Ser Davos Seaworth and Venomous Blade

By snowfrost, in 2. AGoT Rules Discussion

Ser Davos Seaworth
Response: Kneel Ser Davos Seaworth to save an atttachment on a character from being discarded from play. Then, attach it to another eligible character, if able.
Venomous Blade
Response: After you lose a challenge, Venomous Blade goes into Shadows.
use City of Shadows,I have only Seaworth in play,then attach VB to Seaworth.when I lose M,can VB return to shadows?

snowfrost said:

Ser Davos Seaworth
Response: Kneel Ser Davos Seaworth to save an atttachment on a character from being discarded from play. Then, attach it to another eligible character, if able.
Venomous Blade
Response: After you lose a challenge, Venomous Blade goes into Shadows.
use City of Shadows,I have only Seaworth in play,then attach VB to Seaworth.when I lose M,can VB return to shadows?

Yes, because the response window that allows the blade to trigger (losing a challenge) happens while Davos is still moribund:dead pile (assuming you didn't save him). So, when all moribund cards leave play, Davos goes to the dead pile and Venemous Blade goes into shadows.

No. What happens here is:

1) Military claim initiates: Davos is chosen
2) Save/cancel: nothing
3) Military claim resolves: Davos becomes moribund:dead pile
(insert unopposed and renown here)
4.1) Rulebook passive initiates: VB is attached to a moribund card
4.2) Save/cancel: Davos' response is not allowed, because without another character, it will leave VB in the same moribund state.
4.3) Rulebook passive resolves: VB becomes moribund:discard pile
5) VB's response is not allowed, because it is already moribund
6) Davos goes to the dead pile and VB goes to the discard pile

Discarding an attachment attached to a moribund card is a terminal effect, because if you just save it, it will still be in a position to be discarded (this is why Davos' response lets you transfer the attachment).

My answer assumes VB cannot be attached to an opponent's character (we know it can't when coming out of shadows, but does this restriction apply here?).

Khudzlin said:

No. What happens here is:

1) Military claim initiates: Davos is chosen
2) Save/cancel: nothing
3) Military claim resolves: Davos becomes moribund:dead pile
(insert unopposed and renown here)
4.1) Rulebook passive initiates: VB is attached to a moribund card
4.2) Save/cancel: Davos' response is not allowed, because without another character, it will leave VB in the same moribund state.
4.3) Rulebook passive resolves: VB becomes moribund:discard pile
5) VB's response is not allowed, because it is already moribund
6) Davos goes to the dead pile and VB goes to the discard pile

Discarding an attachment attached to a moribund card is a terminal effect, because if you just save it, it will still be in a position to be discarded (this is why Davos' response lets you transfer the attachment).

My answer assumes VB cannot be attached to an opponent's character (we know it can't when coming out of shadows, but does this restriction apply here?).

I agree 100% with this.

Additionally, the restriction would not apply as the ability printed on Venomous Blade is explicitly a passive that dictates how it comes out of Shadows. Once it is in play it is just another attachment. The passive that initiates the "attach to" restriction and the kill effect will not trigger when you attempt to move the blade with Davos's ability. The only restrictions on an ability like this are restrictions explicitly stated in the effect and normal play restrictions (i. e. can't put on a No Attachments character, can't put on a location, or [for Frozen Solid] must put on a location).

I think VB can be saved to attach opp's charactor.

EDIT: never mind.

snowfrost said:

I think VB can be saved to attach opp's charactor.

Correctomundo. (Which means correct. This is for people who have never heard someone say correctomundo. >.>)