Hi.

I know this topic has been partially covered, but I'd like to have some confirmation about this particular situation.

Banner for the Storm: Response: After you win a P challenge, you may attach Banner for the Storm (from play or from your hand) to a HB character as a Banner attachment with the text: "Attached character gains vigilant."

and an immune character, for example:

The Queen of Thorns, that is "immune to your triggered effects".

Can Banner for the Storm be attached to the Queen? I believe so, because the Queen is not directly chosen.

And, if the Queen would be "immune to your card effects" (not only triggered effects), would she gain vigilant? A character is not immune to its own ability and the word "gain" on the attachment confuses me. The Queen ignore the attachment effect even if the effect is gained as a her personal keyword?

Thank you.

And what about Ruined Tomb?

"Response: after you play a character, kneel Ruined Tomb and kneel 1 influence to attach the topmost attachment in your discard pile to that character, if able".

Can I use Ruined Tomb to the Queen of Thorns? Again, I believe so, because the character is not "choosen" by the Tomb. Correct?

A character (or any other card, for that matter) that is immune to attachments will not be affected by them, though they can still be attached (unlike No attachments). So the Queen of Thorns would not gain Vigilant from your Banner.

Immunity is not limited to choosing as a target. It makes the card ignore all effects that would directly affect it. Say you have a location that gives characters +3 STR while they are standing (King's Pavillion): your Queen of Thorns would not get the +3 STR, because the effect comes from one of your cards. However, in your situation, I believe attaching a card to another only directly affects the first one.

Khudzlin said:

Do you refere to "immune to triggered effects" or to "immune to card effects" ? I think in the first case vigilant would work.

Ikaros said:

And the reasoning for card effects still being able to put attachments on a character (provided the character is not chosen/targeted itself) is correct. The direct effect is on the attachment itself; the character is only indirectly affected when the card is attached. A good way to think of it is that since a card effect can take an attachment off an immune character (provided the character is not chosen/targeted itself), a card effect should be able to do the reverse, too.

Thanks.

It was just a bit strange because attaching an attachment to a character when you control many, seems to carry an implicit need to choose one of them. But, if there is no explicit word "choose", then, there is no targetting.