Who gets priority?

D

Dr Sin

New Member
Does anyone have a link of the judge's list stating that the opponent of the controller of the last effect resolved (or activated? even if resolved with no effect?) in the last chain "gains" priority to start a new chain? (I'm trying to convince a person that it's kind of official)

And to clarify, let's see if I get it:

TP activates Smashing Ground. NTP responds with Solemn Judgement. TP chains Seven Tools. Chains resolves as normal.
Now, at this point, NTP has priority to start a new chain?
For example, remove Strike Ninja, activate Waboku etc...

Thanks very much in advance
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
BenjaminMS said:
Er..? No. After a chain finally resolved, the priority goes back to the TP.
Click to expand...
No, the opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve in the chain is the one that gets Priority.

The only exception to this is when that chain ends in a monster being Summoned to the field. The Turn Player retains Priority at that point. It doesn't matter whose monster it is or who summoned it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
No, the opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve in the chain is the one that gets Priority.

The only exception to this is when that chain ends in a monster being Summoned to the field. The Turn Player retains Priority at that point. It doesn't matter whose monster it is or who summoned it.
Click to expand...

*starts to understand less and less of priority now*
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey is everywhere :D, I was just to say that, though that is what is known to be followed, we are still waiting for complete confirmation in such a case. As well as many other priority issues.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Oh, no! You are kidding BenjaminMS.

I believed that after a chain resolves, no matter who had the last effect resolved, priority would always returns to TP.

I asked in this forum and saw so many threads about this matter, and many people says "the opponent of the controller of the last effect resolved in the last chain gains priority to start a new chain".

I accepted: "all right, this is oficial", and then you come and tells me I was correctly first? This is not fair, my brain cells is being destructed...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So I guess the basic response is, anytime a monster is summoned to the field, the controller gains priority.

So, that would mean that if I activated Ojama Trio, and my opponent does not chain or otherwise respond, I would retain priority because it was my effect that was the last to resolve, and it caused a monster to be summoned, even though it wasnt to my side??
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
masterwoo0 said:
So I guess the basic response is, anytime a monster is summoned to the field, the controller gains priority.

So, that would mean that if I activated Ojama Trio, and my opponent does not chain or otherwise respond, I would retain priority because it was my effect that was the last to resolve, and it caused a monster to be summoned, even though it wasnt to my side??
Click to expand...
Change the word 'controller' to Turn Player and you've got it!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dr Sin said:
Oh, no! You are kidding BenjaminMS.

I believed that after a chain resolves, no matter who had the last effect resolved, priority would always returns to TP.

I asked in this forum and saw so many threads about this matter, and many people says "the opponent of the controller of the last effect resolved in the last chain gains priority to start a new chain".

I accepted: "all right, this is oficial", and then you come and tells me I was correctly first? This is not fair, my brain cells is being destructed...
Click to expand...

As far as I can see, it seems that everyone except for me thinks it goes to the opponent of the last resolving player... :(
:confused_
It seemed logic to me that the TP would get priority... but now I don't know it anymore :( Oh well...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dr Sin said:
all right Skey and slither, but does this state exists in the judge list? Or not?

Thanks and sorry to be bothering you.
Click to expand...

Not that I know of, this has just been followed by concept, and that is was has been accepted by concense.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay... Now we have a problem... If I change it to "Turn Player", if my opponent summons a monster with Call of the Haunted, and I am the turn player, then I gain priority, but if I activate Ojama Trio, and summon 3 ojama tokens to my opponents side, and he now becomes the controller of the tokens, I STILL retain priority as the turn player??
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
masterwoo0 said:
Okay... Now we have a problem... If I change it to "Turn Player", if my opponent summons a monster with Call of the Haunted, and I am the turn player, then I gain priority, but if I activate Ojama Trio, and summon 3 ojama tokens to my opponents side, and he now becomes the controller of the tokens, I STILL retain priority as the turn player??
Click to expand...

*puzzled* I think that your opponent gets priority, because it were your actions that summoned the 3 tokens.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
BenjaminMS said:
As far as I can see, it seems that everyone except for me thinks it goes to the opponent of the last resolving player... :(
:confused_
It seemed logic to me that the TP would get priority... but now I don't know it anymore :( Oh well...
Click to expand...

A simple way of looking at it is, if I as the turn player activate Reinforcements of the Army, and my opponent does not wish to respond, after RotA has succesfully resolved he would have priority to activate a SP2 or higher (if possible).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
masterwoo0 said:
Okay... Now we have a problem... If I change it to "Turn Player", if my opponent summons a monster with Call of the Haunted, and I am the turn player, then I gain priority, but if I activate Ojama Trio, and summon 3 ojama tokens to my opponents side, and he now becomes the controller of the tokens, I STILL retain priority as the turn player??
Click to expand...

I wouldn't see it like my opponent is summoning regarless of anything turn player is summoning the tokens which in due case he would still retain priority, sort of like summoning Lava Golem.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
At this point in time you'll not find an official link to you question, we're hoping (and a number of us are working hard to...) see something posted officially soon.

For the time being, I'd suggest you as the judge at the tournament you're playing in how they will rule such a scenario as the opinions you'll find (as with here) go a number of ways.

If you wish me to tell you how you'll see it ruled in touraments where a current L3 judges presides I'd be happy to.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Priority is given to the opponent of the player that controls the last effect on a chain block.


That just seems like a load of bullcrap to me. This tells me that a response window is created in direct response to a chain block resolving. Um, honestly this doesn't make any since. The resolution of a chain block isn't an activation point for neither player.

This whole discussion is based off the notion of being in Main Phase 1 or 2 correct? Thus, saying the opponent of the person that controlled the last effect on a chain block is a huge load of bullcrap to me.

Well, that's just more speculation from me. At least to me it's an interesting way of looking at it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
If it starts with the turn player, it should return to the turn player. I dont see how the opponent ever gains priority without the turn player first passing his opportunity to activate an effect after the chain resolves.

Once the resolution is completed. If the turn player does not have any effects they wish to activate, then priority passes to the opponent, and the turn player must now decide if they wish to respond to the opponents event, or pass priority again, at which point the opponent must now either resolve the effect or chain to it.

After the opponents chain link has resolved, it should still go back to the turn player to state that he either has no further effects he wishes to activate, passing to the opponent who either states that they have no effects as well or that they do wish to activate an effect, or they both agree to end the particular phase and move on.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top