Secondary Chains

F

FelixChCh

New Member
I've had a look around, but have not found the specific answer to this - if you know where it is point me that way - thanks.

Here is the scenario. I have two face down Des Koalas, a set desert sunlight, a set Seven Tools, and a set Magic Jammer.

1. I activate Desert Sunlight
2. Opp chains Ceasefire
3. I activate 7 tools
4. Opp chains Mystical Space Typhoon (yes I know this will have no effect, but bear with me)
5. I chains Magic Jammer, discarding Night Assailant (Night Assailant's effect activates starting a new chain)

No further chaining

Resolve the chain:
5. Magic Jammer resolves stopping Mysty
4. Mystical Space Typhoon is negated - no effect
3. Seven tools of the bandit negates Ceasefire
2. Ceasefire is negated
1. Desert Sunlight resolves flipping my Des Koalas face up (effects activate simultaneously and go on the same chain as Night Assailant)

All OK so far? Apart from not being realistic (who would try mystical space typhoon in this chain?) is the chaining and resolution OK?

Onward to the question...

Q1 - My understanding is that neither myself nor my opponent can chain to the second chain whilst we are working chain 1. So the activation of Night Assailant's effect cannot be chained to when it activates.

Q2 - After this first chain has resolved does anyone get the chance to chain to this second chain?

We would then resolve chain 2:

3. Des Koala (1) effect resolves
2. Des Koals (2) effect resolves
1. Night Assailant effect resolves

As far as I understand this scenario there is no opportunity for my opponent to Divine Wrath Night Assailant, nor either Des Koala.

:confused:
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chaos General is right. You had things interesting until you tossed in the MST on top of Seven Tools of the Bandit.

Seven Tools is a Counter Trap Card (Spell Speed 3) and MST is a Quick-Play (Spell Speed 2). You cannot not chain a Spell Speed 2 effect to a Spell Speed 3, not even if it is a Trap to Trap Chain. In fact, there are very few Traps that can actually chain to another Counter Trap.

Night Assailant doesn't activate until the Chain resolves, so Divine Wrath would start a new Chain.

As far as Des Koala is concerned, you would have to chain Divine Wrath to the activation of Des Koala's effect, so I would think that once Ceasefire resolved (destroyed in chain, I mean), the timing is missed for its activation.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ok, my question is this. Would there be only two chains, or 3?

SEGOC would seem to only come into play for the two "Des Koala"s, NOT with the "Night Assailant".

Is it possible for chains to be 'chained' or placed in a chain with each other? Meaning..if there are indeed 3 separate chains that happen, how exactly would they resolve? How do you determine if the SEGOC'd "Des Koala"s resolve 1st, or if the effect of "Night Assailant" resolves 1st?


hmmm.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well, all this is theoretical as the chain can never happen as listed, but the controller of Night Assailant shouldnt be able to resolve Night Assailant's effect since that would mean he is resolving it in between chain links.

If I am wrong, then the first opportunity would be after Magic Jammer resolves, since almost everything (where discards are used like Sinister Serpent in Standby Phase, or Night Assailant) points to resolve effect, then resolve discards effect.

This is the ruling for Magic Jammer vs Night Assailant

"Night Assailant" doesn't have to be sent to the Graveyard by an effect, or by an effect controlled by your opponent; it just has to be sent to the Graveyard. "Night Assailant"'s effect activates when sent to the Graveyard as a cost for "Magic Jammer" or "Tribe-Infecting Virus"; "Night Assailant"'s effect activates after the current chain resolves.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Sorry about the spell speed FUBAR - I was trying to get a long chain in place a slipped up - obvious when looked at :) I was trying to get the discard in...

Okay, try again - two scenarios to make it simpler...

1. Opponent activates Ceasefire
2. I chain Desert Sunlight

No further chaining

Resolve the chain:
2. Desert Sunlight resolves flipping my Des Koalas face up
1. Ceasefire is resolves

Des Koalas effects activate and start a second chain as soon as they are flipped face up.

All OK so far?

Onward to the question...

Q1 - My understanding is that neither myself nor my opponent can chain to the second chain whilst we are working chain 1.
So though the Des Koalas activate when they are flipped face up by Desert Sunlight they cannot be chained to.

Q2 - After this first chain has resolved does anyone get the chance to chain to this second chain?

We would then resolve chain 2:

2. Des Koala (1) effect resolves
1. Des Koals (2) effect resolves

Second Scenario..

1. Opponent activates a normal magic card
2. I activate Magic Jammer, discarding Night Assailant
3. Opp chains Curse of Royal
4. I chain 7 tools

Can yo chain Divine Wrath to Night Assailant's effect activating, or do you have to continue with Chain 1 first?

Resolve

4. Resolve 7 tools, negate Curse of Royal
3. Curse of Royal is negated
2. Magic Jammer resolves negating magic card
1. Normal magic is negated.

Now chain 2 is:
1. Night Assailant's effect

Can the opponent chain Divine Wrath or is it too late?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
SEGOC would seem to only come into play for the two "Des Koala"s, NOT with the "Night Assailant".
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter when an event was triggered. The "simultaneous" means effects that are trying to activate simultaneuosly. Since both Des Koala and Night Assailant have to wait exactly until the chain is done resolving to activate, they are all activating at the same time, and would all go onto the same chain.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DaGuyWitBluGlasses said:
It doesn't matter when an event was triggered. The "simultaneous" means effects that are trying to activate simultaneuosly. Since both Des Koala and Night Assailant have to wait exactly until the chain is done resolving to activate, they are all activating at the same time, and would all go onto the same chain.
Click to expand...
Ok, good. That is what I wanted pointed out. Thanks. I wasn't sure if there was any kind of timing issue involved.

And for FelixChCh:
In both of the later scenarios the effects are not actually activating and resolving until the current chain completely resolves. So the opponent would be able to chain "Divine Wrath" to the effects of "Night Assailant" and "Des Koala".

Now I will point out, that they would only be able to stop 1 of the "Des Koala"s and not both, since they are forming a chain because of SEGOC.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So does this mean that all secondary effects that fall out of resolving a chain are simultaneous in 'game time', even though they are potentially activated sequentially (i.e. the Desert Sunlight, discarding etc)?

They would then all get processed as a SEGOC, with turn player mandatory as first chain links, then opponent mandatories as next chain links etc...

Still need to know about Divine Wrath... :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
FelixChCh said:
So does this mean that all secondary effects that fall out of resolving a chain are simultaneous in 'game time', even though they are potentially activated sequentially (i.e. the Desert Sunlight, discarding etc)?

They would then all get processed as a SEGOC, with turn player mandatory as first chain links, then opponent mandatories as next chain links etc...

Still need to know about Divine Wrath... :)
Click to expand...
No, not all 'secondary' effects would fall into a SEGOC chain situation. If you had discarded "Archfiend of Gilfer" instead of "Night Assailant", then his effect would actually be missed due to timing issues because his effect is optional and must be the last thing to happen in the chain. Both effects from "Des Koala" and "Night Assailant" are mandatory effects that MUST take place when the current chain resolves.

But, yes, other than the effects that have timing issues, your statement is correct.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So, if you go back to your initial post with the "Des Koala"s being placed 3rd and 2nd on the SEGOC chain, then "Night Assailant", you, as the controller of all effects would definitely have to decide which of the effects you REALLY wanted to resolve and place it 1st in the chain as it would be the least likely to get negated because it IS 1st on the chain.

Does that make sense?...lol.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
No, not all 'secondary' effects would fall into a SEGOC chain situation. If you had discarded "Archfiend of Gilfer" instead of "Night Assailant", then his effect would actually be missed due to timing issues because his effect is optional and must be the last thing to happen in the chain. Both effects from "Des Koala" and "Night Assailant" are mandatory effects that MUST take place when the current chain resolves.

But, yes, other than the effects that have timing issues, your statement is correct.
Click to expand...
Just to further clarify Archfiend of Gilfer would have missed his timing because he was discarded as an activation cost in the above example (taking Night Assailants place). If he were discarded as a result of say Graceful Charity resolving and a Night Assailant had been sent to the grave in the same chain or even as the other card for Graceful both cards would activate and Night Assailant would be first on the new chain with Archfiend being second because Night Assailant is mandatory and Archfiend of Gilfer is optional.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I've got the missing the timing issues hammered out now - at recent tournaments there have been slip ups with Peten by some folk...

Anyway.

This leads to my final scenarios for the day.
I have Sangan equipped with Black Pendant. Face down Des Koala, and Desert Sunlight and Magic Jammer.

Opponents Turn scenario
1. Opp activates Raigeki Break targetting Sangan discarding Archfiend of Gilfer
2. I chain Desert Sunlight
3. Opp chains Enemy Controller tributing their face up Sangan
4. I chain Magic Jammer discarding Night Assailant

No further chains

Resolve...
4. Magic Jammer negate Enemy Controller
3. Enemy Controller is negated
2. Desert Sunlight flips Des Koala
1. Raigeki Break Resolves

Remove cards from field when the chain has resolved.
We then have a SEGOC of horrible proportions. As turn player mandatory go first on the chain we end up with.

1. Opponent Sangan
2. My Des Koala
3. My Sangan
4. My Night Assailant
5. My Black Pendant
6. Opp Archfiend of Gilfer [Timing missed]

I chose to put Black Pendant in at number 5.

Now...
My Turn scenario
1. Opp activates Raigeki Break targetting Sangan discarding Archfiend of Gilfer
2. I chain Desert Sunlight
3. Opp chains Enemy Controller tributing their face up Sangan
4. I chain Magic Jammer discarding Night Assailant

No further chains

Resolve...
4. Magic Jammer negate Enemy Controller
3. Enemy Controller is negated
2. Desert Sunlight flips Des Koala
1. Raigeki Break Resolves

Remove cards from field when the chain has resolved.
We then have a SEGOC of horrible proportions. As turn player mandatory go first on the chain we end up with.

1. My Black Pendant
2. My Des Koala
3. My Sangan
4. My Night Assailant
5. Opponent Sangan
6. Opp Archfiend of Gilfer [Timing missed]

How does that sound? So once the chain 2 SEGOC is established with each of these scenarios who has priority? Important as my opponent wishes to play Pikeru to avoid effect damage, and I want to Divine Wrath that Sangan.

These are very imporatant issues when you run a burn deck with these cards. To make things more interesting lets add in Magical Thorns, to show the resolution of a continuous trap card in between steps of chain 1 :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I don't see an issue with either scenario.

And to clarify once more, as anthonyj pointed out, "Archfiend of Gilfer" misses his timing because he was discarded as a cost for "Raigeki Break", it really doesn't matter that anything else happened, in this scenario, after the "Raigeki Break" when looking at "Gilfer"s effect timing.

Also, the order of YOUR mandatory effects are not set in stone. You are able to choose the order in which they resolve.

I'm sure you know that already, but just wanted to say it again.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
On your 'who has priority?' question, I might be really wrong about this, but I'm going to learn something from this either way.

I believe that in general, the off-turn player gets first-dibs to react to an event. The only time this isn't the case is when the turn player summons something, as most of the community is very much aware about.

I feel only 80% sure about this, so hopefully someone else will provide additional information about this.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That could be the case DarkJason.

You are right that if I as the turn player 'do something' such as summon, the opponent gets a chance to respond (following the old chestnut about 'are you going to use priority with that?').

In this case as we have a second chain that fell out of the previous one I think that it will be the turn player that has priority to play a card/activate an effect to go on the new chain.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I discussed that problem with a friend a few weeks ago.
It took about an hour to come to a useful conclusion.. o_O
We stumbled across this situation:

Magician of Faith vs. Mind Crush.

Player A controls a f/d Magician of Faith and has a Pot of Greed in his Graveyard.
Player B has got a f/d Mind Crush.

Player A flips the MoF and targets Pot of Greed.
Player B doesn't want to respond.

ChainLink1: MoF -> Pot of Greed

Chain Resolves and Player A took Pot of Greed into his hand.

The question was:
May Player A activate Pot of Greed or may Player B activate his Mind Crush first??
A similar situation was answered on Judge List:
http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=3127#3127

That made clear to us, that, after a chain resolves, both players may respond to the current Game State; beginning with the TurnPlayer.
They may not use an Effect with Spell Speed 1 or do an action.

After resolving the Chain, the Game State became "A Card was added to the Hand". Both Players may now respond to that Game State.
The Turn Player may not activate Pot of Greed.

Player A isn't able to respond to the current Game State with a card having Spell Speed 2 or more.
Player B activates Mind Crush, calls Pot of Greed, and starts a new chain.

Chain Resolves. Pot of Greed is discarded to the Graveyard.

The Game State becomes "A Card has been discarded".
(Forced Requisition could be activated right now.)
Nobody is able to respond to the current Game State.

If both the TP and the NTP passed their Priority, the Game State becomes "neutral".
From this it follows that the TP has got Normal Priority again, so he can do an action or activate cards with a Spell Speed of 1, or activate other cards not needing a special Game State.

Because both Players passed Priority, the Game State becomes "neutral".
The turn continues.



Of course that all is speculation.
(When does Kevin Tewart write the Article about Priorities...^^??)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Harti1990 said:
I discussed that problem with a friend a few weeks ago.
It took about an hour to come to a useful conclusion.. o_O
We stumbled across this situation:

Magician of Faith vs. Mind Crush.

Player A controls a f/d Magician of Faith and has a Pot of Greed in his Graveyard.
Player B has got a f/d Mind Crush.

Player A flips the MoF and targets Pot of Greed.
Player B doesn't want to respond.

ChainLink1: MoF -> Pot of Greed

Chain Resolves and Player A took Pot of Greed into his hand.

The question was:
May Player A activate Pot of Greed or may Player B activate his Mind Crush first??
A similar situation was answered on Judge List:
http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=3127#3127

That made clear to us, that, after a chain resolves, both players may respond to the current Game State; beginning with the TurnPlayer.
They may not use an Effect with Spell Speed 1 or do an action.

After resolving the Chain, the Game State became "A Card was added to the Hand". Both Players may now respond to that Game State.
The Turn Player may not activate Pot of Greed.

Player A isn't able to respond to the current Game State with a card having Spell Speed 2 or more.
Player B activates Mind Crush, calls Pot of Greed, and starts a new chain.

Chain Resolves. Pot of Greed is discarded to the Graveyard.

The Game State becomes "A Card has been discarded".
(Forced Requisition could be activated right now.)
Nobody is able to respond to the current Game State.

If both the TP and the NTP passed their Priority, the Game State becomes "neutral".
From this it follows that the TP has got Normal Priority again, so he can do an action or activate cards with a Spell Speed of 1, or activate other cards not needing a special Game State.

Because both Players passed Priority, the Game State becomes "neutral".
The turn continues.



Of course that all is speculation.
(When does Kevin Tewart write the Article about Priorities...^^??)
Click to expand...


http://www.cogonline.net/threads.10327
There was a couple of similar questions raised at the SJC this past weekend. Since we had a L3 there, I posed it to him. This was what he was told on the subject (so feel free to agree or disagree as you see fit).

After a chain in activated and resolved, the other person has the chance to activate a "response chain" of sorts where they can start a new chain before other things are done. The exception to this is where a chain ends in the result of a summon (from say Premature Burial or Metamorphosis). In that case the player retains priority in order to activate an ignition effect (such as the TER suck or Exiled Force's nuke) before the other player can activate a response.

So in the case above, you can activate Metamorphosis, get TER... suck up a monster... and after that is all said and done, your opponent can use Ring of Destruction on TER before the turn player can continue.
Click to expand...

Kevin already has finished his Priority Artical but Konami doesn't agree with it or something like that.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top