dark magician of chaos question
- Thread starter woltarr
- Start date
Although the text says when the "card" is destroyed or removed from the field. After all, if "Dark Magician of Chaos" is equipped to "Relinquished" and you activate Giant Trunade or Heavy Storm, the DMoC is RFP. You also can't use Emergency Provisions to send the same equipped DMoC to the GY because of that effect. That's why I'm leaning more towards it would be RFP.
John Danker
Administrator
Oh it's never an argument....it's a "Sprited Discussion" right? <soft chuckle>
That's true...Raijinili said:
We never argue... healthy debate... always a fun time
BTW, isn't it interesting that now that we've seen a small taste of actual good, strong, accurate mechanics in the articles coming from the List, all of the sudden ...the forums are dead.
...
It should have been this way from the start, mechanics first, rulings second.
I see that the ruling says that, but the ruling doesn't quite make sense.densetsu_x said:
What does being destroyed in the hand have to do with Electric Snakes effect? He has to be discarded by an opponent's effect in order gain his effect. Being destroyed wouldn't trigger his effect on the field or in the hand.
To be honest, the Rel/TER ruling looks to be erroneous (but obviously never changed).densetsu_x said:
Wouldn't be the first time....
Just because it's written in the UDE FAQ doesn't mean its accurate.
The fact that the effect does not trigger while DMoC is face-down, indicates a face-up Continuous/Trigger Effect. It should only work if DMoC is a monster.
Of course it could just be an effect that butts in at the point of being sent. However, that wouldn't prove one way or the other concerning SJ, because even IF it is an Equip Spell, it still resolved onto the field and into play.
The point was he's not considered to be in the hand when destroyed since otherwise then the ruling wouldn't mention "having gone straight from hand to graveyard".
novastar said:
But because it IS written in the FAQ, that's how we're suppose to rule it until it is otherwise changed.
I understand that, but it seems to me that a ruling designed to show that Solemn Judgment doesn't destroy in the hand would use an effect that would actually activate while destroyed in the hand. The fact that they used an effect that doesn't really aply makes me question the whole ruling. It's as if they meant to say that it wouldn't activate if destroyed in the hand by Solemn Judgment because it needs to be discard, and then somebody got confused.densetsu_x said:
DMoC is an "off-field" effect. This is evidenced by the fact that Skill Drain can't negate it.novastar said:
Graveyard effects are also "off-field" effects.
When cards leave the field, they default. So DMoC defaults to monster.
The exception seems to be base-attack modifiers.
Yes that looks like it's correct, I didn't see the Skill Drain ruling.
There is a nuance here, where just at the point where the monster is being taken off the field and sent to a destination, effects such as these would kick in. At that point the card has defaulted back to it's original form.
Having said that, the monster (card as it were) is still required to be resolved to the field and face-up for the effect to work.
I would think that in the event DMoC were equipped to TER/Rel while face-down, it would not be removed from play.
There is a nuance here, where just at the point where the monster is being taken off the field and sent to a destination, effects such as these would kick in. At that point the card has defaulted back to it's original form.
Having said that, the monster (card as it were) is still required to be resolved to the field and face-up for the effect to work.
I would think that in the event DMoC were equipped to TER/Rel while face-down, it would not be removed from play.
There is a ruling under Dark Magician of Chaos that says a face-down DMoC when destroyed is not removed from play.
chaos general
New Member
novastar said:
Actually, Apples and Oranges arent too different... They're both fruit, both make juices, both are moderately roundish, both have peels, both have seeds, both grow on trees, etc.
But onto topic-
I'd like to think that DMoC would not be removed from play if negated by Solemn Judgment. Think about it - Its summon is totally negated, thus its hitting the field is also negated. That means that neither of its effects activate, since DMoC specifically states "when this card is removed from the field...." Because of SJ, it never hits the field, technically, thus never has its effects activate. If you were to say that it would be removed from play, then you'd be saying it hit the field, but it doesnt - Jinzo gets negated by Solemn Judgment because he never hits the field for his effect to go off.
Since there is no "Limbo Zone" between the hand and the Monster Card Zone Solemn Judgment would have to destroy cards in the hand. There is no transtate of existance for a monster about to be summoned. It's "technically in the hand" or "technically on the field", not "technically in the middle so the rules for being on the field aplly" or similar.
You activate a spell card on the field. Your opponent chains with Magic Jammer to negate it. The spell card is destroyed.
You declare a summon by placing it on the field. Your opponent responds with Solemn Judgment to negate it. The summon is destroyed.
This all occurs in the window between the time the summon is declared and any other effects activate. If Solemn Judgment or Horn of Heaven is not activated, you could say the summon was successful or "resolved". Similar principal.
(Note I said similar, not identical since summoning doesn't have a speed you're not chaining, you're responding. But the theory behind it is what I'm looking at. You're not activating a spell card in your hand. So neither are you declaring your summon in your hand either.)
You declare a summon by placing it on the field. Your opponent responds with Solemn Judgment to negate it. The summon is destroyed.
This all occurs in the window between the time the summon is declared and any other effects activate. If Solemn Judgment or Horn of Heaven is not activated, you could say the summon was successful or "resolved". Similar principal.
(Note I said similar, not identical since summoning doesn't have a speed you're not chaining, you're responding. But the theory behind it is what I'm looking at. You're not activating a spell card in your hand. So neither are you declaring your summon in your hand either.)
Its an unfair comparison, though. Monster Summoning mechaincs operate entirely different then Spell Card activation mechanics.
Jinzo doesn't get placed on the field and then you wait for his effect to resolve. Spell Cards must actually be placed into the Spell Trap Zone to await resolution.
In either case, though, a Spell Card or a Monster Card exist in one place (the hand) or the other (the field), not in a limbo inbetween awaiting resolution.
Jinzo doesn't get placed on the field and then you wait for his effect to resolve. Spell Cards must actually be placed into the Spell Trap Zone to await resolution.
In either case, though, a Spell Card or a Monster Card exist in one place (the hand) or the other (the field), not in a limbo inbetween awaiting resolution.
chaosruler
New Member
no, you would not. He is never considered to have transfered from the field to the graveyard
-chaosruler
-chaosruler