Jinzo, SORL, B. Jacker, Amplifier, Remove Brainwashing

J

Judicator

The Man in Room V
Situation:

Player A's Jinzo is equipped with Amplifier
Player B has facedown Brain Jacker and faceup Remove Brainwashing

A activates swords of revealing light thus causing B's Brain Jacker to flip

B uses Brain Jackers effect for Jinzo, then wouldnt an infinite loop occur?

A's Jinzo switches to B's side thus no longer negating Remove Brainwashing
A's (currently under B's control) Jinzo then switches back to A's side thus re-negating Remove Brainwashing and B's Jacker's effect kicks in again...etc.

So how should this situation resolve or be resoloved?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
maestro satori said:
If I remember correctly remove brain washing and snatch steal the control does not revert back to the control of snatch steal even if remove brain washing is negated. would the same apply to brain jacker?
Click to expand...

We had a bit of a lengthly thread going on the situation of Remove Brainwashing being destroyed in conjunction with Snatch Steal. We did get an official answer from Curtis. The monster Snatch Steal is equip. to does revert back.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Kenjiblade said:
<Insert gratuitous post here>

Oh no, I'm not contributing anything to the actual thread...Just passing along, for no reason at all.

*There, you happy now Rai?*
Click to expand...

Steve, Please read this whole thread. Pole Position is not a very good friend of Muka Muka or monsters that increase their attack by their own effect (Shadow Ghoul, enraged Muka Muka...) and give us your thoughts :D, please :D!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Raijinili said:
If a card would start an infinite loop, like the Muka Muka example, you wouldn't be able to activate the last card.


In this case, whatever card was last activated couldn't be activated, since you know that it will end up in a loop already.
Click to expand...

that doesn't seem right.
[edit: Bad Muka Muka example removed]

Sometimes a loop will occur without any planning or knowledge that it'll happen. That's why a process needs to be figured out for coming up with equilibrium once a loop starts. That solves all of the problems, and I again stand by my proposal for a process of doing just that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think my other Muka Muka was a bad example. Here's another example:

Player A has Zombyra on the field who has previously attacked (ATK = 1900), and a face up Pole Position.
Player B has a face up Muka Muka equipped with Axe of Despair, no cards in hand (ATK = 1600)
Player B also has a face up Dark Bat.

Player A attacks Dark Bat with Zombyra.

Dark Bat is sent to the graveyard. Zombyra's effect reduces him to 1700. Player B ends his turn. Player A now draws, which increases the Muka Muka to 1900 causing the Pole Position to negate spells that affect Muka Muka, including Axe of Despair. So Muka Muka goes back down to 900, which causes Pole Position to now negate the spells for Zombyra again, which reactivates Axe of Despair and increases Muka Muka to 1900 and endless loop.

So what's fair in this case? Does Player B lose his draw because it would create the loop? Does Player A lose his chance to attack Dark Bat because he can forsee the future and the future is that Player B is going to draw a card and create an endless loop? Does player A not get to play Pole Position because he *might* attack Dark Bat instead of Muka Muka? I mean, really guys, none of these are fair solutions.

Resolve the loop. Equilibrium can be obtained!

Player B draws
Muka Muka ATK goes up by 300 due to the effect of Muka Muka
Pole Position now negates axe on Muka Muka due to the effect of Pole Position
Pole Position now no longer negates axe but negates spells for Zombyra due to the effect of Pole Position. Axe increases ATK of Muka Muka due to the effect of Axe.
Pole Position negates axe due to the effect of Pole Position <--here's the start of the repeat, so negate the effect of Pole Position. Now Pole Position does not negate the effect of the axe, no cards are protected from spells, but it will take effect again as soon as the loop Disappears. So if Muka Muka destroys Zombyra, the moment Zombyra is destroyed, Pole Position can reactivate and Muka Muka goes back down to 900.


This is a good, non-sanctioned solution that the "uppers" ought to consider so that the lower level judges can figure it out if there isn't a ruling.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Raijinili said:
If a card would start an infinite loop, like the Muka Muka example, you wouldn't be able to activate the last card.


In this case, whatever card was last activated couldn't be activated, since you know that it will end up in a loop already.
Click to expand...
... nothing is activating.

if Muka Muka is under 1900 then the loop will occur, and Axe, Pole Position or any other card, would have been already been legally activated.

The problem being that Muka Muka's effect is continuous.

The only way i can see this logic working, is if you single out this exact combination of cards, and state that based on the potential for this loop you cannot have all 3 of them active and in play at the same time (Axe of course can be substituted).

That seems...reeeeeally messy.

of course... who plays with Muka Muka anyway? so how often would you see this happen? ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The only solution I see for this problem is either one of this:
Destroy Pole Position (not likely because it will destroy the strongest monster on the field, and it is why we are arguing)
Destroy axe of despair
Destroy Muka Muka
Discard Cards from the hand to lower muka muka`s attack (not fair to the player but, if it has to be done, it has to be done)
None of this solutions are fair so put a bomb to the field and let it explode taking all cards involved. :p
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
novastar said:
... nothing is activating.

if Muka Muka is under 1900 then the loop will occur, and Axe, Pole Position or any other card, would have been already been legally activated.

The problem being that Muka Muka's effect is continuous.

The only way i can see this logic working, is if you single out this exact combination of cards, and state that based on the potential for this loop you cannot have all 3 of them active and in play at the same time (Axe of course can be substituted).

That seems...reeeeeally messy.

of course... who plays with Muka Muka anyway? so how often would you see this happen? ;)
Click to expand...
You would have to backtrack to the last manual activation or option triggered that would have allowed this to happen, and take it back.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Somehow I doubt you can rewind the game X turns in the past esp. if it was nothing more than drawing a card which started said loop... unless the ruling will force you to discard a card as soon as it's drawn.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
novastar said:
of course... who plays with Muka Muka anyway? so how often would you see this happen? ;)
Click to expand...

<clearing throat and raising hand meekly> Errr....I play an Enraged Muka Muka deck. Quite honestly, it performs quite respectfully too!

<getting his courage up>

Dissing Muka Muka and his Dad? <cowardly lion voice> C'mon....I'll take ya wif one paw behind my back evennnnnn!

I've posted a thread regarding the Pole Position / Muka Muka question on the UDE Judge's List.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
densetsu_x said:
Somehow I doubt you can rewind the game X turns in the past esp. if it was nothing more than drawing a card which started said loop... unless the ruling will force you to discard a card as soon as it's drawn.
Click to expand...
Well, you know that it's gonna happen anyway. You shouldn't have played it in the first place.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
John Danker said:
<clearing throat and raising hand meekly> Errr....I play an Enraged Muka Muka deck. Quite honestly, it performs quite respectfully too!

<getting his courage up>

Dissing Muka Muka and his Dad? <cowardly lion voice> C'mon....I'll take ya wif one paw behind my back evennnnnn!

I've posted a thread regarding the Pole Position / Muka Muka question on the UDE Judge's List.
Click to expand...
....ok, i take it back...<walks off with head down>
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
novastar said:
... nothing is activating.

if Muka Muka is under 1900 then the loop will occur, and Axe, Pole Position or any other card, would have been already been legally activated.

The problem being that Muka Muka's effect is continuous.

The only way i can see this logic working, is if you single out this exact combination of cards, and state that based on the potential for this loop you cannot have all 3 of them active and in play at the same time (Axe of course can be substituted).

That seems...reeeeeally messy.

of course... who plays with Muka Muka anyway? so how often would you see this happen? ;)
Click to expand...

true it would be messy, however if we look at other successful TCG IE Magic TG. we see alot of complete ban situations. things that cannot be in the same deck together. messy as that is, it seems the only way to avoid things of this nature is to ban them or risk having every tournament at risk of deliberate and accidental infinate loop. people planning on pole position being played and using cards that can be looped.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top