Our meta has been getting wrecked by a Martell Wildling deck, and for thematic purposes I'm trying to build a NW deck to counter it.

Coldhands:
Coldhands cannot be killed.
Coldhands gains the benefit of any The North agenda being run (as if he had the Night's Watch and Wildling traits).
Coldhands must participate in the first challenge initiated for which he is eligible each round.

What exactly does "for which he is eligible" mean? Can he be Stealthed? If I play Focused Offense and my opponent makes the first challenge, is he forced to participate as a defender if he has the appropriate icon? Thanks!

Skowza said:

Skowza said:

Skowza said:

Coldhands' text will not MAKE him able to be declared as an attacker or defender in a challenge it would otherwise be illegal to declare him in. His text only says that if he IS able to legally be declared, you must do so.

What if Coldhands has the Motley attachment on him? He is only eligible if you pay 1 gold. Does his ability force you to pay that 1 gold if you have it? I feel like it does not since his eligibility is conditional now.

Bomb said:

Think of this scenario: You have Selyse Baratheon (with standing influence) and Coldhands on the table. You are the First Player. Coldhands does not have an intrigue icon. Your first challenge is an intrigue challenge. Your opponent complains that you were required, based on Coldhands' ability, to use the influence and Selyse's ability to give him the intrigue icon so that he could participate in the challenge.

That scenario is obviously not true. You cannot be required to trigger optional effects based on what would have happened if you chose to do so. You can extend this same reasoning to the Motley scenario. You are not required to pay the gold to meet the condition on Motley any more than you would be required to trigger an effect that would give Coldhands an icon he doesn't already have in order to match the first challenge type you decide to initiate that phase.

Thanks ktom, I assumed the answers you gave were the correct ones, but for some reason the wording confused me; I wasnt sure if he was forced to participate as a defender even if I didn't/couldn't declare him as one.

The following may take some of the confusion out of it:

3-player game. Player A is First Player, then Player B, then Player C. Player C has Coldhands on the table, standing, and all 3 NW Agendas. For the first challenge, Player A attacks Player B. What does Coldhands do?

Obviously, the answer is "nothing" because Player C is not involved and Coldhands is therefore not an eligible participant. But if the "is eligible for" wording actually removed barriers to Coldhands' participation (as it would have to do in your Stealth or Focused Offensive scenarios), he should be doing something in this challenge, right? (Of course, that would beg the question "what should he be doing." Would he be an attacker or defender? So thank-goodness the text works the way it does!)