Zaborg

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sort by date Sort by votes
This is emphatically false. Zaborg has a targetting effect. No card with a targetting effect can EVER change its target after it has been chosen unless some other card specifically orders it (such as Collected Power). Zaborg does have to select a monster to destroy once he is summoned, and if there are no other monsters on the field when he is summoned, he must destroy himself. However, that does NOT mean he will destroy himself just because there's nothing else on the field at resolution.

When Zaborg is summoned, his effect activates immediately. Since it is mandatory and the summoning player has priority, there's no way for it to not be the first thing on the chain after the summon. At activation, you must select a target for his effect. If said target is not on the field at resolution, for example, if it had been Compulsory Evacuation Device'd, then Zaborg will simply resolve without effect. He will not and can not change targets.

:edit :huh Since when?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jason_C said:
This is emphatically false. Zaborg has a targetting effect. No card with a targetting effect can EVER change its target after it has been chosen unless some other card specifically orders it (such as Collected Power).
Click to expand...
While you're correct, you did not have to be so rude about it. I thought I could be rude...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Jason_C said:
The word "emphatically" does not mean "obviously"; it means "with emphasis".
Click to expand...
How about answering it with less "drama", and simply saying that Zaborg is a targeting effect, and when the target is no longer on the field, the effect disappears and Zaborg does not destroy anything.

Answers the question, and causes less conflicts.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
masterwoo0 said:
How about answering it with less "drama", and simply saying that Zaborg is a targeting effect, and when the target is no longer on the field, the effect disappears and Zaborg does not destroy anything.

Answers the question, and causes less conflicts.
Click to expand...

I agree...answer the question without using terms like emphatically, obviously or other demeaning terms. You might as well just have said I strongly disagree or my god, how wrong can you be? Any of the above puts the person in a situation where they feel intimidated to simply ask questions on effects and rulings. KISS (keep it simple, stupid) comes to mind but I wouldn't want to offend anyone. Get the idea? (kinda makes you feel insulted but I emphatically stress that it was not the intention of this post.)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
.answer the question without using terms like emphatically, obviously or other demeaning terms
Click to expand...
"Emphatically" is not a demeaning term. It is an enforcing term. It is a term often used to dispel rumors, with the intention of making it clear that the rumor is not just questionable but rather established as false.
You might as well just have said I strongly disagree or my god, how wrong can you be?
Click to expand...
Actually, those two are unrelated to each other. There's nothing wrong with "I strongly disagree" as it is simply a statement of one's own opinion. On the contrary, "My God, how wrong can you be?" implies malevolent feelings towards a person for what they have said.
Any of the above puts the person in a situation where they feel intimidated to simply ask questions on effects and rulings.
Click to expand...
Wait, are you saying people feel intimidated to ask questions simply because they might get told they're wrong?

I get told I'm wrong lots of times. As long as someone can back it up with reasoning, I'm just fine with that. I don't see why anyone else should be offended by being told they are wrong.
(kinda makes you feel insulted but I emphatically stress that it was not the intention of this post.)
Click to expand...
Actually, ironically, I did NOT feel insulted until this last sentence. The rest of your post was calm. The last sentence implies mocking and general distaste for my stance on an issue. That's points off for bad form in an argument.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I know im not an authority around here or anything, but I feel I must just say this: why must all recent threads deflect from the original question(s) and end up in a meaningless (IMHO) discussions, mostly of how things get interpreted or/and who's right or wrong (without any real issues involved)?

I personally feel this such things help improve nothing and help noone.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
...because it seems that the people in here is too sensitive, Zaborg selects it´s target when it is "Tribute Summon" and if the selected target leaves the field before Zaborg´s effect resolves Zaborg´s effect disappear...

Asked and Answered...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I would sooo lock this thread, if I still had moderating powers here. :D

The question's been answered, so there's really no need to drag this on any longer.

Also, Jason_C was being rude? Hardly. Stern? Yes. Harsh? Perhaps. But certainly not rude. It looked, to me anyway, like he was merely trying to get his point across very clearly.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I should note that while on many other boards they lock their threads as soon as the question is answered, we don't believe in doing so here.

What we've found is that when there is mature, genuinely helpful, and thoughtful individuals viewing the thread, tangents from it lead to the exploriation of other rules and mechanics. In the COG Yugioh Rules Questions area we don't look at a thread as, "Question answered, thread over" which is why a good many of those who frequent here have passed higher level judge tests, they explore further and dig deeper.

I will agree though that it appears this thread is making no positive forward progress and it's usefulness weather it regards the original question or otherwise has lapsed.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top