Ojama Trio issue.

[skey23]

Ok, so this stoopid card is probably about to become a new 'staple' in everybody's decks. It's picking up in play here like crazy...lol.

Anyway, here's my issue.

I'm running a Dark World deck.
My opponent is running the "Ojama Trio" lock down.
I currently have only 2 "Ojama Token"s on my side of the field.
He has a set "Ojama Trio", ready to complete the field lock.
I draw my card.
He activates his "Ojama Trio".
I chain the card I drew! "Gateway to Dark World"!
Neither of us respond.
I special summon my Dark World Monster.
Now, does "Ojama Trio" fill up my remaining 2 spots? Or does it's effect Disappear since I don't have EXACTLY 3 spots available? The text on "Ojama Trio" does not say 'up to'.


Thanks.

 

[Tkwiget]

Ojama Trio's effect doesn't necessarily dissappear. I'd say it more or less resolves without a effect. Either way, Ojama Tokens aren't getting Special Summoned. That much I know. =P

 

[Digital Jedi]

It's no different from Scapegoat. You don't have the spaces you dont get the monsters.

 

[Tkwiget]

I think he's looking for the correct terminology of what happens to Ojama Trio when it comes to its Chain Link.

I would say that Ojama Trio resolves without effect.

 

[Tiso]

I say it Disappears just because I have seen the term used in rulings.

 

[masterwoo0]

The effect would seem to Disappear more than resolve without effect.

The only thing correct was the activation. The resolution cannot take place because there are no longer 3 empty slots.

This isnt an example of where you try to resolve as much as possible.

I think the argument between resolving without effect and the effect Disappearing comes down to "if" the effect would still carry out.

Torrential Tribute will still attempt to destroy monsters on the field because it doesnt care that you removed anything or any one monster, whereas Monster Reborn cannot Summon a monster if you remove the selected monster from the Graveyard before resolution.

 

[squid]

Why would the effect not attempt to resolve as much as possible?

I was looking at the rulings, and it seems that only if there are enough spaces during activation, that the effect attempts to resolve as much as it can.

When Ojama Trio was activated, there were 3 available slots. When the card resolved, only 2 remained. Why should the remaining 2 tokens not hit the field?


Im not necessarily disagreeing with everyone, because I can see the logic in your arguments. But I am unclear on what prevents it from going the other way.

 

[skey23]

Well, my thought process is this. "Ojama Trio" says to Special Summon 3, not 'up to 3', exactly 3. If, for some reason, I don't still have 3 when it tries to resolve, it can't do anything.

 

[Tkwiget]

Why would the effect not attempt to resolve as much as possible?

I was looking at the rulings, and it seems that only if there are enough spaces during activation, that the effect attempts to resolve as much as it can.

When Ojama Trio was activated, there were 3 available slots. When the card resolved, only 2 remained. Why should the remaining 2 tokens not hit the field?


Im not necessarily disagreeing with everyone, because I can see the logic in your arguments. But I am unclear on what prevents it from going the other way.

Because Ojama Trio is very similar to Scapegoat. There has to be enough open Monster Zones for all of the Tokens to be Special Summoned. The number of tokens being summoned isn't an optional number.

There must be enough monster zones open upon activation and during resolution.

 

[squid]

That makes sense. And its something that I can easily illustrate to someone else, if they need advice on a ruling (not a judge, just a consultant)

 

[Raging Flame Sprite]

Ok, so I'm following that the card cannot resolve due to lack of slots.

Someone care to explain what the exact difference between "resolving without effect" and "Disappearing" is?

 

[Tkwiget]

Raging Flame Sprite[/ycard]]Ok, so I'm following that the card cannot resolve due to lack of slots.

Someone care to explain what the exact difference between "resolving without effect" and "Disappearing" is?

Both terms have no official definition. However, this is how I define them as.

"resolve without effect" means that the card still resolves, but the effect does nothing.

I have Skilled Dark Magician on the field. I activate Graceful Charity. My opponent chains with Imperial Order. Graceful Charity's resolution is negated. Thus, Graceful Charity resolved without effect. Skilled Dark Magician gains a Spell Counter.

I activate Call of the Haunted and target Chaos Sorcerer in my Graveyard. You chain the card Disappear. Call of the Haunted resolves without effect because neither the monster or Call of the Haunted were destroyed. Call of the Haunted remains face up meaninglessly.

"Disappear" means that card effects that aren't considered to have resolved. It's easier to explain what I mean with examples. =)

I tribute summon for Zaborg the Thunder Monarch and activate his effect to target your face down Sangan. You chain Torrential Tribute. All monsters on the field are destroyed. Zaborg the Thunder Monarch's effect Disappears.

At my End Phase I activate Ectoplasmer's effect. Opponent chains Dust Tornado to Ectoplasmer's effect and targets it. Ectoplasmer is destroyed. Ectoplasmer's effect Disappears.

I have Skilled Dark Magician on the field. I activate Swords of Revealing Light. Opponent chains with Dust Tornado. Swords of Revealing Light is destroyed. Swords of Revealing Light's effect Disappears.

That's how I've defined them. It doesn't mean that my definitions are correct.

 

[skey23]

I'm gonna have to disagree with you on the "Zaborg the Thunder Monarch" one. His effect does not Disappear. His effect still resolves, but resolves w/o effect.

 

[Tkwiget]

If the target isn't there for a targetting monster effect, the effect will Disappear. That's what that example is expressing.

 

[Raging Flame Sprite]

It's easier to explain what I mean with examples. =)

Which works well, I understand better with examples So isn't it resolve without effect? Since gateway resolves, taking up the necessary slots; Ojama Trio is still trying to resolve, but since it doesn't have enough slots, its effect cannot be completed, thus it does resolve, but with no effect.

whoa, i lost myself...

 

[Tkwiget]

Not exactly. Gateway to Dark World resolves and summons. The player now has three monsters. Ojama Trio comes around and the effect Disappears because it's a card that requires enough Monster Zones at activation and resolution in order to resolve. So the effect Disappears and the card is considered to have not resolved.

 

[Raging Flame Sprite]

>_< ok, so if whatever it requires/is targetting is no longer there, the effect Disappears...I'm just gonna keep on reading.

 

[Tkwiget]

Raging Flame Sprite[/ycard]]>_< ok, so if whatever it requires/is targetting is no longer there, the effect Disappears...I'm just gonna keep on reading.

As far as I can tell, targetting monster effects will never resolve if their target just suddenly vanishes. The target requires to be on the field at activation and resolution. Other wise the effect will Disappear.

Bare in mind that I could be wrong. I'm not in the least bit claiming this it be official or correct. The two terms haven't been defined, but have been used often in rulings. From those rulings involving the two terms (and from talking with my Head Judge a little about it), I generated those two definitions.

My definitions are still a little vague IMO and I'll be working to make them easier to understand. Take the two definitions like a grain of salt. They won't measure up to much until they become official game terms.

 

[Raging Flame Sprite]

Right, and I understand that. They do at least make sense, moreso than other things.

 

[masterwoo0]

Raging Flame Sprite[/ycard]]Which works well, I understand better with examples So isn't it resolve without effect? Since gateway resolves, taking up the necessary slots; Ojama Trio is still trying to resolve, but since it doesn't have enough slots, its effect cannot be completed, thus it does resolve, but with no effect.

whoa, i lost myself...

This goes back to what I said about an effect that is prevented from resolving because of another effect.

You cant activate Ojama Trio if your opponent does not have 3 zones to fill, so when the 3rd zone is occupied, since the effect must summon 3 Tokens, it goes back to the original ruling of, "You can't activate Ojama Trio if there are not 3 zones", and the effect Disappears.