A theoretical ruling for Victory Dragon.

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

Deathjester

New Member
"If a player would be guaranteed to win the duel with the effect of Victory Dragon, they may choose to be the winner of the Match even if the opponent surrendered."

I know the policy about either player being allowed to surrender at any time, but would UDE be right to make that ruling? Seems like it would be one of those necessary rulings they just haven't bothered to state yet.
 
This might go somewhere then again maybe not. Its an interesting thought but not a rules question per se. Let go discuss it then.....
 
i'd say it's a fair ruling. it protects the work of the player who set it up so that he could win via victory dragon. i think dissension will come if the player is handed the victory in round one of the match. since ude/konami seems to be attempting to police and weed out ftk's. which is understandable. who wants to pay to play a game where you lose before you draw your first card/only draw 1 card?
 
Personally, I think it's a shame Victory Dragon is currently banned, although that's probably because of the difficulty of preventing people from surrendering (thus gaining the next round to retaliate) just before losing completely against it. If only they'd make it so neither player was allowed to surrender while it was out, things would be a whole lot better.

Aside from Level Conversion Lab or a couple of Cost Downs, I can't see many ways of whipping out the Victory Dragon for an easy strike. Plus it needs to attack, plus it needs to be the winning attack, so that's quite a restriction. It certainly promotes Dragons and the associated themed Deck. I figure if someone can manage to get it out and score the winning attack, they deserve to win. It's hardly an FTK/OTK/TTFN. The opponent was clearly going to bite it anyway, and to be fair they should have been aware of the card and be expecting it (it's a Dragon Deck, after all).
 
I remember someone saying that when you fold the game to avoid "Victory Dragon", you're abusing the rule, which is unsporting conduct. This means that if you call a judge over, your opponent can get a warning, and possibly a match loss.

Has anyone ever tried this?
 
Actually it has been stated by UDE that you may concede the game at any time even when victory dragon is on the field before the attack goes through. I dont have the link right now but Im sure someone will post it. So basically you cant get them done for unsporting conduct.

"If a player would be guaranteed to win the duel with the effect of Victory Dragon, they may choose to be the winner of the Match even if the opponent surrendered."....... Thats just not right. As soon as you give the player the choice of ignoring the rules then youre on a slippery slope. Its an impossible ruling that will never see the light of day outside this thread. Now if they simply said you can only concede on your own turn things would be a bit easier.
 
Just seems to me that UDE didn't really plan out how Victory Dragon should be handled if people play it.

In all honesty, I actually think it was a mistake that it was released in the TCG.
 
Isn't this the same problem we've run into all along with the TCG? We have long standing rules that have been a part of the the game almost since the beginning, then a card comes out that needs or, at least, would benefit from the rules being revised in order for the card to work. Then we debate it endlessly on forums after it's release, UDE insists that nothing has changed, the card fades into obscurity, pops up every now and again and then fades back into obscurity again.

Now, a standard possibility is that they'll do as Emerald suggests, and make concession a turn based permission only. But if they do, they will do it silent, without announcement, and I guarantee ten guys will pretend like it's always been that way. :hrm:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top