Sakuretsu Armor and position changes.

S

skey23

Council of Heroes
Ok, I had to ask here sooner or later since I can't find the stoopid Judge List archive and I still don't have access to the Level 3 Judge's List.....

P1 attacks P2.
P2 activates "Sakuretsu Armor".
P1 responds with "Desert Sunlight" or any other card that would put their monster into face-up Defense Position.
P2 does not respond.
P1 does not respond.
Resove chain.
Monster(s) go to defense.

Now, will the monster that attacked still be destroyed by "Sakuretsu Armor"?

Thanks.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
During resolution, it has to still be in the process of attacking. How is it going to be destroyed if it is not in the process of attacking? Magic Cylinder, Negate Attack, Draining Shield, etc are examples why this is true. Mirror Force represents this as well. How is the attacking monster going to be destroyed if he somehow gets to Defense Position and not Attack Position? This is a card that has a specific timing and a specific resolution that has to occur in order for it to work.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If i chain my Gravity Bind (stopping his Level 4) to my Magic Cylinder does my opponent still get hit? Yes, they do.

That completely contradicts your statement.

No it does not need to still be in the process of attacking, it simply needs to have declared an attack to be a legal target for Sakuretsu.

Trying to analyze this is going to be frustrating for you, because in reality that only reason Sakuretsu is targeted is because you are specifically destroying the 1 monster that attacked, otherwise it would be Mirror Force... so in otherwords, you are trying to extract targeting infomation from text that is written like a non-targeted effect...good luck ;).

I do agree that there is some validity to the arguement, but based on the rulings of others very similar to it, that seems to be the interpretation.

Would it be easier to understand if the effect were written as: "Destroy the monster that declared the attack" ?? Would changing it to defence position change that criterion?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Actually one of those judge list questions answers that. Gravity Bind in that situation essentially negates the attack because it is not like the monster jumps back in time and tells itself not to attack. It was in the process of attacking, it essentially becomes negated even if it does not say that it does. Thus, Magic Cylinder is looking for something that has already happened and afterward will go ahead with the LP loss.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Thus, Magic Cylinder is looking for something that has already happened and afterward will go ahead with the LP loss.
Click to expand...
Which is exactly the case here with Sakuretsu.

The destruction criterion is the same as it is with the damage criterion, and it's still carried out.

Magic Cylinder
"[...][1]inflict Direct Damage equal to[1] [2]the attacking monster's[2] ATK [...]"

Sakuretsu Armor
"[1]Destroy[1] [2]the attacking monster.[2]"

You have to break the text into parts, same idea here.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
novastar said:
Which is exactly the case here with Sakuretsu.

The destruction criterion is the same as it is with the damage criterion, and it's still carried out.

Magic Cylinder
"[...][1]inflict Direct Damage equal to[1] [2]the attacking monster's[2] ATK [...]"

Sakuretsu Armor
"[1]Destroy[1] [2]the attacking monster.[2]"

You have to break the text into parts, same idea here.
Click to expand...

Nova you are missing the point. One of the judge list had a question about this, not this exact scenario but it dealt with multiple Magic Cylinders. If I activate 3 Magic Cylinder, what happens? You lose LP for each 3. Gravity Bind would work in that same fashion. If the first MC negates the attack and the other 2 go to look for something that has already happen, they will go ahead with the other effect since key action to happen for the effect damage to occur has already happened thanks to the first MC. For Gravity Bind, it would either 1.) Negate the attack being declared (but does not openly say it) or 2.) It would create a situation that it jumps back to before declaring an attack (which is just even more confusing).

Now, how do you present your situation. Opponent declares attack, you activate Gravity Bind, then chain with Sakuretsu Armor? Or do you activate Sakuretsu Armor and then chain Gravity Bind? Is there any rulings to suggest in that scenario the monster is destroyed because it is no longer attacking. Not everything YGO is perfect and even the advance faqs are not as accurate. There is at least one section in the Advanced FAQ that is not entirely correct.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
would it matter, Tiso, the order in which Sakuretsu Armor and Gravity Bind were chained? Wouldn't the trigger of a monster attacking still allow for Sakuretsu to activate? And then, since it is targetting, it picks the monster that opened that activation window to destroy, and as long as that monster remains face up on the field, its still the targetted monster. Sakuretsu doesn't lose its target, and it doesn't refer to whether or not the attack was averted by another effect.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If the first MC negates the attack and the other 2 go to look for something that has already happen, they will go ahead with the other effect since key action to happen for the effect damage to occur has already happened thanks to the first MC.
Click to expand...
But that is not true.

The negation and the damage are not dependant effects, they are independant.

I have a very clear stance, Magic Cylinder's damage effect is mechanically identical to Sakuretsu Armor's destruction effect... therefore as long as the monster that declared the attack is still face-up when the effect resolves, the effect will carry through, regardless of whether the attack has been "stopped" or "negated"

You could easily write Sakuretsu like this:

"Select an opponent's monster that declared an attack. Destroy the selected monster."

Would Sakuretsu disappear now if the attack were stopped by Gravity Bind?

As far as Gravity Bind is concerned, it doesn't matter which order you place them in, Sakuretsu (and MC) will resolve as normal.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Tiso said:
Not dependent? Negate Attack vs. Wildheart would beg to differ. Magic Cylinder vs. Wildheart would beg to differ.
Click to expand...
It's not concrete to me.

Firstly, how can you end a Battle Phase when the monster is still attacking? I'm not going to get into Negate Attack because its really not the same thing, and it's highly logical to have to stop the attack timing first before ended the Battle Phase, making it dependant. Especially in the case of a face-up attack position monster.

Secondly, just because no damage is inflicted does not mean that the effect didn't resolve, its possible that just couldn't reference the number because Wildheart is unaffected.

It's off topic, but it's a good point you bring up.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ok, Ok, I've got to come clean...this is killing me..lol.

I have intentionally been arguing the 'wrong' answer on this scenario on multiple sites. I have been trying to see what people will come up with to back up their arguments.

Both DaGuy and Nova are correct. The monster will be destroyed. "Sakurestu Armor" does not care what position the monster is in when it resolves, only that it still be face-up on the field.

The main reason I started this argument was to show how card text can lead you in one direction, while rulings and game mechanics will lead you in another direction.

I apologize to everyone for keeping this thing going, but it was interesting to see how many argued both sides.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
Ok, Ok, I've got to come clean...this is killing me..lol.

I have intentionally been arguing the 'wrong' answer on this scenario on multiple sites. I have been trying to see what people will come up with to back up their arguments.

Both DaGuy and Nova are correct. The monster will be destroyed. "Sakurestu Armor" does not care what position the monster is in when it resolves, only that it still be face-up on the field.

The main reason I started this argument was to show how card text can lead you in one direction, while rulings and game mechanics will lead you in another direction.

I apologize to everyone for keeping this thing going, but it was interesting to see how many argued both sides.
Click to expand...

Where is their proof though and yours? All of that is just rationalizing the text. Unless I see some type of judge talk on those judge list about this, I cannot accept it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well, with the activity on the Judge's List again today, hopefully the question will be answered soon. I asked yesterday before I posted here, just in case I got a quick response.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top