Cersei Lannister say something like, "During dominance pay one gold to kneel a character, that character does not stand during the standing phase". What happens if the character I want to target is already knelt?

I believe that character stays knelt... reasoning is because if the second effect depended on the first effect they would have used "then" not "that".

I Just had this hapen to me about half an hour ago in a game. I believe the exact wording of the card is "Kneel Cersei Lannister and pay 2 gold to choose a character. Kneel that character if it is standing. That character does not stand during the standing phase this round."

Its the IF that made my mind up, both I and my oponent agreed that its 2 seperate effects. IF the character is standing you kneel him. The character Also doesnt stand during the standing phase! Atleast thats how we understood it. I think if the charcter Standing was a prequisite to the effect it would say "choose a standing character then kneel him" or something along those lines.

Cool!

Thanks :-)

They are indeed two different effects. In fact, whenever an effect has more than one sentence, each sentence is considered to be a separate effect that is not dependent upon the other effect. The exception being if one of the sentences starts with "then." If that is the case, the first sentence (before the "then") must be successful before the second sentence (after the "then") can even start to resolve.

So with Cersei's ability, the "kneel" sentence and the "doesn't stand in the standing phase" effects are separate and each apply, even if for some reason (like the character is already kneeling) they do not both apply.

There were two alternatives proposed as possibly requiring the character to go from standing to kneeling before the standing phase restriction applied:

1. "Choose and kneel a standing character. That character does not stand during the standing phase."
2. "Choose and kneel a character. Then, that character does not stand during the standing phase."

Both, in fact, would require the character to go from standing to kneeling. In #1, characters that were already kneeling would be illegal targets. As such, you'd never get a chance to apply the "doesn't stand" effect. In #2, a character that was already kneeling would be a legal target, but you could not successfully resolve the kneeling effect (since the character is already knelt). As such, the " then, doesn't stand" effect wouldn't resolve successfully, either, because the word "then" prohibits it when the character is not successfully knelt.

So good eye to both of you. You both got the correct resolution right and identified possible changes to make it work the other way. Nice job.

ktom said:

Why thank you my good sir (or lady)! Ive only been playing for about two months but Ive noticed there is a Very distinct logic and approach to the way the game rules are written and implemented, much more coherent and yet fexible than most games Ive played (table top or card). Its always very satisfying when that logic solves strange problems!