As always please forgive if these have been asked before. We had a few questions come up tonight (less and less the more we play! ). I added in our assumptions to help understand our rulings/thoughts on how we played it (figured ktom would like this). Appreciate the help!

1. F94 Devious intentions says, "Attached character gains infamy, stealth, and an intrigue icon. Attached character gets +1 STR for each power on it." Would a character that has more then 1 devious intentions attachments get +1 STR for each power for each devious intentions attachment? In other words, do they stack?

Example: If a character had 2 devious intentions attachments and 1 power would they have +1 STR or +2 STR?

Our assumption: You would get the same effect twice from devious intentions and the additional STR would not "stack" with multiple on a character.

2. F16 Scurvy Cutthroat says, " Response : after an opponent plays an attachment card, discard Scurvy Cutthroat from play (cannot be saved) to discard that attachment from play." Can that response be used to discard any of the house locations that can be played as an attachment to a House card, assuming they decide to play them as an attachment to their house? i.e. like "Queen Cersei's Chambers"?

Our assumption: Since it's a location and not an attachment, even played as an attachment Scruvy Cutthroat couldn't use their response.

3. F29 Scouting Vessel says, " Challenges : Kneel Scouting Vessel to choose a defending character. For the duration of the challenge, that character does not count its STR."

The multiplayer title Crown Regent says, "If you choose this title, you add 3 to your side’s total STR in any power challenge in which you have at least one participating character."

Unopposed Challenges from the core rules says, "During the “Resolve” step of any challenge, if the attacker wins the challenge, and the defender had a total STR of 0 (or no defending characters), then the attacker claims 1 bonus power for his or her House from the power pool. This bonus power is in addition to all other effects of winning a challenge."

A. In a multiplayer game if an attacking player with a STR of > or equal to 3 initiates a power challenge, a defender w/ the Crown Regent title only blocks with one character, and the attacker uses Scouting Vessel to make the defending character not count its STR -- is the defender at 3 STR? Is the attack unopposed?

Our assumption: The defender would have 3 STR, lose the challenge, and the attack would not be unopposed.

B. Then similarly, In a multiplayer game if an attacking player with a STR of <3 initiates a power challenge, a defender w/ the Crown Regent title only blocks with one character, and the attacker uses Scouting Vessel to make the defending character not count its STR -- is the defender at 3 STR? Does the defender win? Is the attack unopposed?

Our assumption: The defender would have 3 STR, win the challenge, and the attack would not be unopposed.

C. Finally, ignoring Crown Regent, in a joust game if an attacking player with a STR of >1 initiates a power challenge, a defender only blocks with one character, and the attacker uses Scouting Vessel to make the defending character not count its STR Is the attack unopposed?

Our assumption: The defender would have 0 STR, lose the challenge, and the attack would be unopposed.

I hope that makes sense. Thanks again all!

Madduxx said:

Well, let's think about that. Say that I have a non-unique location that says "attacking characters gain +1 STR for each power on them." Lets say further that I have 2 of them in play. There are two individual effects doing the same thing, but I have to resolve them both, right? Meaning that location #1 gives +1, then location #2 gives +1 - for a net gain of +2 STR for each power. The two individual effects, resolving separately, "stack."

You are creating the same situation with 2 copies of Devious Intentions. Your assumption that the character gets the same effect twice is true, but missing the implication that the same text is essentially written on the card two times. That creates 2 individual effects which must be resolved separately, just as if the same text were written on two individual cards. So two copies of DI would have a net effect of +2 STR per power.

Madduxx said:

So by your assumption, does that mean a Targ player playing Khal Drogo's Tent as an attachment cannot trigger Xaro's Home? Does that mean the Chambers-as-attachments are safe from "discard an attachment" effects in general because their card type is "location"?

Your assumption is wrong. When you play the Chambers as attachments, it doesn't matter that the card type is "location"; you have played an attachment. You didn't play a location that became an attachment. The card was never in play as a location before becoming an attachment. It is never susceptible to location-based effects and is vulnerable to any anti-attachment effects. That's the whole point of the choice. So your assumption is incorrect, in all practical game terms (as well as by the FAQ definitions) an attachment has been played and Scurvy Cutthroat could discard the location-played-as-an-attachment.

Madduxx said:

You are correct that the character is still participating, but does not have its STR added into the count for the defender's challenge STR. Crown Regent adds directly to the total challenge STR, not to an individual character. And to oppose a challenge both a participating character and a challenge STR greater than 0 need to be present for the defender - having only one of those conditions covered leaves the challenge unopposed. The rest of your interpretations fall into place from there.

ktom said:

Wait, doesn't Core Set rulebook say that you only need to check total STR?

Rogue30 said:

Kind of. The rulebook says that you have to have a defending STR of 0 or no defending characters in order to make a challenge unopposed . What I said is that a defender must have a defending STR greater than 0 and at least 1 defending character in order to oppose a challenge.

My statement was essentially the logical opposite of the statement in the rulebook. The "Scouting Vesseled character" and the +3 Title bonus clearly falls in this category because the Title bonus is added to the total STR, not to an individual participating character.

The larger implication is that if you have a defending character, but a defending STR of 0, the challenge is unopposed. That part is pretty clear, I think. But there is also an implication that if you have a defending STR greater than 0, but no participating defender (there are a very few interactions that could make this happen), the challenge is still unopposed.

I'm sorry I misread. I thought that you said "both a participating character STR greater than 0 and a challenge STR greater than 0" which of course you did not.

is it sad that I was disheartened when I saw I had 2 of the 3 questions wrong? /sadpanda Just when I think I'm starting to get some confidences on rules.

I digress and thanks for the answers!

ktom said:

Gotcha. Our group already thinks this card is one of the most powerful/useful in our meta currently. Now it's arguably stronger! Doh! Personally, my only gripe is I wish it were house Lannister only.

ktom said:

I'm struggling with this one. I hadn't thought about Xaro's home honestly. I'd say yes it could trigger Xaro's home because it speaks to playing an attachment, not an attachment card. Here is where I'm struggling... the scurvy is specific in saying, "after an opponent plays an attachment card" . I considered it a location card that can be played as an attachment. Following this same line of thought I also believed Scurvy couldn't be used against some of the banner character cards that play from your hand since they're character cards played as an attachment. I took this as simply a limitation on Scurvy's usefulness.

These wouldn't be safe from "discard an attachment" effects, but those don't target attachment cards specifically, but rather attachments.

Does that make sense? It's hard to type out my thought process on this one. Don't get me wrong either. I see where you are coming from and I'm just wanting to explain my perspective.

Madduxx said:

I understand what you're saying, but I think you are being too literal about Scurvy Cutthroat's wording, especially in light of the following from the FAQ:

" (3.22) Card Type Changes to Attachment
An attachment is defined as a card in your
deck, hand, discard pile, or dead pile, of the
actual "attachment" card type, as well as any
card in play that is considered to be "attached"
to another card.
...
When a card is "attached," it loses any other
card type (character, location, event) it may
have. "

So regardless, by the time you can trigger the Cutthroat (ie, the Chamber is in play), the only card-type that card is considered to have is "attachment."

If Scurvy Cutthroat said something like "...after an opponent plays a printed attachment card...," then I'd endorse your reasoning (which is essentially a "natural state" reasoning).

BTW: Before someone take this too far, Scurvy Cutthroat could not discard the attachment that an event like He Calls It Thinking or I'm You Writ Small becomes because those actually were played as events that become attachments - unlike the Chambers which are specifically played as attachments only.

ktom said:

That helps! Thanks for chiming back with the FAQ reference that I obviously missed. I often make mistakes with taking things to literally.

I hadn't yet thought of the events you mentioned. If you hadn't said anything I would have assumed that incorrectly too!

You know...it got me thinking. Ktom you are never allowed to stop playing so we can always rely on your help with rules. No pressure.