Search results

Thanks for the complement DJ. And it was put in a very didatic manner. But I ask you, and once more to all: In the 1st case (in the beginning of the thread), TP attacks and passes, NTP passes too. Now NTP activates Enemy Controller, do you think NTP can still activate his Sak? Thanks again

Yes, our beloved Main Phases 1 and 2. TP is in his/ her MP1. He decides to special summon Cyber Dragon and passes. NTP passes too. Obviously, this doesn't mean that TP (nor NTP) wants to proceed immediately to BP or EP. TP can still perform a normal summon, activate spell/ trap cards...

It's interesting to see that some people thinks one way, some people another. But, the main reason I believe after double pass TP could activate EC and NTP couldn't activate Sak or any other "when an attack is declared" sort of card is that it benefits the strategic aspect and is quite...

yes, we had. And there were people that said that this would be legal (summon Zaborg for example, pass, pass, TP activates MST still in his MP1 and NTP now activating BTH). This sounds insane...

The reason that it would be better if after both pass the response window we could still activate effects and start a chain is that it would make all phases of the turn have the same structure, except the infamous Damage step (that tends to grow in importance now we have Gadgets). Here we go...

double post

Okay, I admit: It's kind of scaring me. And it's a old discussion, that doesn't have a definitive answer yet. And (worst thing) it will increase... The old (and sometimes boring) response window thing. As Gadgets finally hit the stores, I believe cards that can cause trouble regarding this...

Simply amazing, although I spent money and effort to get 3 Steins (it's quite difficult to obtain here in Brasil). Sounds like Freeeeeedom!!!!

My doubt was exactly if Chain Strike could "check" future links (after his activation) to meet its condition. But it only counts links placed before its activation. It's good to know, since we will probably see a lot of these decks... Thanks a lot!

Text Activate only as Chain Link 2 or higher; inflict 400 damage to your opponent times the Chain Link number of this card. You cannot activate this card if multiple cards/effects with the same name are in that Chain. The bolded part is causing some confusion to me. I understood the rule...

I was thinking (again) about this issue, and other strange situation occured to me: JT is in his Battle Step and have 1 face-up Jinzo and one face-up DD Assailant. NJT has only 2 set s/t. JT declares he is attacking directly with DDA and pass. NJT responds activating Book of Moon, targeting...

Another related question. Let's say I have TT set (previous turn) and my opponent only has 1 face-up Cyber Dragon, with 5600 lp. I can summon Stein, use priority to activate his effect, respond with TT (cleaning Cyber Dragon and Cyber Stein) and after that my Twin will enter the field, right...

Well, it's a good thing. Another nice little trick for my Chimeratech deck. In fact, this scenario happened 3 or 4 times already, and I wanted to be sure I was playing right. Thanks

So, in the end, Cyber Phoenix would prevent Chimeratech from being destroyed in the scenario, right? The only way I see to believe otherwise would be something like: - Chimeratech enters the field and its effect triggers immediately. CP effect is aplying to COD the moment it entered the field...

Situation: - I activate Future Fusion designating Chimeratech Overdragon, sending 15 machines from my deck to the grave. - In my 2nd stand by phase after FF activation, I have a face-up Cyber Phoenix or (special summon it with Call of the Haunted). - Now, COD enters the field, immediately...

Thanks Exiledforcefreak for understanding what I was trying to discuss in fact. I just wonder if there is any other person that share this point of view (Sak would resolve destroying VL). MC case I am not completely convinced, but it makes sense too. Thanks

Right, this came up while I was seeing Negate Attack parts 1 and 2 thread. It was kind of hard to find a relevant situation, but here it goes: -TP has only Vampire Lord face-up on the field (no hand, no set s/t). - NTP has only a spent MoF (face-up in the defense position) and 2 set cards...

Wait a minute. I thought a bit more and I disagree with this ruling. I think my initial statement was correct. I will explain in a new thread.

You're completely right Slither. I forgot this possibility. In my statement I should have said: Magic Cylinder resolves properly in this case because the only condition that has to be fulfilled at the time of the resolution of Magic Cylinder is the monster targeted being face-up on the field of...

Magic Cylinder resolves properly in this case because the only condition that has to be fulfilled at the time of the resolution of Magic Cylinder is the monster targeted being face-up on the field, so "MC can check" its attack and determine the damage. Why? Because the only thing that matters to...