Cowardice / Mass Cowardice and higher level guards

[iNano78]

Living level 1 creature is affected by Cowardice or Mass Cowardice. There is a level 2 enemy creature Guarding the zone, and a different target the creature would like to attack (e.g. a conjuration, perhaps a V'tar orb...). Since the L1 creature can't attack the higher level creature, is it free to attack a different target in the zone... almost as though it has the Elusive trait?

No, I'm not suggesting that an orb can be hit by bypassing a neutral Sslak this way; but if an opponent's creature is guarding, what is the Cowardly creature (dis)allowed to do?

[exid]

I would say:
if it attacks it has to attack the guard, but it can't, so it can't attack.
(same as flame attack with a flame imunity guard)

[Puddnhead]

You have a double restriction.
1) You cannot attack anything but a guard.
2) You cannot attack a higher level creature.

Therefore you are out of targets you can attack and can do something else assuming you have no other restrictions, but the one thing you cannot do is attack a target in this zone

[Kharhaz]

You have a double restriction.
1) You cannot attack anything but a guard.
2) You cannot attack a higher level creature.

Therefore you are out of targets you can attack and can do something else assuming you have no other restrictions, but the one thing you cannot do is attack a target in this zone

To clarify, there are no legal targets in the OP example.

I think you may be thinking of mandatory actions where, if more than one apply, you can choose which one to perform; a ranged attack or move toward Thorg for example.

Remember, target legality is only checked during the declare step of the attack. So if you divine intervention a creature with a guard marker after the attack is declared, the creature can ignore that guard for that sequence.

Also while on the subject of the cowardice "fear" effect, the entire ability is similarly checked during the declare attack step, so you cannot enchantment transfusion it after the attack has been declared and make the target illegal.

[Zuberi]

So, I started to write a big long post and realized that it's not really necessary and would probably cause more confusion than it clarified. Instead, I'm going to say that everyone here is correct. You can not make an attack in that zone given that situation. I also really like that Kharhaz points out the difference between what's going on here and Mandatory actions because that has caused confusion in the past when people have conflated guarding with mandatory actions. They're not the same thing. I also like how Puddnhead used the term "restriction". That accurately describes what's actually going on here, I think. You're restricting what options the creature has for an action, you're not forcing an action on it.

I will say however that Kharhaz kind of skims over some of the subtle nuances regarding what's going on, but their overall point is correct and I don't think we need to be nit picky with the details.

[wtcannonjr]

So, banana stickers all around then?

[Coshade]

Giving out banana stickers like they are going out of style

[wtcannonjr]

Giving out banana stickers like they are going out of style

Yay! Does that mean we get a new sticker design for 2018? I mean really, bananas are soooo out of style this year.

What about mango?

[Coshade]

Yay! Does that mean we get a new sticker design for 2018?

The banana fairie would probably be upset