I've got a question about Amelia Voght, in part from the Metagame coverage on Stephen King, at the latest PC:LA.


Amelia Voght's Text:

Reservist

You may reveal two face-down reservist resources you control not named Amelia Voght rather than pay Amelia Voght's recruit cost.



You would announce Amelia's recruit, revealing her, and then putting her onto the chain. After she is put onto the Chain, you are then able to replace a resource.



It's at this point that you would reveal two face-down reservist resources not named Amelia Voght, instead of paying her recruit cost.



If I'm understanding this correctly, then this situation is legal, due to what I've outlined above:

I put Amelia's recruit onto the chain, and the replace her with another reservist resource. I can then choose to reveal two face-down reservist resources I control, that are not named Amelia Voght, instead of paying her recruit cost?


I would think that the above scenario is legal, and King mentioned this trick in his coverage, but I just wanted to clarify what exactly was happening, and that it is legal.

it is actually legal....
i didn't beleive it at first... so i looked it up for myself when i read the coverage.

basically, what you're doing is:
1 - reveal Amelia from your row
2 - place the character card on the chain
3 - you may place a card from your hand face-down in your resource row
4 - pay the cost for Amelia

AS always, the rules are there to work FOR you, not against you. A nice combo that had yet to be capitalized on before.

That is pretty awesome. I've been testing that deck a lot over the past week or two (as have others, I can see!) I'll be sure to use that trick next time.

B.

Her replacement cost isn't checked until she's put on the chain, so you've played a recruitment effect, thus the card is then replaced. That's why this works as it does. Basically you can't pay an alternate recruit cost until the character's recruit is on the chain because their text isn't active sitting in your hand.

-Mike