BIG BANG SHOT

A

ANIKY

Guest
When the card says: "...removed from the field..." minds that it is equiped whit a monster and i use giant trunade its monster is removed from play?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Hi, I'm building a Trample deck and I'm not 100% certain about Big Bang Shot rulings. If I equip an opponent's monster with Big Bang and it attacks my defense position monster the opponent takes the damage. Please correct, if wrong, the following assumptions:

  1. If the attack is higher than the defense my monster is destroyed by they take the trample damage?
  2. If Robbin Goblin is active in my M-T zone its effect is not triggered because Big Bang transferrred the trample battle damage not my defense position monster?
  3. A defense position Spirit Reaper has not been targeted by the effect of Big Bang Shot so it remains on the field?
Follow-up question. At the Regional level is it considered proper ethics to warn the opponent that Big Bang Shot damages the opponent of the card owner when equipping an opponenet's monster or are the duelists supposed to be aware of such rulings?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Candu said:
Hi, I'm building a Trample deck and I'm not 100% certain about Big Bang Shot rulings. If I equip an opponent's monster with Big Bang and it attacks my defense position monster the opponent takes the damage. Please correct, if wrong, the following assumptions:





  1. If the attack is higher than the defense my monster is destroyed by they take the trample damage?
  2. If Robbin Goblin is active in my M-T zone its effect is not triggered because Big Bang transferrred the trample battle damage not my defense position monster?
  3. A defense position Spirit Reaper has not been targeted by the effect of Big Bang Shot so it remains on the field?
Follow-up question. At the Regional level is it considered proper ethics to warn the opponent that Big Bang Shot damages the opponent of the card owner when equipping an opponenet's monster or are the duelists supposed to be aware of such rulings?
Click to expand...
If I had to go on the card text I would say no, equipping it to your opponent's monster and still having it deal the damage to them would not work. Here's my thoughts. Let's look at the text of "Big Bang Shot" shall we...

"When the equipped monster attacks with an ATK that is higher than the DEF of your opponent's Defense Position monster, inflict the difference as Battle Damage to your opponent's Life Points."

Notice the wording here. It says "your opponent's Defense Position monster". I take this to mean your, as in the controller of "Big Bang Shot", so how can your opponent ever attack his own Defense Position monster?

Now if the card text had said something similar to "Fairy Meteor Crush", then it would work.
"When a monster equipped with this card attacks with an ATK that is higher than the DEF of a Defense Position monster, inflict the difference as Battle Damage to your opponent's Life Points."

Notice the difference in wording. It says "a Defense Position monster", not "your opponent's Defense Position monster", that's why equipping "Fairy Meteor Crush" to an opponent's monster works fine with the damage thing.

NOW, with that said. I am WRONG!!! The OFFICIAL RULINGS ONCE AGAIN GO AGAINST RATIONAL THOUGHT! From the UDE FAQ:

"If you equip your "Big Bang Shot" to your opponent's "Dark Magician", and "Dark Magician" attacks your "Giant Soldier of Stone", the opponent of the owner of the "Big Bang Shot" takes the damage (so your opponent, who attacked with "Dark Magician", takes 900 points of damage.)"

For question #2, I believe "Robbin' Goblin" would not activate since the damage dealt was that from "Big Bang Shot", not the monster, even though it was still battle damage.

For question #3, as long as you are not trying to equip "Big Bang Shot" to the "Spirit Reaper", then it would stay on the field since it is not destroyed as a result of battle.

Hope this helps!

Anybody feel free to correct me on ANYTHING!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
If I had to go on the card text I would say no, equipping it to your opponent's monster and still having it deal the damage to them would not work. Here's my thoughts. Let's look at the text of "Big Bang Shot" shall we...

"When the equipped monster attacks with an ATK that is higher than the DEF of your opponent's Defense Position monster, inflict the difference as Battle Damage to your opponent's Life Points."

Notice the wording here. It says "your opponent's Defense Position monster". I take this to mean your, as in the controller of "Big Bang Shot", so how can your opponent ever attack his own Defense Position monster?

Now if the card text had said something similar to "Fairy Meteor Crush", then it would work.
"When a monster equipped with this card attacks with an ATK that is higher than the DEF of a Defense Position monster, inflict the difference as Battle Damage to your opponent's Life Points."

Notice the difference in wording. It says "a Defense Position monster", not "your opponent's Defense Position monster", that's why equipping "Fairy Meteor Crush" to an opponent's monster works fine with the damage thing.

NOW, with that said. I am WRONG!!! The OFFICIAL RULINGS ONCE AGAIN GO AGAINST RATIONAL THOUGHT! From the UDE FAQ:

"If you equip your "Big Bang Shot" to your opponent's "Dark Magician", and "Dark Magician" attacks your "Giant Soldier of Stone", the opponent of the owner of the "Big Bang Shot" takes the damage (so your opponent, who attacked with "Dark Magician", takes 900 points of damage.)"

For question #2, I believe "Robbin' Goblin" would not activate since the damage dealt was that from "Big Bang Shot", not the monster, even though it was still battle damage.

For question #3, as long as you are not trying to equip "Big Bang Shot" to the "Spirit Reaper", then it would stay on the field since it is not destroyed as a result of battle.

Hope this helps!

Anybody feel free to correct me on ANYTHING!
Click to expand...
Again just another case of bad translating. How much effort would it have been to word the card like Fairy Meteor Crush and save us having to look up a ruling? Not much, but like I said Konami just doesn't seem to care.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
After my post, I immediately sent the 'issue' in to the Judge's List, with two suggestions. Errata the card, or change the ruling to match the actual card text.

We'll see how long it takes for them to put the smack down on me.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
After my post, I immediately sent the 'issue' in to the Judge's List, with two suggestions. Errata the card, or change the ruling to match the actual card text.

We'll see how long it takes for them to put the smack down on me.
Click to expand...
Sure I'd raised this whole issue and posted it to the Judges list just after they released that ruling regarding equipping it to your opponent's monster, some people actually managed to notice that it says to inflict the damage to your opponent yet missed that it had to be attacking an opponent's defence position monster, according to the card text anyway.

http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=2243#2243
As I understand it there has been a new ruling concerning this card by UDE:
"If you equip your "Big Bang Shot" to your opponent's "Dark Magician", and "Dark
Magician" attacks your "Giant Soldier of Stone", the opponent of the owner of the
"Big Bang Shot" takes the damage (so your opponent, who attacked with "Dark
Magician", takes 900 points of damage.)"


This ruling is based upon the fact that the card says it inflicts the damage to
your opponent, but this seems a little inconsistant since it requires ignoring
the text stating that the equipped monster's attack must be higher than the
defence of your opponent's defence position monster.


"A monster equipped with this card increases its ATK by 400 points. When the
equipped monster attacks with an ATK that is higher than the DEF of your
opponent's Defense Position monster, inflict the difference as Battle Damage to
your Opponent's Life Points. When this card is destroyed or removed from the
field, the equipped monster is removed from play."

Is this a mistake in the ruling/on the card's text or I'm I just nitpicking?
Thanks



Answer:

Actually, it turns out to be an error in the card text itself.

Kevin sent the matter to Konami to have it examined and they returned our inquiry
reinforcing that the ruling was correct and that the current text has an issue.

Future printings of the card should have this cleaned up. The ruling on the website
stands and should be followed by everyone.


We wanted to thank everyone who brought this to our attention so it could be
worked out with Konami.

---------------------------------------
Curtis Schultz
Official UDE Netrep
CurtisSchultz_Netrep@Hotmail.com

Yu-Gi-Oh! TCG: "Rise of Destiny" SNEAK PREVIEW EVENT
November 20-21 in select cities!
For more info, see: http://www.upperdeckentertainment.com/yugioh/events.aspx
Click to expand...
Nice to know they got around to fixing the text, would prefer if they were a little less secretive about card changes and updates though... :(
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
trample battle damage even when enabled by an equip card will still trigger robbing goblin and robbin zombie card effects. because the damage is not " effect damage " the case would be different if the equip card read as Poison Fangs. that is effect damage added after battle damage by a continuous spell card.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Hmm..I'm still having a hard time with that part. "Robbin' Gobblin"/"Robbin' Zombie" both state "Each time 1 monster on your side of the field inflicts Battle Damage to your opponent's Life Points...".

In this case, the 'monster' is not dealing any battle damage. The battle damage is being dealt by the effect of "Big Bang Shot".

The monster attackes a defense position monster, then "Big Bang Shot" jumps in and checks to see who's ATK/DEF was higher/lower, if the ATK/DEF qualifies for it's effect, then it says "let's do some damage!!"...that's how I see it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
well, if Big Bang Shot was dealing the damage, it would be effect damage, Big Bang Shot, IMO, is just adding another condition to the monster for inflicting battle damage, and therefore is a legal activation of Robbin' Goblin/Zombie

-chaosruler
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
But it's the effect of "Big Bang Shot" that's making the damage Battle Damage instead of Effect Damage.
Click to expand...
If the card text says "inflict a Stone Cold Stunner on the opponent's Life Point's..." you do so ;). The card text can rule all.

The text states that it is Battle Damage that is inflicted, and RG Trigger's from Battle Damage. The same is true of Amazoness Swordswoman.

It's the wording that matter here.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It's about time:

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Big Bang Shot [/font][font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif](Magician's Force, Dark Revelation vol.1)
Increase the ATK of a monster equipped with this card by 400 points. When the equipped monster attacks with an ATK that is higher than the DEF of a Defense Position monster, inflict the difference as Battle Damage to your opponent's Life Points. When this card is removed from the field, remove the equipped monster from play.[/font]
("Opponent's" removed from the first clause of the second sentence)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
novastar said:
If the card text says "inflict a Stone Cold Stunner on the opponent's Life Point's..." you do so ;). The card text can rule all.

The text states that it is Battle Damage that is inflicted, and RG Trigger's from Battle Damage. The same is true of Amazoness Swordswoman.

It's the wording that matter here.
Click to expand...
I understand what you are saying, but the "Robbin'" cards state the MONSTER must inflict the Battle Damage. With "Big Bang Shot", the MONSTER is not doing any damage at all, "Big Bang Shot" is. It's dealing Battle Damage through IT'S EFFECT.

With "Amazoness Swordswoman" or "Spear Dragon", or any other monster that has an effect that 'tramples', or does Battle Damage, the Battle Damage is STILL coming from the monster, even if it's the effect of the monster, it's still 'originating' from the monster, which satisfies the TEXT REQUIREMENT of the "Robbin'" cards.

Do you see what I'm saying?

If the "Robbin'" cards stated: "When your opponent takes Battle Damage..." I wouldn't have ANY issue with cards like "Big Bang Shot" or "Fairy Meteor Crush" being able to activate their effect, but as the wording states on the cards now, I have an issue with it.

[edit]..he he he..nova just came back online. I'm prolly about to be given the 'SMACKDOWN'...he he he...;)

[edit]..aww man..he's gone again...:rolleyes:..I guess I'll have to wait til later.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The way I see it, Big Bang Shot is just altering the way damage calculation is performed. The monster is still the one that has the ATK points, and the monster is the one involved in battle, so I'd say that the monster equipped with Big Bang Shot is the one dealing the Battle Damage. Since the opponent's monster is the one dealing the Battle Damage in the scenario we're discussing, it wouldn't trigger your Robbin' Goblin.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The best way to look at it is not to look at Big Bang Shot as the "inflictor" of the damage but rather the "facilitator" of the damage. What I mean to say is that Big Bang Shot set's up a condition where the Defence of a monster no longer cushions the damage it takes, but becomes just like an Attack Position monster and takes the overflow. You wouldn't say the damage inflicted by an Attack Position monster was inflicted though an effect, would you? I guess what I mean to insinuate is that, in spite of it's text, it's just modifieing the mechanics of attacked Defence Position monsters and not converting Effect Damage into Battle Damage. Hmmm . . .I don't know if that made things any clearer. :(
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top