I'm thinking that Banner for the south cannot be attached to the red viper that is immune to character abilities even if banner for the south is in your hand.

We have a couple of guys who disagree so we figured we clear it up here.

I think you can attach Banner for the South to The Red Viper because the character ability does not directly target the character. It turns into an attachment which you can attach to a character.

I don't see any big difference between this situation and the event He Calls it Thinking, where we know you can attach it to The Red Viper.

I'm not sure He calls it thinking is the right framework for comparison as He calls it thinking affects one thing and the attachment is a secondary effect. With the banner attaching it to a character is the effect. It the banner said something like 'Response: Cancel the determination of an Intrigue challenge. Then, you may attach Banner for the South (from play or from your hand) to a HM character as a Banner attachment with the text: "Attached character gains vengeful."' then I'd see it working the same way. However, banner for the south says Response: After you win an intrique challenge (a trigger condition, not an effect), you may attach Banner for the South (from play or from your hand) to a HM character as a Banner attachment with the text: "Attached character gains vengeful." So its only affect (attaching to a character) does directly effect the Red Viper (not target, but not needed for his immunity).

Lars said:

This is incorrect. Zsa has the right of it on this one.

And yes, it is no different from He Calls it Thinking. The attaching part of He Calls it Thinking is not a "secondary effect." There is no such thing as a secondary effect. The rules say that when a single card has multiple effects, each one is treated as a separate effect. The word "then" in the case of He Calls it Thinking only adds an additional play restriction on the attaching part (the cancel part must be successful). It does not make it somehow "secondary" or "less important" or "completely indirect in comparison to the first part."

Same old example. Let's say there was a character that had the ability "Response: after you win an intrigue challenge, discard an attachment from a Martell character." Could that effect take an attachment off the Viper? Sure could. The card that is directly affected is the attachment being removed - with the Viper only indirectly affected by the loss of an attachment. Banner for the South is effectively "Response: after you win an intrigue challenge, put an attachment on a Martell character." So it's the same thing in reverse. The card that is directly affected is the attachment being added - with the Viper only indirectly affected by the addition of an attachment.

ok, so to follow up it works in both in play or in hand?

Lars said:

From play, yes.

From hand, even easier. It's not an event card, so immune to events doesn't enter into it. Abilities are defined as effects on cards that are in play , so it is technically not a character ability when triggered from hand (it is a character card effect), so immune to character abilities doesn't enter into it, either. So yes there, too.

ktom said:

thanks. this is where we were debating. both sides didn't think it worked from play at all...whoops.