Hello,

if I attack a player who has Tyrion Lannister (LotR) and some clansmen in play and declare stealth on the clansmen, will they still be able to join Tyrion on defense through his ability if he is declared as a defender? I would think not, as they ”may not defend” according to the core set rules, but I would appreciate clarification on this matter.

/Björn

Zmirc said:

You are correct. Stealth means they cannot defend the challenge at all.

Bomb said:

I'm not sure this works quite the same as you're thinking. Stealthed characters cannot be declared as defenders. This does not mean they can't participate by other means. (this also goes hand-in-hand with being able to declare or defend a power/intrigue challenge for an obscene amount of STR with Tyrion being the only POW/INT icon character on the board… so long as he was the one declared, and the clansmen are already knelt)

A good example of this is Greatjon Umber from the Where Loyaty Lies CP. His text says "Challenges: Kneel Greatjon Umber to have him participate in the current challenge as a defender…." This means that, even if you stealth him, or you have flipped Focused Offense (which says you cannot declare defenders), he can still be knelt to be considered a defending character because he was not declared as such during the stealth/defender step of the challenge framework, but was introduced as a defender through a player action effect during the window following that step.

So, to answer the original question, they would count as defenders in the aforementioned challenge… but only if they entered through Tyrion's ability

Stealth is defined in the core rules as "cannot defend" which also means participation. Once Greatjon Umber has had stealth declared against him, he cannot be added to the challenge period, even via his ability. Hid ability is specifically special because he can be added before stealth is declared against him.

Bomb said:

yes, but the language of the card is what sets it apart. yes, the rules state that a character cannot defend when stealthed, but at the same time, Greatjon and/or the clansmen are not defending. The abilitties have them enter "as a participating [character]." This has been discussed at length, over and over in my meta, as well as questions posed to FFG in the past. This ability works in the same way as the following scenario:

An opponent is running Baratheon. They have on the board Stannis Baratheon whose text reads "While Stannis is attacking…" if you do not control a lord character you "…cannot declare defenders." You are playing Stark and have a "jump-in" Catelyn in hand, but no lords on the table for your side. They declare a power challenge against you, using Stannis. You cannot declare defenders for this challenge, however, since her text reads that you can take a challenges action to put Catelyn into play "knelt, as a participating defender…" in an INT or POW challenge, you can still (unsuccessfully w/ out STR boost) defend said challenge with her, because she was not declared as a defender, she was placed into the challenge as a "participating [character]."

Bomb said:

Also, don't forget the golden rule for FFG games:

"If a card's text conflicts with the rules [in this book], the card text takes precedence."

Stealth does not only keep characters from being "declared" as defenders. It completely keeps the character from "defending" the challenge. This includes any special effects like Greatjon and Tyrion. This topic has been beaten to death on these forums as many thought stealth only included the "declare as a defender" framework action when it actually also included any means of participation. In the core rules, stealth says nothing about "declare as a defender" and specifically states "character cannot defend the challenge". This is not an example of "card text supercedes rules" otherwise I can make that generalization for any text.

can I see an official ruling of this, then, as opposed to the broken record approach?

stormwolf27 said:

If you want an official ruling, you need to send the question to FFG, using the Rules Questions link at the bottom of the page.

That said, what Bomb said is the accepted wisdom concerning the matter. Stealthed characters cannot defend in the challenge. "Cannot" is an absolute and may not be overridden by other effects (FAQ §4.3). "Defend" goes beyond being declared as defenders and covers all forms of participation.

If you don't believe us, maybe you believe ktom, who explained this in this thread - not regarding Tyrion, but regarding WLL Greatjon Umber, who can't use his ability either when stealthed either.

If you're still uncertain, please send this to FFG. They have upturned some longstanding rulings recently, maybe they'll upturn this one too. When they answer, please share it with us on the forum.

stormwolf27 said:

As Bomb has explained, the difference is that Stannis says "cannot declare defenders" and Stealth says "cannot defend". Not the same thing.

Ratatoskr said:

A prime example being "While THIS CHARACTER is standing, players cannot declare defenders during intrigue challenges" and "While THIS CHARACTER is standing, characters controlled by the defending player cannot be declared as defenders during intrigue challenges." Same practical result, but very different results with would-be defenders who happen to be "immune to character abilities."

I also want to apologize to stormwolf27 because I was using my smart phone to make the above posts and couldn't easily type my posts. Otherwise I would have tried to provide some references to help explain it better.

In all honesty, I originally thought the same as you because I had thought that is all that stealth did(only preventing the defender from declaring them as a defenders). I actually didn't even re-read the Stealth rule in the core set rule book because I was certain it said "cannot declare as a defender". When I realized it said "cannot defend the challenge", I immediately changed my stance on it because there are several instances where "declare" is used and that specifically means the framework action event when declaring attackers/defenders.

I also want to elaborate a little bit more on "card text supercedes rules text". This normally applies when the card text specifically tells you that it is allowing you to do something(or in Tyrion's case, it is forcing your Clansman to participate if they are kneeling) that is beyond the normal game rules.

Stonesnake is a perfect example of this: "Stonesnake can declare stealth on characters with stealth."

Because it is providing this allowance, it is overriding the protection the Stealth keyword has over Stealth attackers. In Tyrion's case, the overriding rule is how the Clansman become participants in a challenge. By normal game rules, you declare characters by kneeling them to have them participate in the challenge via the declaring attacker/defenders framework action event. Without a card effect, that is the only way to have this happen. Tyrion's card effect has knelt Clansman you control participate in the challenge with him. This does not mean it overrides any other effects that are imposed on any of them that would prevent them from participating in the challenge.

If "cannot" is imposed, it is absolute and prevents whatever "cannot" happen occur. When "can" or "may" is part of a passive or constant card effect, it then provides an allowance to do something that you normally could not do. Triggered effects("Any Phase:", "Phase X:", and "Response:") can provide a special effect as long as there is no play restriction or limitation that keeps the effect from occurring. With Tyrion's effect, you do not have a choice as to which Clansman are participating in the challenge because only depends on them being allowed to participate in challenges and if they are knelt and in your control.