My mind isn't working at work

J

John Danker

Administrator
I'm at work and my mind is on it...but I came across a question that I need to answer for someone...I way too tunnel visioned at work <shrug> and not a good multi-tasker...

If a player uses premature / CoTH and special summons Spirit Reaper we know Spirit Reaper is destroyed, however....if Spirit Reaper's effect is a continuous effect (such as with Berserk Gorila) it doesn't use the chain...

So I'm assuming that a player couldn't at any time use Torrential Tribute in chain to the activation of Spirit Reaper's effect.....or is my tunnel vision at work clouding my thought process?

<Disclaimer>
Please forgive my lack of vision of great ones of the City should I have offended you with this question.....my brain is full of numbers and geometry and it NOT thinking Yugioh.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Inferno Reckless Summon targets thus it needs Spirit Reaper to remain on the field until it has resolved correct? So you could revive him with Book of Life and then respond with Inferno Reckless Summon, the other 2 Spirit Reapers would be special summoned and then the first one would blow himself up. But there would be no possible way to do that with Call or Premature.
Click to expand...
Absolutely, Inferno Reckless Summon being targeted removes it from eligibility here, since it requires both sumon timing and a legal target too activate.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anthonyj said:
Then the Butterfly Dagger Elma/Eternal Rest ruling is incorrect, as there is no way for Gearfried's effect to be continuous and for there to be a window for Eternal Rest to be chained so that Elma would still be on the field to be destroyed by game mechanic.

Ian is wrong or the ruling is wrong. Even UDE can't BKSS that.
Click to expand...
Im going to assume that you meant "Really Eternal Rest" because you're definitely right that there is NO WAY that Eternal Rest would be able to activate against gearfried (unless there was already a monster equipped and you chained Blast with Chain to equip Gearfried the Iron Knight as well... just a stretch).

As far as Really Eternal Rest, just from what I could gather from the mechanics of the question on the test, Gearfried cannot destroy a equip card until it resolves its attempt to equip. Gearfried's effect then destroys it.

In the meantime, since the spell card was, or had to be recognized as, "equipped", you could then activate Really Eternal Rest since the requirement was correct at activation.

Of course, Im sure this will get argued down, but there is no other way to explain it, unless you just say BKSS, but come on... BKSS is no more an answer, than not accepting my Reasoning is.

And that's the only reason why I don't have warm and fuzzy's about Spirit Reaper, based upon the Gearfried ruling.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thank you for the explanation I have a clearer idea of the direction you are coming from now.

Yes I was referring to Really Eternal Rest, just abbreviated and forgot that that was also a card. :)

Well if UDE is ready to state publicly that equip cards actually create a new chain after they have resolved onto the field in order to be "equipped" then I guess it is their show. That is so far outside of anything I've ever heard about the game mechanics before that I'm just stunned. Does this mean that a secondary chain is created any time an equip card resolves? If Gearfried is indeed continuous and he has been targeted by Butterfly Dagger Elma and Elma has resolved then his "Continuous Effect" will not destroy Elma until after this secondary chain has started? Wouldn't it destroy the equip prior to a new chain beginning? Is an equip card not considered equipped when it resolves at all until after this secondary chain has begun or resolved? If an equip card is not considered equipped until the secondary chain resolves then timing would not be correct for Really Eternal Rest so the fact that it is equipped somehow happens at the activation of this secondary chain? Arrrgh, does not follow any form of logical Reasoning. Must distance myself from the concept before I am driven to heavy drinking for the rest of the day. :(
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
anthonyj said:
Thank you for the explanation I have a clearer idea of the direction you are coming from now.

Yes I was referring to Really Eternal Rest, just abbreviated and forgot that that was also a card. :)

Well if UDE is ready to state publicly that equip cards actually create a new chain after they have resolved onto the field in order to be "equipped" then I guess it is their show. That is so far outside of anything I've ever heard about the game mechanics before that I'm just stunned. Does this mean that a secondary chain is created any time an equip card resolves? If Gearfried is indeed continuous and he has been targeted by Butterfly Dagger Elma and Elma has resolved then his "Continuous Effect" will not destroy Elma until after this secondary chain has started? Wouldn't it destroy the equip prior to a new chain beginning? Is an equip card not considered equipped when it resolves at all until after this secondary chain has begun or resolved? If an equip card is not considered equipped until the secondary chain resolves then timing would not be correct for Really Eternal Rest so the fact that it is equipped somehow happens at the activation of this secondary chain? Arrrgh, does not follow any form of logical Reasoning. Must distance myself from the concept before I am driven to heavy drinking for the rest of the day. :(
Click to expand...
I've never been labeled as a "Conventional Thinker", which is why I tend to try to dig more into the "why" of some things, which tends to infuriate or frustrate most, but why start a puzzle if you don't plan to finish it???
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The question is why would you try to apply a ruling to a Continuous Effect, that is quite clearly geared towards a Trigger Effect.

Gearfried has flip flopped, much like Last Will, and you get one answer from one person and a different one from another.

The ruling points directly at a Triggered activation, so there is no point is trying to apply Continuous logic to it just because Ian said that it was. It creates more confusion. It is better to simply say that there is a conflict and it is being worked out, and explain how it should work from both angles.

In the meantime it should be ruled as a Trigger like the ruling suggests.

Bear in mind i have always ruled this as Continuous, but the fact that it is impossible to correctly apply that ruling to it forces me to call it a Trigger. The JERP also refers to it as a Trigger (which it changed from Continuous).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
novastar said:
The question is why would you try to apply a ruling to a Continuous Effect, that is quite clearly geared towards a Trigger Effect.

Gearfried has flip flopped, much like Last Will, and you get one answer from one person and a different one from another.

The ruling points directly at a Triggered activation, so there is no point is trying to apply Continuous logic to it just because Ian said that it was. It creates more confusion. It is better to simply say that there is a conflict and it is being worked out, and explain how it should work from both angles.

In the meantime it should be ruled as a Trigger like the ruling suggests.

Bear in mind i have always ruled this as Continuous, but the fact that it is impossible to correctly apply that ruling to it forces me to call it a Trigger. The JERP also refers to it as a Trigger (which it changed from Continuous).
Click to expand...
The problem is, most continuous effects have some point at which they could be argued as "triggered".

Raging Flame Sprite (when increasing attack)
Spirit Reaper (when self destruct by targeting)
Gearfried the Iron Knight (when destroys equip card)
Jinzo (when summoned to field)
Command Knight (when 2nd face-up monster on field)
Mataza the Zapper (when using second attack)
etc....

How do you just ignore "some" of these by saying they are all continuous, but to some degree, dependent on another action to fill the requirement for "being" an effect.

Raging Flame Sprite will never increase by 1000 if it never attacks directly.

Gearfried can never destroy an equip card if you never attempt to equip one.

The fact that you cant chain to the action is what makes it continuous, but really, a number of these effects do seem to have a trigger event.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
...and not everything that is considered an "event" or "game fact" is a chainable event....which is why I'm thinking that Spirit Reaper being destroyed (and Premature Burial) being sent to the graveyard is possibly the last "game fact"

Did anyone answer my question or have input on weather a continuous effect is considered to resolve?

oh...and btw, you guys are great, thanks so much for all of your input, thoughts, and effort....exactly what makes CoG such a great site.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
John Danker said:
...and not everything that is considered an "event" or "game fact" is a chainable event....which is why I'm thinking that Spirit Reaper being destroyed (and Premature Burial) being sent to the graveyard is possibly the last "game fact"

Did anyone answer my question or have input on weather a continuous effect is considered to resolve?

oh...and btw, you guys are great, thanks so much for all of your input, thoughts, and effort....exactly what makes CoG such a great site.
Click to expand...
Everything points to a "resolution". What else would you call it? Resolution is sort of a "ending action", so I can see room for it to be said that a continuous effect "resolves".

I mean, if you walk into a room and the lights are always on, by hitting the momentary switch to "off", the lights go out, but come back on a few minutes later. You had a resolution, which was darkness. The continuous portion kicked back in a few minutes later to light (or "reset") the room again.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
True, but on the converse, how would you rule say Jinzo? The fact that he's negating existing traps (say in the classic Actvate Trap Card, chain Call of the Haunted scenario). Is the "resolution" that Jinzo negated a trap, or that a monster was summoned, or that said trap that was the last link in the resolution chain was negated?

Intriguing indeed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Geezzz...you know, it constantly amazes me. Here we are, we talk as much as anyone I can possibly imagine about the rules and mechanics of this game.....and after years of doing so we stumble upon something so simple, so basic, that we haven't clearly defined it yet....like weather a continuous effect is "triggered" "activates", and "resolves" <laffin at the irony>
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I skipped a bit of this conversation, but amazingly I find you're still on the same subject (just about).

Have we decided that something is actually wrong here with the mechanics, or is it that something just isn't properly defined and we've just been assuming all these years? Because as far as I know, if there's any kind of gap (that is, between links in a chain or when there's a momentary gap in play) continuous effects simply become active. They do not activate as such, because you can't resolve them. They're like Field Spell Cards, but without the card. The effect is simply there, and is "turned on" at the first available gap in play (i.e. any time not during the resolution of one specific effect).

Could a Continuous Effect be a Trigger Effect but with an ongoing effect? It triggers as soon as it's activated, but because the effect continues indefinitely the game says it's unfeasible to chain to it after its effect has resolved (since it never will because it's continuous), and so simply doesn't allow chaining to it in the first place? That might explain a few things.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
While this sounds silly, it may be relatively accurate. In philosophy, there are terms for potential infinite and actual infinite. The potential ones are ones that have a physical starting place, like if you started right now and counted every second until infinity. You'd never stop, but there was a definite starting point. Then there is actual infinite, which has no begining or end.

I think there could be continuous effects, such as Jinzo, which simply blanked the field and just stay that way, and then there are triggered continous effects, such as the Last Will / Gearfried / Spirit Reaper / Giant Kozaky samples we have here where there is a definite trigger point for the effect, but the resolution of it is continuous to make it unchainable.

While I'm not trying to invent things for the sake of making them work, there does seem to be a growing genre of effects that fit into both categories.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Gearfried the Iron Knight is a continuous effect? o_O

It's pretty much worded the exact same way as Gearfried the Swordsmaster and that card is considered to be a Trigger Effect. There's a Divine Wrath ruling with it.

This card cannot be Normal Summoned or Set. This card cannot be Special Summoned except by the effect of "Release Restraint". When this card is equipped with an Equip Card, destroy 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field.

When an Equip Card is equipped to this card, destroy the Equip Card.

So I'm not exactly seeing how Gearfried the Iron Knight is continuous.

Also, Last Will isn't a continuous effect. It's a trigger effect that activates and resolves a lingering effect at a later time.

Keep in mind there is no such thing as "triggered continous effects" in this game. An Effect monster has only the possible choices of having a Trigger, Ignition, Multi-Trigger, and Continuous.

Spirit Reaper has a total of three effects.
1) Can't die in battle. This effect is continuous.
2) Self-destruction. This effect is continous.
3) Discard 1 card from hand. This effect is a trigger.

Keep in mind that I was just talking out loud. Consider it food for thought. =)

Another thing to think about are those card that are considered to be continuous effects that gain Spell Counters or deal damage after a certain card type is played.

Rapid-Fire Magician
Skilled Dark Magician

I doubt Konami will introduce a new monster effect. If they did, it would change a lot of game mechanics. King Tiger Wanghu comes to mind when I hear something like, "triggered continuous effects."
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I think Yogi brought up a good point which no has addressed yet. Isn't the last thing to happen in John's scenario the destroying of an Equip Card by Game Mechanics? It can't be destroyed until Spirit Reaper destroys itself. If it can't be destroyed until then it must destroy itself AFTER the resolution of the Equip Card, not during. I know, I know, your going to say it doesn't matter, but to me this is pretty simple. Too many events take place between the resolution of the Equip and the activation of Torrential Tribute for the timing to be proper in this instance.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
I think Yogi brought up a good point which no has addressed yet. Isn't the last thing to happen in John's scenario the destroying of an Equip Card by Game Mechanics? It can't be destroyed until Spirit Reaper destroys itself. If it can't be destroyed until then it must destroy itself AFTER the resolution of the Equip Card, not during. I know, I know, your going to say it doesn't matter, but to me this is pretty simple. Too many events take place between the resolution of the Equip and the activation of Torrential Tribute for the timing to be proper in this instance.
Click to expand...

Player A summons a monster.

Player A uses priority to activate mystic Wok on another of his/her monsters that is equipped with an equip card.

Can player B chain Torrential Tribute?

(yes)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top