Here are some of the issues I've hit over the past week:

Kraznyz Mo Nakloz vs events that become attachments ala Risen From The Sea: Can the Targ player just take them, or are they immune since they have no printed cost?

One of my guys gets reduced to 0 by Flame-Kissed while Threat From the North is revealed. Is he put into the dead pile or the discard pile?

Plot effect resolution:

I reveal Valar Morghulis and my opponent reveals Wildfire Assault. He chooses to resolve his plot first, kills some dudes, and then puts his Meera Reed into shadows as a response to his dudes dying before Valar goes off. Is this a legal play, or is there no opportunity for Meera's response?

I have the new Damphair on the board when a Valar happens. I believe that cards stay on the table and moribund until the plots fully resolve, including opportunities for responses such as the one Damphair would have after becoming an agenda. However, if he is still moribund, he is not an agenda yet, so you cannot draw any cards for any saves you do for other characters during this Valar. Is this correct?

My opponent reveals Threat From the North and I reveal Valar Morghulis. I have Maester Wendamyr on the table. Does he stay on the table and moribund through the Valar, allowing me to save someone with him before he is discarded, or is he gone before I can use him?

tibs3688 said:

im sure on this one so ill answer - if there are conflicting moribund states in a situation like this, the first player chooses which one applies.

Thanks for the clarification! Another question:

If my opponent has Winterfell Kennels out and kneels Rickon Stark to copy the effect, does he have to pay the gold and kneel the kennel twice, or can he just grab another wolf for free?

tibs3688 said:

tibs3688 said:

tibs3688 said:

tibs3688 said:

tibs3688 said:

tibs3688 said:

Ok, thanks for all the answers. One last one. If my 2 str dude gets flame kissed on threat from the north and I, as first player, decide to resolve the kill effect first, can I then respond with Risen From the Sea to save him from being killed or discarded, or will he still get discarded since Risen From the Sea only saves vs "kill" effects? Likewise, if threat's discard effect is chosen to resolve first, I assume that Risen From the Sea can't save him even though flame kissed is there?

tibs3688 said:

> Threat from the North says "cannot be saved." So you cannot save that character from the discard. Ever.

> Even putting the "cannot be saved" think aside, note that just saving a character who dies when its STR is 0 doesn't do anything because its STR is still 0, so it will just be killed all over again.

> So, if you want to save a character from something that is "killed at 0," you're going to have to both save it from the kill AND stop it from being killed a second time - all with the same effect. There aren't a lot of those around.

> Now granted, Risen from the Sea is one of them. If a character is killed at 0 (not discarded, since the card doesn't say it can save a character from being discarded), part of the Save effect of Risen is to add the attachment which gives +1 STR. That will stop the character from being killed again if it brings the character's STR above 0. (When Flame Kissed is involved, it works even better because Flame Kissed specifically says it only works if it is the only attachment on the character.)

So, in your overall scenario, if you choose to deal with the "kill at 0" from Flame Kissed first, you can try to save the character - provided that the effect you use would stop the character from being killed again at the same time that it saves. Risen will do that. Then you'd have to deal with the discard from Threat, but assuming the character's STR is no longer 0, the "discard at 0" doesn't apply to the character anymore. So even though the discard "cannot be saved," removing it from the "kill at 0" also removed it from the "discard at 0" position (as a side effect, more or less).

Of course, if you choose for the discard to go first, you cannot save from that, and it's all over.

Alright thanks again. One last one for this topic that I encountered literally about 5 minutes ago, then I should be good for another week or two.

I flip Valar with 5-6 saves available and spend an Iron Cliffs on Asha. My Martell opponent plays HCiT against the save and then claims that I cannot attempt to save her again with the duplicate she has attached (or my iron mines or w/e), and says that because he canceled the first save, she will die. I looked through the FAQ and this really doesn't seem to be the case to me, but the guy seemed insistent so I figured I'd ask about it. Is he correct?

EDIT: Well look at that great minds think alike!

The answer is in the other thread, but here's the detail you might want to know:

Your opponent is probably thinking of the rule in the FAQ that says a Response may only occur once per trigger. This "one response per trigger" rule, as it is called, means that a particular Response effect may only be used one time per response opportunity that is created.

For example, Robb Stark has a Response that effectively says "after you win a MIL challenge, choose and kill an opponent's character." If you win one MIL challenge, you can only trigger that Response 1 time - instead of triggering it as many times as you need to kill every character your opponent has.

Where your opponent is making a bit of a misstep is while the "one response per trigger" rule prevents you from using 1 response card multiple times for the same response opportunity, it does not stop you from using multiple response cards 1 time each for the same response opportunity.

So, in the "attempt to save Asha with Iron Cliffs, cancel it with HCIT, attempt to save Asha again (this time using Iron Mines)" scenario, you are correctly interpreting it as using multiple responses (Iron Cliffs, Iron Mines) 1 time each for the same response opportunity (Valar attempting to kill Asha).

In the end, just remember that "one response per trigger" is a limit on how many a times a single card can be used in a situation, not a limit on how many different cards can be used.

Starting to feel like Cato the Elder here…

This is exactly the reason why I keep advocating that we stop calling it the "one response per trigger" rule, which is a not only misleading but outright wrong shorthand for what the FAQ actually says.

*Sigh* - if everybody always listened to me in all things, the world would be a so much better place…

Ratatoskr said:

*Sigh* - if everybody always listened to me in all things, the world would be a so much better place…

ktom said:

~Like you're some kind of authority or something, dude. I still remember how you claimed the extra card from KoS didn't count against the draw cap. Or how you claimed that the negative gold modifier from Burned and Pillaged was affecting players running KotHH .

Ratatoskr said: