Savage & lock downs

[AO user]

Savage NN is in play. AO or ED can't be played defensively but can they be used to unlock hero that is snared or raza'd?  It affects opponent but doesn't cross the table

[BigBadHarve]

I'd be inclined to rule no, because the effect doesn't actually cross the table. You are removing something on your side of the 'battle line' so to speak, so it's not an attack.

[AO user]

As I type these up now I'm starting to anticipate responses.  Savage is an attack, can opponent play a lock OUT card defensively?  a CW or BJ?  or its nebulous like a negate, affect opponent not targeted character and cant be EE'd by inhumans' royal family etc?

In a game where I landed savage & got it in play, opponent used an ally followed by a negate to remove savage so they could draw 3.  was that legit?  we ruled it affected me (removing my lock down) so it did cross table & worked.
still a little muddy.

[BigBadHarve]

As I type these up now I'm starting to anticipate responses.  Savage is an attack, can opponent play a lock OUT card defensively?  a CW or BJ?  or its nebulous like a negate, affect opponent not targeted character and cant be EE'd by inhumans' royal family etc?

Savage must be negated, you can't avoid it. It should be noted, though, that lil Iceman type cards are also considered attacks and can be used to remove Savage once it's in play.

In a game where I landed savage & got it in play, opponent used an ally followed by a negate to remove savage so they could draw 3.  was that legit?  we ruled it affected me (removing my lock down) so it did cross table & worked.
still a little muddy.

Yes, that would have been a legit play. The negate was used offensively (and as an attack) because it crossed the battle line to your side to negate the effect of Savage. But using the negate to remove your lock down (I assume a 'target may not attack') under the effects of savage would not have been legal.