View New Content

Welcome to Card Game DB
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

Javascript Disabled Detected

You currently have javascript disabled. Several functions may not work. Please re-enable javascript to access full functionality.

The Red Wedding

Submitted Darksbane , Aug 18 2010 01:21 AM | Last updated Mar 01 2011 07:17 PM

The Red Wedding Type: Plot House: Neutral Income:4 Initiative: 3 Claim: 1 Game Text: *Power Struggle.* When revealed, the opponent to your left chooses 1 Lord and 1 Lady character, if able. Then, you must choose and kill 1 of those characters. The other claims 2 power. Number: 57 Set: PotS Quantity: 2 Illustrator: Manuel Calderon
Recent Decks:	STAGS ON A BOAT! Martell Basic 1st Place Newington CT SC Martell Conquest Bara Stark/Martell Conquest 3rd Place Greenville SC Stark Shadows grow long in Winter v2

36 Comments

VengefulViper

Dec 22 2011 03:04 PM

What happens if there are 1) only two lords,2) only two ladys,3) a single lord or lady in play ?

SpiderMonkey

Dec 22 2011 09:59 PM

1) Nothing happens
2) Nothing happens
3) Nothing happens

manutd14

Aug 16 2012 07:43 AM

The words "if able" are confusing me. Is it sure that you need both Lord and Lady so that the "Then" part can be enabled? In such case the card would have the text: "When revealed, the opponent to your left chooses 1 Lord and 1 Lady character. Then, you must choose and kill 1 of those characters. The other claims 2 power. "
In such statement if you can't choose 1 Lord and 1 Lady you can't continue to the "Then" part. But with the "if able" it makes it optional. Could someone please explain it to me? Thanks!

Grimwalker

Aug 16 2012 12:52 PM

As I understand it, the "if able" language enables the "then" to proceed without full completion of the cost. Don't play this card if you have the only Lord or the only Lady on the table, or the opponent will choose that character. By the wording on the card, you'll have to kill him/her.

slothgodfather

Aug 16 2012 02:55 PM

And in normal situations, you would be right Grim. However, over on the FFG boards the discussion says that the "if able" is used for a slightly different reason than usual.

check out ktom's response in this thread:
http://www.fantasyfl...&efpag=0#545717

Grimwalker

Aug 16 2012 05:06 PM

Ahh, I didn't think of that potential point of confusion, that people would consider it unplayable without both newlyweds in play. So my interpretation would be correct if the "if able" text were moved to the end of the second sentence?

I love this game but it's maddening sometimes...

hop

Jan 17 2013 05:04 AM

What happens when you mix Power of blood and Red wedding with only nobles ladies and lords ?

ThePrinceThatWasPromised

Jan 17 2013 05:31 AM

I believe the effect still resolves, (except killing one of them' (but the other will still claim 2 power) because it just requires you to have a lord and a lady to "choose" then attempts to kill one and give the other 2 power.

hop

Jan 17 2013 05:51 AM

But you cannot even TRY to kill any of them.
If only one was noble, you would have to kill the other one.

So I believe the game breaks and you go home...

emptyrepublic

Jan 17 2013 06:08 AM

Power of Blood does nothing to the first part. It's "Choose 1 Lord and 1 Lady, if able" meaning there must be at least 1 Lord and 1 Lady character in play in order for the effect to continue. The "then" part is considered later. If the chosen Lord/Lady both have the noble crest on a Power of Blood turn the second part can't resolve since you can't legally choose a character to kill and by extension there is no "other" character to give the two power too. So nothing would happen.

I wouldn't go home though; probably just flip the table.

ThePrinceThatWasPromised

Jan 17 2013 07:12 AM

I do not know if that is true. The second part is two seperate effects independent of each other. In the FAQ it states:

"If a card has multiple effects, all effects on the card are resolved, if possible, independently of whether any other effects of the card are successful..."

It goes on to discuss the "then" stipulation but that does not apply to second part. If this is correct then I am actually fairly certain that if there were two Lord's and two Lady's but only one of each was noble the two nobles could still be chosen. No one gets killed and the other still claims two power. Although it would be hard to envision youre opponent chosing in this manner unless they had both nobles.

emptyrepublic

Jan 17 2013 07:51 AM

The problem with the second part is the choosing. If the chosen Lord/Lady have noble crests on a PoB turn neither can be "chosen" for the kill. The syntax of the card (to my reading) suggests that the second part has a soft "then" component if you can't specify who gets the kill you are also not able to specify who gets the power.

If the plot was phrased like this...

"When revealed, the opponent to your left chooses 1 Lord and 1 Lady character, if able. Then, you must choose and give 1 of those characters 2 power. The other is killed."

In this scenario you can choose who gets the power and the kill effect wouldn't occur since the character can't be killed. No ambiguity there.

Ultimately if this is an issue in your meta please consult the FFG forum for a more official ruling. I'm arbitrating based on my experience of how FFG seems to rule on these things.

slothgodfather

Jan 17 2013 04:16 PM

I'm pretty sure this has been discussed at length before on the FFG forums, and I seem to recall that Emptyrepublic has the right idea. Your opponent chooses 1 lord and 1 lady. Then when you attempt to choose 1 to kill, you are unable to pick a successful target since "cannot be killed" means cannot be a target of kill effects. Since you can't even choose one of your 2 choices to kill, there is no "other" selection to be made.

Prophit618

Jan 17 2013 05:11 PM

Just to clarify, the problem is with the not being able to choose, not with the not being able to kill. If there were saves around, for instance, since you would still be able to choose the lord or lady to die, even though they didn't, the other would still get the power.

ThePrinceThatWasPromised

Jan 17 2013 06:32 PM

Yeah I am just going strictly off of the rules and FAQ but even that is not always correct. Even if you follow them to the letter they release a specific rule to a card that contradicts it.

Just to clarify, the problem is with the not being able to choose, not with the not being able to kill. If there were saves around, for instance, since you would still be able to choose the lord or lady to die, even though they didn't, the other would still get the power.

This would make a little bit more sense because i was going to say if there was a "then" component, soft or otherwise, and the character was saved would the other not be able to claim it's two power.

ThePrinceThatWasPromised

Jan 17 2013 06:37 PM

Another issue is that this game often does not follow the precedents set by other cards. For example when the phrase "choose and..." Appears on other cards the card chosen does not necessarily have to be able to do whatever you choose it for. (I.e. Game of Cyvasse you may choose a knelt character for the first part even though a knelt character "cannot be knelt". Of course there is a "then" in that card that would prevent the next effect from happening if both players do this.

JCWamma

Jan 17 2013 07:49 PM

That's more a case of Game of Cyvasse being horribly worded than The Red Wedding. Cyvasse means "choose a character with an intrigue icon you control if able, then kneel that character". So you're choosing a valid target for what it's actually asking you to do, it's just that what it's asking you to do isn't what it looks like because of how badly-worded the card is.

ThePrinceThatWasPromised

Jan 17 2013 09:05 PM

Lol o God! This game!

ThePrinceThatWasPromised

Jan 17 2013 09:22 PM

Lol i read the rulebook and FAQ and follow them down to the last detail, study all the precedents, and yet there is still some minor thing that throws things off. And yeah I have always said Cyvasse should be worded "House Martell Only. Challenges: Each player must choose a charcter with an intrigue icon he or she controls, if able. Kneel all chosen characters, if able. Then, the player who knelt the character with the highest STR may choose and return a character to its owner's hand."

slothgodfather

Jan 17 2013 09:26 PM

(I.e. Game of Cyvasse you may choose a knelt character for the first part even though a knelt character "cannot be knelt". Of course there is a "then" in that card that would prevent the next effect from happening.

I know this is slightly derailing the comments of this card, but chosing a knelt character for GoC does not prevent the "then" effect from happening, but it does prevent that character from having it's STR considered for the effect. So if I play GoC and choose and (successfully) kneel a Lost Spearmen (3 STR) and you choose an already knelt Craster (5 STR) - we both did choose a character with an INT icon, but I knelt the character with the highest STR - allowing me to bounce a character of my choice.

ThePrinceThatWasPromised

Jan 17 2013 09:41 PM

And to avoid confusion the second part should not be separated by a period, but a comma instead, that is what leads me to believe it is two separate effects independent of one another.

hop

Jan 17 2013 11:56 PM

I'm pretty sure we are not playing Cyvasse the way it was meant to, but since it is such a strong card, they won't errata it.

ThePrinceThatWasPromised

Jan 18 2013 12:08 AM

I know this is slightly derailing the comments of this card, but chosing a knelt character for GoC does not prevent the "then" effect from happening, but it does prevent that character from having it's STR considered for the effect. So if I play GoC and choose and (successfully) kneel a Lost Spearmen (3 STR) and you choose an already knelt Craster (5 STR) - we both did choose a character with an INT icon, but I knelt the character with the highest STR - allowing me to bounce a character of my choice.

Yes sorry I should have clarified I meant in the event that both players choose knelt characters or just the one who did is ineligible to win the "game".