If this will be canceled by Hands Judgement (for example), can I still trigger Mel, right? thx

If the effects of an event card are canceled, the card is still considered to have been played, and it is still placed in its owner’s discard pile.
When the effects of an ability are canceled, the ability is still considered to have been used, and any costs have still been paid.

To be fair it can only be played during challenges so after turn 2/3 it's not likely to hit any important characters/attachments/locations. But yeah it is still really strong and should've probably needed something else like kneeling a R'hllor character as an additional cost.

Yesterday I saw awesome combo using this card : Yoren. I think I do not need to say more.

Dude If you are reading this - you are da MAN!

To be fair it can only be played during challenges so after turn 2/3 it's not likely to hit any important characters/attachments/locations. But yeah it is still really strong and should've probably needed something else like kneeling a R'hllor character as an additional cost.

If the effects of an event card are canceled, the card is still considered to have been played, and it is still placed in its owner’s discard pile.
When the effects of an ability are canceled, the ability is still considered to have been used, and any costs have still been paid.

Could You please give me a page number in a rule reference where it is written? Thanks

RR p4, "Cancel".

What happens first: you pick and discard a card from opponents hand, or you trigger Mel's ability?

What happens first: you pick and discard a card from opponents hand, or you trigger Mel's ability?

EDIT: Currently double checking this with other sources, as it creates a few inconsistencies. Leaving my original answer up, but don't quote me on it. Yet.

I'm actually really glad you asked, because I have been playing this for a while (and I think I have misled some players too) assuming the answer was obvious (that the reaction happened after the effect), but in having someone me ask the question, I realize that this is not the case. The reaction happens BEFORE the effect (this is important, as it allows you to treachery the kneel effect before losing the treachery to seen in flames)

RR p10 "Initiating Abilities/Marshaling cards"

 6.  The card is marshaled/played, or the effects of the

ability attempt to initiate. An interrupt ability that

cancels this initiation may be used at this time.

7.  The effects of the ability (if not canceled in

step 6) complete their initiation, and resolve.

 

Interrupts and Reactions may be used throughout

this process as normal, should their triggering

conditions occur.

 

An event has successfully been played in step 6 (even if its effects are cancelled). That's when you would react to it being played. 

Edit: We've checked with FFG, and "Playing an event" completes in step 7.

We need to wait for full confirmation from FFG on this, but istaril is effectively separating "playing" the event (in Step 6) from resolving the effect of its ability (in Step 7). Since Mel reacts to the event being played, not the effect resolving, that interpretation would say her reactions is triggered between 6 and 7.

There are other parts of the RRG outside the "initiation process" entry that seem to define "playing" the event card as the entire process (including resolving the effect and putting the card itself in the discard pile), so there are some things to be verified with FFG before you start kneeling things with Mel before looking/discarding for the effects of the event, though.

Just to play devil's advocate, but are they meant to be framework events or just a 1-7 step check guideline?  For example...

1) Check play restrictions: can the card be marshaled or played, or the ability initiated, at this time?

would mean they could create a reaction just for checking play restrictions.

"Reaction: After you check play restrictions and determine you CAN play an event..."

or...

3) Apply any modifiers to the cost(s).

"Reaction: After you apply a reduction to the character you would marshal, punch your opponent in the face."

I know the rule after all these listed steps says you can trigger Reactions throughout the process so I get the inquiry completely.

They're a stepwise process. And you can create a reaction to any defined timing step (Return Gold, Checking Reserve, Winning Initiative, Becoming First Player, Counting Income, Paying a cost, Claiming Bonus Power). Thankfully, they're not exploring all that design space yet, because off-hand, who remembers whether returning gold happens before or after checking reserve (besides me besides me & ktom). 

because off-hand, who remembers whether returning gold happens before or after checking reserve (besides me). 

**cough, cough**

Bad example, anyway, since these are two separate timing windows on the flow chart.

They're a stepwise process. And you can create a reaction to any defined timing step (Return Gold, Checking Reserve, Winning Initiative, Becoming First Player, Counting Income, Paying a cost, Claiming Bonus Power).

Note that this is a bit of an overstatement. The potential for a reaction is created after each game occurrence, not necessarily after each timing step. A single timing step might have multiple game occurrences that are reacted to separately, or it might have a single game occurrence - albeit in multiple parts - that are reacted to together. Paying a cost and choosing a target are clearly separate game occurrences (that happen in the same timing step) with separate reaction windows, but announcing challenge type, challenge opponent and attacking characters are multiple parts to the single game occurrence of initiating a challenge (again, in one timing step) and so have a single reaction window for all parts.

So the question is whether initiation and resolution of playing an event/marshaling a card make up a single occurrence (in multiple parts) for the purposes of opening a reaction window, or whether they are separate. The inquiry is totally understandable based on the "Step 6/Step 7" numbering, but the larger interpretation could argue for, effectively, for reading it as "Step 6a/Step 6b."

(besides mebesides me & ktom). 

 

Fixed . And yes, it is a bit of an overstatement - the best example of the kind of occurence you describe is revealing plots, which is a process which consists of 3 steps - although the rules reference guide is very careful with that particular instance, explicitly stating where we can react to it (RR p26). Admitedly, in this case it's because of the confusion with the physical act of revealing, and the 3-step game process of revealing.

Anyway, that's just idle clarification that doesn't help resolve the issue.

For the non-ktoms, Ktom and I have put this question in excrutiating detail to FFG, we'll let you know what we find out.

Can you react to a pre-then effect before the post-then effect occurs? 

For the above card, would you react to "look at hand" before reacting to "discard 1 card"?  (if the Reactions existed in the game of course) 

I know the reaction timing stuff has been sent to FFG for clarification, but I'm just trying to see what you think according to the rules as written.

This has been answered in detail on the Arianne questions in the Rules forum. I'll refer you there, but the short answer is that they share the same reaction window (but two different interrupt windows).

It's worth bumping this since istaril's edit of his post didn't do so automatically.

After checking with FFG, the "after you play" reaction trigger comes after the resolution of the event's effect.