Basic Priority Questions

[carlossilva]

... or they should be, but while browsing through several forums I've often read contradictory answers ( whether direct or implied ) so I've decided to place them here.

1. After the turn player draws a card in his/her draw phase, who has priority to activate a quickplay spell or trap card?

2. After an attack is declared by the turn player, who has priority to activate a card in response to the attack ?

3. After a chain has completely resolved, who has priority to respond to the end of the chain? ( I've read it's the turn player, I've read it's the opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve - this last one actually came from UDE ... )

Thanks

Carlos

 

[Jason_C]

Untrue. Spirit Ryu, Sinister Serpent, and Horus the Black Flame Dragon LV4, for three, are Ignition effects that cannot activate if there is a Last Event to consider.

Yes, I don't think we've ever gotten definite rulings concerning how those cards behave. I think it's always just been taken for granted that, though SS1, they can, in fact, activate in the battle phase, in response to entering the phase, etc. Like how we know Nutrient Z can be activated in the damage step, despite the fact that it isn't qualified to.

 

[skey23]

Ok, since we're 'bouncing' things off everybody. Take a gander at this...***deeep breath in....and hold....****

Begin Draw Phase
- Check for effects that resolve before Draw ("Hino-Kagu-Tsuchi", "Maharaghi")
- Priority is given to Turn Player.
- Turn Player Draws a card.
- - Draw Response Window
- - - Turn Player retains Priority and gets to respond first or pass.
- - - - If response
- - - - - Build response chain as normal.
- - - - - Resolve response chain as normal.
- - - - If pass
- - - - - Priority is passed to opponent.
- - - Opponent gains Priority and can respond or pass.
- - - - If response
- - - - - Build response chain as normal.
- - - - - Resolve response chain as normal.
- - - - If pass
- - - - - Priority it passed back to Turn Player.
- - - If both players have passed consecutively, then end Draw Phase. Otherwise, continue to Non-response window.
- - Non-response window.
- - If response chain occurred, then Non-response window is created.
- - - Turn Player can begin a chain or pass Priority.
- - - - If response
- - - - - Build chain as normal.
- - - - - Resolve chain as normal.
- - - - If pass
- - - - - Priority is passed to opponent.
- - - Opponent gains Priority and can respond or pass.
- - - - If response
- - - - - Build chain as normal.
- - - - - Resolve chain as normal.
- - - - If pass
- - - - - Priority it passed back to Turn Player.
- - - If both players have passed consecutively, then end Draw Phase. Otherwise, return to Non-response window.
End Draw Phase

***And....exhale...***

[edit]Arrrggg! It didn't save my format!! Stoopid #$%^!
There...I think I finally have it manageable...lol.

 

[novastar]

Ok i'll try to work with this... going with Dan' comments.

{Battle Phase}

<Start Step>
- TP Pass
- OP Pass
</Start Step>

<Battle Step>
Activation Window : Attack Declaration
- TP Pass
- OP Pass
</Battle Step>

<Damage Step>
- Some other stuff...
- Damage Calculation Part 1
Activation Window : (ATK/DEF Modifiers)
TP Pass
OP Pass
- Damage Calculation Part 2
- Resolve Effects
- Send to the Graveyard
</Damage Step>

<End Step>
TP Pass
OP Pass
</End Step>

{/Battle Phase}

That seems to be the model we are currently looking at.

I have a few concerns with this which i will bring up later when i get home. The major one is that there should be some sort of chain point for you declare an attack...but after the Start Step. If it isn't there, it should be added.

 

[novastar]

Ok, since we're 'bouncing' things off everybody. Take a gander at this...***deeep breath in....and hold....****

Begin Draw Phase
- Check for effects that resolve before Draw ("Hino-Kagu-Tsuchi", "Maharaghi")
- Priority is given to Turn Player.
- Turn Player Draws a card.
- - Draw Response Window
- - - Turn Player retains Priority and gets to respond first or pass.
- - - - If response
- - - - - Build response chain as normal.
- - - - - Resolve response chain as normal.
- - - - If pass
- - - - - Priority is passed to opponent.
- - - Opponent gains Priority and can respond or pass.
- - - - If response
- - - - - Build response chain as normal.
- - - - - Resolve response chain as normal.
- - - - If pass
- - - - - Priority it passed back to Turn Player.
- - - If both players have passed consecutively, then end Draw Phase. Otherwise, continue to Non-response window.
- - Non-response window.
- - If response chain occurred, then Non-response window is created.
- - - Turn Player can begin a chain or pass Priority.
- - - - If response
- - - - - Build chain as normal.
- - - - - Resolve chain as normal.
- - - - If pass
- - - - - Priority is passed to opponent.
- - - Opponent gains Priority and can respond or pass.
- - - - If response
- - - - - Build chain as normal.
- - - - - Resolve chain as normal.
- - - - If pass
- - - - - Priority it passed back to Turn Player.
- - - If both players have passed consecutively, then end Draw Phase. Otherwise, return to Non-response window.
End Draw Phase

***And....exhale...***

[edit]Arrrggg! It didn't save my format!! Stoopid #$%^!
There...I think I finally have it manageable...lol.

It loks fine... in real life you don't see it...but yes there is 1 window to respond to the actual draw, and 1 window to decide if you want to end the Draw Phase or not.

 

[skey23]

It loks fine... in real life you don't see it...but yes there is 1 window to respond to the actual draw, and 1 window to decide if you want to end the Draw Phase or not.

So it wouldn't be like I said? Where if they both pass consecutively, then they have, in essence, aGreed to move to the Standby Phase.

 

[masterwoo0]

This is getting just a little crazy here. So now we went from saying that the Draw was an actual event that the opponent could immediately respond to, to saying that Drawing a card no longer is a event the Opponent can respond to, and must always wait to chain cards like Drop Off, unless the Turn Player states that they pass their Priority.

The only time you would have a "Priority" in the Draw Phase would be if you Draw a Quick-Play, or, HAVE a Quick-play or Trap Set, or a Continuous Effect that triggered upon Drawing a card. Otherwise, your just stalling for time trying to use something you dont have unless certain requirements are met.

 

[skey23]

The only time you would have a "Priority" in the Draw Phase would be if you Draw a Quick-Play, or, HAVE a Quick-play or Trap Set. Otherwise, your just stalling for time trying to use something you dont have unless certain requirements are met.

Not true. The Turn Player would ALWAYS have Priority after the draw, but would have to pass if they didn't have anything to activate.

[edit]While Masterwoo0 is feverishly typing his response..lol..
I'll go ahead and say that I could be completely wrong with this line of thought. It very well could end up that after the Draw, the opponent can respond 1st or pass, THEN the Turn Player gets to either respond or pass.

I'll concede to both ways of logic...lol.

 

[masterwoo0]

Somehow, I think "Priority" and the Turn Player being able to initiate the start of a chain, which isnt necessarily "Priority" (because if it was, since this has always been the case, Priority would have always been defined, and not the mystery it is now), are starting to blend together.

Like I said, the Turn Player has always had the right to start any chain. So is that the building block to the start of Priority. or something else?

And for those that say it is, then what happened to the rest of the "other things" that went along with having Priority? Did they just decide knowing that your opponent must wait to play a Trap or Quick-Play until you activate an effect that is chainable, was enough to last for 4 years of playing Yugioh?

 

[novastar]

This is getting just a little crazy here. So now we went from saying that the Draw was an actual event that the opponent could immediately respond to, to saying that Drawing a card no longer is a event the Opponent can respond to, and must always wait to chain cards like Drop Off, unless the Turn Player states that they pass their Priority.

The only time you would have a "Priority" in the Draw Phase would be if you Draw a Quick-Play, or, HAVE a Quick-play or Trap Set, or a Continuous Effect that triggered upon Drawing a card. Otherwise, your just stalling for time trying to use something you dont have unless certain requirements are met.

Why does everybody think that Drop Off works like a Counter Trap?

You can activate it at any point along the chain, so there is no reason why the TP can't get Priority first.

I equate the draw event to a summon event, you retain Priority.

 

[skey23]

Nova, what about my question before? On #205.

 

[novastar]

Like I said, the Turn Player has always had the right to start any chain. So is that the building block to the start of Priority. or something else?

Yes, it is the essence of Turn Player Priority (which is what we used to call it). In most cases, it was understood even without "Priority" defined that the TP went first in most cases.

Actually, from what i was told, the JPN Handbook had a brief description of it...simply being the Turn Player's Preference to go first. However, don't quote me on it...i did hear it from a reliable source though.

It's starts to become noticable when we started to apply it to summoning and Ignition (Cost) Effects. Then we started to apply it to Triggers as well, and use TPP to create an order to those.

We had an understanding of 2 major forms of Priority:

- Turn Player Priority, which applied to Phases/Steps in general as well as ordering Triggers.

- Response Priority, which applied to events like summoning and chain resolution, and included Cost Effect Priority.

Now they are sloooowly trying to merge the 2 into 1.

 

[novastar]

So it wouldn't be like I said? Where if they both pass consecutively, then they have, in essence, aGreed to move to the Standby Phase.

No, i'm completely agreeing with you... i'm just saying that in practice (actually playing the game in real life), it's transparent to most players...and they treat it as one Chain Point.

 

[Jason_C]

Not much to contribute here. But I've been in this debate so long I figure I may as well through out that both Nova's and Skey's "maps" of the Draw Phase/Battle Phase are absolutely, 100% correct, and everything they've posted since has been correct. IMHO.

 

[skey23]

No, i'm completely agreeing with you... i'm just saying that in practice (actually playing the game in real life), it's transparent to most players...and they treat it as one Chain Point.

Ok, now I'm confused...lol. I AM saying it's one chain point if both players pass on responding to the Draw.

I'm saying the non-response window will only show it's head if there was a response chain created to the Draw. If the Non-response window is what you are calling the 2nd point for making the decision before leaving the Draw Phase.

I'm basing this from Dan's Battle Phase post that you 'adjusted'.
<Battle Step>
Activation Window : Attack Declaration
- TP Pass
- OP Pass
</Battle Step> -- There wasn't any Non-response window here. Just the simple double pass, so on to Damage Step.

<Damage Step>

 

[novastar]

i donno...if they want it as one point...so be it. I see it as 2.

 

[Jason_C]

i donno...if they want it as one point...so be it. I see it as 2.

It's one point unless there NEEDS to be two. Skey's right. There is INITIALLY one point, and if nothing is activated, that's it. If something is activated, then once the chain resolves, say hello to non-responsive window (I'm so glad I came up with that term. We should spam Kevin until he puts that in the next rulebook version ). There can, of course, be an infinite number of windows. But only however many are necessary.

 

[novastar]

It's one point unless there NEEDS to be two. Skey's right. There is INITIALLY one point, and if nothing is activated, that's it. If something is activated, then once the chain resolves, say hello to non-responsive window (I'm so glad I came up with that term. We should spam Kevin until he puts that in the next rulebook version ). There can, of course, be an infinite number of windows. But only however many are necessary.

No, if you have one window...that is a response window...then all of the windows are response windows.

Why? because if you have to start and resolve a chain to recieve another window...then the second window is in response to the one before it...

Get it?

The main difference is that you are talking about a Phase vs. a Step. Steps can be more "streamlined"...

 

[Jason_C]

No, if you have one window...that is a response window...then all of the windows are response windows.

Why? because if you have to start and resolve a chain to recieve another window...then the second window is in response to the one before it...

Get it?

That makes perfect sense. I've said many times (admittedly not HERE, but in some of our discussions before) that the non-responsive window is sometimes referred to as a window to begin a response chain. The thing is, however, that "response windows" usually, as you said, allow only for SS2 and higher. So I chose the term "non-responsive window" to indicate that such things as summons and Metamorphosis can occur here.

 

[novastar]

That makes perfect sense. I've said many times (admittedly not HERE, but in some of our discussions before) that the non-responsive window is sometimes referred to as a window to begin a response chain. The thing is, however, that "response windows" usually, as you said, allow only for SS2 and higher. So I chose the term "non-responsive window" to indicate that such things as summons and Metamorphosis can occur here.

Well... thats good enough... we'll leave it at that.

 

[Jason_C]

<THIRD EDIT: Nova edited his post, thus making this meaningless.>