I've tried to agree, but...

[Dr Sin]

I was thinking about Sangan and when his summon is negated via Horn of Heaven or Solemn Judgement. I searched in the forums, read the last discussion, I know the official rule says his effect is negated, but I still couldn' t "buy it".
Why his effect is negated if I summon him and the opponent "HoH, SJ"s him? Where is he at this moment and how is it possible to him not be in the hand or on the field? Is he in the already discussed "different dimension", "nowhere land", "limbo zone" etc?
I know the rule and I can just accept it, but if I could have some more reasons to believe it, it would be great.
Also, in the end, what statement about when Sangan is already face-down on the field, is flip-summoned and negated is accepted right now? In this case, his effect works or not?

Thanks in advande, sorry for my poor English and to be asking it again.

 

[Digital Jedi]

So chain point would get missed, but what created the chain point resolves before the existing chain...Thats what is bothering me. The resolution of anything before the resolution of a resolving chain.

 

[novastar]

Yup...a design flaw...or omission if you will...

That only became important when summon negation became possible.

 

[Tkwiget]

Hmm, I might just be missing something but I can't seem to grasp it still. The card I believe should exist some where. Just can't float there, doesn't make any sense then.

That's the part I'm not getting is the location of the monster when it's being summoned. I mean, it isn't like you hold the card and show it to your opponent and say, "I'm summoning Sangan." and wait for them to respond.

Also, I'm still hung up on the impression that Solemn Judgment and Horn of Heaven activate in response to the summoning, but then again the summoning would be considered successful. =/

I don't think a lot of players declare what they're summoning, I just think they slap the monster down without saying a word.

>_< Thanks Jedi for clearing some of the confusion, I guess I'll stick with the thread.

Remember people, the location of the monster that was negated is what I think is in question here.

So would this new thought of mine have ANY valid point to it?

Solemn Judgment and Horn of Heaven (after I compared the activation timing to Trap Hole and Bottomless Trap Hole) are activated to the declaration of the summoning. Correct? If that's the case, then the monster is still in fact physically in the hand.

If that is correct, then my god, please let me know. XD

Dillie, thanks for talking to me on AIM buddy! Jedi, thanks for clearing out my head and Squid, don't worry. =) God this site rocks! XD

 

[Dillie-O]

I'm in Nova's boat here. There is definitely a point where the summon is "declared" or "started" and the actual resolution of the monster being summoned, where to summon negators get a chance to activate. If the summon was completly undone, then that would mean that you were still entitled to summon a monster and could proceed with another one, should it be in your hand.

Similarly, when you use trap cards such as Negate Attack against a BLS-EotB, you DON'T get to use its secondary effect because the attack was negated. The attack was still declared, which disqualifies BLS and others from using their other abilities, although for damage calculation and other trap purposes, you never get that far along the battle process.

I think what makes things so hard is that there are only two or three cards in the game that actually negate a summoning and everything else can only respond to it.

 

[novastar]

So chain point would get missed, but what created the chain point resolves before the existing chain...Thats what is bothering me. The resolution of anything before the resolution of a resolving chain.

Well if i have four effects chained together...the first three resolve "before the the enitre chain resolves"

You cant respond to any of them or events within them either at the end.

 

[Digital Jedi]

I simply feel like they didn't define where they wanted the card to be when they created and ruled on the effect. Creating a Limbo Zone is fine. But ultimately, there isn't one. When I rationalize the rulings, I take into acount the intention of the effects involved. In this case, I don't think they ever inteneded for there to be a Limbo or Red Zone and failed to see it as an issue. The way the rulings stand now, the monster is just destroyed for no effect, other then monster effects that activated when destroyed no matter where their located. Pheonix and V Lord for example.

Nova's chain point theory is good, but the resolution process bothers me somewhat, and I really don't see this chain point fitting into the game mechaincs overall. No offence.

 

[Digital Jedi]

Well if i have four effects chained together...the first three resolve "before the the enitre chain resolves"

You cant respond to any of them or events within them either at the end.

But this monster is not part of a resolving chain, in this scenario. He's incidental to the resolving chain. He just happens to be summoned as a result of the resolving chain, but he's not a part of it. The fact that he's going to resove into a proper object before the effect on this actual chain are done resolving is where I find contention points.

 

[anthonyj]

But this monster is not part of a resolving chain, in this scenario. He's incidental to the resolving chain. He just happens to be summoned as a result of the resolving chain, but he's not a part of it. The fact that he's going to resove into a proper object before the effect on this actual chain are done resolving is where I find contention points.

But Jinzo's effect will not become "active" until Call of the Haunted has resolved. Yes it will turn on before the next chain link but that isn't adding to the chain in any way because it is a continuous effect.

We know that a continuous monster effect will be active immediately upon the monster being face-up on the field with the exception of having to wait for an effect that is currently resolving when it becomes face-up on the field. So once Jinzo is "on the field" with a summon where would the resolution be? That is why there has to be a declaration of summon and response to the declaration before the monster is placed on the field. Continuous Effects would immediately become active (since nothing is resolving) when summoned to the field and thus would prevent the activation of any trap.

What I said earlier about Nightmare Penguin is another example about why the negation would have to happen "before" the flip summon actually occurred. Nightmare Penguin's first effect activates upon being flipped face-up. It does not require being successfully flip summoned so according to game mechanics as soon as it was flipped it should place the effect on chain link 1. If this occurred "before" Horn of Heaven was used to "respond" to the flip summon then Horn of Heaven would be chain link 2 (which doesn't happen). Since Horn of Heaven only negates the summon itself and the summon was not necessary to be successful for the effect in chain link 1 the Penguin should still get it's effect after it has been destroyed by Horn of Heaven. It doesn't because Horn of Heaven is activated "before" the flip summon actually occurs. In the series monsters were always announced before coming to the field. I don't believe this was just for verbal impact to add to the show. It is actually part of the game mechanics. The monster is declared, payments, tributes, etc. are handled, the negators have the opportunity to prevent the summon and then and only then is the monster successfully summoned. Once the monster is on the field any continual effect immediately kicks in and then it can be affected by any other effects active on the field (Stumbling, Level Limit - Area B, etc.) and obviously at this point you can respond to the summon with Trap Hole, Torrential Tribute, etc. Too much happens in these time slots for it to be simplified to "put monster on field, and then respond with Horn of Heaven to rewind the summon. What about the continuous effect of the monster? What about other effects like Stumbling? There just has to be a declaration and negation point before the summon would actually occur.

 

[Tkwiget]

Good point about the show and the characters declaring that they're summoning a monster.

Prehaps we should as judges encourage players to declare their summonings? It would then cut out some of the work on our part during events. It isn't like we don't have enough tasks to do already.

After all, if there's a player in a regional that has Horn of Heaven or Solemn Judgment used on their monster and knows about this ruling. I bet that the player would call over a judge. I feel sorry for that judge if they don't pick up on some of the extremely important details. Such as Horn and Judgment negate the declaration of the summoning and don't respond to it.

 

[squid]

Good point about the show and the characters declaring that they're summoning a monster.

Prehaps we should as judges encourage players to declare their summonings? It would then cut out some of the work on our part during events. It isn't like we don't have enough tasks to do already.

After all, if there's a player in a regional that has Horn of Heaven or Solemn Judgment used on their monster and knows about this ruling. I bet that the player would call over a judge. I feel sorry for that judge if they don't pick up on some of the extremely important details. Such as Horn and Judgment negate the declaration of the summoning and don't respond to it.

I think that I differ on that distinction though, Tkwiget. Horn and Judgment arent negating the declaration itself. To negate that, they would be allowing a subsequent Normal summon, later in the turn.

It is a response. It responds to the declaration. It negates the summons, making it an unsuccessful summoning. To me, that is the key.

 

[Tkwiget]

I should have said, "response" in front of declaration or however to make it look right. We're on the same page here, I just worded it a little bad. XD

 

[Digital Jedi]

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a declaration point. But in my opinion the declaration of a summon still occurs befor the monster is brought to the field, in other words, before your opponent gets to see what it is. The theory of there being a "chain" point is that the monster card gets placed on field, a responce point is created where the opponent gets to see the card, then the monster resolves into a monster card.

But Jinzo's effect will not become "active" until Call of the Haunted has resolved. Yes it will turn on before the next chain link but that isn't adding to the chain in any way because it is a continuous effect.

Yes, and where would Jinzo be resoving into a monster card? In between chain links. You see, my propblem is that the cointinous effect of a continuous monster card becomes active the mmoment the monster hits the field. Continuous Effects from monsters do not activate or resolve. But now we have to say that a monster resloves but its effect doesn't. (??) That is where I have a hard time with it. I also cant rationalize the resolution of a monster object inbetween chain links. The effect of Jinzo doesn't resolve between chain links. But th monster does? That creates more issue then it answers for me.

 

[squid]

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a declaration point. But in my opinion the declaration of a summon still occurs befor the monster is brought to the field, in other words, before your opponent gets to see what it is. The theory of there being a "chain" point is that the monster card gets placed on field, a responce point is created where the opponent gets to see the card, then the monster resolves into a monster card.

thats what I was trying to address with making a distinction between the monster zone and the 'field'. This does allow for the card to be shown to the opponent upon declaration, even in a Flip Summon, and for there to be a response point for the opponent to negate the summons itself.

 

[squid]

Ok, just to be an extra aggravation to everyone before I go offline:

The ruling for Granadora vs. Solemn Judgment/Horn of Heaven:

[Re: Granadora] When "Granadora"'s Summon is negated and it is destroyed, by "Solemn Judgment" or "Horn of Heaven", the owner of "Granadora" takes the damage.

Is it just me who sees a problem with an effect taking place when the monster it was attached to has never officially reached the field.

No matter what theory that has been expounded, that we use, I cant understand how an effect like this can continue when the field from which it activates has never happened.

aw, cripes. Ignore me. I just clicked the autolink for Granadora and read its rule #4.

That's it. Im going home...

 

[Digital Jedi]

How is Grandadora's ruling any different then Vampie Lord's or Sacred Phoenix of Nephthys? Grandadora says nothing about being on the field when its destroyed. And it's second effect has nothing to do with its first effect. You take 200 points of damage when its destroyed face down, too.

 

[anthonyj]

I'm not saying there shouldn't be a declaration point. But in my opinion the declaration of a summon still occurs befor the monster is brought to the field, in other words, before your opponent gets to see what it is. The theory of there being a "chain" point is that the monster card gets placed on field, a responce point is created where the opponent gets to see the card, then the monster resolves into a monster card.

Yes, and where would Jinzo be resoving into a monster card? In between chain links. You see, my propblem is that the cointinous effect of a continuous monster card becomes active the mmoment the monster hits the field. Continuous Effects from monsters do not activate or resolve. But now we have to say that a monster resloves but its effect doesn't. (??) That is where I have a hard time with it. I also cant rationalize the resolution of a monster object inbetween chain links. The effect of Jinzo doesn't resolve between chain links. But th monster does? That creates more issue then it answers for me.

See the issue is your view on "declaration". You declare you are tributing Sangan to Summon Jinzo. This happens verbally, before the monster actually comes to the field. There is no need to wait for the monster to be summoned before finding out what it is, you are told what it before it reaches the field. And monsters don't "resolve" onto the field, they certainly don't "resolve" into the monsters they are when summoned by Call of the Haunted. This isn't VS. a monster is a monster. It can have an effect in hand, it can have an effect face down, it doesn't need to be something else before it is properly summoned. That is why Horn of Heaven is timed after the declaration, before the summon has occurred. The whole flip summoned Sangan vs. Horn of Heaven ruling is so difficult because it seems to be saying it isn't Sangan on the field before it is summoned. If that is how Takahashi wants it to work then BKSS. There is no logic to it. Sangan was on the field before he got destroyed. He is going from the field to the graveyard so by all logic it shouldn't matter a whit that the flip summon was negated, all that should mean is that it was stopped from making it to face-up on the field. And since he doesn't need to be face-up on the field and the conditions for triggering once he reaches the graveyard were reached it is truly an anomaly. A special twist to the negators (hey they really should get something, how often do you actually see Horn of Heaven anyway?)

 

[Digital Jedi]

You do understand that I'm disagreeing with the notion that a monster resolves onto the field when summoned?

 

[anthonyj]

I do. That was clarification that we don't "resolve" as has been suggested elsewhere in this thread. Horn of Heaven happens pre-monster making it to the field. That certainly makes the most sense and is perfectly justifiable by the rulings we have as well as the way Mr. Takahashi has over and over again visually presented the way the game works.

I just feel sorry for poor Sangan getting so unfairly picked on. What has Konami got against Critter anyway?

 

[Digital Jedi]

So your saying, simply, that a summon declaration includes the declaration of the name of the monster?

 

[anthonyj]

Exactly. The name of the monster is included in the declaration.