Priority v. 1.1

Priority v. 1.1

By Michael Palmer

It's come to my attention that many of the questions being asked on our forums here at netrep.net have been the same questions regarding priority and specific monsters and how they interact. First, I'll say the golden rule that no one seems to understand as of right now. A monster does not have priority! YOU THE PLAYER HAVE PRIORITY!!! Some people just don't understand that so the first thing we always say while answering questions is "This monster doesn't have priority, no monster has priority. The player has the priority." So make sure you rephrase your questions before posting them if you ever ask about a monster's priority.

With that pushed aside, I thought up a few situations with certain monsters that you could use their effects with while using YOUR priority:

Player A summons Tribe-Infecting Virus to the field.
Player B responds with Trap Hole.
Player A choose to use turn priority to activate Tribe's effect.
Player B's Trap Hole is then added on the chain as link 2.

Chain:
Link 1: Tribe-Infecting Virus's effect is activated.
Link 2: Trap Hole is activated.

Resolution:
Link 2: Trap Hole first resolves since it was the last card on the chain and destroys Tribe-Infecting Virus.
Link 1: Then Tribe's effect resolves since it was not negated destroying all monsters of the specific type called.

Reason: I know what many of you are thinking.  How can a card resolve fully if it's no longer present on the field at resolution?  Well, to put it quite simply, it's like chaining MST to Raigeki.  Even though you destroyed Raigeki in the chain, it's effect was never negated so it will resolve as normal even though it was destroyed in the resolution step before it's resolution would take place.  The same goes with Tribe and any other monster, it's effect is being chained to with the trap card being responded with.  Since you can't chain to a summon, the trap card would have to be chained to the cost effect of the monster.  Since the trigger effect is spell speed 1, it would have to be the first link in the chain.  Then you add on the speed 2 effect of the trap card, in this case it was Trap Hole, and it destroy Tribe first and then Tribe's effect destroys all monsters of the specific type called.

Player A summons Magicial Scientist.
Player B activates Ring of Destruction.
Player A activates Scientist's effect by paying 1000 Life Points.
Player B's Ring of Destruction then resolves destroying Scientist and dealing 300 points of damage to both players.
Player B's Scientist's effect resolves special summoning his fusion monster to the field.

Chain:
Link 1: Magical Scientist's effect is activated.
Link 2: Ring of Destruction is activated.

Resolution:
Link 2: Ring of Destruction resolves destroying Magical Scientist and dealing 300 points of damage to both players.
Link 1: Magical Scientist's effect resolves special summoning a Fusion monster.

Reason: Basically see the same as TIV.

Player B has Skill Drain face-up on the field.
Player A tribute summons Jinzo.
Player B's Skill Drain is already active and is a continuous effect.
Player A's Jinzo is negated upon the successful summoning.

With this it's a simple time stamp effect.  Since Skill Drain was in effect first on the field, Jinzo's effect is negated.

Player B has a face up Level Limit Area B on the field.
Player A tribute summons Spell Canceller.

Same issue as above, since Level Limit was in effect first, it will turn Spell Canceller to defense position.  Then Spell Canceller's effect will trigger, negating Level Limit, I'll also add to this, since Level Limit is negated that DOES NOT mean you can change the position of Spell Canceller, you can not change the postions of a monster summoned that same turn, so it'll stay in defense until it's either destroyed or until you can turn it your next turn.  You however can change positions any other monster you may control at that time since Level Limit is now negated by Spell Canceller.

Reason: In this case, I'm demonstrating that continuous effects take priority over other effects.  What I showed you is that a continuous effect that's on the field will take priority over resolution against another continuous effect introduced due to it being in effect first.  In this case, since Skill Drain was active first, it's effect will effect Jinzo first before Jinzo could effect Skill Drain.  Since Jinzo is negated, Skill Drain is not negated by Jinzo's effect.  In the second demonstration I showed you Spell Canceller Vs. Level Limit Area B, the end result is Spell Canceller goes to defense mode and then negates Level Limit, the simultaneous effects would go on chain as I showed above.

Player A tribute summons Mobius The Frost Monarch and targets two spell/trap cards on the field.
Player B responds with Torrential Tribute.
Player A's Mobius The Frost Monarch resolves since it's effect is activated as soon as hits the field and the targetted spell or trap cards that were targetted upon summoning are destroyed. If Torrential Tribute is one of these targetted cards, it does not negate Torrential Tribute.
Player B's Torrential Tribute then resolves destroying all of the monsters on the field, including Mobius The Frost Monarch.

Chain:
Link 1: Mobius's effect is activated targetting up two spell/trap cards on the field.
Link 2: Torrential Tribue is activated.

Resolution:
Link 2: Torrential Tribue resolves destroying all monsters on the field.
Link 1: Mobius's effect resolves destroying the two spell/trap cards that were designated as the targets upon activation (summoning).

Reason: This one should be apparent, the effect activates as soon as it's summoned, and this means that as soon as Mobius hits the field, the player controlling Mobius gets to select up to two targets with it's effect. Then Player B has the right to respond with a trap after the selection is made. Mobius's effect would resolve as normal and than the trap card activated in response to him will resolve as normal.

Here's a tad bit different of a situation...

Player A's D.D. Warrior Lady attacks Player B's Face Down Card.
Player B flips their Face Down Card and reveals their own D.D. Warrior Lady.
Damage Calculation is reached and Player A takes 100 points of damage for running into D.D.'s 1600 defense with a 1500 ATK.
The question being is who gets the choice to remove first?

This one is quite simple, the turn player would have first choice on whether or not to remove. Player A would be the person to make the first choice on this, if they choose not remove, than it goes to Player B who has the choice now with their D.D. Warrior Lady. If they choose to remove than both monsters are removed from play. If not, than nothing happens and both monsters stay on the field, Player B's in face up defense position and Player A's in face up attack position.

That's enough for cards you would have "priority" with. It should be a little more evident that cards with normal face up effects would have their effect active on the field before any trap can be activated in response to the summon (not chained to the summon since another Golden Rule is that summons have no spell speed, which means for you new guys, they're non-chainable).

CARDS THAT A PLAYER HAS NO PRIORITY WITH:

If you read the above, you'll notice that that means that what is coming next is cards that you have no priority over to activate certain effects they control. First I'll talk about the one card that almost everyone wants to confuse it would seem.

Player A summons Breaker The Magical Warrior
Player B activates Bottomless Trap Hole
Player A chooses to use priority... but wait, what does that mean!?

Chain:
Link 1: Breaker is summoned, activating his effect to add the counter.
Link 2: Bottomless Trap Hole is activated.

Resolution:
Link 2: Bottomless Trap Hole resolves destroying and removing Breaker from the game.
Link 1: Since Breaker is no longer face-up on the field, the counter cannot be added to the card.

Reason: Breaker's effect is very tricky and some people don't understand how it's tricky. Breaker basically almost has two effects. The first is the addition of the counter, without this counter you cannot activate the secondary effect, so it's essential. The face up effect of Breaker as soon as it's summoned is the addition of the counter, not it's "breaking" effect itself. So the only priority you have when an opponent responds to the summon of your Breaker is the addition of the counter. If you look at the above chain you'll see that Breaker's counter is never added because Breaker is no longer face-up on the field to recieve the counter.

OTHER EFFECTS AND PRIORITY:

This goes towards the Giant Orc summoning/Sac to Catapult Turtle Vs. Torrential Tribue.  It's still my reasoning and my opinion that you could sacrifice the monster to Catapult Turtle, since when you look at the above chains, you see that it's always the trap being chained to a speed 1 effect.

What would happen in this case is the situation would look like this:

NOTE: This is still being debated, I've got many people I know who are very good judges agreeing with me and others who are very good disagreeing, it's a very hot topic, but I hope to have something on it soon (I've already started looking into it).

Player A summons Giant Orc.
Player B activates Torrential Tribute.
Player A uses turn priority to activate the trigger effect of Catapult Turtle.

Here's the chain:
Link 1: Catapult Turtle's effect is activated, the cost of the effect is sending Giant Orc to the graveyard, which is done at activation.
Link 2: Torrential Tribute is activated.

Resolution:
Link 2: Torrential Tribute resolves destroying all monsters on the field.
Link 1: Since Catapult Turtle's effect was never negated, it would resolve as normal dealing 1100 points of direct damage to Player B.

Reasoning: I'm calling this reasoning for a reason, if someone comes up with it not being true, I want them to understand my completel reasoning behind my explanation.  If a monster is considered face-up on the field after the summon, and if priority chains are the way I and many others have described them in the previous thread, then Giant Orc would in fact be on the field for the sacrifice to Catapult Turtle.  Since the player with turn priority can choose activate any effect, including trigger effects, it would only make sense that they could activate Catapult Turtle's effect.  Since the sacrificing of Giant Orc is a cost, it has already been tributed and destroyed by the time Torrential Tribute (which is chained to the trigger effect) resolves.  Since Catapult was not negated (much like the Tribe example and Magical Scientist example above) then it would resolve as normal dealing 1100 points of damage to the opposing player.

I see no reason why it would be any other way and I see on reason why it would be contradicted within the game, it would only confuse even the most expert of players into second guessing every aspect of the game, it's situations like this that tend to cause people to quit, it causes massive confusion with the game, and it just really isn't very cost worthy if you get my point.

I'll look into maybe getting a few answers from UDE about the proposed chain, but for now I'm leaving this in the essay as another example of turn priority.  It might be contested, but I still have yet to see a very good reason (the one reason someone gave only strengthens the argument I have).

In any case, that's all the updates I'm doing to this, most other things can be asked about in this thread.  If you have any questions or beef about something I've exlained, feel free to explain yourself, that's what this is all about, it's to help others reach a better understanding about this aspect of the game and without that help, we're doomed to confusion and uncertainty for the rest of our lives... well... for the rest of the time we're playing Yu-Gi-Oh!
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

Well the truth of the matter is we will all just have to wait until someone can (and hopefully will) come out and say something official about all of this. Until then ill just duel as I can as of right now.
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

The order looks like this:

- The Turn Player declares a summon
- At this point you have the timing to negate the summon with HoH/SJ
- If not negated, the monster is successfully summoned
- The Turn Player is given Priority

- At this point you can perform 1 of 3 things:
  1.) Use Cost Effect Priority and activate the Spell Speed 1 effect of the monster summoned (if there is one)
  2.) Respond with a Spell Speed 2 effect (any that can legally be activated)
  3.) Pass

- Once you act, the Opponent can then respond to the summon and/or chain with a Spell Speed 2 effect or Pass.

- Once both players Pass, the Summon Reponse Chain resolves.
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

solitarywolf17 said:
Well the truth of the matter is we will all just have to wait until someone can (and hopefully will) come out and say something official about all of this. Until then ill just duel as I can as of right now.
Dont misinterperet that, I mean that i'll just employ in all the duels I have the correct issues dealing with priority that everyone else has already adjusted to.
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

Well you are right about one thing Nova Star I forgot about that whole window of opportunity employed by the Spell Speed 3 Trap cards. Well Ill just modify my post tomoorow, since I have to go home now.Well thanks for the reminder Nova
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

novastar said:
The order looks like this:

- The Turn Player declares a summon
- At this point you have the timing to negate the summon with HoH/SJ
- If not negated, the monster is successfully summoned
- The Turn Player is given Priority

- At this point you can perform 1 of 3 things:
1.) You Cost Effect Priority and activate the Spell Speed 1 effect of the monster summoned
2.) Respond with a Spell Speed 2 effect (any that can legally be activated)
3.) Pass

- Once you act, the Opponent can then respond or chain.

This is the way I've understood it best. In this situation also because if the turn player summons a monster and then decides to activate "Pot of Greed", the opponent has always been able to say "wait" and activate say "Trap Hole".

- A
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

solitarywolf17 said:
Well you are right about one thing Nova Star I forgot about that whole window of opportunity employed by the Spell Speed 3 Trap cards. Well Ill just modify my post tomoorow, since I have to go home now.Well thanks for the reminder Nova
You are quite welcome, we are here to discuss and learn (including me). I'm just adding what I have learned over the years, in talking with people who know far more than me.

This is the way I've understood it best.  In this situation also because if the turn player summons a monster and then decides to activate "Pot of Greed", the opponent has always been able to say "wait" and activate say "Trap Hole".
I totally agree, you must allow for a proper response. And if the opponent wants to respond to the summon, the Turn Player would have to wait until afterwords before activating [Pot of Greed].
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

densetsu_x said:
This is the way I've understood it best. In this situation also because if the turn player summons a monster and then decides to activate "Pot of Greed", the opponent has always been able to say "wait" and activate say "Trap Hole".

- A

And actually to take my own example 1 step further, it wouldn't even had to have been "Pot of Greed". Say the turn played decided after summoning, he wanted to activate "Metalmorph" on the monster he summoned. The opponent has the chance to say "wait, I didn't have a chance to respond" and activate "Trap Hole" in response to the summon.

1 thing I can say is that "State" only lasts as long as both players have had the chance to respond to that condition. If both end up passing the chance to take advantage of it, then the window has passed and they can only respond to something new.

- A
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

1 thing I can say is that "State" only lasts as long as both players have had the chance to respond to that condition.  If both end up passing the chance to take advantage of it, then the window has passed and they can only respond to something new.
Absolutely, we are on the same wavelength.

It all comes down to "timing" and "activation windows"

Thats what makes Yu-Gi-Oh! so good.
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

Novastar's interpretation is correct. Digging through old files and whatnot, it is supported by some Trap card rulings (see Pineapple Blast) as well as some cost-effect monster rulings.

As for the Breaker/Enemy Controller situation, it is possible with Ultimate Offering.
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

Dlanaan said:
Novastar's interpretation is correct. Digging through old files and whatnot, it is supported by some Trap card rulings (see Pineapple Blast) as well as some cost-effect monster rulings.

As for the Breaker/Enemy Controller situation, it is possible with Ultimate Offering.

Could you explain that last part a little more. Just how does "Ultimate Offering" make it possible? (and honestly, that ruling in the FAQ that the opponent player can then activate Breaker's effect... how does the non-turn player have priority to activate a non-multi-trigger effect since it's the player, not the monster, that has "priority").

- Andrew
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

Dlanaan said:
As for the Breaker/Enemy Controller situation, it is possible with Ultimate Offering.
In addition, the FAQ ruling for Enemy Controller did not state that Ultimate Offering has to be on the field.

[quote author=NetRep]
Enemy Controller
9. If your opponent Summons "Breaker the Magical Warrior" and activates "Breaker the Magical Warrior"'s effect to place a Spell Counter on him, and you chain "Enemy Controller" to the effect and take control of "Breaker the Magical Warrior", resolve "Enemy Controller" first and "Breaker the Magical Warrior"'s effect of placing a Spell Counter second, and the player who used "Enemy Controller" can use "Breaker the Magical Warrior"'s effect to destroy a Spell or Trap Card.
[/quote]
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

densetsu_x said:
Dlanaan said:
Novastar's interpretation is correct. Digging through old files and whatnot, it is supported by some Trap card rulings (see Pineapple Blast) as well as some cost-effect monster rulings.

As for the Breaker/Enemy Controller situation, it is possible with Ultimate Offering.

Could you explain that last part a little more.  Just how does "Ultimate Offering" make it possible?  (and honestly, that ruling in the FAQ that the opponent player can then activate Breaker's effect... how does the non-turn player have priority to activate a non-multi-trigger effect since it's the player, not the monster, that has "priority").

- Andrew
The non-turn player does not have Priority. In fact this is not a Priority issue, the Turn Player could take control of an Opponent's Breaker (after being normal summoned during the Turn Player's Battle Phase), and let the counter placement effect resolve, and then use the counter during his/her Main Phase 2.

This is not a Cost Effect Priority issue.
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

novastar said:
densetsu_x said:
Dlanaan said:
Novastar's interpretation is correct. Digging through old files and whatnot, it is supported by some Trap card rulings (see Pineapple Blast) as well as some cost-effect monster rulings.

As for the Breaker/Enemy Controller situation, it is possible with Ultimate Offering.

Could you explain that last part a little more. Just how does "Ultimate Offering" make it possible? (and honestly, that ruling in the FAQ that the opponent player can then activate Breaker's effect... how does the non-turn player have priority to activate a non-multi-trigger effect since it's the player, not the monster, that has "priority").

- Andrew
The non-turn player does not have Priority. In fact this is not a Priority issue, the Turn Player could take control of an Opponent's Breaker (after being normal summoned during the Turn Player's Battle Phase), and let the counter placement effect resolve, and then use the counter during his/her Main Phase 2.

This is not a Cost Effect Priority issue.

Ok... now I am getting the example where the opponent isn't the turn player and he summoned "Breaker" through "Ultimate Offering"'s effect.

What confused me originally by the wording is that it was making it sound like the opponent was the turn player which left me thinking :? how am I supposed to do that? :?

The other way though makes more than perfect sense.

- Andrew
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

novastar said:
The non-turn player does not have Priority. In fact this is not a Priority issue, the Turn Player could take control of an Opponent's Breaker (after being normal summoned during the Turn Player's Battle Phase), and let the counter placement effect resolve, and then use the counter during his/her Main Phase 2.

This is not a Cost Effect Priority issue.
Isn't it that Breaker's effect is a spell speed 1. So the opponent who used Enemy Controller can not activate his effect because the match is still in the turn player's Main Phase 1 or 2.

Now if it was the other way around, and the opponent (provided Ultimate Offering is on the field and not negated) summons Breaker, then the turn player can activate Enemy Controller and use Breaker's effect because he/she is still in his/her Main Phase 1 or 2.

In addition, NetRep FAQ on Enemy Controller does not state that UO must be on the field to do this! Arghhhh!
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

It doesn't because there may come another instance in the future where it is possible to Normal Summon a monster during the opponent's turn. The ruling applies strictly to the situation, not to how it may come about. This is the same thing as for those rulings that say 'If a card is turned face-down'. It doesn't say that it has to be turned face-down by Book of Moon or by Tsukuyomi. It rarely if ever even mentions those cards. This is because it is the instance that matters.
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

The opponent couldn't use "Ultimate Offering" during the turn player's Main Phase 1 or 2... only the Battle Phase.

However, noone said that "Breaker's" effect had to be used immediately. All it said is that if the person took it with "Enemy Controller", that the effect could be used... at the proper time.

Without a doubt I can say the wording in the FAQ is outright misleading... or at the very least, it's forcing the players to "assume" that when they say you can activate the effect, they mean at a proper time when the effect could be used. But that seriously should be rewritten to clarify it much better.

- A
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

Just to add to the Response Priority issue. Lets look at a typical response window, and it will help to illustrate why Cost Effect Priority is unique.

Lets assume again that Triggers are not involved here.

The Turn Player activates [Fissure], and the opponent only has a face-up [Gemini Elf]. Assume no other cards are chained.

- [Fissure] resolves destroying [Gemini Elf] and sending it to the graveyard
- A resulting Response Chain can be formed based on a monster being sent to the graveyard
- The Turn Player is given Priority

- At this point the Turn Player can do 1 of 2 things:
  1.) Activate a Spell Speed 2 effect in response
  2.) Pass

- Once you act, the Opponent can then respond and/or chain with a Spell Speed 2 effect or Pass

- Once both players Pass, the Response Chain is resolved.

At no point in this sequence can you activate a Spell Speed 1 effect such as [Pot of Greed] until this response window is resolved. This is why Cost Effect Priority is unique. There are many examples throughout the turn.

In general you can only activate Spell Speed 1 effects or Normal Summon or Set, when the Chain Block is empty and no events/actions are outstanding.

Those two flows are how, after a collection of info, I have come to understand the Priority/Response mechanic. I will look more into it, and come back if i have more info.
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

densetsu_x said:
The opponent couldn't use "Ultimate Offering" during the turn player's Main Phase 1 or 2... only the Battle Phase.
Got that.

densetsu_x said:
However, noone said that "Breaker's" effect had to be used immediately. All it said is that if the person took it with "Enemy Controller", that the effect could be used... at the proper time.
When is that proper time when Breaker will be returned to the owner after his/her End Phase?
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

Raigekick said:
densetsu_x said:
However, noone said that "Breaker's" effect had to be used immediately. All it said is that if the person took it with "Enemy Controller", that the effect could be used... at the proper time.
When is that proper time when Breaker will be returned to the owner after his/her End Phase?

In this example, since "Ultimate Offering" would have had to been activated during the battle phase, if the turn player took "Breaker" at that time, the next proper time to use "Breaker"'s effect and destroy 1 S/T card on the field would be Main Phase 2.

- A
 
Re: Priority v. 1.1 (All Read before posting priority quest.)

Dlanaan said:
It doesn't because there may come another instance in the future where it is possible to Normal Summon a monster during the opponent's turn. The ruling applies strictly to the situation, not to how it may come about. This is the same thing as for those rulings that say 'If a card is turned face-down'. It doesn't say that it has to be turned face-down by Book of Moon or by Tsukuyomi. It rarely if ever even mentions those cards. This is because it is the instance that matters.

This is a possibility, but the fact that ruling is around now is really devastating to the game. Plenty of people both run Breaker and Enemy Controller, and this ruling is telling them one of the many exceptions to rulings that allows a spell speed 1 effect to be activated during the opponent's turn.

UO is not involved in any way with this situation, I've checked it on the UDE site and our site (and our site is the exact same as the UDE since it's a carbon copy mirror). There is a chance it's just a screw up that has gone unreported, but it's something that can be severely damaging to the game, and to be quite honest with you, to have rulings that have no explanation what so ever, but just as exceptions to the gameplay is just horrible.

It's like walking up to someone and saying I can flap my wings and fly even though you can't, there is no explaining it, I'm just an exception to the rules of gravity...

It's really stupid and irresponsible.
 
Back
Top