Yu-Gi-Oh! Rulings Questions

[Progenitor]

Can I use Igknight Unite targeting itself?

That's like asking if MST can target itself.

 

no it can't.

[ÆƵ–]

That's like asking if MST can target itself.

 

no it can't.

 

Good to know. Better make a ygopro report then

[Forest Fire]

If a Pendulum monster is targeted by Mask Change II, why would it not go to the graveyard?

[Dova]

When a Pendulum monster would go from the field to the Graveyard, it goes to the Graveyard instead, because mechanics. If Mask Change II said "send it to the Graveyard, and, if you do" it would not resolve correctly, but as Mask Change attempts to put it in the Graveyard from the field, the Pendulum Monster's mechanics would take priority.

[TF2_The_Scout]

Can I chain Kozmo Strawman's quick effect to its ignition effect? If so, will both effects resolve?

[Azuriena]

Can I chain Kozmo Strawman's quick effect to its ignition effect? If so, will both effects resolve?

You can. Both effects will resolve properly because monsters do not have to be face-up on the field to resolve their effects activated on the field.

[Dragulas]

If i return a face down banished card to the grave with omega, is it considered to be sent or just returned?

[Azuriena]

If i return a face down banished card to the grave with omega, is it considered to be sent or just returned?

Just returned (not sent).

[~Faytl~]

Say you special summon Poseidra the Atlantean Dragon through its effect with Atlantean Marksman as one of the tributes. Can you choose in what order the chain resolves so Poseidra resolves first?

[Yuuji Kazami]

Say you special summon Poseidra the Atlantean Dragon through its effect with Atlantean Marksman as one of the tributes. Can you choose in what order the chain resolves so Poseidra resolves first?

 

Marksman can only resolve after the Summon. But Marksman forms a chain with Poseidra's effect that activates upon Special Summon. I would like to say that you get to pick, but I'm not certain with the order of the chain resolving. This seems like a TCG vs OCG ruling.

 

Also #MakeTerrieYGORulingMod

[ÆƵ–]

I'm not sure on the ruling myself, but I think I heard somewhere that in tcg, you decide the order, but in ocg, it goes in whatever order the conditions were met with, so I'm this case marks chain 1, posi chain 2. Though I might have this tcg vs ocg backwards

[Azuriena]

Say you special summon Poseidra the Atlantean Dragon through its effect with Atlantean Marksman as one of the tributes. Can you choose in what order the chain resolves so Poseidra resolves first?

When players have the opportunity to activate triggered effects and they have multiple effects that were triggered, the Chain is formed in this order (SEGOC):

 

1. The turn player's mandatory effects, in the order they were triggered.

2. The non-turn player's mandatory effects, in the order they were triggered.

3. The turn player's optional effects, in the order they were triggered.

4. The non-turn player's optional effects, in the order they were triggered.

 

The activation of both Poseidra's and Marksman's Trigger Effects are mandatory, so you have to activate them in the order in which they were triggered. In this case, Marksman was Tributed, then Poseidra was Summoned with its own effect, so Marksman's effect must activate first as Chain Link 1 and Poseidra's must activate second as Chain Link 2. Poseidra's effect will resolve first.

 

Also #MakeTerrieYGORulingMod

 

^^;

 

I'm not sure on the ruling myself, but I think I heard somewhere that in tcg, you decide the order, but in ocg, it goes in whatever order the conditions were met with, so I'm this case marks chain 1, posi chain 2. Though I might have this tcg vs ocg backwards

 

You do have it backwards, haha. >.< In the OCG, the order in which the effects were triggered does not matter (but you still follow SEGOC).

[Draconus297]

So, here's a snippet from the effect of "Spellbound Leviathan", and I want to know if I worded this correctly for what I intend.

 

If your opponent takes Battle Damage from a battle involving a "Spellbound" or "Mellaxis" monster you control, inflict 500 damage to your opponent (This is treated as Battle Damage. This effect deals damage even if the Battle Damage that triggered this effect was reduced to 0 by a card effect).

 

Here's how I intend this to work:

Say that this monster (1900 ATK) and "Spellbound Swordswoman" (1700 ATK, boosts everyone's ATK and DEF by 200 if she inflicts Battle Damage) are on the field together.

Your opponent controls Trapeze Magician and a random monster with 1000 ATK.

Swordswoman attacks and destroys something that had 1000 ATK.

Your opponent takes 700 damage, the ATK of your monsters is boosted, and your opponent takes 500 more damage, treated as Battle Damage instead of effect damage so that Trapeze Magician's effect doesn't block it.

Leviathan (now 2100, with its other effect being that it will reduce Trapeze Magician's ATK by 300 and boost its own by the same amount) attacks Trapeze Magician, and your opponent activates that Trap that reduces Battle Damage taken in a battle to 0 and saves the weaker monster. Your opponent still takes 500 damage, thanks to Leviathan's effect.

 

Did I word it right?

[Yuuji Kazami]

So, here's a snippet from the effect of "Spellbound Leviathan", and I want to know if I worded this correctly for what I intend.

 

If your opponent takes Battle Damage from a battle involving a "Spellbound" or "Mellaxis" monster you control, inflict 500 damage to your opponent (This is treated as Battle Damage. This effect deals damage even if the Battle Damage that triggered this effect was reduced to 0 by a card effect).

 

Here's how I intend this to work:

Say that this monster (1900 ATK) and "Spellbound Swordswoman" (1700 ATK, boosts everyone's ATK and DEF by 200 if she inflicts Battle Damage) are on the field together.

Your opponent controls Trapeze Magician and a random monster with 1000 ATK.

Swordswoman attacks and destroys something that had 1000 ATK.

Your opponent takes 700 damage, the ATK of your monsters is boosted, and your opponent takes 500 more damage, treated as Battle Damage instead of effect damage so that Trapeze Magician's effect doesn't block it.

Leviathan (now 2100, with its other effect being that it will reduce Trapeze Magician's ATK by 300 and boost its own by the same amount) attacks Trapeze Magician, and your opponent activates that Trap that reduces Battle Damage taken in a battle to 0 and saves the weaker monster. Your opponent still takes 500 damage, thanks to Leviathan's effect.

 

Did I word it right?

0 damage in battle isn't considered as inflicting battle damage.

 

If Leviathan's effect is inflicting 500 damage whenever it deals battle damage, it won't resolve in this case if something is activated to reduce the battle damage to 0. Inflicting 0 damage is treated as inflicting no damage.

[Azuriena]

So, here's a snippet from the effect of "Spellbound Leviathan", and I want to know if I worded this correctly for what I intend.

 

If your opponent takes Battle Damage from a battle involving a "Spellbound" or "Mellaxis" monster you control, inflict 500 damage to your opponent (This is treated as Battle Damage. This effect deals damage even if the Battle Damage that triggered this effect was reduced to 0 by a card effect).

 

Here's how I intend this to work:

Say that this monster (1900 ATK) and "Spellbound Swordswoman" (1700 ATK, boosts everyone's ATK and DEF by 200 if she inflicts Battle Damage) are on the field together.

Your opponent controls Trapeze Magician and a random monster with 1000 ATK.

Swordswoman attacks and destroys something that had 1000 ATK.

Your opponent takes 700 damage, the ATK of your monsters is boosted, and your opponent takes 500 more damage, treated as Battle Damage instead of effect damage so that Trapeze Magician's effect doesn't block it.

Leviathan (now 2100, with its other effect being that it will reduce Trapeze Magician's ATK by 300 and boost its own by the same amount) attacks Trapeze Magician, and your opponent activates that Trap that reduces Battle Damage taken in a battle to 0 and saves the weaker monster. Your opponent still takes 500 damage, thanks to Leviathan's effect.

 

Did I word it right?

 

It doesn't work or at least shouldn't exist in this game imo (in the case that you ruled it to work) where 0 isn't a quantity. Especially because the TCG has "reduce damage you would take to 0" translated as "take no damage" in many cases. Inflicting 0 battle damage is not inflicting any battle damage. As such, there's no correct way to word this effect. You could probably design an effect that does something similar, though.

 

Also, Trapeze Magician prevents all damage that is less than or equal to its ATK, not just effect damage.

[Yuuji Kazami]

It doesn't work or at least shouldn't exist in this game imo (in the case that you ruled it to work) where 0 isn't a quantity. Especially because the TCG has "reduce damage you would take to 0" translated as "take no damage" in many cases. Inflicting 0 battle damage is not inflicting any battle damage. As such, there's no correct way to word this effect. You could probably design an effect that does something similar, though.

 

Also, Trapeze Magician prevents all damage that is less than or equal to its ATK, not just effect damage.

He never imo said that it was imo a Performage Trapeze Magician imo. 

 

Imo, it can just be some monster named Trapeze Magician imo that only negates effect damage imo. =P

 

But I'm pretty sure imo that he just wasn't sure imo if 0 damage actually counts as imo damage imo.

[Azuriena]

He never imo said that it was imo a Performage Trapeze Magician imo. 

 

Imo, it can just be some monster named Trapeze Magician imo that only negates effect damage imo. =P

 

But I'm pretty sure imo that he just wasn't sure imo if 0 damage actually counts as imo damage imo.

 

If such a card existed I reckon that it probably would work, but that would be a pretty stupid ruling and a pretty bad decision on their part to even make that card imo.

 

I don't usually reiterate what someone says, but I was already in the middle of writing my response. orz

[Yuuji Kazami]

If such a card existed I reckon that it probably would work, but that would be a pretty stupid ruling and a pretty bad decision on their part to even make that card imo.

 

I don't usually reiterate what someone says, but I was already in the middle of writing my response. orz

=P

 

Here's a fun ruling question. If I activate Lullaby of Obedience while Mistake is already face-up on the field, and I declare:

 

The Creator God of Light, Horakhty

 

It's determined to be a valid target in my opponent's Deck and my opponent does not respond with anything. So do I win the duel? ;P

 

P.S. No cheating by going into my TCG thread! >.< 

 

You can use Google and whatnot though.

[Azuriena]

=P

 

Here's a fun ruling question. If I activate Lullaby of Obedience while Mistake is already face-up on the field, and I declare:

 

The Creator God of Light, Horakhty

 

It's determined to be a valid target in my opponent's Deck and my opponent does not respond with anything. So do I win the duel? ;P

 

P.S. No cheating by going into my TCG thread! >.< 

 

You can use Google and whatnot though.

 

The player that Special Summons Horakhty wins the Duel, so yes.

[Yuuji Kazami]

The player that Special Summons Horakhty wins the Duel, so yes.

 

Are you sure?.... =(

 

Note that Lullaby of Obedience is the first of its kind to steal an opponent's card directly from their Deck for you to use. 

[Azuriena]

Are you sure?.... =(

 

Yes. Or is there a reason you think otherwise?

 

Note that Lullaby of Obedience is the first of its kind to steal an opponent's card directly from their Deck for you to use.

I mean, I'd like to know if you're basing this question on who applies the effects of Lullaby or on Mistake.

 

There are rulings for both, so.

[Mysty]

Are you sure?.... =(

 

Note that Lullaby of Obedience is the first of its kind to steal an opponent's card directly from their Deck for you to use. 

http://www.db.yugioh-card.com/yugiohdb/faq_search.action?ope=5&fid=19404&keyword=&tag=-1&request_locale=ja

 

According to my other source,

https://www.reddit.com/r/yugioh/comments/4jqw6v/can_lullaby_of_obedience_summon_horakhty/d38rhx8

the first source says "if you activate Lullaby of Obedience and declare Horakhty, and the opponent has Horakhty in their Deck, they can choose to Special Summon it to your field, and in that case, you win the Duel."

 

I do say that it is a huge case of BKSS unless Lullaby is translated badly.Then again, since when has consistency of rulings ever been Konami's thing?

[Yuuji Kazami]

 

Yes. Or is there a reason you think otherwise?

 

 

I mean, I'd like to know if you're basing this question on who applies the effects of LoB or on Mistake.

 

There are rulings for both, so.

Well, I basically mean does Lullaby of Obedience gets part of it shut down by Mistake, and forces the opponent to SS Horakhty?

 

Now that I think about it, who technically would win if Horakhty is called like this? It's actually not possible for the above scenario to occur, but who would win since it's your opponent SSing the card?

 

Well, looks like the user above solved that. 

 

Going back to Lullaby of Obedience, does part of the card truly get shut down? ;)

[Azuriena]

Well, I basically mean does Lullaby of Obedience gets part of it shut down by Mistake, and forces the opponent to SS Horakhty?

 

http://www.db.yugioh-card.com/yugiohdb/faq_search.action?ope=5&fid=19409&keyword=&tag=-1

Q: If Mistake's and Vanity's Emptiness' effects are being applied, can either player activate Lullaby of Obedience?

A: In the case that both Mistake's and Vanity's Emptiness' effects are being applied, neither player can activate Lullaby of Obedience.

 

So it goes to say that Mistake does shut down Lullaby's effect that adds from the Deck to the hand.

 

Now that I think about it, who technically would win if Horakhty is called like this? It's actually not possible for the above scenario to occur, but who would win since it's your opponent SSing the card?

Why wouldn't it be possible?

 

The player who activates Lullaby Special Summons Horakhty, and wins the Duel.

[Yuuji Kazami]

 

http://www.db.yugioh-card.com/yugiohdb/faq_search.action?ope=5&fid=19409&keyword=&tag=-1

Q: If Mistake's and Vanity's Emptiness' effects are being applied, you or your opponent activate Lullaby of Obedience?

A: In the case that both Mistake's and Vanity's Emptiness' effects are being applied, neither you nor your opponent can activate Lullaby of Obedience.

 

So it goes to say that Mistake does shut down LoB's effect that adds from the Deck to the hand.

 

 

Why wouldn't it be possible?

 

The player who activates LoB Special Summons Horakhty, and wins the Duel.

I mean, the effect of Mistake is:

 

Neither player can add cards from their Deck to their hand except by drawing them.

 

The keywords being adding cards from "their Deck" to their hand as opposed to "opponent's Deck" to their hand. 

 

It's the same thing with that ruling about the control with Fairy Meteor Crush. Lullaby is pretty much a search from the opponent's Deck, not from your own. Therefore as the choices of Lullaby of Obedience are to add the declared card to your opponent's hand or SS it to their field, they would still get both choices even if Mistake's on the field.

 

So basically, Thunder King Rai-Oh can't do sheet here either. 

 

And Horakhty ends up in hand like a useless piece of Level 12 Divine trash. =3

 

*Creds goes to former Okaa-san who had first noticed it.