There has been a discussion in my meta, so I need answer

Griff:

If Griff would be killed, instead attach him to your House Card as your only agenda with the text: "If you do not control more attachments than each opponent, unattach Griff and return him to play.
Response: After a [Targaryen] attachment you control is discarded from play, kneel 1 influence to return it to your hand."

In my opinion:

1. I have less attachments in play (controlled to be precise) than any of my opponent. He comes for military challenge, I lose and kill Griff. Griff ability kicks in and he goes to the Housecard as agenda. And at that moment it hits the housecard, it bounces back to play alive.

2. In case I have equal or more attachments controlled: Griff to be killed - he goes to the housecard as Agenda. As Agenda he still keeps the Response ability, so I can kneel 1 influence to recurse the appropiate attachments - which would be discarded from play - to my hand.

Am I right?

1. Yes

2. a) If you control as many attachment as your opponent with the most attachments, it means you do not control more, so Griff returns to play.

b) Agendas are not considered to be in play, so his response would not be actionable. The response is his character ability, not his agenda text.

Sorry guys, but there may be a couple more factors you don't seem to be considering:

> First, look very closely at where the quotation marks (noting the text he has an an agenda) are in Griff's text. They include everything starting at the "If you do not control more attachments..." part through to the end of the Response. That means the Response is actually part of the text he is considered to get as an agenda . Griff only has that Response when he is an Agenda! (And note that, like Siege of Winterfell, the Response is actionable while not in play because the nature of agenda cards specifically allows it.) So while he is in play as a character, you cannot use the Response and your Targ attachments will be discarded normally.

> Second, your analysis of when he returns to play does not consider the moribund rules, so your timing is a little off. When he dies, he would normally go into the "moribund:dead pile" state. Instead, because of his text, he goes into the "moribund:agenda" state. But "moribund:agenda" is not the same as actually physically being an agenda (just like "moribund:dead pile" does not give you access to "while this card is in the dead pile..." effects). That means that until he is physically removed from play at the end of the action window in which he is killed and becomes an agenda, all that text he gains is not active. So his "return to play" agenda effect does not actually kick in until the action window (framework or otherwise) after the one in which he is killed. And, if you have the same number or fewer attachments, he will return to play in that very next action window during the passives step (Step 4).

So when he is killed, Griff will leave play completely, no matter how many attachments you have at the time. This is actually really important because it means any attachments or power on him will be discarded, and any lasting effects on him will wear off. Consider the paradox if that were not true: Targ v Targ match. I play a Flame-Kissed and a Forever Burning on your Griff while you have fewer attachments. He dies, becomes an agenda, and (by the incomplete reasoning outlined in the beginning of the thread), returns to play immediately. But since he never actually left play (because of the moribund rules), he's still 0 STR and subject to the "kill at 0 effect." So he dies, becomes and agenda, and...

So it's an important point that, no matter how many attachments you have, Griff physically leaves play in the window where he is killed; loses all attachments, power, and lasting effects that may be associated with him; and becomes an agenda. He can then return to play (clean) as early as the very next action window.

Thanks for the clarification.

ktom said:

Oops. That'll teach me to go by memory on freshly spoiled cards...

why that response is an agenda ability not a char ability?

db123456 said:

"If you do not control more attachments than each opponent, unattach Griff and return him to play" - is this considered a "put into play" effect? If so, say I simultaneously have Griff attached as an Agenda and also in my dead pile, and attachments I control are discarded leaving me with less attachments than an opponent, does Griff remain attached as an Agenda permanently since I cannot legally put him into play?
More questions will probably follow based on the answer to this one...

I like where this is going

Yes, returning him to play is a "put into play" effect and would not be possible/allowed if you have a copy in your dead pile. I was wondering when people were going to start messing around with the rules for unique with these things.

I'm guessing that the following will pre-empt Skowza's other questions:

• You play Griff and he dies. He is now an Agenda on your House card. You control the most attachments, so he stays put. (So far, pretty obvious, right?)
• You can play a second copy of Griff from your hand. After all, you do not have a copy in play or in your dead pile, right?
• If you stop having the most attachments in play, the Agenda copy returns to play as a dupe on the copy you have in play. (No surprise there; we've seen that happen with a bunch of "put into play" effects.)
• But, if while you have one copy on your House card as an Agenda and another one in play that dies, you can no longer attach the one in play to your House card as your "only" Agenda. So that copy goes to the dead pile. (Or you could use a Hill to get it there; doesn't matter.)
• With a copy of Griff in your dead pile, the copy on your House card as an Agenda cannot enter play again - just like every other copy of Griff that is not in play cannot enter play while there is a copy in your dead pile. So no matter how many attachments you have, it stays put.

ktom said:

Good, I thought thats how it worked.
And yes, you did pre-empt all of my questions except one, which I won't be asking right now because I don't want to give away my potentially amazing deck idea. If the idea only works on paper and utterly fails as a deck then I'll come back and throw my ideas out so everyone can improve my deck for me.

Here's a fun one for you: How does the Hand of the King variant work with these characters? Does the First Player get to decide whether the "remove a gold token" or the "attach as an Agenda" replacement effect applies?

Heres my tackle on the situation. He does, but the end result is the same.

IF remove a gold token is chosen, well... its fairly straight forward.

If become an agenda is chosen, that in turn gets replaced by the remove a gold token as well.

Bonus question not at all relevant to Griff: im I right to say a HotK leaving play due to loss of gold tokens does not go through the normal morribund steps? since it doesnt teachnically "leave play", it is just instantly "considered out of play"

-

Mathias Fricot said:

Agendas are not in play. You cannot duplicate a card that is not in play.

One more question; it is on all the new agendas actually.

Eg: I play with agenda(s):

The Stewards
The Builders
The Rangers

I play Griff, he is to be killed.

Does the three other agendas discarded and Griff takes their place or Griff is killed and goes to the dead pile?

Miklos said:

If you have other Agendas, the "as your only agenda" play restriction on Griff isn't met. Therefore, the replacement effect never happens (just like any other effect which doesn't have its play restrictions met).

Griff cannot replace (or displace) agendas that are already there. If you are playing a deck with any other Agenda, Griff will just be a character. And a pretty vanilla character at that.

Miklos said:

With the wording "as your only agenda," I can see how it might be read that way... or it could be read that if you already have 1 (or more) Agenda(s), the ability just doesn't work.

If it were worded "If you are not running an agenda" as many other abilities do, it would be more clear.

KristoffStark said:

ktom said:

Having re-read the text, yeah.

Ah, the magic of the colon and its' vital part in ability structure.

ktom said:

It's this part that makes him just plain silly. Pay three gold and you have claim soak for the entire game.

AGoT DC Meta said:

He is like a cheaper version of the Shadows Arya since you don't have to pay for him to come back into play each time, but with an additional response while he is out of play. And who can come back into play during challenge phase… yea, that's pretty handy.

I'm gonna have to start playing Milk of the Poppy. [sigh]

Miklos said:

After an attachment I control is discarded from play, it becomes moribund. So, I cannot trigger the response that makes him leave play to my hand. It should contradict the moribund rules exception or be worded as a replacement effect, or am I missing something?