Outside of a challenge (but in the challenges phase) could I kneel my Stormlands Bastard to choose a character, but unsuccessfully give it renown? Or do it during a challenge but not choose a participating character? Essentially using his ability to kneel himself as a fizzle to take him from standing to kneeling? A friend of mine did this a few weeks ago (I expected him to immediately flip into a valar D off a rookery) and I was wondering just how legit this was. His explanation was that it was a Do X to Do Y format, and so the Y part (getting renown) was a failure - like kneeling a fiefdom even without a character to play. Is it any different if there is no unique character to even choose? Does the kneel happen but the choose fail? I'm a little rusty on what can be initiated even if you know its going to fail. Kindof pointless, but curious.

Text on the card is:

"Challenges: Kneel Stormlands Bastard to choose a unique Bara character. Until the end of the challenge, that character gains renown."

Remembering that you have to be able to pay all costs and choose all targets in order to initiate an effect, if you want to trigger his ability, you have to kneel him and have a unique Bara character to choose as a target. The card doesn't place any limitation on the target about "participating." It doesn't create any play restriction about "during a challenge." All you have to do to trigger it is have a unique Bara character to choose and kneel the Bastard.

The chosen Bara character gets Renown until the end of the challenge. If there is no challenge going on, the character gains Renown and immediately loses it because the duration is spent. If it is during a challenge and you pick a non-participant, it will still gain Renown until the end of the challenge, but since it isn't participating, that is not likely to do it much good.

So your friend is right. There are a lot of legal ways to trigger the effect that has no practical meaning. Ultimately, that potentially allows for some interesting shenanigans, but doesn't really matter because if you want to try to find ways to "exploit" being able to freely kneel this character during the Challenge phase (so long as there is a Unique Bara character available), have at it. It's unlikely to mean much overall. Most people are probably going to read the card the way it seems like you did - assuming restrictions that aren't technically there because "Challenges: During a challenge, kneel Stormlands Bastard to choose a participating unique Bara character. Until the end of the challenge, that character gains renown.", while not the text, is the only way to get practical use of the card over 95% of the time.

Ok, just for confirmation though (and in light of something like Valar D.). Stormlands Bastard is effectively worded as "Do X to choose Y [period] Do Z." I could not, however, kneel Maester Wendamyr to keep him safe from Valar D if there was no one currently in a state to save because he is effectively worded "Do X to do Z," correct? IE, wording like the Stormlands Bastard that seperates it into one full sentence where you are just paying a cost to choose a character is fine as long as you have the character to choose as that's all that is required- the secondary part is not required. Whereas something like Wendamyr with one all inclusive clause would need to have a character that it is able to save in order to kneel, correct?

Kennon said:

Quite correct. It is the period in the case that allows the ability to be activated without purpose (though "then" would have the same effect).

In both cases, a legal target is required to activate the ability. Maester Wendamyr requires a moribund:killed/discarded character to target. All the Bastard requires is a Unique Bara character.

Northern Fiefdoms?

KristoffStark said:

The proper distinction between Stormlands Bastard and Maester Wendamyr is that Wendamyr is a Response. As such, he must have something to Respond to in order to meet his play restrictions. So unless there is a killing/discarding effect for him to interrupt, the play restrictions for his save Response are not met and you are not allowed to trigger him.

If Stormlands Bastard said "Response: after an opponent initiates a power challenge, kneel Stormlands Bastard to choose a unique Bara character. Until the end of the challenge, that character gains renown," you could still kneel him to no effect, but not if an opponent had not initiated a power challenge. In theory, you could, you could kneel Wendamyr to no effect, but only if a character was in the process of actively being killed/discarded - so there would never be a time you could trigger him where he wouldn't have an effect.

So the difference here is "Response" (and the play restrictions involved in triggering it) and "Challenges." Not "There's a period in after 'choose a character.'" After all, it's not like "Choose a character. Kill that character." is going to let you choose a CBK character for that effect.

~I'm off to build a GJ Alliance with Bara deck running this guy along with Imposter OOH to always have food for TBaK! It will be unstoppable! *evil laugh*

ktom said:

Good point. I don't know why I always think of Saving as removing characters from moribund, rather than preventing them from entering it in the first place.

The reasoning is obvious enough: if saving removed someone from the moribund state, you'd still be able to Respond to the character being killed, even though they're still alive.

KristoffStark said:

Since saving the character stops it from ever going into moribund in the first place, this doesn't happen and the character keeps its attachments.

ktom said:

Indeed.

I've been thinking. Prior to my returning to the forums, I considered myself an expert in the rules of this game. I run the local league, and my calls are universally accepted by the local players.

However, numerous errors in my understanding have been pointed out.

I think it comes down to two things, which are more or less the same thing. I've been away from the forums. For some people this might not result in the same atrophy of understanding, but the only other exposure I get to this game are my biweekly events, which are attended by the same 4-6 people. When presented with that limited source of opposition, we each of us develop a limited vocabulary of tactics, as well as the rules that are behind those tactics.

Adversity brings improvement, and our adversity has been limited.

Hopefully I can take the ideas and clarifications/corrections that I encounter here, and introduce them to the group in a way that benefits us all.

KristoffStark said:

You raise a really good point, because I'm the opposite. I don't have any play time during the school year, except the rare rare occasion, but I do keep tabs loosely on the rules discussion and general discussion subforums. When I was home for a few days last month and I played with my local group, this happened:

I had Balon Swann and a mountain refugee, he was running KotHH and had no setups. He flipped Muster the Realm and I flipped Loyalty Money Can Buy. He attacked with a deadly army on a claim zero military challenge. I defended with Swann, forgetting he had Scorched Earth out. Not only did I lose the challenge, he got the unopposed power, killed Swann with deadly, and I was left sitting there going "what just happened?" My friend Tyson remarked "Have you ever played this game before?" What I am trying to say is you need both; to not make play errors and to not make rules errors. Unless your an allstar, which I am clearly not. I am going to go on a "minimum of one game a day" regimen in training for regionals lol.

Sometimes, knowing the rules backward and forward just means you understand exactly how the other guy is kicking your butt.

ktom said:

ktom, are you implying that you sometimes ... lose games??

Say it ain't so!!

Sometimes? No. Frequently? Yes.

ktom said:

... ... I mean

Huh... I don't usually joke in smilies. Oh well.

I've often wondered how well my small local playgroup prepares me for something like Regionals. I really should go to one some time (though my guess would be "not very well")