Snatch Steal vs. "re-flippables"

[CraniumX]

Snatch Steal vs. "re-flippables"

Simple question, if an opponent Snatch Steals a face-up (yes, defense position ) monster that can flip itself face down, can they flip-summon it that same turn and use its effect?

 

[Digital Jedi]

Tageting is made meaningless once the stolen monster is flipped face-down.

There is no effect keeping the face-down monster on the new controler's side of the field. There is no effect that will return the face-down monster to the opponent's side of the field. As John said targeting is not even an issue once Snatch Steal is destroyed by this paticular game mechanic.

The Game Mechanic of monsters being unable to be equipped while face-down is a long standing one and is not a two part process. It is immediatly destroyed with no pauses in between.

As was already stated Snatch Steal will have no effect on the said monster once it's destroyed and control of the monster will not return because the monster now "forgets" who he belongs to.

Whenever dealing with Snatch Steal forget what you know about other control changing cards, because they don't apply here, think of it only as an equip and aply the rules that aply to all equip cards.

 

[Valkyrelord]

There's a differnece between Mirage Knight and Snatch Steal.

If you were to Book of Moon Mirage Knight, it will not be removed from the field during the turn it was involved in battle because it is accounted for it's "own" effect, the effect itself is printed on the card, which is why it would reset being placed face-down.

For Snatch Steal, has it's "own" effect. So if the target of Snatch Steal was placed face-down by Book of Moon, Snatch Steal will be destroyed.

Normally, if you were to Mystical Space Typhoon Snatch Steal while target remained face-up, it would return to the previous controller, because you can determine the target.

Now in the case of Book of Moon, the target goes face-down, Snatch Steal is destroyed by game mechanic, but the original target of Snatch Steal cannot be determined since it is now face-down. Thats why control of that monster does not switch.

Your right with that statement, when a monster equiped with Snatch Steal is flipped face-down the second effect of Snatch Steal (returning the monster to the owner) is lost because the targeted monster is Unkown. so it will remain in the side of the player that activated Snatch Steal.

 

[Tonylaudat]

The point that I was trying to make before, which I guess I need to make clearer, is that there are two things that occur after the stolen monster is flipped face down. One is that Snatch Steal is destoried by game mechanics, and the other is that the status of the stolen monster needs to be determined.

If the status of the stolen monster was to be determined first, the it would return to its original controler, and then Snatch Steal would be destoried via game mechanics, and this this disscussion would not be revelant.

That said, lets assume that after the monster is flipped face down, that Snatch Steal is destoried via game mechanics first. This rasies the question of what the status of the face down monster will become.

Digital Jedi said "There is no effect keeping the face-down monster on the new controler's side of the field. There is no effect that will return the face-down monster to the opponent's side of the field."

This of course assumes that an effect is needed to return the monster to its original owner. Since monsters do not exist on you opponet's side of the field without a card effect that allows them to be so (either its own, or another card's effect), I would argue that no effect is needed, rather the monster would return to its original owner by defualt since there is no effect telling it to be on your opponet's side of the field (I believe that this is what is going on with Snatch Steal Vs Stirke Ninja since Strike Ninja first appears on the side of the field of the person who stole it and the returns to its original owner). Why would such an effect be needed if the monster stolen was flipped face down?

I also wish to know how a monster "forgets" who it belongs to. If I were to you Remove Brainwashing on such a monster, wouldn't it return to the control of its original owner? Since (in the vast majority of cases), the monster stolen originally belonged to its original owner, and Remove Brainwashing would work return it to its original owner, the monster could not forget who that was, or else Remove Brainwashing wouldn't work on it.

Also, if the stolen monster "forgets" who it belongs to when it is flipped face down, then why doesn't it "forget" who it belongs to if it is removed from play for a turn and brought back? In both cases Snatch Steal was destoried by game mechanics, so why do we have two different results?

 

[Warrior519]

whew

a heated argument indeed! i have read this whole thing and i think i agree with tonylaudat. he does make alot of good points but as of now the only thing we can do is just do what upperdeck/konami say about the card rulings. if we want to solve this problem maybe we could ask upperdeck/konami for a debate or something on this particular issue?

alot of good points from both sides though

well there is my 2 cents

 

[StRiKe_NiNjA]

The point that I was trying to make before, which I guess I need to make clearer, is that there are two things that occur after the stolen monster is flipped face down. One is that Snatch Steal is destoried by game mechanics, and the other is that the status of the stolen monster needs to be determined.

You cannot determine the target, it is face-down. Simple. It simply will not take place.

This is case is true for Premature Burial.

I Special Summon Stealth Bird with the effect of Premature Burial. I activate the effect of Stealth Bird to place it face-down. Will Premature Burial destroy it? No. Premature Burial can no longer determine the target.

 

[StRiKe_NiNjA]

Digital Jedi said "There is no effect keeping the face-down monster on the new controler's side of the field.

There is no effect that will determine the target of Snatch Steal if the target goes face-down. That's why the previous controller won't regain control of that monster.

Tell me. Why is it when Snatch Steal is destroyed by Mystical Space Typhoon, why does the target return the previous controller?

You have reference. The target is face-up, so you can determine it.

Now tell me. Why does the target if it were to go face-down, now that Snatch Steal is destroyed by game mechanic, does not revert back to the previous controller?

You have NO reference. As the target is now face-down, the effect of Snatch Steal no longer affects it and will NOT revert it back to the previous controller.

The "Equip Insignia" is key. This is what keeps Snatch Steal on the field, and control of a target.

As a well known rule, you cannot target face-down monster with Equip Cards. If the target were to go face-down, you cannot determine it and it will remain there.

 

[Digital Jedi]

The point that I was trying to make before, which I guess I need to make clearer, is that there are two things that occur after the stolen monster is flipped face down. One is that Snatch Steal is destoried by game mechanics, and the other is that the status of the stolen monster needs to be determined.

If the status of the stolen monster was to be determined first, the it would return to its original controler, and then Snatch Steal would be destoried via game mechanics, and this this disscussion would not be revelant.

That said, lets assume that after the monster is flipped face down, that Snatch Steal is destoried via game mechanics first. This rasies the question of what the status of the face down monster will become.

Digital Jedi said "There is no effect keeping the face-down monster on the new controler's side of the field. There is no effect that will return the face-down monster to the opponent's side of the field."

This of course assumes that an effect is needed to return the monster to its original owner. Since monsters do not exist on you opponet's side of the field without a card effect that allows them to be so (either its own, or another card's effect), I would argue that no effect is needed, rather the monster would return to its original owner by defualt since there is no effect telling it to be on your opponet's side of the field (I believe that this is what is going on with Snatch Steal Vs Stirke Ninja since Strike Ninja first appears on the side of the field of the person who stole it and the returns to its original owner). Why would such an effect be needed if the monster stolen was flipped face down?

I also wish to know how a monster "forgets" who it belongs to. If I were to you Remove Brainwashing on such a monster, wouldn't it return to the control of its original owner? Since (in the vast majority of cases), the monster stolen originally belonged to its original owner, and Remove Brainwashing would work return it to its original owner, the monster could not forget who that was, or else Remove Brainwashing wouldn't work on it.

Also, if the stolen monster "forgets" who it belongs to when it is flipped face down, then why doesn't it "forget" who it belongs to if it is removed from play for a turn and brought back? In both cases Snatch Steal was destoried by game mechanics, so why do we have two different results?

There are a few fundamental points you are missing, however.

For one, monsters do not return to thier owners by default. They return through effects (or rulings.) Creature Swap is permenant simply because it doesn't have the effect that returns it to it's previous controller's side of the field. It says nothing about begin permenant. But because without the added effect (such as Change of Heart or Mind Control) it stays where it is.

Remove Brainwashing is an unfair comparison to any control changing card. Remove Brainwashing returns monsters to the original owner. Period. Not the previous controller. The monster being face up or down has nothing to do with it. It simply gives me my card back because it was mine to begin with. The monster or his effect doesn't need to "know" who he is. It's in one of my sleeves. It's my monster.

Monsters removed from play is also a completely different situation. It's not on the field. You don't have your own "Removed from play" zone that's seperate from mine. My monster will always go to my Graveyard. These areas reset control issues. Flips on the field do not.

"Forget" is a term used on the judges list with regards to effects and may have been a bad choice of words with regards to Snatch Steal. But as I said forget what you know regarding control changers and think of it as what it realy is: an Equip Spell Card. The instant that the equipped card is flipped face-down Snatch Steal is destroyed. Snatch Steal can no longer detrmine the status of the monster because it is no longer equipped to it.

So the two main points to remember here are quite simple:

1.Monsters do not return to thier previous controller unless an effect (or ruling, as is the case here) specifically states so.

2. Equips cannot affect face-down cards because they cannot even be equipped to the a face-down card. So Snatch Steal can't even determine who the card belong to previously.

 

[novastar]

If this is true, then why would a monster that wsa stolen, and then flipped face down, not return to its original controler? In both cases, Snatch Steal "lost its target" since it was destoried by game mechanics, and yet in the case of Stirke Ninja, it returns to you, but if it is a face down monster it doesn't. Isn't this a contradiction?

Yes, it is.

Unfortunately that is the ruling, we don't like it, but that's it.

You'll find many disappointing ruling that contradic, its the nature of the system in YGO.

 

[John Danker]

As an educated guess I would think the reason behind Strike Ninja returning is because when removed from play all monster effects are reset (with the exception of Twin Headed Behemoth)

If monster effects are reset would then monsters also "remember" where they're suppose to be as well?

There is a big difference between being turned face down and removed from play as well. Strike Ninja was never turned face down.

I'd be curious as to what would happen if Stike Ninja were taken with Snatch Steal, turned face down, later flipped face up, removed from play, and then returned to the field.

 

[Tonylaudat]

I only mentioned Remove Brainwashing to make to rasie of question of why a monster that always knows who its original owner is can forget who it was stolen from when it is flipped face down. Wouldn't the monster need to know who its original owner was for Remove Brainwashing to work, since as far as the game (mechanics) is conserned, card sleeves are simply a physical extension of the card themselves.

Digital Jedi said,

"For one, monsters do not return to thier owners by default. They return through effects (or rulings.) Creature Swap is permenant simply because it doesn't have the effect that returns it to it's previous controller's side of the field. It says nothing about begin permenant. But because without the added effect (such as Change of Heart or Mind Control) it stays where it is."

Where is it written on Change of Heart, or Mind Control that there is an added effect that returns the stolen monster at the end of the turn? I would argue that there is no such effect, only the fact the the effect keeping the monster on its new side of the field (Change of Heart, or Mind Control) expires at the end of the turn. Creature Swap on the other hand is different. It takes two creatures and switches control of them. However unlike either Change of Heart, or Mind Control, because the effect which has switched control of the two monsters has no condition upon which it ends, the monsters remain siwtched permenatly.

Also, if creatures do not retun to their owners (or original controlers) by defaut, then under what effect does a Stolen Strike Ninja that is removed play end up returning to its original contorler's side of the field?

 

[Digital Jedi]

Change of Heart
Select 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field. Take control of the selected monster until the End Phase of this turn.

Mind Control
Take control of 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field until the End Phase. This monster cannot declare an attack or be Tributed.

The bold text is the "added effect" I was apeaking of. Argueing that there is no effect returning them, only that the effect is expiring, is like argueing that my driver licence has no expiration date, it just expires on the date shown. Or saying: "No this is not my left hand, this is my hand on the left side of my body." They are both the exact same thing.

And Remove Brainwashing does not work the way you suggest, it's the player who needs to know who the monster belongs to, not the monster.

And monsters do not return to thier owners (or previous controllers) by default while on the field. Once a monster leaves the field control issues are reset. Monsters do not belong to anyone but the owner when retruned to the hand, the deck or sent to the Graveyard or removed from play.

 

[chaosruler]

also, in regard to Strike Ninja returning to the owner while a f/d monster doesn't, the only thing I can think of is that Strike Ninja is still face-up (granted in the RFP zone), so you can still reference who his original controller was.

Just my pitiful attempt at logic, as if that existed

-chaosruler

 

[Tonylaudat]

Digital Jedi said

"Change of Heart
Select 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field. Take control of the selected monster until the End Phase of this turn. "

"Mind Control
Take control of 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field until the End Phase. This monster cannot declare an attack or be Tributed."

"The bold text is the "added effect" I was speaking of. Argueing that there is no effect returning them, only that the effect is expiring, is like argueing that my driver licence has no expiration date, it just expires on the date shown. Or saying: "No this is not my left hand, this is my hand on the left side of my body." They are both the exact same thing."

"And monsters do not return to thier owners (or previous controllers) by default while on the field. Once a monster leaves the field control issues are reset. Monsters do not belong to anyone but the owner when retruned to the hand, the deck or sent to the Graveyard or removed from play"


If I'm standing face to face with you, then the had on the left side of your body is you left hand, but from my perspecvite, it would be my right. Desptie the fact that we are describing the same thing, our perspectives cause us to see it in two different ways. What you see as an added effect, I see as simply the end of a duration. If there was no siginificant difference between the two, then we wouldn't have anything to talk about. However, in this case there is. If "until the End Phase" is simply a duration, then the monster affected by Change of Heart must return to its original controler by defult. If on the other hand, "until the End Phase" actually means something to the effect of until the End Phase at which time Change of Heart/Mind Control returns the target monster to its originall controler (assuming it still exists on the field), then there would be an effect returning the monster to its original controler.

Since either one could be correct we should go with the explination that make the most sense with the way that the game is currently player, and current ruilings.


If monsters do not return to their original contoler while on the field by default, then why does a stolen Strike Ninja (whose effect does not specify which side of the field he need to come back into play on) that is removed from play return first on the side of the field of the player who stole it, and only then returns to its original controler (assuming that the original controler, and original owner are the same player, which is almost alwyas the case). If control issues are truly reset, then what is stopping Stike Ninja from simply returning to its original controler's side of the field in the first place?

Also, if there has to be another effect to return a stolen monster to its original controler, then why does the stolen monster return when Snatch Steal is destoried by MST. Snatch Steal has no added effect returning the monster. Even if it is no longer effected by Snatch Steal, if the monster didn't return to its original controler by defualt, and there is no effect to return it, then wouldn't it simply stay stolen, since there would be no effect to direct it to do anything else.

 

[chaosruler]

Well, I'm just trying to help, but looking at Change of Heart as a condition shows why it goes back even if the monster goes face-down. As for a monster equipped with Snatch Steal being flipped face-down and staying with the current controller (or thief, Snatch Steal, thief, haha, joke ), when the monster is flipped face-down, there is no game mechanic that allows face-down monsters to be "tagged" for control, if they were affected by continuous effects. As for Strike Ninja, it leaves the field, that's (IMO) the same as if you use Compulsory Evacuation Device on your (ownership) monster that's on your opponent's side, it goes to the owner's hand, not the controller's. Also, since Strike Ninja is still face-up, albeit Removed From Play, you can still determine who the original owner is, unlike using Book of Moon, Tsukuyomi, or a "ignition flip" effect (or hibernate, if you like that better )

hope I helped, lol

-chaosruler

 

[John Danker]

The removed from play, coming back to the side of the field it was removed from, and then immediately back to the owner is explained by the fact that it was removed from play....which resets all effects.

 

[Digital Jedi]

LOL Nice try, Tony. But I'm afraid your misinterpreting things, again. The control of a monster is not a matter of perspective as is the left side of my body. My left side of my body may seem like your right if were standing face to face but an individual's left is constant and never changes. My left is always my left. Your left is always your left. Regardless of perspective.

You keep suggesting that Change of Heart and Mind Control do not have effects that end the turn. Tony, the card effect is the text written on the card. What are you talking about, my friend? Your arguing that the effect on the card is not the effect on the card. Your saying the card effect just runs out and "until the End Phase" is written in the cards effect but not part of the effect? Huh?

I have said this several times and you continue to ignore it, but I'll state it once more for emphasis: Control issues are reset when a monster leaves the field. There is no such thing as "control" outside of the field. If removed from play any effect returning a card from play will have to return it to the owners side of the field (unless the effect specified otherwise.) This applies to all cards not just monsters.

If returned to the deck, it returns to the owner's deck.

If returned to the hand, it returns to the owner's hand.

If sent to the Graveyard, it goes to the owner's Graveyard.

If returned from the removed from play area, it will return to it's owner.

None of this has ANYTHING to do with a monster changing control on the field.

If control was an issue outside of the field then my opponent could not use Monster Reborn or Autonomous Action Unit on my Mataza the Zapper.

Another thing you also seem to be ignoring that I have repeatedly stated is the fact that Snatch Steal is an equip card. The monster only changes control because he is equipped with a card that brings him to the other side of the field. It's not creating a "lingering" effect like Mind Control or Change of Heart, it's not an effect that hangs around the field and applies later in the turn even though the spell card is now in the Graveyard. It's a continuous effect that either does or doesn't apply. Without the equip or the effect of the equip you never have control. This is true of all equip cards and your typical control changing cards do not apply to this effect.

All that said (again), flipping the equipped monster face-down makes his last controller a moot point. Control remains with the opponent. This is a just the mechanics of the game and every other situation you brought up has been a unique set of curcumstances with effects that modify this mechanic. This is of course how the game works, as all cards effects are simply modifiers of existing mechanics.

 

[Tonylaudat]

I am arguing that "Until end of turn" is not an effect in and of an effect, but rather a duration of an existing effect. Why can't the effect of Change of Heart simply expire at the end of the turn?

Are you arguing that "Until end of Turn", should really be interputed as "Change of Heart/Mind Contorl returns the targeted monster to its original controler at the End Phase of this turn?

I know that control issues are reset when a monster leaves the field, I was just wondering why said monster doesn't simply return to its controler in a one step process, rather than coming back into play on the side of the field that it was on, and then returning to its original contoler (which is a two step process). I was wondering this, since the contol of the monster was reset, it would seem to make more sense to have it retun in play on its original contoler's side of the field.

Finally, I brought up MST Vs Snatch Steal to illustrate a point. That point is that since the stolen monster is returned when Snatch Steal is destoried by MST despite the fact that there is no effect telling to to return to its original contoler (only the loss of Snatch Steal's effect), then there are cases (at lesat one) in which monster can switch sides of the field without an effect directing it to do so. If this is the case then, why can't the phrase "Until end of Turn" be seen as simply a duration, rather than an independent effect that turns the card off?

 

[Digital Jedi]

I am arguing that "Until end of turn" is not an effect in and of an effect, but rather a duration of an existing effect. Why can't the effect of Change of Heart simply expire at the end of the turn?

Because it's written on the card. "!?"

Are you arguing that "Until end of Turn", should really be interputed as "Change of Heart/Mind Contorl returns the targeted monster to its original controler at the End Phase of this turn?

Um, yes. Is that really up for debate?

I know that control issues are reset when a monster leaves the field, I was just wondering why said monster doesn't simply return to its controler in a one step process, rather than coming back into play on the side of the field that it was on, and then returning to its original contoler (which is a two step process). I was wondering this, since the contol of the monster was reset, it would seem to make more sense to have it retun in play on its original contoler's side of the field.

Your thinking of the ruling for Interdimensional Matter Transporter, and that is a unique case. I have always suspected that this is yet another card that does something slightly different from what its text actually says. The ruling simply lets you know that monsters removed from play, with Interdimensional Matter Transporter specifically, return to same side of the field they were removed from, but since control has been reset it goes right back to it's owner. This isn't going to be the case with a monster effect like Strike Ninja.

You'll also note that Interdimensional Matter Transporter is yet another effect that says "until the End Phase of the turn" Do you believe that this effect also just times out?

Finally, I brought up MST Vs Snatch Steal to illustrate a point. That point is that since the stolen monster is returned when Snatch Steal is destoried by MST despite the fact that there is no effect telling to to return to its original contoler (only the loss of Snatch Steal's effect), then there are cases (at lesat one) in which monster can switch sides of the field without an effect directing it to do so. If this is the case then, why can't the phrase "Until end of Turn" be seen as simply a duration, rather than an independent effect that turns the card off?

Becasue it is an equip. Because you only had control of the monster due to Snatch Steal's continuous effect. "Take control of a monster on your opponent's side of the field that is equipped with this card." Snatch Steal has to be equipped to maintain control. Without it you don't have control. No effect is sending it back, but an effect failed to keep control of it. Incidently, Creature Swap doesn't say anything about lasting until the end of the turn nor is it continuous yet, strangely enough, the effect doesn't "time out."

Tony, if control changer effects only "time out" for a card effect that specificaly says "until the end of the turn" (Change of Heart, Mind Control) and but does not "time out" for a card effect that doesn't (Creature Swap) then how could that possibly mean they aren't returing due to effect?

 

[chaosruler]

Are you arguing that "Until end of Turn", should really be interputed as "Change of Heart/Mind Contorl returns the targeted monster to its original controler at the End Phase of this turn?

Hey, guys, Change of Heart sets a condition on the monster to return, but also continues to affect the monster throughout the turn, as seen when a f/d Horus the Black Flame Dragon LV 6 is Change of Heart-ed and flipped face-up. It immediately returns to its owner.

Wow, now I'm confused.... ^_^

-chaosruler