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]

As far as i understand, there is no "Phase/Step Change Response Chain" timing.

Sure there is. How else could a person ever legally activate Cold Wave? It's just that there's no limitation on what can and cannot be done at the beginning of the Main Phase.

 

[novastar]

That is not a conventional timing window.

Response Windows conventionally only allow Spell Speed 2 or higher effects to be manually activated. Even in the Main Phase, every response timing created (with the exception of the Summon Response) limits both players to SS2 or higher effects.

The fact that Cold Wave is a Normal Spell proves my point.

 

[Jason_C]

That is not a conventional timing window.

Response Windows conventionally only allow Spell Speed 2 or higher effects to be manually activated. Even in the Main Phase, every response timing created (with the exception of the Summon Response) limits both players to SS2 or higher effects.

The fact that Cold Wave is a Normal Spell proves my point.

Cold Wave must be activated at the beginning of the Main Phase. How do we KNOW what the beginning of the Main Phase is without some way to distinguish it from the rest of the MP? We don't. So there must be a response window.

So far as I know, the only response window which directly discriminates agains SS1 effects is the window to respond to a summon. And even that doesn't rule out all SS1 effects.

 

[novastar]

No Jason, it is an activation condition...NOT event timing....

So far as I know, the only response window which directly discriminates agains SS1 effects is the window to respond to a summon. And even that doesn't rule out all SS1 effects.

nope...it's the opposite..the ONLY response window that allows SS1's is the Summon Response. Every other one restricts you to SS2 or higher.

 

[Jason_C]

N Jason, it is an activation condition...NOT event timing....

Or... is it an activation requirement DEPENDENT upon event timing?

 

[skey23]

So far as I know, the only response window which directly discriminates agains SS1 effects is the window to respond to a summon. And even that doesn't rule out all SS1 effects.

Draw response. Attack declaration response are two that immediately come to mind..lol...**POKE**...:nerd_jedi

 

[novastar]

Or... is it an activation requirement DEPENDENT upon event timing?

No, it's simply a condition...much like Sinister...but rather than it being "during" it must be at the "start"

 

[Jason_C]

Draw response. Attack declaration response are two that immediately come to mind..lol...**POKE**...:nerd_jedi

I can't say I see how those discriminate against SS1 effects. Draw phase does not allow for SS1 effects. Battle phase does not allow for SS1 effects barring Spirit Ryu. So just because the effects can't respond there doesn't mean that those response windows discriminate against them. It is the phase as a whole that has a beef with SS1.

 

[Jason_C]

No, it's simply a condition...much like Sinister...but rather than it being "during" it must be at the "start"

Word. I concede to your logic.

 

[novastar]

Example:

P1 activates Imperial Order in the Main Phase.

resolve...

[Chain Link 1] Imperial Order

*timing ensues...
{Response Chain}

What can be activated here?

- SS2 or higher Spell/Trap
- SS2 Monster Effect

Thats it. Make sense?

 

[Jason_C]

Example:

P1 activates Imperial Order in the Main Phase.

resolve...

[Chain Link 1] Imperial Order

*timing ensues...
{Response Chain}

What can be activated here?

- SS2 or higher Spell/Trap
- SS2 Monster Effect

Thats it. Make sense?

Wait... You're saying... Ah. And then after that, we enter the non-responsive window, and a monster can be summoned / SS1 can be activated, etc. And if both players pass in the non-responsive window, we proceed to end Main Phase.

And now, to go somewhat off topic, I would assume a manual battle position change works similarly to a summon as far as timing and response?

 

[skey23]

Example:

P1 activates Imperial Order in the Main Phase.

resolve...

[Chain Link 1] Imperial Order

*timing ensues...
{Response Chain}

What can be activated here?

- SS2 or higher Spell/Trap
- SS2 Monster Effect

Thats it. Make sense?

Wait...are you talking about chaining to "Imperial Order"? Or are you referring to after it has resolved? Because...

P1, the Turn Player activates "Imperial Order".
P2, no response.
P1, no response.
"Imperial Order" resolves.
Priority passes to P2, who has nothing to activate. If they wanted to, they could only activate Spell Speed 2 effects anyway since they aren't the Turn Player.
Priority passes back to P1, who now activates the effect of his face-up "Cannon Soldier".

 

[Jason_C]

Wait...are you talking about chaining to "Imperial Order"? Or are you referring to after it has resolved? Because...

P1, the Turn Player activates "Imperial Order".
P2, no response.
P1, no response.
"Imperial Order" resolves.
Priority passes to P2, who has nothing to activate. If they wanted to, they could only activate Spell Speed 2 effects anyway since they aren't the Turn Player.
Priority passes back to P1, who now activates the effect of his face-up "Cannon Soldier".

He's talking about after it resolves. How does P2 get priority in your example?

 

[skey23]

How does P2 get priority in your example?

Because the opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve gets Priority. That's one of the arguments I have been trying to get clarity on. It's part of the initial posters questions. It was demonstrated in Dan's post that has been quoted several times in this thread.

[edit]I'm beginning to believe that statement should read more like this:

The opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve gains Priority, EXCEPT when that effect resulted in the Summon and/or Special Summon of a monster(s). In that case, the controller of the effect would retain Priority to respond.

 

[Jason_C]

It's part of the initial posters questions. It was demonstrated in Dan's post that has been quoted several times in this thread.

...and it's simply not correct.

 

[skey23]

...and it's simply not correct.

Says YOU. Apparently, it's the accepted ruling of the L3s, as per John Danker's responses. And of course, UDE, as per Dan's response being quoted.

BTW..I edited my post above to better clarify that statement.

 

[Jason_C]

Says me. And if I'm understanding novastar correctly, says him as well. And says logic.

I have never disputed what Judges are told to rule. I know that Dan has instructed the judges to rule it that way, and I know that they SHOULD, as judges, rule it that way. I just know it is incorrect.

I also know that the statement you made after editing your post, while in concurrence with what Dan said, is far more complex than priority needs to be. And I know that it is far more complex than priority IS. Becuase priority is simple. The complications occur when UDE steps in.

I am not saying you and Mr. Danker HAVEN'T been told to rule it that way. I'm just saying I don't think it's right. Says me.

 

[John Danker]

The opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve gains Priority, EXCEPT when that effect resulted in the Summon and/or Special Summon of a monster(s). In that case, the controller of the effect would retain Priority to respond.

According to my understanding that's almost correct....with one exception. If the chain ends in a summon regardless of weather the summon is on the part of the turn player or non-turn player the turn player regains priority....which, btw, makes no sense to me personally....it's a question I've inquired about and that's the response I've been given....problem is I can't off the top of my head remember weather it was Dan, Kevin, Gary, Dave Brent, or John Lacey <shrug> That "glitch" still bothers me...as I said though it doesn't have to all "make sense" or be "logical and in order" to be correct.

It's obvious that I personally don't have it all figured out...though it appears that some others here are dead set on believing they do. I'm going to do some posting to judges lists and see what kind of reponses I can get, once I do I'll report back to you all. This has been an interesting thread thus far. It's yet more proof that even those who are "in the know" as I consider all of us contributing to be, don't even come close to agreeing and seeing priority in the same light...showing the reason I'm just utterly disgruntled with Konami and their lack of responsabiliy on the issie.

 

[masterwoo0]

Priority is NOT simple, or there wouldnt be as many arguments about it, or nonacceptibility with its edicts.

You say that you will follow it as long as we judges are told to call it that way, but yet you yourself say it isnt true.

Well, you are being told the same thing about your explanation of priority, so who is more right, and who is more wrong.

The old saying goes, "He who has all the gold, makes the rules!"

I'm sure you see how that applies in this situation. Priority will never be as simple as defining it as a Back and forth between two players since there are too many effects that can run afoul of that concept.

Throw all the reasons you want in to the mix. But it all boils down to the fact that there are too many cards out there that both the OCG and the TCG dont share as of yet, along with new cards neither side have, that make putting anything concrete, totally insane, since it could very well change 180 degrees from just one card effect.

 

[Jason_C]

though it appears that some others here are dead set on believing they do.

The world is round and my name is Jason. These are things I am dead set on. An understanding of priority is something I am not. I believe I have it figured out. But I am willing to change my beliefs. I have already done so at least once, probably several times because of things Novastar said. I disaGreed with him before, and now I agree. I am not dead set on ANYTHING Yu-Gi-Oh related. I just tend to be a little slow to catch on sometimes.

It's yet more proof that even those who are "in the know" as I consider all of us contributing to be, don't even come close to agreeing and seeing priority in the same light...showing the reason I'm just utterly disgruntled with Konami and their lack of responsabiliy on the issie.

I couldn't agree more. When two such people as you and novastar can disagree, an explanation is BADLy needed.