The End Of Anubis & Exiled Force

[daleotar]

In the game F.A.Q., in the second paragraph the text about Skill Drain says:

? "Skill Drain" negates the effects of face-up Effect Monsters on the field, but does not negate effects ?that activate in the Graveyard?, such as "Witch of the Black Forest", "Sangan", "Mystic Tomato", "Giant Rat", "Exiled Force", "Sinister Serpent", and "Vampire Lord".

That text says in a clear form that the ?effect? of Exiled Force activates in the graveyard in a very textual form, that which confirmate that as the effect of Exiled Force activates in the graveyard, The End of Anubis negates this effect.

To confirm these text, I say that one thing in many cards is activate the effect, other thing is the cost of effect's activation, and other thing is the activation of the card; if a card have a cost to activate, the player pays first the cost and if the opponent not chain a counter trap, its ?effect? resolves in a correct form, that is to say, first goes the cost and after the activation of the ?effect? of the card, ?that is different that the activation of a card?, that is to say that Exiled Force effect have a cost, and then, if the opponent not chain Divine Wrath, the effect activates normally, and then, at that time, Exiled Force is in the graveyard when the effect of destroy 1 monster on the field is activated.

Please respond me in this forum, because,in tournament many times I have lost because according to the approach of a judge the "effect" of Exiled Force not activates in the graveyard.

Please, is better if an official upperdeck judge responds me, to confirm my question in legal form.

David Tarazona
YU-GI-OH UpperDeck Judge LEVEL 2

Thank you

 

[StRiKe_NiNjA]

Ok... I'm going e-mail the list and challenge the ruling. Any odds on if I'm ignored?

You can "challenge" rulings? I never knew that.

Have maybe another member of the forums who is able to sent this up the Judge's List, or a close friend.

That way, there will be a lesser chance this e-mail would be ignored and is not from the same person.

 

[chaosruler]

10 to 1 you're ignored, j/k

but anyway, I hope they lissen, but prolly not

-chaosruler

 

[Fiendish Envoy]

What exactly is the Kuriboh ruling that Raijinili said was similar to this situation?

 

[densetsu_x]

You can "challenge" rulings? I never knew that.

Have maybe another member of the forums who is able to sent this up the Judge's List, or a close friend.

That way, there will be a lesser chance this e-mail would be ignored and is not from the same person.

A ruling on "Dark Magician of Chaos" was challenged and actually changed on the mailing list because what they had on the Official FAQ was wrong:

"¢ When you Normal Summon or Special Summon "Dark Magician of Chaos", resolve all other effects in the current chain, then "Dark Magician of Chaos"' effect activates in a new chain as Step 1.

But we all know that's not the case since his effect is optional. That rule was made back in the day when they thought that's how DMoC worked and though they amended that rule... they haven't gotten around to updating the FAQ.

"King Tiger Wanghu" is another monster that recently had some rulings changed as they finally classified him as a Trigger Effect and not Continuous.

But essentially, I'm challenging the ruling that "Exiled Force" is a Graveyard Effect:

From the "Skill Drain" entry:
"¢ "Skill Drain" negates the effects of face-up Effect Monsters on the field, but does not negate effects that activate in the Graveyard, such as "Witch of the Black Forest", "Sangan", "Mystic Tomato", "Giant Rat", "Exiled Force", "Sinister Serpent", and "Vampire Lord".

Which of those don't belong?

And I pointed out MANY other situations that use the same wording/scenario as "Exiled Force" to say that if "The End of Anubis" negates one (EF), it would have to negate all of them.

Can I see why Curtis made that statement originally? Yes because of the "Skill Drain" ruling. But is the "Skill Drain" ruling written correctly? Not really no. And since JERP says it's not a Graveyard effect AND they've been updating the rulings to match Konami ("Dark Necrofear" being the biggest difference that was recently changed), I'm hoping they change that last ruling very quickly.

 

[densetsu_x]

What exactly is the Kuriboh ruling that Raijinili said was similar to this situation?

I'm not sure but "Kuriboh"'s effect activates while it is in your hand since again, you can discard it to "removed from play" (if "Banisher of the Light" is on the field) and still reduce battle damage to 0. "Kuriboh"'s effect has no bearing upon the graveyard at all.

 

[StRiKe_NiNjA]

In this case, I am in full support for a ruling change. It doesn't make sense, Exiled Force does not activate in the graveyard.

Good Luck, densetsu_x

I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

 

[densetsu_x]

Well, I'll also be curious to see what our main 2 active L3 Judges have to say about this.

Dlannan, John? What do you guys say? (I know, nothing like being put on the spot).

 

[daivahataka]

I think it should definitely be challenged, no offense to Curtis but it's not the first time he's given out bad info:

If Pinch Hopper were tributed for the effect of Share the Pain would its effect
be usable?



Answer:

In this case yes, because the last thing that has happened is "Pinch Hopper"
being Tributed. (Thanks to "Share the Pain")

---------------------------------------
Curtis Schultz
Official UDE Netrepâ„¢
CurtisSchultz_netrep@Hotmail.com


re: Pinch Hopper 2004-12-15 14:39:00 <Lance Miller>


If you were the one to activate Share the Pain, would not you first tribute your
Pinch Hopper as the cost at activation and then at resolution your opponent would
tribute their monster? In that case wouldn't Pinch Hopper lose the right timing
to activate its effect since the last thing to occur was your opponent's monster
being sent to the graveyard?



Answer:

You are correct. It would lose the timing.

---------------------------------------
Curtis Schultz
Official UDE Netrepâ„¢
CurtisSchultz_netrep@Hotmail.com

(the advantage of reading the daily mails and occasionally re-reading from the start is being able to recall such errors! )
I know the above is not quite as bad as the ruling on Exiled Force but it does show that, like all of us, the man is fallable.
As people can see, at least he is willing to admit when wrong so we should be able to find out once and for all what's the story with Exiled Force clearly activating on the field yet being listed as a graveyard effect for Skill Drain.

 

[FelixChCh]

In the Pinchhopper example where is the problem - I can't see where the trouble lies.

In the first snippet the enquiry is about the effect of Share the Pain, and in the later one it is about the cost of activation. For the cost of activation tribute of Pinchhopper you'd lose the effect of Pinchhopper, but on resolution of the effect of Share the Pain (where you tribute pinchhopper) you would still get the effect of Pinchhopper (as this is the last thing to happen).

I feeling really dim here - help me out, how are these two examples from Monsieur Schultz conflicting?

 

[daivahataka]

In the first part he said that you would get Pinch Hopper's effect, the second part is challenging this and he admits that you wouldn't in fact get to use Pinch Hopper's effect.

 

[FelixChCh]

I think this depends how you read the first snippet: 'tribute for the effect of Share the Pain' I read as my opponent is using Share the Pain, tributes no-matter-what as cost of activation and I tribute PinchHopper in resolving the effect of Share the Pain(hence getting the effect of PinchHopper).

The second snippet I read as me playing Share the Pain and tributing PinchHopper as the cost of activation.

The monster in question is tributed at different times, so different outcomes.

 

[daivahataka]

You're probably right, bit ambiguous as to what the poster of the first part intended though, usually it's a case of them activating the spell card unless they state that their opponent activated it, I've deleted that post as a result.
Once again the advantages of many viewpoints shows.

 

[FelixChCh]

You're probably right, bit ambiguous as to what the poster of the first part intended though, usually it's a case of them activating the spell card unless they state that their opponent activated it, I've deleted that post as a result.
Once again the advantages of many viewpoints shows.

And now all my posts are out of context! :O

 

[daivahataka]

And now all my posts are out of context! :O

Soz, just feel it's better to delete erroneous info before someone gets over excited and starts dispersing it. I'll go on the hunt for other apparent mis-rulings, see if I can find anything of worth.
I do still feel that the Exiled Force Vs. End of Anubis ruling should be challenged though.

 

[DimensionalWarrior]

I'M CONFUSED! Exiled Force shouldn't be a Graveyard Effect...however, if you consider that in order to activate a card you must pay the cost, Exiled Force would be negated by End of Anubis (Exiled Force is in the graveyard when it activates due to the cost). That mean that The End of Anubis would negate ALL cards that tribute themselves to the graveyard in order to activate (like John said...Cannon Soldier would be negated....that does not make any sense)

I don't agree...I hope Densetsu x wouldn't be ignored...Good luck !

 

[chaosruler]

actually, if this holds out to an extreme, then you could chain Ring of Destruction to Tribe-Infecting Virus' effect of calling Fiend while EoA is face-up, and since Tribe is in the Graveyard, Tribe will be negated. Lol, I meant it when I said extreme.

-chaosruler

 

[daivahataka]

Another "funny" ruling case I came across are the rulings on Blowback Dragon, that card's in SERIOUS need of errata if those rulings are all accurate as the card says:

Toss a coin 3 times. If at least 2 of the results are Heads, select 1 card on your opponent's side of the field and destroy it. This effect can only be used once per turn during your Main Phase.

Yet the rulings state:

You select the target of "Blowback Dragon"'s effect when you activate the effect, BEFORE flipping the coins.

This of course makes it targeting and completely ignores the text on the card!
Either it needs errata or this should be up there with Exiled Force's effect somehow magically activating in the Graveyard.

 

[novastar]

The "select" wording is not required to be the very first line of text in an effect.

The problem lies in the fact that Konami wasn't intuitive enough simply use the word "target" instead of making us play this guessing game.

If the effect of Blowback Dragon stated this instead:

"Toss a coin 3 times. If at least 2 of the results are Heads, destroy 1 target card on your opponent's side of the field. This effect can only be used once per turn during your Main Phase."

There would be no misunderstanding at all...

However, under the current templating that Konami uses, Blowback Dragon is consistant with effects like it, and does not need to be errata'd.

for instance Barrel Dragon

"Toss a coin 3 times. If 2 out of 3 results are Heads, destroy 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field. This effect can only be used once per turn during your Main Phase."

Almost identical, and it even leaves out the "select" text.

 

[StRiKe_NiNjA]

"Toss a coin 3 times. If at least 2 of the results are Heads, destroy 1 target card on your opponent's side of the field. This effect can only be used once per turn during your Main Phase."

"destroy 1 target card"

Hehe, I believe there is a grammar mistake.

Since we're making Erratas to Blowback Dragon, I thought should suggest my version.

This effect can only be used once per turn during your Main Phase. Target 1 card on your opponent's side of the field. Toss a coin 3 times. If at least 2 of the results are Heads, destroy that card.

 

[daivahataka]

The "select" wording is not required to be the very first line of text in an effect.

It's the dependence on "If" regarding the selection of a card which makes it seem contrary to the rulings, not the position of the statement within the card's text. It's the word select they need to drop for something else, your suggestion sounded much clearer as to how the card should work.