You can't ignore part of an action as you wish unfortunately, similar to how you cannot ignore the cost for actions.

You have to satisfy all parts of the text box.

I'm not sure that's correct. There is no 'Then' for the second sentence, which usually means you can perform that regardless of the other part of the text. If it said 'then' you may move gold , then sure, but it doesn't so it's two seperate sentences and actions surely?

(and yeh SJK- what the hell is this doing in Stark? Should be neutral 100%)

I'm not sure that's correct. There is no 'Then' for the second sentence, which usually means you can perform that regardless of the other part of the text. If it said 'then' you may move gold , then sure, but it doesn't so it's two seperate sentences and actions surely?

After further consideration, I do think that Nail is probably right. Usually when a card has two separate actions possible, they are denoted by different bold faced headings. For example, see Mace Tyrell.

After further consideration, I do think that Nail is probably right. Usually when a card has two separate actions possible, they are denoted by different bold faced headings. For example, see Mace Tyrell.

True about the bold face, but the 'then' rule is also relevent. 'Then' is usually the indicator meaning that you cannot perform the effect unless the previous sentence cost has been paid. This seems like a confusingly structured and printed effect. In this case, the cost is to kneel and sacrifice to pay the cost of the kill effect. The next sentence has nothing to do with an effect of that previous cost or even effect, it seems to me? I'm trying to think of another card with similar wording/effects.

For instance it should say do x to move gold, or do X, then move gold. Instead, it doesn't which makes it looks seperate.

I'm not sure that's correct. There is no 'Then' for the second sentence, which usually means you can perform that regardless of the other part of the text. If it said 'then' you may move gold , then sure, but it doesn't so it's two seperate sentences and actions surely?

Its a good counter to Varys at least.  

So if I want to put my money on this I have to do the dominance action I need to satisfy.

Kneeling the Card,
Paying X Gold (at least one)
choose a character with x or less printed strength

while it isn't importent if the character actually dies or is saved.

Right?

So in the search for hilarious jank there might be a situation where one wants to use this on his or her own chud to be able to refill it.

Also: WTF why is this a Stark card?

'Then' would require the character to actually die for the second part to resolve.
You have to resolve the full effect (note that you 'may' add gold) of a card, but in this sense the results of both actions are independent.
 

Is there an official ruling or a general concensus about how this works? Whether you can add gold without performing the first part of the action.

Is there an official ruling or a general concensus about how this works? Whether you can add gold without performing the first part of the action.

From thronesdb Rules FAQ:

• Killing a character and moving gold onto The House of Black and White is all part of the same action. You must legally target a character for a kill in order to move gold onto The House of Black and White.
• Moving gold does not depend on whether the kill was successful or not.
• You may kill a character with printed strength 0 (or X) by discarding 1 or more gold.

 

From thronesdb Rules FAQ:

• Killing a character and moving gold onto The House of Black and White is all part of the same action. You must legally target a character for a kill in order to move gold onto The House of Black and White.
• Moving gold does not depend on whether the kill was successful or not.
• You may kill a character with printed strength 0 (or X) by discarding 1 or more gold.

 

Aha! Thanks!