So basically, I want to have a unit attached to Great Book of Grudges while I have a Grudge Thrower and Reclaim the Hold in play. I sac to the grudge thrower, triggering great book of grudges, can I use reclaim the hold to turn that unit and great book of grudges into developments so I can pick them back up using abandoned mine? I think Reclaim the Hold needs better wording.

As I read it, "... you may discard 1 resource token from this card to place that card into its current zone as a development instead of discarding it"

So the question is, does it hit the discard pile, thus triggering great book of grudges, then via reclaim the hold it's now a development?

I would believe it would work that way. A card shouldn't count as leaving play until it has been put in a place that is out of play. putting it in the discard would put it out of play, then you may trigger the book and the quest. Not official, but just the way I see it.

Not that this is any sort of official answer either, but it makes sense that Reclaim the Hold would act as a replacement effect. i.e. "When any card you control would be put into your discard pile from play, you may pay 1 to instead place it as a resource in its current zone" This would prevent the destroyed card from "double-dipping" and triggering other "enters discard" effects.

ivory_tower said:

Does the unit and attachement get turned into developments? I thought it was the unit only and the attachement goes into discard pile.

mast said:

I believe so. Reclaim the Hold says "any card you control", which does not limit itself to units.

Read through the topic, but am still confused. Can anyone help me out with the following questions?

1. If I have Reclam the Hold, Grudge Thrower and, say, 2 Defenders of the Hold, and choose to sacrifice one of the Defenders to pay for Grudge Thrower effect, but then spend a resource off Reclaim the Hold to make it become a development instead , will I trigger Grudge Thrower effect?

I'm asking because according to the rules,

Sacrifice means to put a card that you
control into its owner’s discard pile. It
cannot be cancelled or prevented by
other effects.

and here sacrificing is "interrupted" in a way (?) so I'm not sure if such a play is legal and if the cost for Grudge Thrower effect can be considered payed.

2. If I have the same plus Dwarf Ranger and perform same steps, will I Dward Ranger ability trigger, even though the Defender does not go into the discard pile and becomes a development instead ?

3. If I have the same plus The Great Book of Grudges (as above) and perform the same steps, will indirect damage effect trigger even though the Defender does not go into the discard pile and becomes a development instead ?

1. The sacrifice isn't interrupeted its result is rather a different.

2. The Ranger's ability will trigger since the Ranger just depends on the unit to leave the play. Before you can trigger Reclaim the Hold the card has to leave the play too.

3. I think the Book's effect doesn't trigger if you use Reclaim. The Book needs the card to enter the discard pile and not just to leave the play. Reclaim prevents that explictly.

Ramas said:

But does it leave play? To Leave Play, according to the FAQ:

"Leaves Play
Leaves play is when a card that is in an
in play zone goes into an out of play
zone, such as back into a hand, deck, or
discard pile." (p. 5)

If you use Reclaim the Hold, card doesn't go from in play zone to out of play zone, since it merely gets flipped facedown as development.

Yes it leaves play. This is the trigger for Reclaim. If it doesn't leave game you can't use Recalim.

Ramas said:

I know by Reclaim's text it leaves play or you can't use it, but in game terms it doesn't. Flipping a card facedown in the same zone does not constitute leaving play as far as the rules/FAQ see things, in order to leave play, a card has to go Out of Play. With Reclaim, the card leaves play, but doesn't leave play, it goes into a sorta limbo to see if you pay the resource or not, only if you decline to pay and the card hits the discard pile does it by the rules leave play. Probably get a rewording of Reclaim the Hold in the future, something like "When a card you control would leave play..." (or something like that).

I feel like that they way reclaim was intended to be written it should say something like "if a card would enter your discard pile you may pay 1 to have it placed in its zone as a development instead" To me it would replace the sent to discard with become a development. Thus as with rip and other cards we know that change to/from a development doesnt cause something to leave/enter play. That is my take.

TL

Well, thanks for sharing the opinions.

Since I'd asked, I've though about the topic multiple times on my own and the following picture started to form in my head:

1. An action of the Thrower is triggered by the player, causing sacrificed unit to go into the discard pile. Also, the thrower's effect goes into the active chain. If the Defender with The Great Book attached goes into the discard, the player decides what the order will be. Let's say, the dwarf goes in first.

2. The Great Book of Grudges constant effect and Dwarf Ranger forced action are trigered at the same time. If Reclaim the Hold has a resource on it, the player can discard it to make it's constant effect trigger at that same time as well - this is not an Action, so I don't think any action chain allocation should happen. All the effects then exist waiting to be resolved.

3. The effects resolve - first either The Great Book's or Reclaim the Hold's - in the order of the player's preference. Then the forced effect from the Ranger.

4. As the Great Book of Grudges also enters discard, it's up to the player to spend another resource off Reclaim the Hold (if any) to trigger its effect for the second time.

5. If the player does, the effect resolves and the Book happily lands back in play as a development.

6. The action chain kicks in and all attackers or defenders get their hammers

Now, is there anything wrong in this reasoning? It seems logical to me, but at the same time, it seems way too powerful a combo: 1 resource, 1 unit and an attachement (4 resources in total in this scenario) spent to gain 2 HP (in form of extra developments), 1 direct and 6 indirect damage AND hammers for the remaining attackers (9+ difference in total hit points!). Plus, as mentioned multiple times before, the developments planted can be reused as "draw cards" later if Abandoned Mine is around.

Any opinions?

I don't think the Book does anything IF you Reclaim the Hold the Dwarf it was attached to. GBoG states it only deals IDD when the unit enters the discard pile from play, which when using RtH it never does (quest specifically states "instead of discarding it").

Hmm... That makes sense in a way - both Reclaim the Hold and Dwarf Ranger trigger off a card leaving play. The Great Book is triggered by a card, entering the discard pile, yes.

Something I don't understand is: does the sacrifice actually happen as a single step, or not? My understanding of the FAQ is that it does - i.e. the unit sacrificed leaves play and enters the discard pile and there is no "pause" inbetween to allow only effects triggered by "leaving play" to happen. Hence, sacrificing the Defender would trigger both "leaves play" and "enters discard pile" at the same time.

The other possible interpretation of the rules is that there are two discrete steps in "sacrificing" (leaves play -> nowhere and nowhere -> discard pile) and thus two opportunities for the effects to kick in. If this is the case, I'm still not sure why triggering Reclaim the Hold after the first step does not interrupt and nullify the "sacrifice" - I would still expect Grudge Thrower's ability to fizzle as a result, as the cost has not been paid.

Personally, I lean towards the first interpretation, but maybe there are rulings for similar situtuations that prove this point of view wrong?

I've also sent a message for rules clarifications to FFG. Not sure how long it will take them to answer though...

Oh, well...

It seems that sacrifice and Reclaim the Hold do not play well together.

Just got a response from Lukas by mail:

Maksim,

Thanks, I'll update the Rules Summary.