Dark Neo-Victory Panther Spacian Viper XX03

[Digital Jedi]

Here's a bizarre question.

Suppose Victory Viper XX03 is copied by Neo-Spacian Dark Panther. You use the third effect to Special Summon an Option Token. When the end of the turn comes, what happens to the option token?

I know what I'm thinking, but I'll let you all chime in first. (Take that Official Judges List)

 

[Digital Jedi]

I don't necessarily think a monster HAS to have stats to exists and that Magical Hats is the exception. I think it's something that can be blank if an effect says it's blank (or fails to define it).

Dark Ruler Ha Des does not have an effect that states he cannot be reborn from the Graveyard. If that was the case, it could be negated by being attacked by another Dark Ruler Ha Des that has more attack. But, it can't be negated, so that means that it is not an effect, and is instead a restriction.

You've lost me. Isn't what your describing a condition? Either way you look at it, my point was that the text states you cannot Special Summon it from the Graveyard. You stated that it was a condition that he could be Special Summoned from other places. My point, in the form of a question was, how is that a condition? That would mean that anytime text doesn't restrict you from doing something, that being able to do it is a condition. Hence my Cyber End Dragon example.

Aside from that, I don't recall any information that distinguishes restriction from condition. And most of the examples you've presented have always been described to me as conditions, period.

 

[masterwoo0]

And most of the examples you've presented have always been described to me as conditions, period.

And that's the gist of it, described by whom? Nothing has been described of Victory Viper, yet I am supposed to accept that it has always been the same as effects that do not have any relation to "his" effect.

 

[Digital Jedi]

I'm speaking directly about your comparisons of condition vs restrictions. I've never heard of a separate game term or mechanic that delineates condition from restriction. They have always been described to me as one and the same.

 

[masterwoo0]

I'm speaking directly about your comparisons of condition vs restrictions. I've never heard of a separate game term or mechanic that delineates condition from restriction. They have always been described to me as one and the same.

And all I'm saying is, "Where" and by "Whom", and what are the specific examples of a Rulings where a Condition is defined.

 

[Digital Jedi]

We've been discussing conditions for years now. The rules section is cluttered with the term, so any one post isn't what I'm pulling this from. From our discussions on this forum we've always refered to anything that wasn't a negatable effect as a condition (Hapire Lady 1 et al). For lack of the judges list and the rulings defiinig a term for us, we generally use our own terms to keep things ordered. But we've been pretty consistant so far with use of the word "condition", and I've yet to see it split in the manner you suggested.

 

[masterwoo0]

But we've been pretty consistant so far with use of the word "condition", and I've yet to see it split in the manner you suggested.

Restrict; to confine within bounds : RESTRAIN

Condition; a premise upon which the fulfillment of an agreement depends : STIPULATION

========================================

Toon Gemini Elf / Skill Drain 2005-09-15 19:12:00 <John Danker>


Toon Gemini Elf is summoned to the field while Skill Drain is active and then, during the same turn, Skill Drain is removed by Giant Trunade.

Can Toon Gemini Elf still attack?


-------------------------------------------------------------------

Answer:

It would no longer be able to attack that turn, because the restriction would again be applied.

---------------------------------------
Curtis Schultz
Official UDE Netrepâ„¢
CurtisSchultz_netrep@Hotmail.com

Toon Gemini Elf's restriction: Cannot attack on turn summoned.



Am I forced to "Level up?" 2005-01-26 14:08:00 <Lewis Hyde>


When Horus LV6 destroys a monster, in the End Phase do I have a choice not to send him to the Graveyard? LV4 in the UDE site says I do! Would it not be same for LV6?



Answer:

You are not forced to "Level up" your LV monster. If you do not want "Horus the Black Flame Dragon LV6" to "level up" into its LV8 form, you can simply choose not to have it do so.

But this doesn't mean you can stock-pile either. If you decide in a later turn that you actually do want to "Level up," you will need to satisfy the "level up" condition during that later turn.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Curtis Schultz
Official UDE Netrepâ„¢
CurtisSchultz_netrep@Hotmail.com

Horus the Black Flame Dragon LV6's Condition: Must destroy a monster in Battle to Level Up.


Now, both Toon Gemini Elf and Horus LV6 cannot be called restrictions, because that would mean that the ONLY way to level up Horus LV6 would be by destroying a monster in Battle, while we know that you could use the effect "Level Up!" to accomplish raising the monster to LV8. And we know that the only way for a Toon to attack on the turn it is played to the field is if it is not summoned, or if the restriction is removed.

So, conditions and restrictions are not the same. Conditions give you choices or decision points; "do this, do that", "if this, if that". Restrictions tell you what you cannot do; "you cannot do this, "you cannot do that".

How can they be considered the same?

 

[Digital Jedi]

Because a restriction can be part of a condition. "Stipulation" doesn't exclude "restraint". "Stipulation" can be all encompassing. A Restraining Order can stipulate that you stay away from someone. A contract can stipulate that you not divulge information about certain products or conversations. "The condition of our agreement is that you tell no one." Their not the same thing. But one (restraint) can be part of another (condition). You can't just say a condition is only defined by what you can do and not by what you can't.

 

[masterwoo0]

Because a restriction can be part of a condition. "Stipulation" doesn't exclude "restraint". "Stipulation" can be all encompassing. A Restraining Order can stipulate that you stay away from someone. A contract can stipulate that you not divulge information about certain products or conversations. "The condition of our agreement is that you tell no one." Their not the same thing. But one (restraint) can be part of another (condition). You can't just say a condition is only defined by what you can do and not by what you can't.

But I can certainly say that a restriction leaves no options, whereas a condition may or may not, and since they aren't defined (which is why there is a question as to whether or not Viper is a condition), who's to say I am not correct? We are both entitled to our differing opinions.

So the only real thing left to resolve is who is correct.

 

[Digital Jedi]

A restriction leaves no options? Did you not define Ha Des Special Summon text as a restriction? Wouldn't that leave you the option of Special Summoning hi from someplace else but the Graveyard? I don't think I'm following your line of thinking at all. And you know how I am when I don't undestand. The voices start again.

 

[masterwoo0]

A restriction leaves no options? Did you not define Ha Des Special Summon text as a restriction? Wouldn't that leave you the option of Special Summoning hi from someplace else but the Graveyard? I don't think I'm following your line of thinking at all. And you know how I am when I don't undestand. The voices start again.

If he is in the Graveyard, how can he be summoned from somewhere else?

The restriction is from the Graveyard, just as I said. If he is not in the Graveyard, is there a restriction on his being Special Summoned? No. He can be Special Summoned from hand, Deck, or RFG. The "Condition" exist as long as he is not in the Graveyard.

 

[Digital Jedi]

If he is in the Graveyard, how can he be summoned from somewhere else?

The restriction is from the Graveyard, just as I said. If he is not in the Graveyard, is there a restriction on his being Special Summoned? No. He can be Special Summoned from hand, Deck, or RFG. The "Condition" exist as long as he is not in the Graveyard.

Well, I think I get what you saying, and if I do, then that just seems overly complex and difficult to explain. Simplicity to me would be a condition being a state of being placed upon the card that says "you can do this and/or you can't do that." Even Ha Des effect can be explained that way.

In context with the Victory Viper, it seems to me its a condition placed on the tokens. Which would jibe with all the other instances we have of tokens with "conditions" placed upon them.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

What Curtis did was use the word condition in the more gramamtical sense:

It's a condition to activate its effect.

"condition" there has nothing to do with game mechanics. Its no different than saying A monster being summoned is a condition to activate Torrential Tribute.


Condition as a game mechanic appears here:

If you control "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" and activate "Inferno Fire Blast" to inflict damage, and then after that resolves you activate "Non-Spellcasting Area", "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" still cannot attack because "Non-Spellcasting Area" will not negate the condition.

"Condition" as a game mechaninc is identical to an effect other than it can't be negated/affected by other cards. Restriction if used mechanically, jsut means a "you can not" condition.

 

[masterwoo0]

What Curtis did was use the word condition in the more gramamtical sense:

It's a condition to activate its effect.

"condition" there has nothing to do with game mechanics. Its no different than saying A monster being summoned is a condition to activate Torrential Tribute.


Condition as a game mechanic appears here:

If you control "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" and activate "Inferno Fire Blast" to inflict damage, and then after that resolves you activate "Non-Spellcasting Area", "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" still cannot attack because "Non-Spellcasting Area" will not negate the condition.

"Condition" as a game mechaninc is identical to an effect other than it can't be negated/affected by other cards. Restriction if used mechanically, jsut means a "you can not" condition.

Like I said, I dont seem to be able to corroborate your meaning of condition in any Rule Book. If that is your opinion, then that is your opinion. As you have so famously stated in the past (in so many words), if it isnt in writing, it isnt a Ruling.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

Like I said, I dont seem to be able to corroborate your meaning of condition in any Rule Book.

and there's nothing in the rulebook to explain many of the rulings on the FAQ, afterall there wouldn't be any need to have the rulings on the FAQ

If that is your opinion, then that is your opinion. As you have so famously stated in the past (in so many words), if it isnt in writing, it isnt a Ruling.

But the effects of it ARE in writing on the FAQ, in the ruling I posted for example, especailly after comparing it to similar cards that are ruled as effects, and not condition.

Its logical extrapolation from the rulings.

 

[masterwoo0]

So, are we getting closer to a resolution???


Victory Viper XX03's Option Tokens 2006-10-19 20:18:00 <Erik VandeVooren>


A player has a Victory Viper XX03 on the field, which has used its effect to
create an Option Token. Later, they summon a second Victory Viper XX03.
If the Vic Ciper which created the Options is removed from the field,
can the Option Tokens remain bound to the new viper?

If yes, would a player then be able to switch which Vic Viper a Token is bound to
while there are multiple face up, changing thier attack values (to slip under
Messenger of Peace, for example)?



-----------------------------------------------

Answer:

The Option Token generated by "Victory Viper XX03" are bound to the card that special summoned them. (refered to in the text as "this card.")

They will not latch onto another card, nor can be they told to do so.

---------------------------------------
Curtis Schultz
Official UDE Rules Dude
CurtisSchultz_Netrep@Hotmail.com

 

[skey23]

That answer would lean more towards the "Option Token" staying on the field after the end of the turn....IMHO.

[edit]I'll add my thoughts on this, then I'm done....

"Dark Panther" will always be 'this card' as long as it remains face-up on the field. Just because it's effect changes doesn't mean it isn't 'this card' anymore. The only time it won't be 'this card' anymore is when it gets flipped face-down, or is removed from the field.

I could be completely wrong, but like I said, that's my thoughts on the subject.


Enjoy!

 

[masterwoo0]

That answer would lean more towards the "Option Token" staying on the field after the end of the turn....IMHO.

[edit]I'll add my thoughts on this, then I'm done....

"Dark Panther" will always be 'this card' as long as it remains face-up on the field. Just because it's effect changes doesn't mean it isn't 'this card' anymore. The only time it won't be 'this card' anymore is when it gets flipped face-down, or is removed from the field.

I could be completely wrong, but like I said, that's my thoughts on the subject.


Enjoy!

Well, only Curtis knows what he meant, but it looks exactly like I said earlier, when he said "this card" is referencing Victory Viper XX03.

I think everyone, other than me, is getting hung up on the fact that Dark Panther becomes "this card" temporarily. But as Curtis said, if Victory Viper produced it, it is ONLY tied to the Victory Viper XX03, which happens to be "this card" and "this card" only.

 

[Digital Jedi]

You see, from that message I took that the card name is irrelevant, and only the card generator is important.

 

[masterwoo0]

You see, from that message I took that the card name is irrelevant, and only the card generator is important.

Of course!! That would be expected if I only presented two Victory Viper XX03's.

If I made it Victory Viper and Sangan, you would obviously know that I am only talking about Viper. Tossing in another Viper meant that he was being more specific as to which one was being referenced, and that would be "the one that made the Token".

Even if Dark Panther created the Token when he was "this card", he is no longer the referenced "Victory Viper XX03" that Curtis is talking about at the End Phase of the turn.

He made a point to identify Victory Viper, even though there was no other cards to muddy the waters with. He could just as easily stated that "the Option Tokens generated by this card (and what card would anyone in their right mind think he is talking about??) are bound to the one card that Special Summoned them." That to me sounds even more ambiguous.

But, since he was in the mood to answer this one question, perhaps if someone has already submitted the given scenario, we may see something soon.

I've already submitted my one "stumper" for the time being....

 

[Digital Jedi]

But the notions that a card's name can change likely never entered his mind when explaining that particular scenario. We refer to card names as a matter of grammar. We don't yet know if a card changing name equates a card leaving the field.