There is a discussion going on over at agotcards.org about Varamyr ( http://www.agotcards.org/card/v/656 ).

The claim right now is that if the initial ability is cancelled, that not only do both characters stay in play, but that the second part of the ability (discarding the new creature from play), is never resolved, and both characters can remain in play. Something about that doesn't quite sit right with me but I cannot say for sure.

My take is that if the initial ability is cancelled, Varamyr will stay in play, and the Creature will come into play (it was a cost, after all). But if the ability is cancelled then the entire ability is cancelled, so the bounce at the end of the phase won't happen either.

It seems perverse, actually. But it should work.

dh098017 said:

Varamyr reads: "Any Phase: Put 1 Creature character into play from your hand to return Varamyr Sixskins to your hand. At the end of the phase, if that Creature is still in play, discard it from play (cannot be saved)."

Remember that in an ability worded "Do X to do Y," X is the cost and Y is the effect. So comparing that to Varamyr, putting the creature into play from your hand is the cost and returning Varamyr to your hand is the effect.

Remember that if an effect is canceled, the cost is still paid. e.g., if you kneel 3 influence to choose and kill a character, canceling that means the character isn't killed, but the influence stays knelt, right? So if you cancel Varamyrs ability, the Y part (returning him to hand) doesn't happen, but the X part (putting the Creature into play) does.

Now, as worded, the "At the end of the phase" part is a separate, individual part of the ability. Canceling an ability cancels ALL effects of the ability. So the "return to hand" condition never actually resolves if you cancel the effect, so it is never actually applied.

Canceling your own Varamyr has long been one of those funny little "timing cheats" that ends up helping you a lot more than it hurts.

The "Pay X to do Y" is weird here. To me, X revolves around the Creature, where the cost is the Creature is put into play with the condition that it is discarded at the end of the Phase. Y revolves around returning Varamyr Sixskins to your hand.

I do not think there is a good way to put the lasting effect as part of the cost in the first sentence.

X = Creature in play from hand
Y = Varamyr Sixskins returned to your hand
Z = If the Creature is still in play at the end of the phase, discard it from play.

I think the only effect is Varamyr Sixskins. Z is a condition of the cost and is not really what I'd consider an effect.

I have found a similar worded ability that I think may counter what I said above.

Jousting Steed

Creature, Warhorse

Knight character only. Attached character gains Renown. Challenges: Unattach Jousting Steed. Then, it becomes a STR 2 character with a and a icon and 'while Jousting Steed is attacking alone, no more than 1 character can be declared as a defender.' At the end of the phase, return Jousting Steed to its owner's hand if it is still in play.

So if someone cancel's this ability, the Jousting Steed remains attached to the Knight character. So if canceling this would return Jousting Steed to its owner's hand, then Varamyr Sixskins being canceled should discard that Creature from play at the end of the phase. The difference is only the cost, but the structure of the ability is similar.

The last sentence doesn't appear to have a dependency on the effect resolving successfully or not, but I think it would be retarded if Jousting Steed had to be returned to your hand if its ability was canceled.

That is awesome and I think that explanation actually helps me to understand the timing rules in general. Can it generally be said that once a cancel is played, that the cost remains paid, and everything else subsequent to the cost wording (up through the current paragraph) is null and void?

That sounds about right to me. Thinking in programming logic, the effects are being executed in a loop, and once the cancel card hits, the framework pops out of the loop, ignoring everything else.

Does that make sense?

dh098017 said:

Bomb said:

Bomb said:

~So you guys didn't believe me and ran to ktom instead, huh? I'll remember that.

ktom said:

Awesome.

I honestly don't really care if what I had said after my deconstruction of Varamyr Sixskins about the Jousting Steed was a "counter", "evidence", "proof", "illustration", "portrayal", "thesis", "published novel", or "article in the New York Times" as to why I was incorrect. That was the entire point of me entering it in my post because I did not actually believe my analysis would be correct as it does not fit in the cost for effect structure, however the ability is excellent when it is canceled so it is worth analyzing. I do not need to be belittled for my choice of terminology in order to reinforce your claim that I am incorrect.

Also, I was well aware there was no cost, which is why I said that was the difference. I'll remember to explain myself better next time when trying to prove myself wrong.

move along, nothing to see here. dont mind bomb, he's sensitive

At the risk of inflaming tensions, a "counter" and an "example" are diametrically opposed - it's not so much an issue of word choice as by using the word "counter" it sounded as though you were attempting to contradict yourself.

Give ktom a break, please. He's one of the genuinely nicest players in the community, and in general, if you think there was malice behind any of his comments, realize that you're probably wrong.

radiskull said:

Actually that is exactly what I was trying to do. I found what I had considered to be a "counterexample" to my analysis as to how the text structure of the ability worked.

radiskull said:

I really do appreciate his responses and his detail and am sure we are similar in many ways. A simpler form of "you're incorrect" is more than sufficient many times however.

Bomb said:

Bomb said:

Does "Nurtured by the Crone" cancel varamyrs effect?

No. Varamyr has no targets (you can tell because his effect doesn't use the word "choose"). Since Nurtured can only cancel effects with a single target, its restrictions are not met.