"Losing" versus "Inflicted"

[Spartan]

"Losing" versus "Inflicted"

Yesterday at the tournament I encountered a whole deck based around the illegal Immortal of Thunder/BBtD combo, and just wanted to make sure if I was right. Since BBtD only works on inflicted damage, Immortal's 5000 LP loss is only considered "losing", which would be similar to a payment. Due to the differences in texts, BBtD would not work on Immortal's negative effect right?

(BBtD = Barrel Behind the Door)

I had to get solid proof since we had no judges present in the store, and netrep didn't have the ruling up on it yet, so wanted to confirm with you guys.

 

[ensui]

Re: "Losing" versus "Inflicted"

Barrel Behind the Door cannot chain to the life point loss caused by The Immortal of Thunder because it is not damage.

 

[Lord Tranorix]

Re: "Losing" versus "Inflicted"

But conveniently enough, you CAN use BBtD on the damage inflicted by Granadora. People often mistake Granadora for having the same effect as Immortal of Thunder...quite a shame.

 

[helpoemer316]

Re: "Losing" versus "Inflicted"

I've ran against a similar deck and I told them that it couldn't be done at the time, they won tournaments with this thing at this site before I showed up and after he found out he was very heart broken.

The Immortal of Thunder is not really effect damage, the only way to describe it is as a pay cost for it being destroyed.

A good rule of thumb with cards that inflict direct damage is that cards that inflict direct damage to the life points and are chainable by BBtD actually say in it "Inflict direct damage", so it says in the effect that it is direct damage.

Just something I thought I'd point out.

 

[Raijinili]

Re: "Losing" versus "Inflicted"

The Immortal of Thunder is not really effect damage, the only way to describe it is as a pay cost for it being destroyed.

I would disagree with that statement. Costs can't be paid if you don't have enough LP. Immortal can make you lose LP if you don't have at least 5000 LP.

 

[n00b]

Re: "Losing" versus "Inflicted"

The Immortal of Thunder is not really effect damage, the only way to describe it is as a pay cost for it being destroyed.

I would disagree with that statement. Costs can't be paid if you don't have enough LP. Immortal can make you lose LP if you don't have at least 5000 LP.

Yeah, the best way to describe it is "losing Life Points." Yu-Gi-Oh! is a very specific game when it comes to terminology (usually), and if a card does not use exact wording, it probably means it's doing something else, even if it has the same end result.