1 if my opponent reveal VM and I reveal at the gate, but he will be the first player and decide at the gate go first. can I search nothing for the plot(even that I have some maester in my deck)?

2 a location dupe save consider a location ability?

1. At the Gates tells you to search and put into play, so you have to do it successfully, if able. Other cards that gives you an option are usually worded with "may".

2. Yes, using a dupe on a location is an ability. From the FAQ :

Using a duplicate to save a character
is considered to be a gained triggered
"Response:" action. Thus, it is treated as a
triggered effect and may be canceled, but
because it is gained (and therefore an ability
of the card attempting to use the response), [….]

So, I'm not sure if you question results from the fact that it is written for characters and not for location in the FAQ. But that's not the first time when we must rule according to the context. For example this very same paragraph says that the duplicate save is a "Response:" action. But Responses are not actions. And we don't make an exception for the duplicates.

Consider this paragraph :

"Card abilities" also refers to any abilities (again, keywords and traits are excluded) gained by card effects.

So this is only about card effects - is using a duplicate a card effect?

“If one of your unique cards is about to
leave play, as a triggered ‘Response:’ effect,
you may discard an attached duplicate to
save the unique card from leaving play."

The duplicate is a card, and it has an effect, so even if it is not printed on the card, I believe it is a card effect. In any case, I think this FAQ paragraph could as well extend to abilities gained through game effects (even if I cannot imagine any, there could be some abilities gained - say through claim replacement)

1 if I have no maester card in my deck, what happen? maybe my opponent can call the jugde to check my deck?

1. This situation is not really handled in the rules, so I'd follow common sense here. You can call a judge, but there is a time limit and you will loose a lot of time. If your opponent is going to win soon and really has no Maester in his deck, he may argue that you are stalling. And if you are going to win soon, it's not good for you to loose time.

So, if I were you, I would ask a judge to check the deck after the game is over and apply the same penaly as if a card without the shadow crest had been put illegally into the Shadows.

In any case, I wouldn't check the deck myself even at the end of the game, since one might meet the same opponent in the finals.

db123456 said:

Note that if they argue that you are stalling, you're going to need to call the judge over to make a sportsmanship call, anyway.

I think instead of stalling, check the deck after the game. If they have a Maester, then you automatically get a modified/straight win as they probably are considered forfeiting. Just like checking Shadows cards after the game that have not been revealed yet. I think that would be more reasonable than stalling but I am not a judge.

Hmmm, does GOT not have a "even if search is mandatory, find is always optional" rule? That seems a pretty big flaw.

Bomb said:

I dont think this would work; if the judge did find a Maester in the deck the Maester player could argue that the character was in his/her hand at the time and there would be no way to verify it. If a stalling complaint was made the TO could simply time the amount of time it takes to look thru the deck and allow the game to go an extra min or two to make up for the lost time.

bane2571 said:

I disagree - if a card says to do something, you need to do it if you can.

Skowza said:

If the Maester is in their hand, then it won't be in their deck. I don't understand what you are saying. Don't shuffle your hand, cards in play, discards, or dead pile back into your deck after the game until it is verified. If a Maester is shuffled back into the deck after At the Gates, this would be easy to track.

I don't think it'd be that difficult to verify if it came to it.

Bomb said:

I'm sorry, I'm not sure whats confusing…
Scenario: AtG and Valar are played Round 1, the person who Valared is first player and chooses AtG to go off first, Maester player searches his/her deck and says "I have no Maesters in my deck" and the game proceeds from there. Maester player plays a Maester character in Marshalling in Round 3… how can a TO verify that the player had that card in hand in Round 1 as opposed to that player having drawn it during Round 1, 2, or 3 after lying about it not being in the deck? By the end of the game it is too late to determine if the character was in the deck or in their hand when the Valar went off in Round 1.

Skowza said:

That's fine, but that's not what you said. "…if the judge did find a Maester in the deck the Maester player could argue that the character was in his/her hand at the time and there would be no way to verify it…." is what you said and that really just didn't mean the same thing as what you said above.

There is one very quick and easy solution to overcome your above scenario. The TO can very quickly compare that players deck list to the contents of the players hand, dead, discard pile, etc. If all copies of all Maester is not present in any of those places, then the player is cheating. The only exception is with a dead unique 3 cost or less Maester being all that remains in the deck.

Regardless, if the player is cheating and it is discovered, there will be repercussions. It shouldn't be worth it for them to cheat, but you never know with some players. :-(