Yu-Gi-Oh! Rulings Questions

[Darj]

Want to be sure about something:

 

Scenario:

It's the Standby Phase, you control no monsters while your opponent does, you have Sky Striker Quick-Play Spells like Widow Anchor on hand/field, and monsters like Wind-Up Rabbit and Mekk-Knight Purple Nightfall activated their effects in the previous turn, which means they are coming back on this Standby Phase.

The question is: can I activate the Sky Striker Quick-Play Spells in that Standby Phase before the monsters return? I'm a aware that since their effects already resolved, it's not like you can chain the Spells to their effects. Or perhaps the monsters are forced to be the first thing to happen in the Standby Phase, for whatever reason? I would think that for that, their effects would have to have something among the lines of "the start of your next Standby Phase".

[Azuriena]

Want to be sure about something:

 

Scenario:

It's the Standby Phase, you control no monsters while your opponent does, you have Sky Striker Quick-Play Spells like Widow Anchor on hand/field, and monsters like Wind-Up Rabbit and Mekk-Knight Purple Nightfall activated their effects in the previous turn, which means they are coming back on this Standby Phase.

The question is: can I activate the Sky Striker Quick-Play Spells in that Standby Phase before the monsters return? I'm a aware that since their effects already resolved, it's not like you can chain the Spells to their effects. Or perhaps the monsters are forced to be the first thing to happen in the Standby Phase, for whatever reason? I would think that for that, their effects would have to have something among the lines of "the start of your next Standby Phase".

You can

 

See this chart (https://www.yugioh-card.com/en/gameplay/fasteffects_timing.html) first to get context for the following

 

During your Standby Phase in box A, you can return the banished monster or activate a fast effect

 

You can do these things in any order you want. You can return Nightfall in box A, then banish it again with its effect in box A (after looping back to it via left blue box -> yellow box -> NO -> box B -> box C -> box A) or box B, then activate a Quick-Play Spell in box A or box B, then return Rabbit in box A. Or any other kind of valid order

[Catman25]

If I control Pacifis, the Phantasm City, and my opponent destroys my set Waking the Dragon, Pacifis will go off as a mandatory CL1, but due to its restriction, will Waking the Dragon go off as CL2? 

 

Edit: JK, it'll resolve due to there being a Normal monster in deck to summon. Along the same line however, will I be able to SS an effect monster? Idk if it counts Activation right at CL1, or at resolution (I assume its the former, but just checking)

 

 

 

Additionally, if I have no targets to search with Pacifis' first effect, will it still go off when I summon a monster?

[Atypical-Abbie]

If you choose to Special Summon an Effect Monster with Waking the Dragon you cannot also Special Summon the Token and vice-verse. If you Special Summon a Normal Monster though you can still do both. If the clause preventing Effect Monsters from being Normal or Special Summoned should that have happened, or will happen, you can no longer activate the effects of the card, as it is for that entire turn, not after the activation of the effect.

 

The first effect is mandatory so yes.

[Catman25]

Sorry, so I will be able to SS an effect monster off of Waking? As in, Pacifis activating on CL1 doesn't disqualify me from SSing an effect monster (i.e. the condition is met only on resolution of Pacifis)?

[Atypical-Abbie]

Sorry, so I will be able to SS an effect monster off of Waking? As in, Pacifis activating on CL1 doesn't disqualify me from SSing an effect monster (i.e. the condition is met only on resolution of Pacifis)?

That is the opposite of what I said, you cannot do that.

[Catman25]

oh ok, your "If you choose to summon an Effect Monster" threw me off, since you cant actually choose to do that, you're saying

[o_smily]

If the effects of my Millenium-Eyes Restrict were to be negated by any of my opponent's card effects, would I still be able to use Millenium-Eyes Illusionist or Relinquished Fusion to equip a monster to my Restrict?

[Atypical-Abbie]

If the effects of my Millenium-Eyes Restrict, were to be negated by any of my opponent's card effects, would I still be able to use Millenium-Eyes Illusionist's or Relinquished Fusion to equip a monster to my Restrict?

Interesting question, I wasn't too sure, because you are equipping with another card, so normally that wouldn't matter, but as it turns out, since the effect is negated, you can't equip it.

 

Source:

https://www.db.yugioh-card.com/yugiohdb/faq_search.action?ope=5&fid=21533&keyword=&tag=-1

 

[spoiler=Q&A]

Question:

エクストラモンスターゾーンに自分の「ミレニアム・アイズ・サクリファイス」が表側表示で存在しています。

 

この状況で、自分が墓地の「サクリファイス・フュージョン」の『②：自分メインフェイズに墓地のこのカードを除外し、相手フィールドの効果モンスター１体を対象として発動できる。自分フィールドの、「アイズ・サクリファイス」融合モンスターまたは「サクリファイス」１体を選び、その効果による装備カード扱いとして対象の相手の効果モンスターを装備する』効果を発動した際に、相手がチェーンして「スキルドレイン」を発動した場合、効果処理はどうなりますか？

Answer

質問の状況の場合、「スキルドレイン」の『①：このカードが魔法＆罠ゾーンに存在する限り、フィールドの全ての表側表示モンスターの効果は無効化される』効果が適用されている状態で、墓地で発動した「サクリファイス・フュージョン」の効果処理が適用される事になります。

 

この場合、「ミレニアム・アイズ・サクリファイス」のモンスター効果が無効化されていますので、『その効果による装備カード扱いとして対象の相手の効果モンスターを装備する』処理を適用する事ができません。

 

墓地の「サクリファイス・フュージョン」の効果の対象として選択された相手の効果モンスターは、そのまま相手のモンスターゾーンに残る事になります。

 

Rough translation from Google Translate:

Question:

My "Millennium Eyes Sacrifice" exists in the extra monster zone as face-up display.

 

In this situation, you can activate this opponent's field monster as an opponent's field monster, excluding this card from the Graveyard during your Main Phase of "Sacrifice Fusion" in your graveyard. When you activate the effect "When you activate the effect" Eye Sacrifice "fusion monster of yourself or" Sacrifice "1 body selected, and the effect equips the target opponent's effect monster as treating the equipment card" When the opponent chains and " If you activate skill drain, what happens to the effect processing?

Answer

In the case of the question situation, as long as "1: This card exists in the Magic & Trap Zone, the effect of all the face-up monster in the field will be invalidated" of "Skill Drain" "Sacrifice fusion" effect processing which was activated in the cemetery will be applied.

 

In this case, since the monster effect of "Millennium Eyes Sacrifice" has been invalidated, you can not apply the process "Equip the target opponent's effect monster as an equipment card handling due to that effect".

 

The effect monster selected as the target of the "Sacrifice Fusion" effect of the cemetery will remain in the opponent's monster zone as it is.

[o_smily]

If I have an Xyz Material that has an effect when sent to the Graveyard, will its effect activate when the Xyz monster is sent to the Graveyard without detaching?

 

EDIT: Another question: when you Tribute monsters via a Ritual Spell Card, when it states to Tribute monsters from (...), am I allowed to simply Tribute 1 monster?

[Atypical-Abbie]

What card do you have in mind exactly? It depends on the wording here, because cards that saying "sent from the field to the GY" would not work, as a material is not on the field, though those saying simply "sent to the GY" can.

 

You can Tribute just 1 monster yes.

[beckon9]

Can I use the effect of Monster Gate to special summon Blue-Eyes White Dragon from the Deck?

[Atypical-Abbie]

Can I use the effect of Monster Gate to special summon Blue-Eyes White Dragon from the Deck?

Yes, of course, there is no reason it couldn't be. Any Normal Monster can be Special Summoned with Monster Gate.

[o_smily]

If I were to have Golden Castle of Stromberg face-up on the field during my next turn after activation, and I control a face-up Pumpkin Carriage or any card that negates my Field Spell Card from being destroyed by card effects, does this mean that my Field Spell Card can stay face-up on the field without having to pay its cost? If so, what would happen when whatever card that was protecting it left the field (I'd assume it would leave the field)?

[Dragulas]

If I were to have Golden Castle of Stromberg face-up on the field during my next turn after activation, and I control a face-up Pumpkin Carriage or any card that negates my Field Spell Card from being destroyed by card effects, does this mean that my Field Spell Card can stay face-up on the field without having to pay its cost? If so, what would happen when whatever card that was protecting it left the field (I'd assume it would leave the field)?

Its a maintenance cost, no effect can protect a card from that (unless it is specifically designed so), the cost is not optional either so you will have to banish the cards and castle will remain. In case you no longer can pay the cost the card will be destroyed, regardless of carriage or any card that protects from destruction, even if the field effects are negated.

[Atypical-Abbie]

If I were to have Golden Castle of Stromberg face-up on the field during my next turn after activation, and I control a face-up Pumpkin Carriage or any card that negates my Field Spell Card from being destroyed by card effects, does this mean that my Field Spell Card can stay face-up on the field without having to pay its cost? If so, what would happen when whatever card that was protecting it left the field (I'd assume it would leave the field)?

That is a maintenance cost, as seen by the "this is not optional" text, which means it would still be destroyed in these cases. Read more here:

 

http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Maintenance_cost

[Spyre of the Wolves]

What's the TCG ruling of Had Destruction? I've got 1 card in my hand and my opponent activates it. Is that legal?

 

 

 

Each player sends 2 cards from their hand to the GY, then draws 2 cards.

[Atypical-Abbie]

No it's not, you must be able to resolve a card when you activate it, as such, if neither players has at least 2 cards in their hand, this card cannot be activated.

[Azuriena]

The answer is just no

 

That "why" doesn't really make any sense at all and cannot be applied with any accuracy, universally or not

 

Additionally Hand Destruction has bad text that misleads as to how it works. Don't create a rule of thumb to extrapolate from the way it works alongside its text

[Atypical-Abbie]

The answer is just no

 

That "why" doesn't really make any sense at all and cannot be applied with any accuracy, universally or not

 

Additionally Hand Destruction has bad text that misleads as to how it works. Don't create a rule of thumb to extrapolate from the way it works alongside its text

I am sorry, but how am I creating anything when this is just the way it is and has been for as long as I can remember it?

[o_smily]

A monster effect that activates when sent to the GY is unaffected by card effects that negate that monster's effect. Is the same true for on Summon effects? If I were to Summon a monster whose effects would be negated while it is face-up on the field, would any on-Summon effects activate?

[Atypical-Abbie]

A monster effect that activates when sent to the GY is unaffected by card effects that negate that monster's effect. Is the same true for on Summon effects? If I were to Summon a monster whose effects would be negated while it is face-up on the field, would any on-Summon effects activate?

Well, a card in the GY isn't unaffected by negation effects, just the ones that only apply on the field itself, some cards even specifically mention that they negate the monster in the GY as well. As for your question, any effect that activates when the card says "When this card is Normal Summoned" or similar activate on the field, so they would be negated under a card like Skill Drain.

[Darj]

Nothung the Starlight vs. Damage Diet:

 

One of Nothung's effect reads as:

"If this card is Special Summoned: Inflict 800 damage to your opponent, then 1 face-up monster your opponent controls loses 800 ATK and DEF."

Needless to say, it is an "A, then B" effect.

 

Damage Diet:

"Halve all damage you take this turn. You can banish this card from your Graveyard; halve all effect damage you take this turn. (You cannot halve the same damage twice with this effect.)"

 

My question is: would I be able to use the part B of that effect of Nothung if it is activated under the effects of Damage Diet? I ask because in that scenario, Nothung's effect would inflict 400 damage rather than 800, and IDK if this means the part A of the effect is not being met to proceed with part B. Or does part B checks for the burn effect going through, regardless of much it burns at the end?

[The Warden]

You would reduce by 800 still. It is a set value, unaffected by if the damage is reduced or outright nullified by another card effect. Consider it more a chain of effects, rather than one effect begetting the second effect.

[Darj]

You would reduce by 800 still. It is a set value, unaffected by if the damage is reduced or outright nullified by another card effect. Consider it more a chain of effects, rather than one effect begetting the second effect.

 

The question is about if the "inflict 800 damage" condition is being fulfilled, not about the stat reduction. Under Damage Diet, you inflict 400, not 800, so technically you are not fulfilling the part A of the effect to proceed with part B. Think of how Bottomless Trap Hole won't banish the monster if it didn't destroy it.