Quill & Tankard Regulars - Issue 25

“A black-winged three-eyed demon? There be no such thing! Bah, too much mead for ye, yer seeing things!”

“Nuh-uh, I knows what I saw! It came from tha window, collided from tha painting of Archmaester Ebrose and then flew in the back. Right cheeky bugger too, that pitcher was almost full o’ ale still!”

The argument between two of the Inn’s staff was suddenly interrupted by two more marching through from the Pantry - one of them with a huge black raven resting on his arm.

“Sadly chaps, no demons this time, but something clandestine none the less. This here bird be from tha Citadel, and it do come bearing... secrets.”

Hello and welcome back, dear Apprentices, Maesters, Archmaesters and other guests of the Quill & Tankard. We have exciting news! From now on, you can find exclusive spoilers of future cards on our column. Not in every issue, probably, but regularly. We’re proud to introduce the latest segment of Quill & Tankard Regulars - The Raven’s Message!

The Raven’s Message
The Raven’s Message exclusively reveals and discusses an up-and-coming, either mechanically or rules-wise interesting, card. The cards are from future products, and have been obtained directly via raven from the Archmaesters at the (FFG) Citadel.

Our first card for The Raven’s Message is the event ‘Supported by the Smith’ from the A Journey’s End Chapter Pack, which will be closing out the Song of the Sea Cycle. The event is one of the new set of Prayer events, each of which allows you to choose between two costs (kneeling 2 influence or kneeling a character) and contains an interesting deck construction restriction of being allowed for all Houses except one.

Based on the Prayer events we have received so far, the House that is not allowed to use one of them, is the one that has good in-House access to similar effects/themes. The Smith is no exception. It allows a player to put into play up to 2 locations with a combined cost of 2 or less from their discard pile. Thus it comes as no surprise that the event is forbidden from the House of the Kraken, with Greyjoy arguably being the most location-centric House in the game... and already having cards like Weathered Crew (SA) and First Mate (SB) for repairing their all-important Warships.

Now, it’s important to note that this is a “put into play” effect. Since that “bypasses all costs (including all gold penalties) and play restrictions” (FAQ 4.4, page 11), you can even use it to jump in two locations with the Limited keyword. For example, Baratheon player’s should enjoy it immensely due to the way it can be used to abuse Seat of Power (WotN) in producing a huge amount of resources. The ‘put into play’ aspect also means that you can utilize Supported By the Smith to work around OOH penalties, creating some interesting possibilities. The Iron Mines (KotS) has already been run from time-to-time OOH in other Houses, and the Smith could easily make that an even more tempting option. Note that if you put a copy of an unique location into play with this, it will attach itself to the first copy as a duplicate. Same with two copies of the same unique location entering play at the same time - you will end up with a duplicated location.

Since this is an Any Phase: event, the most devious uses for it might come in the challenges phase where you could pray for the Smith in the middle of an important challenge. For example, Wyman Manderly might be praying for the Smith to restore his White Harbor Dromon (TGF) back to its former glory before stealth is declared, so that he can Naval in a defender with it. For our previous example of Seat of Power (WotN) , you could theoretically use two Seats of Power twice in one Marshalling-phase, for quite an astonishing cost-reduction of 12 gold.

Can this be cancelled by Paper Shield (QoD)? Well, that depends on the cost that was actually paid. If you paid by kneeling a character, it can. If you paid with Influence, it can’t. This is because the play restrictions of a Response are checked at the time the Response is triggered. Here, the cost of the effect has already been paid at the time Paper Shield (QoD) would be triggered, so you’re looking at that.


Scribe's Heart - Passive vs. Constant Effects
Scribe's Heart is a series of articles delving deeper into specific topics, from game mechanics to specific types of card effects and beyond. An effort is made to explore the discussed topics in-depth, in order for these articles to function as important study material for both apprentice and acolyte.

This week on Scribe’s Heart, we tackle a topic that regularly leads to confusion not only among fresh novices but also seasoned scholars of the arcane. Passives, constants, lasting effects - here’s the gist of it.

The three effect types

There are three basic types of card effects in AGoT:

• Triggered effects
• Passive effects
• Constant effects

All other types of card effects, like lasting effects, terminal effects or replacement effects, are derived from these three basic types.

Triggered effects are triggered at the discretion of the controlling player and are marked by a boldfaced Response:, Any Phase: or [Name of Phase]:.

Passive and constant effects are not easily discernible by a formal characteristic, however. Basically, any card effect that is not prefaced with bold text is either a passive or a constant effect. It is not always easy telling them apart, but it is important sometimes. Things are not helped by the fact that the templating on the cards is less than consistent, and unusual situations can arise.

Passive effects and constant effects have in common that they are not optional. They must happen, whether the players want them to or not. For more competitive Jaime players it’s important to stress that, unlike in other games, purposefully neglecting to remind your opponent about a passive or constant effect in AGOT goes directly against the rules (see Tourney Rules p. 10 under “Misrepresentation”) and is thus in fact a form of cheating.

Passives and Constants in-depth

Passive effects go through the game's standard Initiate-Save/Cancel-Resolve cycle, just like triggered effects and framework events. That means they are initiated at a specific point (the effect’s play restrictions will tell you when that point is), then there's the opportunity to cancel the effect, or to save cards that would be forced to leave play because of it, then the effect resolves. Unless we’re dealing with a passive that creates a lasting effect (see below), a passive has no duration beyond the action window during which it initiated. It stops affecting the game once it has fully resolved.

An example for a passive would be Ser Jorah Mormont (WLL). The lack of boldfaced text in front of the card effect tells you that this is no triggered effect. It has to happen. The play restriction tells you when the effect is supposed to happen: "After Ser Jorah Mormont comes into play". Let’s assume Ser Jorah Mormont (WLL) is played via a standard Marshalling action. Then the timing would be as follows:

1. Marshalling Action initiates. You announce your intention to play Ser Jorah from hand and pay his gold cost.
2. Save/Cancel Responses. There’s no way to cancel the Marshalling of a card, so we can disregard this step.
3. Marshalling Action resolves. You place Ser Jorah in your play area.
4. Passive abilities are activated. This is where Ser Jorah’s ability happens.

4.1 Passive ability initiates. You choose the character to be discarded.
4.2 Save/Cancel Responses. Save the chosen character from being discarded or cancel the discard effect entirely. The latter is hard (though not entirely impossible) to achieve since there are precious few effects that can cancel passives. Most cancels work on triggered effects of some sort.
4.3 Passive ability resolves. If not saved, the chosen card enters a moribund:discard state.

5. Responses to anything happening before are triggered.
6. Action ends. Moribund cards leave play.

That they go through the Initiate-Save/Cancel-Resolve cycle is is, in fact, what differentiates passive effects from constant effects. You see, constant effects don't do that. They do not initiate at a certain point. They are "always on", so to speak. They start affecting the game the instant they enter play, and they keep affecting the game until they leave play (as long as they are not blanked). Since constant effects have no point of initiation, they cannot be cancelled either. A cancel by definition interrupts another effect after the initiation of that effect, and keeps it from resolving. No initiation, no cancel.

Plot effects that start with the words "When revealed..." are always passive. Plot effects that have no "When revealed" are usually, but not always, constant effects. A classic example would be The Power of Blood (Core). It starts working the moment it is flipped, and will work until it is switched out for another plot (or until it is blanked). An example of a passive plot effect that is not “When revealed...” would be The First Snow of Winter (ODG). Examples for non-plot cards with constant effects would be Winterfell Castle (Core) or Gutter Rat's Cunning (Core), while Golden Tooth Mines (Core) and House Messenger (PotS) would be classic cards with passive effects.

Lasting effects

A short word about lasting effects: They are created by triggered or passive effects, but they have a duration beyond the action window in which they were triggered (which is why they’re confused with constants sometimes). Since they are created by triggered or passive effects, they do have a point of initiation, and can be cancelled. Most have a limited duration (“until the end of the phase/round/etc.”), but there are also some with an unlimited duration. An important difference from constant effects is that, once the original triggered or passive effect resolves successfully, the lasting effect remains active even if the card that originally created the effect is blanked or leaves play.

Examples of lasting effects:

• Catelyn Stark (LoW). The “return to hand” part is a lasting effect, created by a triggered effect. It will happen even if Catelyn is blanked after coming into play. It will not happen if Catelyn is killed, though, since the effect requires her to be in play.
• Seductive Promise (Core). Example for a lasting effect with an unlimited duration. Created by a triggered effect.
• Robb Stark (LoW). Lasting effect created by a triggered effect. Again, if Robb is blanked or removed from play after the ability has resolved successfully, the STR buff persists. The lasting effect is not limited to characters that were in play at the time Robb’s ability was triggered.
• Ser Jorah Mormont (PotS). Lasting effect created by a passive effect. Like Robb’s, Ser Jorah’s effect persists after he is gone (wouldn’t make a whole lot of sense otherwise, now would it), and also affects characters that enter play later.

More tricky situations

So far, that's all pretty easy, right? So, what's the fuzz about?

Well, let’s go back to constant effects. The examples for constant effects above have all been *unconditional*. They're always true, no matter what, as long as the card is in play or the plot is revealed and unblanked.

Most constant effects have additional conditions attached to them, though. Let's look at a few examples:

• A Song of Summer (ASoS): A constant effect, but one that is only "on" while it is summer.
• Acolyte of the Flame (TWH): Again a constant effect, but also one that requires a condition to be fulfilled.

These conditions are checked constantly, and if they apply, the effect is active: “While/if/when X is true, Y is also true”.

Usually it’s still not that hard to tell these conditional constants apart from regular passive effects. A normal passive effect will tell you to do a specific thing at a specific time: “After/When X happens, do Y”. Kneel this. Kill that. Draw those. Claim them. Discard it. And so on. An example of this would be Robert Baratheon (Core). The play restriction tells you when to initiate the effect, and you resolve it. Theoretically, there’s the opportunity to cancel the effect, if you can find a way to do so.

But there’s another group: Passive effects with constantly checked conditions, like: “While/if/when X is true, do Y.” Here’s where things get fuzzy. Let’s look at an example.

Fishwhiskers (CtB): The condition is like the ones usually associated with constant effects. It is constantly checked. But the effect itself is clearly passive. It doesn’t globally modify the game state, but instead asks for a specific task to be performed.

Since the condition is checked constantly, the effect will reassert itself as soon as Fishwhiskers (CtB) stands back up. It is possible to stand him to pay for To Be a Kraken (SB), for example, but when you do, he will kneel again during step 4 of that same action window, where passives resolve. Likewise, he will stand in the standing phase, but will kneel right down again. The same would happen if you found a way to actually cancel the passive. It wouldn’t do you any good, he would just kneel again. So, what we have here is a passive effect that looks a hell of a lot like a constant effect. Other examples of this would be the passive effects on King Robert's Hammer (TBoBB) or Black Hatchling (QoD) (or the other QoD Hatchlings).

Does that remind you of something? An effect that, if cancelled, will just reassert itself?

Let’s look at another example:
Cat o' the Canals (RoW). Another passive effect with a constantly checked condition. If the effect were cancelled, it would just happen again. There’s only a very slight difference compared to Fishwhiskers (CtB): here the passive effect removes a card from play. Thus there is a very real possibility of a save. Starting from duplicates, there’s a ton of things that save a character from being discarded. But the basic problem remains: Even if Cat is saved, the condition for the discard still applies, and she’ll just get discarded again.

Now, this should ring a bell. What we have here is nothing else than a terminal effect! A terminal effect is defined as an effect that removes a card from play and renders normal saves inefficient due to a constantly checked condition which would just reassert itself even after a successful save. The only way to successfully save from a terminal effect are saves that both save the card in question and remove it from the terminal state at the same time.

Of course, the best known and most ubiquitous terminal effects are our universally loved (*cough*, loathed) burn effects... and they are nothing else than what we have discussed here: Passive effects with a constantly checked condition that remove cards from play. You don’t believe us? Well, let’s have a look.

Burning down the House

Let’s recapitulate: When we talk about “Burn”, we mean a mechanic that lowers the STR of characters and removes them from play when their STR is 0. Some cards, like Flame-Kissed (Core), have both a “reduce STR” effect and a “remove from play at STR 0” effect. Others, like Forever Burning (Core), have only STR reduction and need other cards to achieve the terminal burn.
So, the point is, that in order to achieve terminal burn (for a character with STR 1 or more), you need both aspects: The STR reduction and the “remove at STR 0” terminal effect. They both operate under quite different parameters, though.

The STR reduction is always either a constant or a lasting effect. The terminal effect must be a passive effect with a constantly checked condition. Why must it? Because any effect that removes a card from play must have a point of initiation - a defined, specific point at which the card becomes moribund. Otherwise, how would you save from it? If the terminal effect was a constant, you couldn’t! The timing of the game wouldn’t allow it. Like a cancel, a save interrupts an effect between its initiation and resolution. No initiation, no save. And hard as saving from burn might be, it *is* possible (with cards like Viserys Targaryen (Core), Risen from the Sea (KotS), Moqorro (VD) or Rhymes with Meek (ARotD)).

Now, what does that mean? In most cases, nothing much, really. You lay a terminal burn effect on some guy and reduce his STR to 0, the game sees that the condition of the terminal effect is met, and during the next step in which passives resolve, which is usually right after, BOOM, dude’s history, unless there’s one of the rare ways out on hand.

But sometimes... well, let’s say it’s the plot phase. I flip Threat from the North (PotS). You flip one of those “When revealed...” plots that can remove characters from the game. Let’s skip the obvious (Valar Morghulis (Core)) and go with Search and Detain (HtS). The second I flip my plot, its constant effect gives all characters in play -1 STR. Some of yours hit STR 0 in the process. They will get discarded, will they not? Not so fast. As we’ve established, the discard happens as a passive effect, in step 4 of the action window. Now, the “When revealed...” effect from Search and Detain (HtS) is a passive too. But as the FAQ tells us, all “When revealed...” plot passives resolve before any regular passives resolve. That means Search and Detain (HtS) resolves before the discards from Threat from the North (PotS). And that means that, assuming you made yourself First Player, you can make one of your characters moribund:hand before they get discarded by Threat from the North (PotS). And since a moribund card can’t be made to leave play a second time, it will go back to your hand instead of being discarded.

Questioned by the Conclave
Questioned by the Conclave is a series of quizzes for our readers, loosely based around the topics of the Issue in question. Correct answers will be posted in the comments, after enough readers have had their chance of testing their knowledge. The difficulty of the questions will vary from those directed at Apprentices, to those best suited for Archmaesters.

1) I play Incinerate on The Hound (PotS) and reduce his STR to 0. What happens?
2) Can you think of a situation in which the effect of Ser Jorah Mormont (WLL) could be cancelled?
3) Guard at Riverrun (LoW) - constant or passive?
4) Arianne Martell (PotS) - constant or passive?

Antti Korventausta (WWDrakey) is a self-proclaimed Finnish AGoT philosopher and nitpicker, who also used to practice Quantum Mechanics, but found that it paled to AGoT in both interest and complexity. As a Stahleck regular and judge, he sometimes has oddly vivid dreams of understanding portions of the game. In AGoT, he'll play anything as long as it's suitably twisted... often ending up with something that has horns on it.

Helmut Hohberger (Ratatoskr) started playing AGoT in September 2010 and has never looked back (although his wife has, longingly). As a German, he loves rules - and I mean *loves* 'em. Try triggering a Response at the end of a phase on his watch, and he'll probably invade your country. He has actually read the FAQ, and was made a judge at Stahleck 2011 and at various other events. He sometimes answers rules questions on boardgamegeek and the FFG rules board. Some of his answers haven't even been contradicted, corrected or expanded upon by ktom - there is no higher accolade for a rules board morlock.

Every Maester needs a Raven on his shoulder. As a Finn, Iiro Jalonen (Ire) got pulled under the waves by Krakens years ago, and has never looked back. A self-inflicted Shagga and active member of the global AGoT community, he has always strived to know the rules of the game, in order to make them do ridiculous things.

James Waumsley (JCWamma) started playing Thrones in January 2012. Although he’s not got many links on his collar just yet, he’s a fiendishly competitive player who delights in making sure the rules are upheld, so that his opponents have no excuses (or in practice, so that he has no excuses himself).