level modulation versus serial spell

W

woltarr

New Member
rules says that serial spell wont work with level up! because serial spell is unable to find a monster LV on the field in order to correct copy the effct of level up´ed creature

since level modulation dont have this problem because it can target any LV creature in grave , may i chain serial spell to it and special sumon 2 diferent Lv creatures ?

example ; my grave has 1 armed 7 properly sumoned before and 1 horus 6

woltarr
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I don't see any issue with chaining Serial Spell to Level Modulation. There are no costs to be observed and no conditions that would prevent 2 monsters from being special summoned to the field. Nice way to get two of your Levelers out as long as you don't mind giving your opponent 4 cards 8^D
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dillie-O said:
I don't see any issue with chaining Serial Spell to Level Modulation. There are no costs to be observed and no conditions that would prevent 2 monsters from being special summoned to the field. Nice way to get two of your Levelers out as long as you don't mind giving your opponent 4 cards 8^D
Click to expand...


errr nope

Serial Spell DONT copy activation costs

draw 2 cards is the activation cost and not part of the efct

woltarr
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
woltarr said:
errr nope

Serial Spell DONT copy activation costs

draw 2 cards is the activation cost and not part of the efct

woltarr
Click to expand...
Drawing 2 cards cant be the activation Cost, because if your opponent cannot Draw 2 cards because he only has one card left, then you couldnt activate the effect because the Cost must be paid.

It doesnt say, "Your opponent draws up to 2 cards".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Drawing 2 cards cant be the activation Cost, because if your opponent cannot Draw 2 cards because he only has one card left, then you couldnt activate the effect because the Cost must be paid.

It doesnt say, "Your opponent draws up to 2 cards".
Click to expand...
That was my take on it, too. I thought the opponent drawing was part of the effect. A balance to offset the gain you receive from pulling the monster from the GY.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
MightyDingo said:
That was my take on it, too. I thought the opponent drawing was part of the effect. A balance to offset the gain you receive from pulling the monster from the GY.
Click to expand...

Drawing 2 is the cost.

You cannot activate "Level Modulation" if the opponent has 1 or less card in their Deck, or if you have "Protector of the Sanctuary" on the field.

Why would this ruling even matter if drawing cards part of the effect? If you draw until you Deck Out from Card Destruction the same would apply here, but it does not. Drawing 2 would be the cost of activating Level Modulation. So you would get 2 selections and your opponent only would get 2 cards. Then again this is just pure conjecture since we know how Konami never wants to define stuff clearly.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I gotta stop doing this when I'm stuck on projects, leads to bad rulings 8^D

So to edit my initial response.

There still is no problem with chaining Serial Spell to Level Modulation as long as your opponent has two cards to begin with. Since Serial Spell only copies the effects, they will draw two and you'll get to revive two monsters. Kinda balances things out if you ask me 8^D
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Your opponent drawing two cards is a cost? I think were getting away from what a cost for an effect is. A cost means giving something that you have in payment for the effect. That is by no stretch of the imagination a cost. Aside from the fact that it doesn't fit the templating of any cost currently in the game, if it were there would be a specific mention of this oddball cost in the rulings.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
Your opponent drawing two cards is a cost? I think were getting away from what a cost for an effect is. A cost means giving something that you have in payment for the effect. That is by no stretch of the imagination a cost. Aside from the fact that it doesn't fit the templating of any cost currently in the game, if it were there would be a specific mention of this oddball cost in the rulings.
Click to expand...

Oh because the rulings are never confusing or misleading? It is written in the form of a cost. Why is so hard to believe that Konami can once in a blue moon make up new costs or game mechanics?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tiso said:
Oh because the rulings are never confusing or misleading? It is written in the form of a cost. Why is so hard to believe that Konami can once in a blue moon make up new costs or game mechanics?
Click to expand...
It's not hard to belive. But there is templating involved to costs that is consistant 99 percent of the time. Konami is also consistant with ponting out new mechanics and not just expecting us to guess the new ones. Also, activation requirements are phrased similar to costs. The differences are costs involve you sacrficing something for the sake of the effect, while activation requirements simply look for something in order to activate their effect.

The thing is, one can't consistantly try to prove their point by saying that Konami is inconsistant and that it could be the they say it is. A judge for one thing, cannot rule that way. He must take what has consistantly been the case and base a ruling on that. Not on the mere possibility that Konami can rule something the way they want it. With all the inconsistancy in Yu-Gi-Oh! there is still a basic templating and structure that is followed consistantly. Otherwise this would just be a game of "make up your own card effect."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
It's not hard to belive. But there is templating involved to costs that is consistant 99 percent of the time. Konami is also consistant with ponting out new mechanics and not just expecting us to guess the new ones. Also, activation requirements are phrased similar to costs. The differences are costs involve you sacrficing something for the sake of the effect, while activation requirements simply look for something in order to activate their effect.

The thing is, one can't consistantly try to prove their point by saying that Konami is inconsistant and that it could be the they say it is. A judge for one thing, cannot rule that way. He must take what has consistantly been the case and base a ruling on that. Not on the mere possibility that Konami can rule something the way they want it. With all the inconsistancy in Yu-Gi-Oh! there is still a basic templating and structure that is followed consistantly. Otherwise this would just be a game of "make up your own card effect."
Click to expand...

I think we can pretty much say Konami is inconsistent if they keep changing game mechanics around, let alone never giving a clear definition of priority or having rulings that would a judge head explode.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Im not saying that they are consistant all the time. That would be impossible to say. But they do have consistancy in respects to things already established. Costs for effects for example. Another is when a new mechainc is introduced. They just don't introduce a new mechanic without some notation or insinuation that it is. Dark World for example introduced a new mechanic without expressly saying it was a new mechanic. But there was no mystery that there was one being introduced.

Remember too, that Yu-Gi is a game where new effects redifine the mechanics and not the other way around as most games are and should be. Understanding that helps to see where the actual consitancy lies.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
This is a good one. Costs are normally the first thing mentioned in the card text. For example:
Tribute to The Doomed
Normal Spell

Discard 1 card from your hand. Select 1 monster on the field and destroy it.
Click to expand...

Divine Wrath
Counter Trap

Discard 1 card from your hand. Negate the activation and the effect of an Effect Monster and destroy the monster.
Click to expand...

Oddly enough the first line of the text of Level Modulation does sound like a cost. Of course I cannot think of any other card that has your opponent Draw Cards as a Cost, normally its Tributing a monster, Paying LP, and Discarding a Card from their hand. But I can see this going either way. Someone should ask this one on the board...

Level Modulation
Normal Spell

Your opponent draws 2 cards. Special Summon 1 monster from your Graveyard that includes "LV" in its card name, ignoring the Summoning conditions. The monster that was Special Summoned by this effect cannot attack, nor activate or apply its effect this turn.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well speaking in terms of "expeculation", it might really be a cost, why not? Lava Golem takes 2 monsters from the opponents side of the field and those are considered cost and not effect.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top