creature swap

[sensAsian]

on the previous board, there was a question about creature swap, but i cant find the thread and i cant find the search function (not too bright) so i guess i have to make a new one. sorry.

anyways, it said that at the resolution of creature swap, the non turn player had priority meaning after both players get their new creatures, the non turn player had priority to do something before the turn player tries to tribute summon his new monster.

if this is true then:
if my opp plays premature burial and targets magical scientist and i do nothing, then at the resolution when magical scientist hits the field, the non turn player (me) would have priority right?? i could do something before scientist tries to use his effect??

 

[Fiendish Envoy]

anyways, it said that at the resolution of creature swap, the non turn player had priority meaning after both players get their new creatures, the non turn player had priority to do something before the turn player tries to tribute summon his new monster.

Actually, after a chain has successfully resolved, the turn player would retain priority. I'll go into this more in-depth later in the post.

if this is true then:
if my opp plays premature burial and targets magical scientist and i do nothing, then at the resolution when magical scientist hits the field, the non turn player (me) would have priority right?? i could do something before scientist tries to use his effect??

As I said above, the turn player would retain priority after a chain resolves, so after this chain involving "Premature Burial" resolves, the turn player would have priority once again.

Heres a bit on how priority works:

Player A declares the summon of "Magical Scientist".
Player B is unable to negate the summon of "Magical Scientist" ("Horn of Heaven"/"Solemn Judgement")
Player A successfully summons "Magical Scientist".

Player A uses his priority to activate the effect of "Magical Scientist".
<priority passes to Player B>
Player B responds to the initial summon with "Ring of Destruction" [targetting "Magical Scientist].
<priority passes back to Player A>
Player A chains to "Ring of Destruction" with "Sevel Tools of the Bandit".
<priority passes to Player B>
Player B does not respond.
<priority passes back to Player A>
Player A does not respond.

If both players consecutively pass priority, the chain is now ready to resolve:

1) "Seven Tools of the Bandit" negates and destroys "Ring of Destruction".
2) "Magical Scientist's" effect resolves and summons a fusion monster to the field.

Now that this chain has successfully resolved, the turn player would have priority once again.

This may be confusing, so let me know if you need more clarification.

 

[densetsu_x]

Actually, from what I think it was John who mentioned it, the scenario described would be correct.

After "Creature Swap" has finished resolving where the non-turn player didn't chain to it and then the turn player didn't chain anything else, the non-turn player can start a new chain before the turn player could do something like a tribute (I believe in the original example, "Change of Heart" was used, though the situations are still the same)

 

[Fiendish Envoy]

Since there isn't an official ruling on priority, I'm going to continue ruling it this way, but everything will hopefully be answered when the anxiously awaited Priority Essay comes out.

Currently, the definition of priority is under the control of the tournament head judge.

 

[densetsu_x]

I know the thread is here somewhere, though I'll let John repeat it the next time he is around.

That supposedly was an official ruling as that was what UDE told the judges on how to rule that particular scenario.

Of course I also remember us having our own debate about that ruling on the thread.

 

[Fiendish Envoy]

Hmm, I'm surprised they didn't make a post on the Judges List if they indeed did find an official ruling.

I was just talking with Steve, and he says that this question will be officially answered once the Priority Article gets on the UDE FAQ.

 

[jdos]

Here's the link to that previous thread.

http://www.igforums.com//threads/2950&highlight=snatch+steal+compulsory

 

[Gimpy]

I think I have a pretty good handle on this "priority at the end of a chain" thing. I'll throw this out for fodder.

At the end of any game event (in responce to which a new chain may be created) both players must be given an opportunity to respond / create a new chain. The turn player most likely would retain priority, (this is a little unclear at this point, hopefully some rulings will be comming down soon) but may not proceed with a new event (summon, activate effects, pay costs, ect.) until both players have passed their respective chances to respond to the last event.

It's sort of the same principal as the rule "A game phase (Draw Phase, Standby Phase, Main Phase 1, ect.) does not end until BOTH players agree it does."

When an event resolves there is a window open for either player to respond with a new chain. If a monster has just been Special Summoned via Call of the Haunted that creates a new "event", and before the Turn Player can rush off and tribute that monster for his/her Jinzo, the Opponent must be given a chance to respond to that event.

I think Konami is trying to enforce the idea that "Turn Priority" is not a tool for keeping your opponent from activating or doing anything during your turn. If a player can summon, then call "Turn Priority" and activate something else before their opponent can get a chance to react to the new state of game then the game becomes too one-sided.

Sometimes I have a hard time putting into words an idea in my head, but I hope that made sense to somebody.

 

[novastar]

Yes exactly Gimpy, and it is ALWAYS the Turn Player who retains priority, when a chain or event resolves. It is perfectly acceptable to have each turn one-sided. This is an alternating turn game so when its your turn, you should be ultimately be in control of it, the opponent simply responds.

This needs to be clarified...which it never will by UDE.

And a word to the wise, anyone who tells you differently, is simply following orders and really does not have the foggiest.

 

[John Danker]

I'm afraid this is going to be a thorn in all of our sides until it's ruled officially....which is when Konami decides the EXACT wording on Kevin's essay is perfect....and who knows when that will happen. <shrug>

Sad to say but, your best bet is to check with the head judge at any given tournament you're playing at as to how THEY will rule it that day.

I know how I've been TOLD to rule it and will continue to do so until either I'm told to rule it otherwise or until Kevin's essay is posted and it says differently.

This isn't how it should be obviously but it's the way it is. We're at the mercy of Konami.

 

[novastar]

I agree, there is a BIG thorn here... one that i'm confident Kevin's "essay" will not get rid of.

Is it really Konami we are at the mercy of? or is it actually UDE? who frankly should not be involved with rulings at all. I could say a lot of things, but i won't because i don't have the whole picture to make certain statements. But in dealing with this garbage for over 2 yrs, there is only one REAL answer i come to...

Get rid of UDE and THEN we will see what Konami has to say...

 

[John Danker]

I'll say this once again. Kevin's essay has been submitted to Konami for a number of months. It's sat there waiting for a response, passed from one desk to another likely (with no one there wanting to touch the whole issue with a ten foot pole) It's finally been read and needs to be edited.

Edited? Why? We don't know. It could mean they're not completely happy with the wording (they're extremely picky about wording being exactly the same as the theirs) It could mean that a concept is off, it could mean they want to sit on it and figure the concept out themselves and need an excuse for more time ....we...don't....know.

Kevin has worked carefully but hard to try and clarify much wording (thus the card reprints) as well as clarify game mechanics and concepts. To do this with Konami is indeed a laborsome process though. It will come....but it will come when Konami is ready for it to come.