megamorph
- Thread starter squid
- Start date
When exactly was that question about GMG and Fuslier Dragon posted since they changed how Original ATK is defined for a monster when it's in the Graveyard. Further, you have the "official" ruling that if you use a monster who's Original ATK is a "?" (like in the case of Tyranno Infinity) as the tribute for GMG, GMG's ATK is 0.
Also, If you have Red-Eyes B. Dragon equipped with Megamorph (regardless if it doubles or halves the ATK) and you play Inferno Fire Blast (that says you inflict damage equal to the Original ATK of REBD), it was stated on the Judge list that you will inflict 2400 (that came from Kevin T himself).
So I'm more inclined to believe that it won't work.
Also, If you have Red-Eyes B. Dragon equipped with Megamorph (regardless if it doubles or halves the ATK) and you play Inferno Fire Blast (that says you inflict damage equal to the Original ATK of REBD), it was stated on the Judge list that you will inflict 2400 (that came from Kevin T himself).
So I'm more inclined to believe that it won't work.
Belgian Blue
New Member
It dates from 2004.
But I implore you to look at the rulings in regard to Behemoth and megamorph, as well as fusilier dragon and megamorph, both can be found on netrep.
In both rulings, the adjusted value is referred to as the original attack. Since GMG looks for the original attack, and the adjusted value is referred to as original attack, it would have to work.
The thing is we can all sit around and "guess" why it wouldn't work, but in light of what I just posted, I'd like to see the first post put up on the UDE judge list to be answered by someone at UDE. Because if it doesn't work, then I want to know why, since the adjusted attack is called original attack in the official rulings (so it should work, or UDE needs to update its rulings in regard to megamorph).
But I implore you to look at the rulings in regard to Behemoth and megamorph, as well as fusilier dragon and megamorph, both can be found on netrep.
In both rulings, the adjusted value is referred to as the original attack. Since GMG looks for the original attack, and the adjusted value is referred to as original attack, it would have to work.
The thing is we can all sit around and "guess" why it wouldn't work, but in light of what I just posted, I'd like to see the first post put up on the UDE judge list to be answered by someone at UDE. Because if it doesn't work, then I want to know why, since the adjusted attack is called original attack in the official rulings (so it should work, or UDE needs to update its rulings in regard to megamorph).
I doubt it's from 2004, since DCR, IOC, and AST were the sets from that year.
In any case, if your theory is right if I tribute Tyranno Infinity for GMG, then GMG's ATK should be double whatever Tyranno Infinity's ATK was (since that card's Original ATK changes). However, as I stated from the Official Rulings and FAQ page itself, if you tribute a ? Monster, the ATK for GMG is 0.
Moreso, another ruling on the Official FAQ: Elemental Hero Flame Wingman vs Fusilier Dragon: If your "Elemental Hero Flame Wingman" destroys a "Fusilier Dragon, the Dual-Mode Beast" that was Summoned without Tribute, inflict 2800 damage to your opponent's Life Points.
The reason for these is because the monster is in the Graveyard when both effects activate, be it a Trigger (as in EHFW) or Continuous (with GMG). In the Graveyard, Megamorph has no effect on the card, and any effects that may have been altering the Original ATK (like for Fusilier or Behemoth) do not apply. So all you are left with is the ATK that was printed on the card.
In any case, if your theory is right if I tribute Tyranno Infinity for GMG, then GMG's ATK should be double whatever Tyranno Infinity's ATK was (since that card's Original ATK changes). However, as I stated from the Official Rulings and FAQ page itself, if you tribute a ? Monster, the ATK for GMG is 0.
Moreso, another ruling on the Official FAQ: Elemental Hero Flame Wingman vs Fusilier Dragon: If your "Elemental Hero Flame Wingman" destroys a "Fusilier Dragon, the Dual-Mode Beast" that was Summoned without Tribute, inflict 2800 damage to your opponent's Life Points.
The reason for these is because the monster is in the Graveyard when both effects activate, be it a Trigger (as in EHFW) or Continuous (with GMG). In the Graveyard, Megamorph has no effect on the card, and any effects that may have been altering the Original ATK (like for Fusilier or Behemoth) do not apply. So all you are left with is the ATK that was printed on the card.
Belgian Blue
New Member
densetsu_x said:
Ok, I'll bite. Now I want to know WHY. GMG looks for the original attack. Infinity's original attack at that point is whatever amount of removed dino's x1000. Evidenced by the ruling on megamorph and megarock dragon. So why ? Why would GMG's attack be 0 ? It should be, as the card effect states "twice the original attack of the tributed monster"
But then why the ruling on GMG and fusilier dragon, that was answered by Curtis schultz in 2004 (yes it was 2004, just search for great maju garzett in the judge forum, it'll yield 28 results, its near the bottom and has fusilier in the title).
At this point I'm less concerned with the yes or no, but more with the why.
I gave you the "why" already.
1)
Great Maju Garzett
Effect Monster (Fiend / DARK / 6 Stars / ATK 0 / DEF 0)
The ATK of this card becomes twice the original ATK of 1 monster that you Tributed for the Tribute Summon of this card.
"¢ When you use a monster with an original ATK of "?" then "Great Maju Garzett"'s ATK is zero.
As I said, that is your Official FAQ Ruling.
2)
Check the date again since Fusilier Dragon wasn't even out in the US until 2005. Further, since Fusilier's effect was a new concept, they didn't have consistant answers for awhile. However, between TLM and CRV, they changed the rulings to make them all consistant across the board. Granted, they still use Original ATK a little loosely. But take the rulings for Flame Wingman:
"¢ The damage inflicted by the effect of "Elemental Hero Flame Wingman" is based on the ATK of the destroyed monster in the Graveyard. So it's the original ATK of the monster.
"¢ If your "Elemental Hero Flame Wingman" destroys a "Fusilier Dragon, the Dual-Mode Beast" that was Summoned without Tribute, inflict 2800 damage to your opponent's Life Points.
Important to note that the second ruling I copied there was not how it was first ruled, but was later changed to what you see now. So the Orginal ATK in these cases refer to what's printed on the card (which also fits the "?" rule I highlighted above).
So again, there are your "why"s straight from the FAQs. When the card is in the GY, the Original ATK is what's printed on the card. So no. It won't work.
1)
Great Maju Garzett
Effect Monster (Fiend / DARK / 6 Stars / ATK 0 / DEF 0)
The ATK of this card becomes twice the original ATK of 1 monster that you Tributed for the Tribute Summon of this card.
"¢ When you use a monster with an original ATK of "?" then "Great Maju Garzett"'s ATK is zero.
As I said, that is your Official FAQ Ruling.
2)
Check the date again since Fusilier Dragon wasn't even out in the US until 2005. Further, since Fusilier's effect was a new concept, they didn't have consistant answers for awhile. However, between TLM and CRV, they changed the rulings to make them all consistant across the board. Granted, they still use Original ATK a little loosely. But take the rulings for Flame Wingman:
"¢ The damage inflicted by the effect of "Elemental Hero Flame Wingman" is based on the ATK of the destroyed monster in the Graveyard. So it's the original ATK of the monster.
"¢ If your "Elemental Hero Flame Wingman" destroys a "Fusilier Dragon, the Dual-Mode Beast" that was Summoned without Tribute, inflict 2800 damage to your opponent's Life Points.
Important to note that the second ruling I copied there was not how it was first ruled, but was later changed to what you see now. So the Orginal ATK in these cases refer to what's printed on the card (which also fits the "?" rule I highlighted above).
So again, there are your "why"s straight from the FAQs. When the card is in the GY, the Original ATK is what's printed on the card. So no. It won't work.
The judges list message is from 2004. But it was updated in '05:
http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=2444#2444
http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=2444#2444
Which contradicts The FAQ ruling on Flame Wingman and Fusilier because otherwise Flame Wingman would only inflict 1400 and between the 2, I'm sticking with what's on the FAQ until otherwise errata-ed.
masterwoo0
NINJA4LIFE
I think that the main problem is that they have yet to get a handle on monsters that change their own ATK, as those seem to present the most problems.
Didn't we have a mile long discussion on Fusilier awhile back where it seemed it was one of those cards that retained it's modified Original ATK in the Graveyard, contrary to any other card that does this? Or was that another one of those discussions that never got answered?
DJ - It doesn't (as I said, case in point, the Fusilier / Flame Wingman Ruling).
And why can't you run Megamorph in your deck? It's a valuable tech card for most decks regardless.
And why can't you run Megamorph in your deck? It's a valuable tech card for most decks regardless.
MightyDingo
New Member
LOL! You beat me to it, sQuid. I was going to post it here, but then I found the Behemoth ruling (and left work...I sometimes have more free time at work. 
).
This is a sticky wicket. I found the Fusilier (post-revision) and IFL rulings in the Judges List....and the Behemoth ruling by scrolling down in the Megamorph rulings. I will admit I had never encountered the problem until it was brought up at the Lair.
Strictly from the rulings in Megamorph, Behemoth in particular, I see no reason that it cannot work. Unfortunately, I think this may end up being an arbitrary ruling for the card to protect gameplay, if they deem necessary.(A BKSS situation?)
I see the problem as 3-fold:
1. This was a game spun of out a cartoon(Anime, excuse me.) and not designed from the begininng as a serious game(i.e. MTG).
2. Translations between the languages have occasionally caused inconsistencies.
and
3. Well, I really didn't have three but I am sure it's out there.
It seems like this card may be caught in contradictory rulings, I am very interested to see the reply from UDE.
). This is a sticky wicket. I found the Fusilier (post-revision) and IFL rulings in the Judges List....and the Behemoth ruling by scrolling down in the Megamorph rulings.
I will admit I had never encountered the problem until it was brought up at the Lair. Strictly from the rulings in Megamorph, Behemoth in particular, I see no reason that it cannot work. Unfortunately, I think this may end up being an arbitrary ruling for the card to protect gameplay, if they deem necessary.(A BKSS situation?)
I see the problem as 3-fold:
1. This was a game spun of out a cartoon(Anime, excuse me.) and not designed from the begininng as a serious game(i.e. MTG).
2. Translations between the languages have occasionally caused inconsistencies.
and
3. Well, I really didn't have three but I am sure it's out there.
It seems like this card may be caught in contradictory rulings, I am very interested to see the reply from UDE.
HorusMaster
New Member
MightyDingo said:LOL! You beat me to it, sQuid. I was going to post it here, but then I found the Behemoth ruling (and left work...I sometimes have more free time at work.
This is a sticky wicket. I found the Fusilier (post-revision) and IFL rulings in the Judges List....and the Behemoth ruling by scrolling down in the Megamorph rulings.
Strictly from the rulings in Megamorph, Behemoth in particular, I see no reason that it cannot work. Unfortunately, I think this may end up being an arbitrary ruling for the card to protect gameplay, if they deem necessary.(A BKSS situation?)
I see the problem as 3-fold:
1. This was a game spun of out a cartoon(Anime, excuse me.) and not designed from the begininng as a serious game(i.e. MTG).
2. Translations between the languages have occasionally caused inconsistencies.
and
3. Well, I really didn't have three but I am sure it's out there.
It seems like this card may be caught in contradictory rulings, I am very interested to see the reply from UDE.
And 3....why don't you just tribute Cyber Dragon for GMG AND THEN equip it with Megamorph? Would kinda eliminate the need for a "mile long discussion", doncha' think? LOL
Because the Original ATK of GMG is 0 so eqipping Megamorph to it makes it 0 and it stays there even after Megamorph leaves the field.
You know, I used to read through these things more thoroughly back in the day. Lately I've just been skimming the threads and not participating as actively as I used to. But a couple of things are gnawing at me.
For one thing, the FAQ doesn't support the notion that the new ATK value of a monster equipped with Megamorph is its new Original ATK. Megamorph does not change the original ATK value into a new Original ATK, as is evidenced by its first ruling (though very poorly worded).
Fusilier on the other hand is something completely different. It actually redefines its printed stats. It's as if it erases the number on the card and writes in a new value. This new value is very much considered the Original ATK value, it's simply Fusilier's effect allows it to recalculate in this way.
This is the problem I think we're having with a lot of these effect interactions. We're confusing the mechanics of one with another.
Perhaps this is what's bothering me. We're talking about two different effects here. A Cyber Dragon equipped with Megamorph is completely different from a Fusilier at doubled/halved ATK.
For one thing, the FAQ doesn't support the notion that the new ATK value of a monster equipped with Megamorph is its new Original ATK. Megamorph does not change the original ATK value into a new Original ATK, as is evidenced by its first ruling (though very poorly worded).
"Megamorph" changes the original ATK of the monster it is equipped to. Having multiple "Megamorph" equipped to a monster is the same as having one.
If the new ATK value of a monster equipped with Megamorph was its new Original ATK, then a second Megamorph would modify that value. But it doesn't, it ignores the new value placed upon it by the first Megamorph, and recalculates its ATK based on its printed set of stats. Simply put, the new ATK value of a monster equipped with this card is a modified ATK, and not a new Original ATK.
Fusilier on the other hand is something completely different. It actually redefines its printed stats. It's as if it erases the number on the card and writes in a new value. This new value is very much considered the Original ATK value, it's simply Fusilier's effect allows it to recalculate in this way.
This is the problem I think we're having with a lot of these effect interactions. We're confusing the mechanics of one with another.
No argument with the ruling. But there's just one thing you didn't consider. Tyranno Infinity's Original ATK is no longer "?". It's the number of Dinosaur-Type Monsters' removed from play.densetsu_x said:
It doesn't actually. I just think we've been trying to wrap our minds around the effects in completely the wrong direction. Tributes, that look to the tributed monster as a reference for something, always look at them when they were on the field unless otherwise noted. Otherwise you couldn't use a token with Catapult Turtle. Flame Wingman looks at Fusilier when it's is destroyed by battle and sent to the Graveyard. Great Maju looks at what Fusilier was at while on the field. The two rulings gel, you just have discard some of the previous notions we had when they were ironing these effects out. I also think the FAQ very poorly exaplains how these types of effects work, but cut through the poor choices of words and you can see the functionality they intended.densetsu_x said:
Thing is though, the rulings for Flame Wingman / Fusilier Dragon were different before so it's not like they just blindly picked one. All this changed when they decided that cards like The Creator Incarnate and Kaibaman had to be face up in order to use their tributing effects (I'm not saying it's related, just when this occurred).
Further, cards like Fusilier Dragon and Behemoth have their own effects that dictate what their Original ATK are while they are face up on the field. That's why if you Book of Moon them or use Skill Drain, their Original ATK returns to what was printed on the card. Same with Chimeratech Overdragon where if you use SKill Drain, his Original ATK becomes (and stays) 0 since he had the "?" printed on the card.
Now a card like Catapult Turtle or Mystik Wok works different since those effects say to look at the current ATK/DEF of the monster you are tributing. But when a card like E-Hero Flame Wingman or Altar for Tribute has the effect of looking at the Original ATK, it's whatever that ATK that is printed on the card since in the Graveyard those monsters don't have any effects. When a monster is tributed for a Summon and you need to look at the Original ATK, you have to look at the ATK of the card while it's in the Graveyard.
If you want more proof against that it will work, take the ruling for Inferno Fire Blast:
"¢ If "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" equipped with "Megamorph" is selected for "Inferno Fire Blast", you inflict 2400 damage to the opponent.
Gee... but doesn't Megamorph change the Original ATK of REBD? Yup it does. But the ruling dictates otherwise.
Now if you want to argue that the rulings on the FAQ are wrong, that is a whole different conversation and
actually irrelevant to the initial question which was "Will it work and why/why not?" I've shown based on what the rulings are that it won't work. And frankly the FAQ > the Judge List when it comes to the official answers because at the tournaments, the judges have access to the FAQs, not the Judge Lists (which they go back and forth on as to whether or not their answers are "official" or "best way to rule it for now".) If you don't like the answers, I can't help you there. But frankly though, it is far less of an issue than it's being made out to be.
Further, cards like Fusilier Dragon and Behemoth have their own effects that dictate what their Original ATK are while they are face up on the field. That's why if you Book of Moon them or use Skill Drain, their Original ATK returns to what was printed on the card. Same with Chimeratech Overdragon where if you use SKill Drain, his Original ATK becomes (and stays) 0 since he had the "?" printed on the card.
Now a card like Catapult Turtle or Mystik Wok works different since those effects say to look at the current ATK/DEF of the monster you are tributing. But when a card like E-Hero Flame Wingman or Altar for Tribute has the effect of looking at the Original ATK, it's whatever that ATK that is printed on the card since in the Graveyard those monsters don't have any effects. When a monster is tributed for a Summon and you need to look at the Original ATK, you have to look at the ATK of the card while it's in the Graveyard.
If you want more proof against that it will work, take the ruling for Inferno Fire Blast:
"¢ If "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" equipped with "Megamorph" is selected for "Inferno Fire Blast", you inflict 2400 damage to the opponent.
Gee... but doesn't Megamorph change the Original ATK of REBD? Yup it does. But the ruling dictates otherwise.
Now if you want to argue that the rulings on the FAQ are wrong, that is a whole different conversation and
actually irrelevant to the initial question which was "Will it work and why/why not?" I've shown based on what the rulings are that it won't work. And frankly the FAQ > the Judge List when it comes to the official answers because at the tournaments, the judges have access to the FAQs, not the Judge Lists (which they go back and forth on as to whether or not their answers are "official" or "best way to rule it for now".) If you don't like the answers, I can't help you there. But frankly though, it is far less of an issue than it's being made out to be.
I'm not sure if you completely grasped the meaning of my post. I'm saying the rulings DO work and that their NOT wrong (just poorly worded). I'm suggesting that the logic your using to interpret the rulings is incorrect, or at the very least, leaning towards previously undefined allusions. For example:
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I'm saying the effects of something like Fusilier is an effect that actually changes original ATK value into something else. And I'm saying an effect like Megamorph is not. Really, if you go back over my post, and apply my reasonings with the rulings and the FAQ, then they no longer contradict each other.
Really? You can tribute a token for Great Maju Garzett and you don't reference the token's stats in the Graveyard.densetsu_x said:
Um, this supports exactly what I was trying to point out. That the Original ATK of a monster equipped with Megamorph remains unchanged. If the original ATK is unchanged, then of course it would inflict 2400 points of damage.densetsu_x said:
Maybe I didn't make myself clear. I'm saying the effects of something like Fusilier is an effect that actually changes original ATK value into something else. And I'm saying an effect like Megamorph is not. Really, if you go back over my post, and apply my reasonings with the rulings and the FAQ, then they no longer contradict each other.
Belgian Blue
New Member
densetsu_x said:
Yes, when the ORIGINAL attack is ?, such as when you tribute maju garzett for great maju garzett. However, Tyranno infinity and megarock dragon RESET their ORIGINAL attacks to something else, so it wouldn't be "?" anymore. So that ruling is null and void in this case.
Look at digital jedi's post, its from 2004. I told you where to find it as well, I shouldn't have to tell you this twice.
As you see from what I just said, this isn't a why.
And like the fusilier dragon example showed, attack isn't taken in the graveyard its taken on the field. This is also the reason why you can tribute an equipped monster for DDV, or why you can tribute tokens for maju garzett's effect. Your explanation makes no sense at all.
Belgian Blue
New Member
Digital Jedi said:
Now read the rulings on megamorph with Behemoth, Power Bond and fusilier dragon. In all three examples the adjusted attack value after megamorphg is referred to as Original attack value ...
So megamorph's new value IS ORIGINAL attack.