Resolve w/o effect-effect dissappears?

[John Danker]

I'd commented on another board regarding a ruling that I'm not for certain if the phrase "resolve without effect" is the same as the term "dissappear"

If you look at the ruling for Creature Swap and the only monster on either player's side of the field being removed before the resolution of Creature Swap it states that the effect of Creature Swap "dissappears"

We're all familiar with the phrase "resolves without effect"

So why does it matter? We know there are cards which timing depends on the last thing to resolve, so if "dissappears" is different than "resolve without effect" is the timing for cards such as BTH and Torrential Tribute still correct if the last thing to resolve was the summon of a monster?

Yes I know this is walking on thin ice, my attempts thus far at trying to get certain terms clearly defined has yielded nothing after a number of months so I'm grasping at straws <shrug>
These are the types of things a judge gets his fingers into by being face to face with too many rules lawyers!

 

[Tiso]

But Cat is different. You would shuffle the Deck, then place it on top of the Deck. Merchant is not going into the Deck, you pick up the top card of the Deck. No where do you actually take hold of the Deck and go searching in it. It just so happens you find nothing for the effect to resolve with and you end up with a headache as what to do. In fact I am probably going to try this out on WC2006 tonight with a no Spell or Trap Deck.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

Note: For the FAQ, the only things you can get from it is rulings.

Don't read any more than necessary:

• 
  This card can remove from play multiple monsters at once, if they are Summoned simultaneously. Since this card can affect multiple monsters, it does not target.

One should only read the bold part, as that is the ruling. There is no because/since.

(It certainly would be possible for a card to target an unchosen amount of monsters)

There is not a concern over the details of the FAQ from either company before putting rulings up.


Note: There is no ruling under Pot of Avarice that says the card will not resolve.

See "effect" is different than "affect"

Now resolve without [a]ffect would be a more approriate term.

There was an effect that was generated, and did resolve (carry through), but it didn't affect anything.

This is all very abstract, but in general the resolve without effect term to me is a defunct term that contradicts itself.

Affect is to have an effect upon.

They are essentially as much the same word as "walks," "walked" and "walking" are the same word.