Blockman and Skill Drain?

K

kansashoops

New Member
Would Blockman work while Skill Drain is on the field? The card's language is basically the same as Exiled Force's, and the ruling there is that the effect activates in the graveyard and can therefore be used while Skill Drain is present. (Which I've never understood, since it shouldn't be able to tribute itself and send itself to the graveyard if it has no effects while Skill Drain is on the field, but there you have it.)

Incidentally, the only posts I found about Blockman here seemed undecided about how many tokens he could produce and when. If you haven't read it yet, I suggest you read Curtis Schultz's article on metagame, which covers Blockman in good detail. Bottom line: turn he's summoned counts, opponent's turns count, and current turn counts.

http://www.metagame.com/yugioh.aspx?tabid=33&ArticleId=5185
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I am going to go out on a limb and just say that you can still use its ignition effect, but as for how many tokens will be summoned if any is still in the air. Are we assuming Blockman is a continuous effect or does it create a game state that when Tribute will create the tokens. Either way reading that article on Blockman makes me want to use it now. Friggin automatic 2 tokens if my Giant Rat is attacked during my opponent's turn and I start mines? Thank you and good night as I summon any Tribute monster with ease.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
[edit]This is in response to Kansashoops, not Tiso

The Metagame article is not correct.

"Blockman" only counts the controller's turn. It does not count the opponent's turn. Isn't this like the 3rd time you've been told this on different threads? And haven't you been told the same thing over on Pojo as well?


And yes, his effect will work just fine if "Skill Drain" is active, it IS pretty much the same as "Exiled Force" since Tributing him is the cost to activate his effect.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
"Blockman" only counts the controller's turn. It does not count the opponent's turn. Isn't this like the 3rd time you've been told this on different threads? And haven't you been told the same thing over on Pojo as well?
Click to expand...
Actually I'm the one that has been, and is still, resisting the idea.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
Isn't this like the 3rd time you've been told this on different threads? And haven't you been told the same thing over on Pojo as well?
Click to expand...
Say what? I did not participate in any earlier threads here on Blockman. I did read them before posting tonight, but since they predated the metagame article, and since Shultz disperses ruling information to judges, I assumed his article was correct. So shoot me. If that information was incorrect, I find it odd that they never posted a correction/retraction, but I'll take your word for it.

The only thing I remember ever saying about Blockman before tonight was in a thread on pojo where I suggested someone might try running it in one of their decks, and I based what I said on the metagame article. If someone later came back and corrected me there, I missed the post.

In short, I have no idea what you are talking about, but I guess I shouldn't post here so often, since I'm obviously irritating you. Sorry.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Take as you will, but WC2006 counts the turn you summon it, as in your own turn. Then if you wait for your opponent's turn, it did not get a counter. It was at the start of my turn, before I drew that it got a counter. So yeah, still cool, but Metagame got it wrong it seems.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tiso said:
Take as you will, but WC2006 counts the turn you summon it, as in your own turn. Then if you wait for your opponent's turn, it did not get a counter. It was at the start of my turn, before I drew that it got a counter. So yeah, still cool, but Metagame got it wrong it seems.
Click to expand...

Computergames are NOT the way to get the correct rulings -_-'

In WC2006 if both you and your opponent play Snatch Steal on the same monster (let's say you're the owner) and you play Heavy Storm after that, the monster goes to your opponent and does not stay with you. Also, equips stay equipped on monsters when they are put face-down (at least Snatch Steal is).

What I'm saying is, that game is full of bugs :p
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just remember though, that until an official ruling or errerta (sp) is released, stating that Blockman's effect only counts your turns, you play the card as it saids, and count every turn, yours and your opponents.

Metagame got it right, as far as the card text goes.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chillout1984 said:
Computergames are NOT the way to get the correct rulings -_-'

In WC2006 if both you and your opponent play Snatch Steal on the same monster (let's say you're the owner) and you play Heavy Storm after that, the monster goes to your opponent and does not stay with you. Also, equips stay equipped on monsters when they are put face-down (at least Snatch Steal is).

What I'm saying is, that game is full of bugs :p
Click to expand...

How is that a bug? Is there a ruling on the card about that? You would think that flipping the monster face-down and destroying Snatch Steal would return your monster to your side of the field, but it does not. Who is to say that 2 Snatch Steal on the same monster does not care about about the original owner, only the previous controller. Either way, I already have my answer about Blockman from WC2006. Just food for thought, Blockman clearly would have been used in the Yomi-Lion Emperor Decks that were going on in the OCG.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay, that makes 2 games in a row where an equip card stays equipped to a face-down monster!! I know I mentioned it about Duel Academy also.

I would say its okay to see if a "known" ruling works the same way on a videogame, but an unknown is just to risky and eventually you lose focus with the fact that it IS not recommeded to use a videogame for rulings.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
kansashoops said:
Say what? I did not participate in any earlier threads here on Blockman. I did read them before posting tonight, but since they predated the metagame article, and since Shultz disperses ruling information to judges, I assumed his article was correct. So shoot me. If that information was incorrect, I find it odd that they never posted a correction/retraction, but I'll take your word for it.

The only thing I remember ever saying about Blockman before tonight was in a thread on pojo where I suggested someone might try running it in one of their decks, and I based what I said on the metagame article. If someone later came back and corrected me there, I missed the post.

In short, I have no idea what you are talking about, but I guess I shouldn't post here so often, since I'm obviously irritating you. Sorry.
Click to expand...
My apologies to you. I was obviously mistaken. And no, it wasn't DJ either. There is somebody else here on this site that's also on Pojo that's been told the same thing over and over and over and over again, but they refuse to believe it simply because of that Metagame article...lol. They must have a screen name very similar to yours...lol.

I'll get that person!...and their little dog too!....mwaaahahaha!


and DJ is correct, it takes a lot to irritate me! I'm too funloving and jovial to get irritated!


Just ignore the man behind the curtain...he's an idiot..
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tiso said:
How is that a bug? Is there a ruling on the card about that? You would think that flipping the monster face-down and destroying Snatch Steal would return your monster to your side of the field, but it does not. Who is to say that 2 Snatch Steal on the same monster does not care about about the original owner, only the previous controller. Either way, I already have my answer about Blockman from WC2006. Just food for thought, Blockman clearly would have been used in the Yomi-Lion Emperor Decks that were going on in the OCG.
Click to expand...
The basic priciple still stands though. The games should never be used for ruling clarification.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
The basic priciple still stands though. The games should never be used for ruling clarification.
Click to expand...

Of course, but obviously there are rules that are not recorded but are known anyway. Unless I am mistaken Snatch Steal does not mention Book of Moon scenario. Either way, I am going by what I seen for my own eyes and what goes on in the OCG and if this card worked the way Metagame said it would have been in every Deck since day 1 with that Yomi-Dandylion Emperor business going on.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tiso said:
Of course, but obviously there are rules that are not recorded but are known anyway. Unless I am mistaken Snatch Steal does not mention Book of Moon scenario. Either way, I am going by what I seen for my own eyes and what goes on in the OCG and if this card worked the way Metagame said it would have been in every Deck since day 1 with that Yomi-Dandylion Emperor business going on.
Click to expand...
I think a lot of people think the "every turn" version is too good to be true. Hence the resitance to the idea. Truth be known, it's not that good, but it certainly adds another layer to the game. I would like to see some of the lesser played Tribute Monster's played as a result of this.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
There was already enough Tribute friendly cards that could have been used. Would I like it if summoning Blockman on my opponent's turn and my next turn gives me 2 counters? Yes. Is it going to happen? No. Konami is not going to allow a card to be abused like that. It is fine the way it is. As if it is hard to keep a monster on the field for more than 1 turn.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
By Tributing this face-up card, Special Summon in Defense Position a number of "Block Tokens" (Rock-Type/EARTH/Level 4/ATK 1000/DEF 1500) equal to the number of turns this card has been face-up on your side of the field. These tokens cannot declare an attack.

I've already explained this in another thread.

The bolded text is how you calculate the number of tokens to Special Summon. "number of turns" isn't implying any specific player. If it isn't implying any specific player then it implies both players.

Another thing you should consider is if it counted only your turns, then it would say that. It doesn't even indicate that nor are there any other cards that indicate it would. So I don't really believe that it would count just the controller's turns. The card text almost seems like it's missing an entire sentence or a couple key words to clearify that.

They could have prevented a card with this kind of wording from being as vague as it is by actually wording it correctly. Keep in mind I'm not saying that I'm correct in how the card works but I wouldn't dismiss it counting only your turns.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The argument is that the OCG version counts just your turns, and that's a fine argument. Problem is there have always been glaring inconsistancies between our game and the OCG and the way some cards are played. Konami seems to make arbtray decisions with no explanations why, so I can't just accept that it only counts your turns without thinking back to Equip Trap Cards and Ultimate Offering.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top