Dimension Wall

[John Danker]

The question came up on another board of weather Dimension Wall could be activated in response to an attack on a f/d monster. One post said that, "No, it cannot since you cannot activate a card/effect if it will not do anything."

There is a ruling with Dimension Wall that states....

If your opponent already activated "Waboku" this turn, then they cannot take battle damage, so you cannot activate "Dimension Wall". However, you can chain "Dimension Wall" to "Waboku" if the timing is appropriate

Now I understand this ruling since it's already been established that no battle damage will be taken this turn. My question arrises though from the point of, until the damage step is reached we never know for certain if battle damage will be taken. We only know that at the declaration of attack there is potential for battle damage to be take (in the case of knowing the attacking and monsters atk and if the defenders monster is in atk position or if there is an attacking monster with piercing battle damage effect)

This thought pattern of not being able to activate Dimension Wall in response to an attack on a f/d monster seems fishy to me....am I off base here?

*EDIT* Just got back from SJC St. Louis and I'm bleery eyed and can't reason right now.

 

[LordLight2]

Doesn't Dimension Wall redirect the damage a player would receive from an attack, back to the other player? It seems to me, that ANY damage, regardless of the position of the attacked monster, would be redirected.

 

[John Danker]

Doesn't Dimension Wall redirect the damage a player would receive from an attack, back to the other player? It seems to me, that ANY damage, regardless of the position of the attacked monster, would be redirected.

Well you're correct in part, not ANY damage, just battle damage, more specifically battle damage that the player WOULD have recieved (there is another thread addressing this as with the scenario of an attacking Amazoness Swords Woman, battle damage can only be redirected once as it's still battle damage but not battle damage the defending player WOULD have suffered)

Really though that's not the point of my original post.

 

[skey23]

Are there any Traps or Quick Plays that can give the attacking monster Piercing or Trample? If not, then I'd say the ONLY way you'd be able to activate "Dimension Wall" in your given scenario would be if the monster attacking had Piercing or Trample.

 

[LordLight2]

Well you're correct in part, not ANY damage, just battle damage, more specifically battle damage that the player WOULD have recieved (there is another thread addressing this as with the scenario of an attacking Amazoness Swords Woman, battle damage can only be redirected once as it's still battle damage but not battle damage the defending player WOULD have suffered)

Yeah I meant, ANY BATTLE DAMAGE, not Any damage. What can I say? I'm at work so my mind is turning to mush.

I think I misread the previous post. If I understand Dimension Wall correctly, it sets up a "state" that if any battle damage occurs from that attack, it is then transferred to the opponent. That is why it works with Lily.

So to me, it can be activated at any time the opponent declares an attack as you don't know what will happen. If nothing happens, then Dimension Wall's state should just vanish.

 

[Oceanus]

Personally, I believe that you should be able to activate it in clear and present danger such as a trample monster, or "Final Attack Orders" is on the field.

Situations involving cards that don't do anything but will when the chain continues (Kindof like activating "Book of Taiyou" and chaining "Book of Moon" when only 1 monster is on the field) have never been supported. So I assume that situations where activating a card literally has no purpose as there are no available targets or the situation is incorrect with the text and such, applies also to this situation.

Skey23, "Meteorain" does come to mind =P.

 

[John Danker]

So skey you're saying that in order for the conditions to be correct to activate Dimension Wall, at the time of the declaration of attack, there must be potential conditions set up for there to creat battle damage?

If my understanding of your thought pattern is correct the following scenarios would mandate acceptable conditions for Dimension Wall to be activated.....

(1) TP w/ 1900 atk and non-TP w/ atk position 1800 atk

(2) TP w/ Spear Dragon attacking

(3) TP w/ monster attacking & Final Attack Orders resolved to the field and non-TP w/ f/d def. positon monster.


However these would not be valid conditions...

(4) TP attacking w/ Final Attack Orders f/d and non TP w/ f/d monster.

(5) TP w/ 1900 atk monster attacking non-TP atk position 1800 atk monster and non-TP has Book Of Moon f/d.

Do you see the problem between scenarios #2 and #5?
In both of those scenarios the non-turn player has potential to suffer battle damage, that is to say it's visable potential. There is also potential in both scenarios though to NOT take battle damage (what if in scenario #2 the f/d monster is Giant Soldier of Stone? and what if in scenario #5 the non-turn player activates Book Of Moon as a second response?

The point I'm getting at is that I don't see POTENTIAL visable and apparent battle damage as a viable condition.

 

[Digital Jedi]

The thing is, a face-down monster and previously activated Waboku do not equate to the same thing. With Wab being activated and successfully resolving, there is no chance that your taking Battle Damage this turn regardless of the circumstances. It's a done deal.

When attacking a face-down monster, you have no way of knowing what's going to happen. Modifiers could put that monster into attack position, or a chained effect from either player could give the attacking monster trample. Any number of card effects could alter the situation. It's not a done deal, it's uncertain and either player could very easily strategize around it.

 

[LordLight2]

Dimension Wall states:

You can only activate this card when your opponent declares an attack with a monster. Instead of you, your opponent takes the Battle Damage you would have taken as a result of this battle.

According to the card, the only thing you need to activate this card is for your opponent to declare an attack. Does it matter if it's in attack or defense position? If nothing gets through, then you wasted a card. But what if something does? ie. Meteorain.

 

[John Danker]

Personally that's my thought pattern on the card as well LordLight2. The condition to activate the card is clearly stated.

 

[DarkLogicianOfCaos]

The thing is, a face-down monster and previously activated Waboku do not equate to the same thing. With Wab being activated and successfully resolving, there is no chance that your taking Battle Damage this turn regardless of the circumstances. It's a done deal.

Oops! I think you got it backwards there, DJ. It is not the defense position player (the one receiving the attack) that has activated Waboku in the situation addressed in the rules, it is the Attacker who has activated Waboku. Therefore, the rulings, I believe, are saying, "If the attacker has activated Waboku prior to attacking, you cannot activate Dimension Wall, because to do so would be knowingly attempting to send Battle Damage to a place that will reduce it to zero (a place that cannot receive it) and Konami doesn't want to do that."

Seeing as you (Attackee) can Chain it to (Attacker's) Waboku, it suggests that since, at the time of activation, there is no effect preventing Battle Damage to be redirected/applied to the attacker, it is okay to waste the card, legitimately. Therefore, I can see where you can activate it even if YOU will not receive Battle Damage (do to defense position and non- trample attacking Card), as long as your opponent CAN receive the effect (Battle Damage), SHOULD you receive Damage--that is the real issue with the Waboku, that the Attacker is not a legitimate option for redirect.

However, while that makes sense, I think it would be messed up to be able to play it like that. I'm only saying, that the Waboku ruling doesn't really help clarify the argument.

 

[skey23]

I can certainly see your poing John. And I believe you have convinced me to change my thought pattern about this card. (you too LordLight) I will now agree that pretty much the only time you would not be able to activate the card would be when Battle Damage was 100% guaranteed to not occur, as in the resolved "Waboku" case. Other than that, due to the number of other uncertain variables, it's fair game.

 

[DarkLogicianOfCaos]

<looks around> oh, no props for me?
...fine...... <goes off to sulk>

 

[Fury]

Rulings can change when new cards are released. If there would be a monster that wouldnt block the overflow damage even if in defense mode then you wouldnt know it before flipping it face-up. (By the way Spirit Reaper could have had such a penalty instead of targeting vulnerability, but that's another story.)

So even if right now you could make the right guess most of the time, I dont think that should be the way to go.

---
EDIT: By the way that Waboku ruling seems erroneous to me. The first ruling under Waboku says:

"Waboku" makes Battle Damage dealt by your opponent's monsters to your monsters and to your Life Points become zero.

The damage redirected by Dimension Wall doesnt come from the defending player's monster but from the attacking player's monsters.
The original text reflected this more (I still remember Edo's article where he explaind it).
The update of the text to make its use easier changed the way the card should work, but the rulings didnt change.

You take no Battle Damage this turn.

This here is inconsistent with the original text because they thought that all battle damage to a player must come from the opponent which is false. In DJ's errata thread this was a main mistake, too. Ancient Lamp for example forces your own monsters to battle and the battle damage is taken by you but still doesnt come from your opponent. Your weaker monster also would be destroyed by battle. Waboku only protects you from your opponent's monsters but not your own.

"Waboku" applies to ALL of the monsters on that player's side of the field for the entire turn.

The new text changed the way the card works - like the wrongly updated SORL.

Long story short: there are rulings for the old text and there are rulings for the new text and they contradict each other.
(Personally I'm voting for the original functionality.)

Maybe some more creditable than me could tell this to UDE too, they maybe dont know this (maybe also dont care, however).

 

[Digital Jedi]

Waboku's errata didn't change the way the card works at all and neither does it contradict precious rulings.

EDIT: By the way that Waboku ruling seems erroneous to me. The first ruling under Waboku says:

"Waboku" makes Battle Damage dealt by your opponent's monsters to your monsters and to your Life Points become zero.

That ruling can only be erroneous, if it weren't true. But Waboku does indeed make Battle Damage inflicted by your opponent's monsters zero. The ruling isn't excluding other forms of Battle Damage just because it doesn't include them. It's just referring to the most common form.

You take no Battle Damage this turn.

This here is inconsistent with the original text because they thought that all battle damage to a player must come from the opponent which is false. In Djs errata thread this was a main mistake, too. Ancient Lamp for example forces your own monsters to battle and the battle damage is taken by you but still doesnt come from your opponent. Your weaker monster also would be destroyed by battle. Waboku only protects you from your opponent's monsters but not your own.

In the old days, Battle Damage could only be inflicted one way. But that hasn't always been true and Waboku always protected you from redirected Battle Damage. The current errata was to more accurately reflect Waboku's function. Again, the old ruling still stands, as does the current errata. They in no way contradict each other. Waboku's intention was to reduce Battle Damage you received to 0. The manner in which you receive it is irrelevant to it's function.

Oops! I think you got it backwards there, DJ. It is not the defense position player (the one receiving the attack) that has activated Waboku in the situation addressed in the rules, it is the Attacker who has activated Waboku. Therefore, the rulings, I believe, are saying, "If the attacker has activated Waboku prior to attacking, you cannot activate Dimension Wall, because to do so would be knowingly attempting to send Battle Damage to a place that will reduce it to zero (a place that cannot receive it) and Konami doesn't want to do that."

Seeing as you (Attackee) can Chain it to (Attacker's) Waboku, it suggests that since, at the time of activation, there is no effect preventing Battle Damage to be redirected/applied to the attacker, it is okay to waste the card, legitimately. Therefore, I can see where you can activate it even if YOU will not receive Battle Damage (do to defense position and non- trample attacking Card), as long as your opponent CAN receive the effect (Battle Damage), SHOULD you receive Damage--that is the real issue with the Waboku, that the Attacker is not a legitimate option for redirect.

However, while that makes sense, I think it would be messed up to be able to play it like that. I'm only saying, that the Waboku ruling doesn't really help clarify the argument.

Nope, I'm pretty clear on the ruling. And I believe it does some clarifying:

If your opponent already activated "Waboku" this turn, then they cannot take battle damage, so you cannot activate "Dimension Wall". However, you can chain "Dimension Wall" to "Waboku" if the timing is appropriate.​

This is essentially reinforcing what I stated before. A fully resolved Waboku is unstoppable. There is no way to erase lingering effects from the field, so activating Dimension Wall is akin to activating a card that is going to do nothing. This also supports the distaste Konami has for treating 0 as an actual number that can be inflicted. It's considered nothing.

Conversely, an unresolved Waboku can still have many things happen to it. It's not a done deal yet, and any thing added to the chain could affect its successful resolution. But because there's no way to know, it can't be said for certain that Dimension Wall will do nothing, and it can't be restricted from activation if the possibility still exists.

Attacking a face-down is not a sure fire guarantee that no Battle Damage will be inflicted. There should be no restriction on it's activation.

 

[exiledforcefreak]

Are there any Traps or Quick Plays that can give the attacking monster Piercing or Trample? If not, then I'd say the ONLY way you'd be able to activate "Dimension Wall" in your given scenario would be if the monster attacking had Piercing or Trample.

Even in a senario where the attacking monster is an airknight parshath or something we still don't know if it will inflict damage.



This arguement to me seems stupid. The arguement is that you can't activate dimension wall when a monster attacks a face down monster because you don't know if damage will be inflicted or not, right?

Has it occured to anyone that this is ALWAYS the case no matter WHAT position the defending monster is?

for example:
I attack with airknight parshath into a defense position d.d. warrior lady; at this point i will be inflicting damage and my opponent could use dimension wall if they wanted to. In the damage step my opponent uses the reliable guardian to raise his d.d. warrior lady's defense to 2300, above that of airknight's attack... and my monster DOESN'T inflict damage.

You would similarly have a monster in attack position and use shrink/rush recklessly/mirror wall. The point remains that no matter what the situation you never know if the attacking monster will inflict battle damage or not.

In conclusion, it seems to me that you should in fact be allowed to activate dimension wall when someone attacks your face down monster.

 

[John Danker]

That point has been made and agreed on previously in the thread yes.

 

[Fury]

This is the old text of Waboku (SDJ-046):

Any damage inflicted by an opponent's monster is decreased to 0 during the turn this card is activated.

And the current ruling:

"Waboku" makes Battle Damage dealt by your opponent's monsters to your monsters and to your Life Points become zero.

We see that they match.

Now the new text:

You take no Battle Damage this turn. Your monsters cannot be destroyed as a result of battle this turn.

Lets examine the ruling posted above - first about the monsters:
So the opponent's monsters dont inflict damage. But you say that's not the only thing that happens. Since your monsters wont destroy themselves either does this mean they dont inflict damage either? That would mean they cant destroy opposing monsters or deal damage to the opponent either, which is clearly not the case. So why are they not destroying themselves? Maybe because the new text states that they simply wont be destroyed in battle. But hey! Doesnt that mean that they wouldnt be destroyed by opposing monsters either? Yes it does. So then why we have a ruling that has nothing to do with how the card works? My monsters not taking battle damage is not the same as my opponent's monsters not inflicting damage, is it?

Exactly the same way: me not taking battle damage is not the same as opposing monsters not inflicting battle damage.

So the conclusion is: the card works now differently with the new text, it doesnt work as the ruling describes. So either the old ruling needs to be removed, or the text needs to be changed.

---
EDIT: Oh, and if someone is wondering, this is still on-topic. The first post was also about Dimension Wall vs. Waboku.

 

[Tkwiget]

The question came up on another board of weather Dimension Wall could be activated in response to an attack on a f/d monster. One post said that, "No, it cannot since you cannot activate a card/effect if it will not do anything."

There is a ruling with Dimension Wall that states....

If your opponent already activated "Waboku" this turn, then they cannot take battle damage, so you cannot activate "Dimension Wall". However, you can chain "Dimension Wall" to "Waboku" if the timing is appropriate

Now I understand this ruling since it's already been established that no battle damage will be taken this turn. My question arrises though from the point of, until the damage step is reached we never know for certain if battle damage will be taken. We only know that at the declaration of attack there is potential for battle damage to be take (in the case of knowing the attacking and monsters atk and if the defenders monster is in atk position or if there is an attacking monster with piercing battle damage effect)

This thought pattern of not being able to activate Dimension Wall in response to an attack on a f/d monster seems fishy to me....am I off base here?

*EDIT* Just got back from SJC St. Louis and I'm bleery eyed and can't reason right now.

Dimension Wall reads:
You can only activate this card when your opponent declares an attack with a monster. Instead of you, your opponent takes the Battle Damage you would have taken as a result of this battle.

There is no reason why you can't activate Dimension Wall in response to your opponent declaring one of your face down monsters as an attack target. Dimension Wall's effect merely is applied to whatever Battle Damage you take regardless if any would be applied or not. That's how I understand what the Dimension Wall v.s. Waboku ruling is saying. Them attacking your face down monster doesn't change the timing in which you can activate Dimension Wall does it? Answer: No.

<shrugs> That's just merely how I see it in my mind and my mind isn't normal. XD

 

[John Danker]

That's the concensus of what the rest of us came to as well after reasoning it out.