I don't get this ruling

J

Jason_C

Banned
Here's the situation:

Player A has a Tsukyomi and Brain Control in their hand.

Player B has Snatch Steal on player a's Gagagigo.

Player A activates Brain Control targetting the Gagagigo with no chains from
each player.

Player A then summons Tsukuyomi to flip the Gagagigo face down, destroying Snatch Steal. He flips it again and attacks.

Now, at the end of Player A's turn, will Gagagigo return to Player B's field and stay there, or will it stay on Player A's side of the field?

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

Answer:

During the End Phase, control of "Gagagigo" will be returned to Player B due to "Brain Control's" effect.

Before anyone asks, even if Player A Flip-Summons the "Gagagigo" after turning it face-down with "Tsukuyomi", it will STILL return to Player B in the End Phase. The outcome does not change.

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


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

Am I to interpret that as saying that Player B now has a monster at no cost to himself? Is this the same as "If I steal your monster and flip it face down, I get to keep it" but with a little sparkle thrown on by brain control? Does this mean that brain control actually returns the monster to the opponent's field, instead of to it's original owner's field? </mini-rant of questions>
-pssvr
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I replied back to this as soon as I read it the other day for two reasons.

1. I love how Curtis says " Before anyone asks...", when the initial scenario already asked what he told us not to ask!..lol.

2. I tried to clear up what, to me at least, was truly trying to be asked with this scenario. Basically, we all know that if I "Snatch Steal" a monster, then flip it face-down, I get to keep that monster. We've had several debates about this, whether it's right or wrong, I don't wanna get into. Anyway, back to the scenario. I believe he was trying to use "Brain Control" to take advantage of the "wherever it is when it get's flipped face-down while attached to "Snatch Steal" is where it stays" issue. I understand that it will go back to the opponent at the end of the turn due to "Brain Control"s effect, but why wouldn't it immediately come back to Player A's side of the field afterwards? "Snatch Steal" is no longer affecting it. It was flipped face-down on Player A's side of the field, who was the original owner/controller to begin with.

What say you?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That's what I'm getting at. Why doesn't it go back via Brain Control, and then IMMEDIATELY revert to it's original owner? I believe it may be because of the screwed up Tsuki vs. Snatch ruling. In other words, I think Curtis is basically saying Brain Control does not change the snatch ruling.
-pssvr
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
It would have to be removed from the field in order to do that. Once Snatch Steal is destroyed with the monster face-down, it now becomes the opponents monster for all intents and purposes until it is either sent to the Graveyard, removed from play, or returned to hand or deck.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Whether you play Brain Control first or Tsukuyomi (but you'd have to then flip it face-up before playing Brain Control) in that scenario, the same thing will happen.

It's like masterwoo0 said. You see, whenever Snatch Steal is destroyed, the game checks to see which monster was equipped to it and returns it to the other player. When a said monster is affected by Book of Moon, Snatch Steal loses its target and the game is too stupid to know which monster was equipped with it.

You've probably heard that speech, before, but I wanted to emphasize it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Actually, it is move that couldn't score better on the list of *try-to-be-smart-but-it-remains-stupid*-list. (Sorry, I don't want to offend)

What happens? Snatch Steal gets destroyed because Gagagigo was flipped down. So, normally spoken, the monster would stay at the side where it was flipped down. However, Brain Control says: the monster returns... And THAT is why Gagagigo is returned to B and not to A.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
True enough the ruling does seem a bit odd in that although Brain Control sends it back to the other player's field, there's nothing holding it there so, since as far as the game is concerned (via the flipped face-down while Snatch Stealed ruling) the monster belongs to A, why doesn't it then return back to player A?
Does Brain Control set a condition upon the monster?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
"¢ If the monster targeted by "Brain Control" is flipped face-down later in the turn, it is still returned back to the original controller in the End Phase.

I believe Brain Control does set a condition on the monster, just like Change of Heart. If you steal your opponent's monster with Brain Control and play Book of Moon on it, your opponent still gets it back at the end of your turn.

In the situation described at the beginning of the thread, it doesn't matter who the monster's owner is, because the condition set by Brain Control still has to resolve at the end of the turn. So since the tie to Snatch Steal is broken when it gets flipped face down, it doesn't care about who the owner is, and only has to worry about who the original controller was when Brain Control was activated.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
papewaio said:
In the situation described at the beginning of the thread, it doesn't matter who the monster's owner is, because the condition set by Brain Control still has to resolve at the end of the turn. So since the tie to Snatch Steal is broken when it gets flipped face down, it doesn't care about who the owner is, and only has to worry about who the original controller was when Brain Control was activated.
Click to expand...
So Brain Controller does set a condition regarding the who the original controller is? Wonder how this might resolve with a card such as Remove Brainwashing coming into the mix. Would the card once more return to A, or remain with B due to the condition put upon it by Brain Control??? Considering how Remove Brainwashing tends to work I imagine the card would once more return to A.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
*throws siMON KEY at Daivy* Sorry Simon, but it had to be done. Now, what do you figure is an Appropriate penalty if someone FORGETS who a card's original owner was? Ridiculous as it sounds, I had to make a ruling on this once. Two people using similar decks and the same cases, each with 2 Creature Swaps, a Snatch Steal, tsuki, Change of Heart, and 2 Brain Jackers, actually managed to forget who the cards original owner was, making Remove Brainwashing a very touchy subject...
-pssvr
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
pssvr said:
*throws siMON KEY at Daivy* Sorry Simon, but it had to be done. Now, what do you figure is an Appropriate penalty if someone FORGETS who a card's original owner was? Ridiculous as it sounds, I had to make a ruling on this once. Two people using similar decks and the same cases, each with 2 Creature Swaps, a Snatch Steal, tsuki, Change of Heart, and 2 Brain Jackers, actually managed to forget who the cards original owner was, making Remove Brainwashing a very touchy subject...
-pssvr
Click to expand...
Take it they both had no/identical deck protectors?
Well if both have forgotten who was the original owner of the card then it's an irreparable game state so I'd issue both a loss, i.e. make the current game a draw and get them to start another.
If only one can't remember then just tell them to keep better track of their cards and perhaps issue a warning.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
daivahataka said:
Take it they both had no/identical deck protectors?
Well if both have forgotten who was the original owner of the card then it's an irreparable game state so I'd issue both a loss, i.e. make the current game a draw and get them to start another.
If only one can't remember then just tell them to keep better track of their cards and perhaps issue a warning.
Click to expand...
Problem is, you cant have any markings to distinguish between who's card is who's. In that scenario, it's a no win situation because if I can say, that's my card because I remember the small dimple in the Sleeve. Guess what? That's a marked card. Game Loss.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
masterwoo0 said:
Problem is, you cant have any markings to distinguish between who's card is who's. In that scenario, it's a no win situation because if I can say, that's my card because I remember the small dimple in the Sleeve. Guess what? That's a marked card. Game Loss.
Click to expand...
Hence why I said "forgotten" as opposed to refering to being able to recognise the card. (Though if one player had 1st ed.s or ones from a reprint series, whereas the other didn't this would allow them to be distinguished without markings upon the sleaves)
Slight dimples would be considered marking if they're plainly visible and/or there seems to be a significance to them. In general if you can see them on the back of the card when it's not in your hand you should replace the sleeve.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dang. That means I have shopping to do o.0 well, maybe not. The dimples on my cases are really only visible if the light hits them at JUST the right angle...
-pssvr
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Best thing to do if you don't want to have to buy new ones would be just ask the HJ at any tournament you want to play in, but to be honest they'll probably err on the safe side regarding markings and tell you to replace the affected sleeves.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
meh. Maybe I could just take off the outer sleeves on my cards at tournaments, and duel with them in just their inner sleeves. Although I'm kinda iffy about that, since other people will be touching my cards.
-pssvr
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think double sleeving itself isn't allowed...

Yup:
UDE Official Tournament Policy said:
"¢ Each cards may only be in one sleeve. (Cards may not be double-sleeved.)


If a player chooses to use card sleeves, the sleeves must be from the same manufacturer, be the same color, have the same length, and have the same amount of wear. Players should replace sleeves frequently to avoid worn or marked sleeves.

Large plastic top-loading card protectors may not be used in tournaments, as they disrupt the flow of play.​
Click to expand...
​




​
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top