Good Morning,

In my quest to gain a deeper understanding of how cards with "...would be..." on it, I have a situation that I would like to discuss.

Previously it has been rules that on a card like "Stay of Execution", that even when the effect is invoked, the King or Queen in question is in fact killed for purposes of triggering game mechanics (discussed here: http://www.fantasyflightgames.com/edge_foros_discusion.asp?efid=18&efcid=4&efidt=527409&efpag=0#527462 )

The situation I would like to discuss and very similar (if not the same), I just want to see if I am applying the logic correctly. It is the placed of the word 'instead' that is mixing me up (pre effect on the plot, post effect in my situation).

Lets say I activate "The Scourge" (Any Phase: Kneel The Scourge to choose 1 character. That character loses a M icon , an I icon , and a P icon until the end of the phase. Response: After a character loses an icon from The Scourge, choose and discard 1 card from your hand to have that character gain that icon until the end of the phase. Any player may trigger this effect.)

Specifically I would like to discuss the response. Let's say the character I targeted had only an M icon, so in effect, pre-response, that character is now icon-less. I now choose to activate the response that is in the "Play Restriction: Do X to Do Y" format.

Play Restriction: After a character loses an icon from The Scourge (MET)

Do X: Choose and discard 1 card from your hand.

(to) Do Y: Have that character gain that icon until the end of the phase.

In a format like this, X must resolve successfully in order for Y to execute. So to fulfill X, I choose to discard Darkstar (If Darkstar would be discarded from your hand or deck,put him into play instead .) Now Darkstar is in play, but in regards to fulfilling X, was he ever in moribund:discard to resolve X successfully? Does it matter? Does Y execute?

I can't quite wrap my around if invoking Darkstar's ability, is causing X to fail and thus preventing Y from executing. If someone could humor me and walk me through this situation step by step (and state by state) I would be grateful.

Maybe the question would be more relevant when asked for a card like Maester if the Sun (Response: If it is Summer,kneel Maester of the Sun and discard a card from your hand to save a character from being killed or discarded from play.)

If I invoke Darkstars ability to put him into play instead of the discard pile, can I still save a character?

The answer is yes to both of your questions - you did actually discard the Darkstar from your hand for all purposes, just instead of him hitting the discard pile, he goes into play.

Keep in mind that nothing has to actually become "moribund:discard pile" in order for a discard effect to be successful. In fact, on the Response of The Scourge, since you are discarding from your hand, the discarded card will NEVER be moribund because moribund only applies when a card in play leaves play.

Your confusion here is not really the term "would be." It is "instead." There are two possibilities for what happens when the word "instead" is used. You have to look at he context. The first possibility is the Darkstar possibility: "when X would happen, do Y instead." In that circumstance, X is still considered to be successful, but the normal mechanics of X become Y. So Darkstar is still discarded, but instead of being placed in the discard pile, he is effectively discarded into play. This is like Stay of Execution, where the character is effectively killed into your hand. The other possibility is the Bronn possibility: "When X would happen, do Y instead of doing X." (Do you see the difference in wording there? Some people don't.) in that case X is not considered successful because it is considered to have never happened at all. Y completely replaces , instead of becoming the "temporary mechanics" of X. In the Dakstar possibility, you respond to X. In the Bronn possibility, you respond to Y.

thank you, i had a feeling that stay of execution and darkstar were the same, it was just the placement of 'instead' on the two cards that threw me a bit. It appears though that it isn't the placement of the actual word, but more the part of the equation that the word is contextually tied to (the cost vs the effect).

So in both my cases, Darkstar ends up in play; for maester of the sun i am allowed to save a character, and for the scourge the character gets his icon back.

If the wording on Darkstar said: "....instead of discarding Darkstar, put him into play.", then the reverse would be true correct? Since with that wording the discarding is replaced with putting him into play?

dh098017 said:

There is a great thread about this with Darkstar and Maester of the Sun. You can find it by searching "Mathias Fricot" and "bitching." In all seriousness, it works. My personal opinion is that it shouldn't, and even from what I call a "logical reasoning" perspective he isn't what I consider successfully discarded (a la replacement effect) he is considered to have been discarded for everything else. In short: you get the icon and you get Darkstar in play.