I have done numerous searches on this, both on here and not, so if I missed a forum thread that had these questions answered; I'm really sorry.

I just started playing with a group of friends. We've had some issues with some very basic game mechanics:

1) If a location is knelt (Plot: Attack From the Sea) does it still generate it's income bonus since it's not required to kneel for it?

2) Same question as above, only with characters. Can characters still use abilities that do not require them to kneel if they are already kneeling? Also, are the passive effects characters have (Doran Martell PotS) still in effect while the character is kneeling?

3) In concerns to phase/characters abilities, effects, events: Do they resolve based on who has initiative/who is first player? For instance, in marshalling, Player A who is first player for that round plays a Marshalling event while player B plays an Any Phase event directly after. Which one resolves first if they contradict each other? Also, when must you play effects that have a specific phase? Is it during your turn of that phase or at any time which is relevant?

4) In terms of tournament play and just general play with people you don't know, what's considered polite etiquette for table talk? Is asking questions like: "How much strength do you have in military and do any of your played card effects modify that?" considered ok? My game group finds that a great deal of table talk happens and while it makes the game much more enjoyable, we don't really know when too much is too much. Things like asking about total strength and such seem fine, but what about strategy discussions? (If you attack Player C in this way, then I can do this! Etc...)

5) When can shadow cards be brought into play while they are in shadows? If I marshall an attachment into shadows, can it be brought in any phase or just the marshalling phase?

6)Can characters with a strength of 0 be declared as attackers/defenders even though they do not contribute?

So far we've been playing if a location is kneeling, then it still generates income and any passive effects that do not require kneeling are still active.

With characters we've been doing the same thing. If they are kneeling, then any effect that does not require kneeling is still able to be used.

With resolving effects, events and abilities; we've been playing resolution based on who is first player for that round deciding the order in which events are played with subsequent responses being resolved before the next event takes effect and is resolved in turn.

With shadow cards we've been playing that you pay the 2 gold to bring it into shadows, then whenever it is legal to bring the card in (characters, attachments only during marshalling) you can pay it's gold cost to bring it in.

Thank you in advance to anyone who can help me with these questions!

1) Yes

2) Yes

3)The 1st player decides the order in which they resolves

4) That all sounds fine to me, its bound to happen. We play the same way in our group and my friends are still learning so they tend to have questions.

5) shadow cards can be brought into play at the start of any phase, one per phase. From the Shadows rules "each player has the option to bring out one card out of his or her shadows area each phase. "

6) Yes, but if you have zero strength when the challenge resolves its still considered to be unopposed.

Thank you very much

EasyTarget said:

Toqtamish said:

Hold on here. This is actually the wrong answer for the question that was asked.

The questions asked was "If Player A is the First Player and triggers a Marshalling event, then Player B triggers an Any Phase event, what order do they resolve in?" The answer to this is that they resolve in the order they were played. The First Player does not have any say in the order that triggered effects are resolved in. It all comes down to turn order.

As the First Player, Player A gets the first opportunity to play a standard action (eg, Marshalling, Challenges, Any Phase). Any standard action must be resolved completely before any other standard action can be played. So before Player B can even think about playing his Any Phase event, Player A's Marshalling event must resolve in its entirety. After it does, Player B gets the opportunity to play a standard action with everything proceeding clockwise around the table.

No action can interrupt another in this game. As such, there are no "stacks" or "chains" of effects that must be resolved. Everything is resolved in turn order as it is played. So Player B's Any Phase effect will never actually contradict Player A's Marshalling effect because they will never be trying to resolve at the same time. It's first one, and afterwards, the other.

Note that Responses are not considered "standard actions" in and of themselves. However, they work exactly the same way; when a standard action or framework action resolves, Responses come first. The first Response is resolved completely before the next one is even triggered. So even Responses cannot interrupt each other and create "stacks" or "chains." The only exception to this are Responses that use the words "save" or "cancel." Such Responses have their own timing and do interrupt the initiation and resolution of standard actions (or other Responses) for the express purpose of stopping them from resolving. So the only real "stack" or "chain" you can have in this game is the "I cancel you canceling my cancel of your action."

The only time the First Player gets to decide the order of anything is when two passive effects are trying to resolve at the same time. If they can't, and the order matters, the First Player says which one goes first. For example, if you have one effect that says "a character is killed when its STR is 0" and another effect that says "a character is discarded when its STR is 0" at the same time, well, when the character's STR is 0, it cannot be discarded and killed at the same time. So the First Player decides which to do first (which essentially means he decides if it is killed or discarded).

But the First Player's preferences never applies to triggered effects.

EasyTarget said:

In general, it is OK to ask and talk about things like these, but it is not ultimately your opponent's job to play the game for you. For example, if I attack you, it is usually considered courteous game play for me to do some of the basic math and announce it, and to defend my math if it doesn't make sense. This basic courtesy usually includes any passive effects that apply.

Me: "I do a 10STR military challenge against you with these 3 guys."
You: "How do you get 10STR? I only see 8."
Me: "Don't forget Randyll Tarly over here giving these 2 characters +1 each."
You: "Oh, yeah. I forgot about him."

However, it is not my job to call attention to all the card, on the table or in my hand, that I could trigger to increase everyone's STR.

Me: "I do a 10STR military challenge against you with these 3 guys."
You: "OK," I defend with these 3 guys for a total of 11STR.
Me: "11?"
You: "Yeah, don't forget Winterfell Castle over here giving all my characters +1STR, and that Ser Rodrik gets +2STR when defending."
Me: "Oh, right. Well, I kneel my Longship 'Iron Victory' to give this guy +2STR during the challenge."
You: "Hey, you didn't say you were attacking with 12 STR! You said you were attacking with 10. That's not fair!"
Me: "I wasn't attacking with 12, but I am now. The Longship was sitting there the whole time. I don't have to announce whether I'm using it before you declare defenders. And it's not like I was hiding it from you."

See the difference? Some people will say it is courteous to call attention to all the different things you could do to increase STR, provided it is on the table, but even considering how friendly your average AGoT player is, most will not consider it their responsibility to call your attention to the cards that are in play - theirs or yours - in a competitive situation. You can if you want, and some people do, but it isn't something that can be expected or demanded of an opponent.

Oh, and even when I say "I attack for 10," it is a good policy to do the math yourself. We all make mistakes counting everything up sometimes. You can usually trust your opponent's count, but no TO is going to let you go backwards 4-10 phases because you suddenly realized he made a mistake in adding up the STR and you took his word for it.

Oh, and in multiplayer, table talk is actively encourage, short of revealing hidden information. However, telling the truth and honoring bargains are neither required nor enforced, so beware and be warned!

ktom said:

Thats why in a game, when I make an attack or look like I may block I always ask, " What do you have on the table that could modify your numbers". I am a new player and I do not own all the cards yet and I only play 3 of the houses so far so I really dont know what every card does. Now I play only with my friends right now as we are a small group that just started playing but I would think that most people would answer you by pointing out what is on the table that they can do.

Saying that though, if he responds by saying look for myself. I would then ask him to turn each AND EVERYONE of his cards to face me and I would take my sweat time reading them ( if I had more power than him).

Ivengar said:

Stalling the game when you have more power? Strong disappoint. Its not my responsibility to tell you how my cards could potentially interact. If you don't know what they do, ask when they are put into play. If you forget, read their text, but don't be unsportsmanlike.

Mathias Fricot said:

I would not have to read all your cards in detail if you would just answer the simple question. Because of the language of the game wording is VERY important. So if you can not be sportsman enough to tell me that you have this location here that adds +2 to attack and this guy here can gain +1 for every gold you have and that guy there gives +1 to all knights then I am going to have to take my time to read each and every card on your side of the table to find our what your TRUE attack number is.

If someone asked me the same question I would be more than happy to point out what I had on my side of the table in order to keep the pace of the game going. But if the other person wants to force me to look at every possible action then that is just what I am going to do.

Its not like I am asking you to show me your hand.

If an opponent about to attack asks "how many military (/intrigue/power) do you have, then I'll happily tell them, including any bonuses cards (i.e. all plus one because of Winterfell castle, knights +1 because of plot cards etc.) but I'm not going to sit there and list the fact that i can kneel this character to add to someone else's strength (i.e. painted dogs), use core set Catelyn to discount someone's strength etc. otherwise i might as well just stay at home and play against myself...

Thank you, Mighty Jim. My thoughts exactly.

Ivengar said:

In my playgroup, we bend over backwards in casual situations to explain cards, possibilities and other situations as they unfold in an effort to teach each other to be better players. But when a tournament starts, that's every man for himself.

A couple of other considerations on the "sportsmanship" of expecting and answer to this "before I declare defenders, please point out every card you have on the table that might affect my chances of winning on defense" question:

- How far do I have to go when I answer this. For example, if I have "Longship 'Foamdrinker'" out (which allows the winner of a challenge to kill a participating character in the challenge), should I remind you, before you declare defenders, that you are risking their death if you lose? It has nothing to do with challenge STR or with the direct STR calculations of whether or not you win the challenges, but if you are paying attention to it, it will very likely affect which characters you would want to defend with in an indirect kind of way.

- Wouldn't the better time for a new player to examine a card that he hasn't seen before be when it is played? If the card is so new and unknown to you, why didn't you ask to see it when it was played (a time when just about every player I have ever met will hand you the card to read and give you a shorthand version of what it does). And if you did examine it when it was played, why is it now "unsporting" for me not to call attention to it in every situation in which it might be used instead of expecting you to keep an eye on it?

- While the question does sound fairly reasonable (and should always be answered - even volunteered - when teaching someone the game), is it as reasonable in the reverse situation? For example, if I asked "before I declare attackers , please point out every card you have on the table that might affect my chances of winning a military challenge," does my request still seem reasonable - or am I playing your game for you? Do you really win if you are relying on me to explain to you how to beat me?