Pulling the Strings - Applicable Targets

Pulling the Strings reads:

 

When Revealed: Choose an Edict, Kingdom, or Scheme plot card in an opponent's used pile. Initiate the when revealed ability on that card as if you had just revealed it.

Let's say my opponent has two plots with the appropriate traits in his used pile, A Noble Cause (which has no When Revealed effect) and Wildfire Assault (which does). Let's say the board state makes resolving the effect of Wildfire undesireable for me.

Can I choose ANC with Pulling, or do I have to choose Wildfire?

The RRG p. 19, under "Target" says:

 

A card is not an eligible target for an ability if the resolution of that ability's effect could not affect the target at all.

Would that be applicable here? Or would initiating the ability of a plot not count as "affecting" the chosen plot, similarly to how immunity does not extend to abilities originating from an immune card?

Interesting question!

On one hand, the plot card in the used pile is the eligible target.

On the other hand, even such a card whose effect you would initiate, wouldn't be "affected" by Pulling the strings.

Therefore, I think that A Noble Cause is an eligible target.

My 2 cents

This is one weird rule you quoted. I agree with the above, copying initiating another plot's ability doesn't seem to affect that plot at all. Along the same lines:

How does me gaining gold affect the chosen card?

Wildfire Assault doesn't affect chosen characters either.

That particular entry does muddy the waters somewhat. However, it is important to note that nowhere in the rules is "target" defined as "the object and/or recipient of an ability's effect." That can't be the definition of "target" for the game because:

1. Not all objects and/or recipients of an ability's effect are considered "targets" of that ability. An ability can affect a game element without having a "target."
2. Not all chosen "targets" are directly affected by the ability in question. Sometimes, an ability's chosen target(s) serve as references to tell you how the ability resolves (as with To The Rose Banner!, using its target to define X, and Wildfire Assault, using its target to define which characters are killed by exception rather than by direct choice).

The actual definition of "target" from the rules ends up being "a game element that must be chosen (by the player resolving the ability) in order for an ability to resolve." This ends up encompassing both direct targets (i.e., game elements chosen as the objects affected by the ability's effect), and reference targets (i.e., game elements chosen to define the scope and resolution of the ability's effect, but not actually affected by the effect itself).

And that's the problem here. The entry on targets in the RRG does NOT make a distinction between direct and reference targets - even though the cards clearly do. As such, the fact that the bit about "A card is not an eligible target for an ability if the resolution of that ability's effect could not affect the target at all." applies to abilities with direct targets, but not to abilities with reference targets, is completely lost.

The plot chosen as a target for Pulling the Strings is a reference target (similar to the characters chosen by To the Rose Banner! and Wildfire Assault), so the entry in the RRG about eligible targets needing to be affected by the ability doesn't apply to it - because NO PLOT CARD would ever be affected by the effect of Pulling the Strings. As such, you could choose Noble Cause in the above example and let there be no affect on the game state. (Note: the rule about "a card ability can only be initiated if its effect has the potential to affect the game state" doesn't apply here because the game will trigger/initiate the "When Revealed" ability of the plot no matter what; and you are only obligated to choose an eligible target - not necessarily an eligible target that would allow the ability, which has already initiated, to resolve successfully.)

Now, admittedly, this whole discussion about direct vs. reference targets, and the inapplicability of the "A card is not an eligible target..." rules text to reference targets is nowhere in the rules documents. Rather, it is a general explanation offered to allow the card text of things like To the Rose Banner! and Wildfire Assault to work period - because a literal reading of the rules without such an explanation/understanding of the existence and role of "reference targets", these cards would not work at all. There is a basic assumption that cards are not written so as to not work at all, so I offer this as a means of answering questions like the OP related to Pulling the Strings until we get something official from FFG.

Actually, To the Rose Banner does affect its target directly in its post-then aspect (sacrificing it). Wildfire Assault and Pulling the Strings (and possibly other abilities) still don't.

Is gaining power considered as affecting the character? I'd assume no, just like placing a poison token isn't considered as affecting. So then these two cards also use "reference targeting"?

Yes, they do.

Well... I'm not sure about that. If a character was somehow "cannot gain power" (that existed in 1.0...), it would seem that they should be illegal targets for those abilities - as opposed to being legal targets that lead to failed results.

(But then, if a character "cannot have poison tokens placed on it," we'd expect Tears to fail, too. Using the event immunity/Tear ruling to explain targeting may not be the best way to go since Tears doesn't actually "choose" anything as a target.)

Well... I'm not sure about that. If a character was somehow "cannot gain power" (that existed in 1.0...), it would seem that they should be illegal targets for those abilities - as opposed to being legal targets that lead to failed results.

I was about to suggest that too, but then I realized that you wouldn't be able to initiate such an ability anyway, because of the lack of potential to change the game state, so I guess it's irrelevant.

Well... I'm not sure about that. If a character was somehow "cannot gain power" (that existed in 1.0...),

I can't find any card with that text in 1.0.

I can't find any card with that text in 1.0.

I was about to suggest that too, but then I realized that you wouldn't be able to initiate such an ability anyway, because of the lack of potential to change the game state, so I guess it's irrelevant.

Not necessarily.

Say that when I trigger Eddard or Riverrun Minstrel, I have 2 potentially eligible characters (2 other participants for Eddard, 2 House Tully for the Minstrel) to target. In each case, one of them has "cannot gain/claim power" and one does not.

At the point that I check play restrictions (Step 1), the ability has the potential to change the game state (there is a character that gain/claim the power). But when I get to actually choosing targets (Step 5), if the "cannot gain/claim power" is considered a legal target, I could choose it and let the effect of the ability fail.

So, this is actually a question inherent in the OP, but one that was completely side-stepped since the "When Revealed" ability triggers automatically (and therefore doesn't go through the "can it affect the game state?" check). The rules say that you have to have a valid target to get past the "check play restrictions" step, but that any valid target available when you get to the "choose targets" step can be chosen -- not just those that were valid when the play restrictions were checked.

So if we don't consider gaining power to be affecting the character the way that we don't consider gaining a poison token to be affecting the character (making such characters "reference" targets instead of "direct" targets in the suggested parlance), a "cannot gain/claim power" character that otherwise meets target restrictions could be chosen in Step 5, assuming you have another character that allows you to get past Step 1.

I only have one question: are you guys passing all of this over to Nate, or should I email him?