burning land

[Samuel]

Hi everyone,

How are you?

I have one question about Burning Land. Can I Activate this card even if they aren't a Field card on the Field?

Thanks a lot for your answer.

Samuel

 

[skey23]

It would indeed appear that way.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=3236#3236

The destruction effect is one-time only.

You may play field spell cards and ahe them remain on the field while Burning Land is in play.

 

[skey23]

Kewl, that's also a much newer ruling than what I posted...lol.

 

[Raijinili]

The logic is wrong because every other time I try to bring logic to this game, I'm told that the game is not about regular logic, so why introduce it now?

Who exactly is this attacking?

After looking at the card a little closer, I could actually see Raijinili's point of view.

How boring.

I'm still going to counter your argument, though.

Dark Hole and Raigeki require to have a monster on the field to activate. "Destroy all" doesn't include 0. Zero monsters means there isn't anything to destroy. If there isn't anything to destroy then you aren't getting the effect of the card. You can't activate the card if you aren't going to get the effect.

This doesn't prove that "Destroy all" can't include 0, since the generally accepted reason for why Raigeki can't be activated to destroy 0 is because destroying 0 is basically doing nothing, and a card can't be activated if it doesn't do anything. It must have a purpose, that being its effect on the game.

Playing a Permanent card (usually) automatically lets it do something.

Also, I can easily prove that "all" can include 0:
Ceasefire
Normal Trap
Flip all face-down Defense Position monsters on the field face-up. Flip Effects are not activated at this time. Inflict 500 points of damage to your opponent's Life Points for each Effect Monster on the field.

Well, prove to those versed in the Ceasefire rulings, at least.

And finally:
"You can't activate the card if you aren't going to get the effect."
This isn't accurate. Rather, "You can't activate the card if you aren't going to get ANY effect."

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

Careful there.

Don't confuse "0" with nothing.

They're different.

 

[masterwoo0]

I'm still going to counter your argument, though.
This doesn't prove that "Destroy all" can't include 0, since the generally accepted reason for why Raigeki can't be activated to destroy 0 is because destroying 0 is basically doing nothing, and a card can't be activated if it doesn't do anything. It must have a purpose, that being its effect on the game.

So, if I have an active Spell Absorption, I can activate Raigeki if my opponent doesnt have any monsters. By this definition, I am gaining life points by its activation, and if I have an active Fire Princess, I am also infliction damage as well.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

So, if I have an active Spell Absorption, I can activate Raigeki if my opponent doesnt have any monsters. By this definition, I am gaining life points by its activation, and if I have an active Fire Princess, I am also infliction damage as well.

No.

Raigeki can't be activated if IT doesn't do anything.

Spell Absorption increases your life points.
Fire Princess inflicts damage to the opponent's lifepoints.

Raigeki doesn't do that.

 

[Raijinili]

DaGuy said what needed to be said, so... yeah.

Careful there.

Don't confuse "0" with nothing.

They're different.

I thought I didn't. >_>

I said "basically".