About Bait Doll

A

antilegend

New Member
Bait Doll
(Labyrinth of Nightmare)
Force the activation of 1 face-down Trap Card. If the timing of the activation of the Trap Card is incorrect, negate the effect and destroy it. If it is not a Trap Card, it is returned to its original position. After this card is activated, it is placed into the Deck (not the Graveyard). Then shuffle the Deck.

1) If Bait Doll did not force the activation of a card (the card is chained, destroyed by MST, etc.), did it return to the deck?
2) You can activate Bait Doll on YOUR OWN trap card so you don't have to pay the cost, right? (e.g. Return from the Other Dimension)
3) If you activate Bait Doll on a face-up Trap card that is set previously in the same turn (e.g. Opponent's Trap set by Dust Turnado or you own Trap set previously), will it be considered "Incorrect Timing" and get destroyed?

Thx for the answers~
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
anthonyj said:
The one that pretty plainly states that Bait Doll does activate traps without having to have the cost paid? Or are you referring to a different e-mail from Steve?
Click to expand...
Actually, it plainly states that if you can't pay the cost, you don't fulfill the requirements, and if you can fulfill the requirements, you can force the activation. Which means that either you can pay the cost with Bait Doll, or you can never force the activation of Elemental Burst.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Raijinili said:
A perfectly reasonable and ignorant stance. Well, at least one of the two.
Click to expand...
Again resorting to baiting and name calling. Really Raij this is a civil discussion. You seem to be the only one who believes that your Japanese rulings knowledge places you miles above all of us common folk. I have certainly appreciated your being able to interject the japanese rulings on situations because they "should" be matching up. And possibly someday we will see everything working the same. But belittling others because they are working with rulings that state the opposite of what is true in the OCG seems a little misguided to say the least. If you have a problem with the TCG rulings question them as we all do. Starting fights with those who are interpreting from the english rulings isn't helpful and is likely to allow others to believe that knowing a ruling is a good reason to belittle those who do not (like you often see on other sites).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anthonyj said:
Again resorting to baiting and name calling. Really Raij this is a civil discussion.
Click to expand...
I'm not calling you a name. I'm saying that ANYONE who thinks that the Japanese rulings should not be considered relevant in a discussion about TCG rulings is ignorant.

And I don't see how I RESORTED to anything. I answered your points.
anthonyj said:
You seem to be the only one who believes that your Japanese rulings knowledge places you miles above all of us common folk.
Click to expand...
Ignorance of the rulings is fine. Ignorance of their importance is something I take issue with.
anthonyj said:
But belittling others because they are working with rulings that state the opposite of what is true in the OCG seems a little misguided to say the least.
Click to expand...
The problem with saying that is that your rulings did NOT state the opposite. In this case, both set of rulings can be interpreted in a way that fits all the rulings involved. We should consider ourselves lucky.

Let me reemphasize. The Japanese rulings and the American rulings for this case can fit together. They are only in conflict if we interpret the American rulings the way you want us to.
anthonyj said:
Starting fights with those who are interpreting from the english rulings isn't helpful and is likely to allow others to believe that knowing a ruling is a good reason to belittle those who do not (like you often see on other sites).
Click to expand...
I would have no excuse to think that I'm better than you here, then. Because I gave the relevant rulings from the JERP, and you know them as well as I do.

It's not a matter of you not knowing them now, it's a matter of you rejecting them.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Raijinili said:
Actually, it plainly states that if you can't pay the cost, you don't fulfill the requirements, and if you can fulfill the requirements, you can force the activation. Which means that either you can pay the cost with Bait Doll, or you can never force the activation of Elemental Burst.
Click to expand...

No, actually what it states is that if you "can" pay the cost then Bait Doll "can" activate the effect without the cost being paid.

This is the logical progression.

1. Bait Doll does not require the owner to pay the cost for the trap being targeted. (as per Curtis)

2. It is clarified that "If the activation requirement is met, then it should follow that "Bait Doll" would successfully force the activation of "Elemental Burst"." The activation requirement being that the cost is available (not that the cost be paid). (as per Steve)

Thus if the opponent has the cost available and Bait Doll activates the trap without the cost needing to be paid then it follows that the trap will successfully activate without the cost being paid. Note it says Bait Doll would successfully force the activation. Not Bait Doll would force the payment of the cost and activate the trap. (as per Logic)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anthonyj said:
No, actually what it states is that if you "can" pay the cost then Bait Doll "can" activate the effect without the cost being paid.
Click to expand...

Steve says (using another Quote tag would be confusing): "...but rather the fact that Tributing the four monsters is a cost of activation. And if you cannot meet the activation cost of a card, it cannot be activated (but of course, you know that)."

- If you meet the activation requirement of the card, then Bait Doll can activate it successfully (i.e. it will have an effect).
- Tributing the monsters is a cost of activation.
- If you cannot meet the activation cost of a card, it cannot be activated.

Are we in agreement in the interpretation so far? Stop me when you disagree.

I interpret the third line as saying the activation cost is part of the activation requirement.
I interpret the first line as saying the activation requirement must be fulfilled for the card to be successfully activated by Bait Doll.
I interpret the first line as another XYZ Dragon VS Dimension Fusion. You CAN successfully force the activation of Elemental Burst, IF you can fulfill the activation requirement, IF you pay the activation cost. But you can't pay the activation cost because Bait Doll doesn't let you. Just like you CAN special summon the XYZ fusions through Dimension Fusion IF you special summon them properly, but you CAN'T special summon them properly.

Of course, the best way to find out what he meant is to ask him. But you KNOW he's not gonna answer...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
AGreed. When confronted with a request for an actual detailed look at rulings mechanics we invariably get put on hold forever.

I better understand how you are looking at Steve's statement now. I wouldn't be at all surprised if this winds up getting explained as another XYZ vs. Dimension Fusion. But at this point his statement does read as a confirmation that Bait Doll activates traps without requiring the cost to be paid. An activation requirement is not the same as an activation cost. Raigeki Break requires that there be a card on the field for it to destroy and that you have a card to discard, it's cost is the discard itself.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hey John, is there any way that we can get that bumped up higher? I've been following this one for quite a while know and have a personal interest in Bait Doll in general, and for me, the potential of triggering my own Raigeki Breaks to offset cost is quite promising.

I can send Kevin and the UDE folks a dollar each if that would help. 8^D
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Raijinili said:
We've had this discussion on the board already. Maybe even this thread.

I'm not gonna help you past this:
http://www.cogonline.net/showpost.php?p=76613&postcount=24
Click to expand...
Wow you actually referred me to the initial ruling we got on this thread as your explanation of activation requirement vs. activation cost. Gee I just wish I had seen this before, now it is all so clear.:(

You obviously have your belief that activation requirement means the cost has to be paid. Good for you. An English major will not agree with your interpretation of what is being said in these e-mails from Curtis and Steve but you go ahead and stick to your guns. Perhaps in another year or two another card with an effect similar to Bait Doll will be released and we'll get some clarification from UDE one way or another.

Can you imagine the cash UDE could be raking in if they would open a 900 number hotline for card rulings. "What's that you want to know about Bait Doll, Last Will, Priority, Toon Monsters, etc.? Okay let me put you on hold a second and we'll get you your answer."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anthonyj said:
Answer:


1. If the activation requirement is met, then it should follow that "Bait Doll" would successfully force the activation of "Elemental Burst".

2. It's not so much that line of text, but rather the fact that Tributing the four monsters is a cost of activation. And if you cannot meet the activation cost of a card, it cannot be activated (but of course, you know that).

__________________
Steve Okegawa
Official UDE Netrép Rules Coordinator
Yu-Gi-Oh! TCG
Click to expand...
Note the "should" in answer 1. Steve actually hasn't answered anything. I see that as just the comment common sense would make, not as something to base rulings around. As we all know, this game isn't the most logical one around.

And with reference to answer 2 and later interpretations, does this mean you cannot use Bait Doll to force the activation of your Skill Drain if you have less than 1000 Life Points? Because if what people above are assuming about how "you can only successfully force a Trap Card with Bait Doll if you can pay the cost" (quotes for clarity) is true, then you couldn't successfully force your Skill Drain because you couldn't pay the cost (even if Bait Doll negates that cost payment anyway).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anthonyj said:
You obviously have your belief that activation requirement means the cost has to be paid. Good for you. An English major will not agree with your interpretation of what is being said in these e-mails from Curtis and Steve but you go ahead and stick to your guns. Perhaps in another year or two another card with an effect similar to Bait Doll will be released and we'll get some clarification from UDE one way or another.
Click to expand...
I said I wouldn't HELP you past that point. As in, I would give you the link, but you would have to develop the argument past that. I found that original message, and if you wanted to, you could have proven my interpretation wrong right there.

But no, now I see how much you think of my intelligence.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Quite honestly folks....we're beating a....well, I won't say dead horse.....more like a comatose horse.

If this is on Kevin's list of topics to confirm with Konami that means that he doesn't know, UDE doesn't know, and there IS no official ruling on the subject at this time. What that means then is that you're going to get varying answers depending on who the head judge is for any given tournament until such time as it's officially defined.

So does that mean we shouldn't continue to pick it appart and try to figure it out and define it ourselves? Of course not, what fun would THAT be?!!

My point is that no matter how much we pick it appart, no matter who we quote, no matter what source we refer to....the point is moot. It may all very well make sense (think back to when everyone thought priority was limited to when a player summoned a monster) but the actual offical answer may countridict everyone's thinking altogether.

By all means though.....continue on!

<narrator's voice> "We now return you to your previously scheduled thread"

*edit* Now that my spelling has been corrected I can rest easy and continue to talk at will <smirk>
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Raijinili said:
I said I wouldn't HELP you past that point. As in, I would give you the link, but you would have to develop the argument past that. I found that original message, and if you wanted to, you could have proven my interpretation wrong right there.

But no, now I see how much you think of my intelligence.
Click to expand...
Well since I had already given an argument for the difference between activation cost and activation requirement I didn't quite understand how your post could be a dispute of that. Like I said previously many cards have "activation requirements" Raigeki can't be activated if your opponent has no monster on the field (even if you plan on chaining Ojama Trio to it). Heavy Storm has to have spell/trap cards on the field to destroy. Fire Darts requires that you have no cards in your hand. You have to have more than 5000 life points to activate Cyber-Stein. That is an activation requirement, that is quite clearly how Steve's message reads. There must be all 4 monsters of the proper attribute on the field before you can activate Elemental Burst otherwise the timing is off. There must be a monster for Ring of Destruction to destroy on the field or it's timing is off. Same thing. Timing is not met if the requirement to activate the card is not there. This is completely different than paying the cost.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The discussion shouldn't stop.

I didn't admit I was wrong in the ruling, only in the interpretation, and that wasn't necessarily admitting that your interpretation was right. I gave TWO possible interpretations, one of which was that Bait Doll would force the cost to be paid.

Oh, by the way, I talked to Steve, and it seems that he meant that the cost would be paid. And that it didn't seem right to him. And that he's not sure whether or not he checked with Kevin. And that he didn't want to go on record.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay. More backpeddling from UDE. I'm truly fine with however Konami decides to go with this. I feel that there is a huge difference between "activation requirement" as per the examples I provided, and "activation cost" such as the actual tribute of a monster, paying life points, etc.

If Steve is wavering on what he "meant" with his statement it really isn't going to matter much how we "define" "activation requirement" anyway. But then again I would feel he completely missed answering the question at all since Curtis had already told us that Bait Doll does not "require" the payment of the "activation cost" when the trap is targeted, to pay the cost then would require chaining the trap to Bait Doll not waiting to be force activated by Bait Doll so why make a statement like he did?

I simply can't imagine why this is so hard for UDE to answer as you would think this would be a simple yes or no from Konami on whether Bait Doll was meant to be able to activate traps without the cost having to be paid. But then again I'm not the one with more than 550 things on a list to get answered eventually.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The way I'm reading some of these last dozen or so post, it would seem that some of the interpretations made are that

A) If you can pay the cost, then the "Forced Activation" is correct, without actually having to pay it, i.e., Player A has 1500 life points left and Player B uses Bait Doll on his face-down Skill Drain.

B) If you can't pay the cost, then the "Forced Activation" is incorrect, and the Trap Card is not activated, i.e., Player A has no hand and Player B uses Bait Doll on his face-down Raigeki Break.

It makes sense that if you couldn't actually activate the Trap Card, or any other effect, without meeting the cost requirement under normal circumstances, then you shouldnt be able to do so with Bait Doll either.

I see it as Bait Doll will allow you to bypass the cost ONLY if you can actually pay it normally, because if you can't, then it would be an illegal activation under most conditions. Kind of like how Spirit Elimination allows you to remove monsters on the field instead of your Graveyard, but you must still remove the correct monsters.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top