Pole Position and Maha Vailo

S

StRiKe_NiNjA

Dimension Shift Ninja
Can't seem to get this one.

Say Archfiend of Gilfer is destroyed by Ring of Destruction controlled by Player2, after damage it's destroyed and it's effect triggers... along the lines with that Pole Poistion is active on the field.

Player1 controls face-up Berserk Gorilla
Player2 controls face-up Maha Vailo

Player2 selects Maha Vailo for the target of Archfiend of Gilfer

Note that Pole Position is face-up on the field.

Does Player2 recieve the increase of 500 points due to Maha Vailo's effect, then Archfiend of Gilfer no longer can decrease Maha Vailo since Pole Position is active on the field? Or is it vice-versa and Berserk Gorilla remains unaffected by Spells? Is this a Timestamp issue?
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
You will most probably first resolve all of the Archfiend of Glifer // Maha Vailo effect.

Therefore, Archfiend of Glifer reduces Maha Vailo's ATK to 1050.
Then Maha Vailo increases its ATK due to his own effect to 1550.

AFTER the complete resolution of this effect (the increase and the decrease all happens at the same time) you check if you have done something wrong).
But you haven't done anything wrong (you could NOT equip Maha Vailo with an Equip Spell that would kick it's ATK higher than the ATK of Berserk Gorilla!).

And the game continues just as normal.... ^^

soul :cool:
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'd agree with soulwarrior here, in this case, I'd just assume being equipped to Maha would resolve itself first, subtracting the 500, but adding the 500 at the same time.

I would also assume though, that in the same situation, you wouldn't be able to equip Maha Vailo with any equip cards that didn't normally increase attack though, like Necklace of Command or Smoke Grenade of the Thief, but I would think, unless as you said, timestamping might be an issue here, you would be able to equip him with Twin Swords of Flashing Light - Tryce, seeing as though the decrease and the increase would happen at the same time. What I'm thinking though, is in a case like that, or if even Archfiend of Gilfer were equipped to Maha, and in this case, the Berserk Gorilla were somehow destroyed, by like, say, a Raigeki Break, or Windstorm of Etaqua shifting its position, and Maha would normally become the highest ATK power creature on the field, he should then change to 2050 (or higher if the case may be there's more than one equip on him), because his effect of having something equipped to him would still count, but the equips themselves would get negated and just stay on him meaninglessly until something higher were played to cause the spells kicking back in to affect him again. What a mess in itself.

Then you could open up a whole other can of worms (should be a card name in itself, Spell Card, Cause one rulings argument and make a judge's head go boom), with Blast with Chain, but I think the Axe of Despair ruling of Pole Position would cover that scenerio, I'd hope at least.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
StRiKe_NiNjA said:
Can't seem to get this one.

Say Archfiend of Gilfer is destroyed by Ring of Destruction controlled by Player2, after damage it's destroyed and it's effect triggers... along the lines with that Pole Poistion is active on the field.

Player1 controls face-up Berserk Gorilla
Player2 controls face-up Maha Vailo

Player2 selects Maha Vailo for the target of Archfiend of Gilfer

Note that Pole Position is face-up on the field.

Does Player2 recieve the increase of 500 points due to Maha Vailo's effect, then Archfiend of Gilfer no longer can decrease Maha Vailo since Pole Position is active on the field? Or is it vice-versa and Berserk Gorilla remains unaffected by Spells? Is this a Timestamp issue?
Click to expand...

- Gilfer will resolve and equip to Maha and decreases his ATK by 500
- Maha's effect would then kick in, and increase Maha by 500 ATK

In the end, Gilfer would remain equipped and Maha would be 1550 as normal. Berserk Gorilla would remain the highest ATK monster the entire time.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
seeing as Strike Ninja has a standing Pole Position question, I hope it will be ok for me to tack on an additional Q about the same subject.

TP has a 1900 attacker (insert your choice)
OP has Mecha Dog Marron

Mecha dog Marron, at 1000 would be eligible for Limiter Removal, which could feasibly put it at 2000 and the Pole Position. If that were so, would Mecha Dog Marron go back to 1000, would it stay on the Field and keep the 2000 attack, or what?

No, Im not trying to be difficult.

Im a bit confused as to whether Limiter's destruction clause is a condition set upon the monster, as a requirement of activation, or if it is actually part of the effect.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Limiter Removal places a condition on all monster who were affected by the effect to be destroyed, even if it has resolved and Imperial Order is later activated.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
Which is why Squid's scenario sounds similar. Mecha-Dog Maron would still be destroyed as the Spell Card that boosted it to 2000 already resolved before Pole Position was activated. Its now the highest ATK monster from a previous modifier Pole Position can't negate a non-continuous effect that has already resolved.
Click to expand...

I know, I was agreeing with you.

I only pointed out to squid that a conditions is placed upon monsters who were affected by Limiter Removal.

That way, squid won't get confused between Burst Stream of Destruction Vs Imperial Order, which places an effect on Blue-Eyes White Dragon, which can be negated by Imperial Order if later activated.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
also, and if the Judge List will answer Skey23, then Different Dimension Dragon MIGHT not be destroyed by Limiter Removal if it was turned into a Machine via DNA Surgery.

-chaosruler
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
Strikes me as being similar to Imperial Order vs. Limiter Removal in that if Limiter resolved and Imperial was activated later in the turn that the destruction effect could not be negated.
Click to expand...
There is a bit of a difference in this case.

Imperial Order must be active and negate the initial resolution of the Spell Card's effect into play (in the case of non-continuous Spell Cards).

A monster "unaffected" by spells will be unaffected by any spell effect that attempts to resolve onto it.

There is definately a case for it to not be destroyed. Of course would you loose the ATK boost too? The more i look at this card, the more problematic it becomes. For some reason i'm leaning towards the boost staying (since it is one-shot and resolved already) but it not being destroyed (since it is a lingering effect or continuous condition).

This is a question for the board. I don't think that we will really have a clear answer until we get some clarification.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
StRiKe_NiNjA said:
I know, I was agreeing with you.

I only pointed out to squid that a conditions is placed upon monsters who were affected by Limiter Removal.

That way, squid won't get confused between Burst Stream of Destruction Vs Imperial Order, which places an effect on Blue-Eyes White Dragon, which can be negated by Imperial Order if later activated.
Click to expand...
well, now I have to go look up Burst Stream of Destruction vs Imperial Order. Thanks! :p j/k

But how do you decide the difference between an "effect" placed on a card (such as what Burst Stream of Destruction places on BEWD), that can be negated, and a "condition" placed on a card that cannot be negated?

I was leaning towards the "unaffected" part of Pole Position, that Novastar was referring to, but have always considered the destruction clause of Limiter Removal to be one of those unavoidable conditions.

Digital Jedi said:
Mecha-Dog Marron would still be destroyed as the Spell Card that boosted it to 2000 already resolved before Pole Position was activated. Its now the highest ATK monster from a previous modifier Pole Position can't negate a non-continuous effect that has already resolved
Click to expand...

Would it make a difference on the outcome if Pole Position were chained, rather than already being active from a previous activation?

Once again: Im not trying to be difficult, really. *runs*
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
well, now I have to go look up Burst Stream of Destruction vs Imperial Order. Thanks! j/k

But how do you decide the difference between an "effect" placed on a card (such as what Burst Stream of Destruction places on BEWD), that can be negated, and a "condition" placed on a card that cannot be negated?

I was leaning towards the "unaffected" part of Pole Position, that Novastar was referring to, but have always considered the destruction clause of Limiter Removal to be one of those unavoidable conditions.
Click to expand...

"Double the ATK of all face-up Machine-Type monsters that are on your side of the field when you activate this card. During the End Phase, destroy all Monster Cards that were affected by this effect."

That sounds more like a conditional resolution not a true "condition" to me. That is worded like a lingering End Phase effect.

But it's all guessing right now.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
StRiKe_NiNjA said:
Can't seem to get this one.

Say Archfiend of Gilfer is destroyed by Ring of Destruction controlled by Player2, after damage it's destroyed and it's effect triggers... along the lines with that Pole Poistion is active on the field.

Player1 controls face-up Berserk Gorilla
Player2 controls face-up Maha Vailo

Player2 selects Maha Vailo for the target of Archfiend of Gilfer

Note that Pole Position is face-up on the field.

Does Player2 recieve the increase of 500 points due to Maha Vailo's effect, then Archfiend of Gilfer no longer can decrease Maha Vailo since Pole Position is active on the field? Or is it vice-versa and Berserk Gorilla remains unaffected by Spells? Is this a Timestamp issue?
Click to expand...

I just hate to throw a wrench into the whole works here, but there is a small problem with your senario. The effect of Archfiend of Gilfer would miss it's timing when destroyed via Ring of Destruction. The last thing to happen in the chain or event must be Gilfer showing up in the Graveyard, but in this case Ring of Destruction destroyes Gilfer, who then goes to the Graveyard, and then both players receive damage equal to the current attack of Gilfer.

It may be only a technicality, and other cards could certainly be used in place of Gilfer in the Pole Possition debate, but we don't need to add to the confusion on optional Graveyard effects.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
chaosruler said:
Um, the last thing to happen would be Archfiend of Gilfer being destroyed by RoD, so his timing would not be missed.

-chaosruler
Click to expand...

It does miss its timing. Damage being inflicted to both players lifepoints is the last thing to happen. Not a monster being destroyed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top