".

People may argue about no explicite -X , so this should be in FAQ I think.

Ok, then "Blockade" is no good for "Starve for Your King!" (and intuition told me otherwise)

The same with Robb and army cost zero. If they are played in other deck than Stark (unlikely off course), you stilll have to pay gold penalty.

My Targaryen opponent will not be pleased with this ruling

Rogue30 said:

Oh, I'm not saying it is intuitive or easily and automatically understood by everyone. I'm just saying that this is the way it works.

Rogue30 said:

Correct. This is probably more easily understood by the wording on the various cards. Blockade reduces the income on the plot card to 0. You already overcome that with locations and other gold bonuses when you count income in Marshalling. And anyway, "Starve for your King!" says to add 4 directly into the income count, not to the income on your plot card, which is then added into the income count. The event is more like a bonus on a location than a modifier to the plot card.

Rogue30 said:

This is incorrect. The FAQ outlines the sequence of paying costs/initiating any action, including playing a card from hand. That sequence is:

1. Determine cost (what is the basic cost, both amount and "unit;" e.g. gold, influence, or knelt cards)
2. Check play restrictions, including verifying that targets are available
3. Apply penalties to the cost (OOH penalty, etc; effects that specifically modify penalties are included)
4. Apply any other cost modifiers
5. Pay costs
6. Choose targets and trigger the effect

So, in this case, a penalty like an OOH gold penalty is added into the total cost before other cost modifiers are added in. So since Robb's variable "reduce to 0" is actually applied to the cost after the penalty is added in, he will counter all OOH gold penalties, too.

Hmm, it is much more simpler the moment I thougth about Blockade and gold bonus locations

Thanks for help.