Banisher of the Light vs. Grave Protector

[Gendo Ikari]

Banisher of the Light
As long as this card remains face-up on the field, any card sent to the Graveyard is removed from play instead.

Grave Protector
As long as this card remains face-up on the field, monsters that are destroyed as a result of battle are returned to the owner's Deck instead of being sent to the Graveyard. The Deck is then shuffled.

Where do monsters destroyed in battle go if both of these cards are face up on the field at the same time? The way I read it, they never hit the graveyard, so they're not removed from play. Is this correct?

 

[miiaah]

The answer is on Netrep website :
"If "Banisher of the Light" and "Grave Protector" are both active, destroyed monsters are removed from play."
I think it's a "Konami said so" rules.

 

[Gendo Ikari]

Konami Said So?

I think I'd rather get an official UDE judgement on this one, but thanks.

 

[DaAmazing1]

That is the Official ruling. Check it out for yourself Grave protector, if your bored you can search for it on ude's site.

 

[masterwoo0]

Grave Protector only stops "Battle" Destroyed monsters from going to the Graveyard.

"Destroyed" Monsters, such as from the effect of Raigeki, Sakuretsu Armor, Blast with Chain, etc... are not destroyed as a result of battle, but by Spell, Trap, or Monster Effect.

The ruling states that when Banisher and Protector are together, "Destroyed" monsters are removed from play.

Monsters destroyed in battle and not by effect would still go back to the Deck per Grave Protectors effect.

Banisher and Protector are both continuous effects that monitor the field for the situation that activates their specific effect.

 

[DaAmazing1]

Masterwood is right I believe.

 

[masterwoo0]

OFFICIAL RULING:
If "Banisher of the Light" and "Grave Protector" are both active, destroyed monsters are removed from play.

It doesn't matter how the monster is "destroyed", whether from battle or any other reason the monster is removed from play. If the case were monstered "destroyed" by battle the ruling would be different. Besides both effects get triggered on the same event.

It does matter.

Thats why monsters like Lesser Fiend and Dark Magician of Chaos cannot remove from play the monsters they "Destroy in Battle" if Grave Protector is active.

Care to explaing that one...?

 

[novastar]

Besides both effects get triggered on the same event.

Actually thats not accurate.

Bottom Line: Grave Protector's effect will replace the event of a monster being sent to the Graveyard as a result of battle. That event never takes place while Banisher of the Light is face-up, thus Grave Protector's effect never becomes relevent.

This is not a timestamp issue, but an example of one continuous effect always pre-empting another.

 

[DaAmazing1]

So masterwood is right.

I figure this:

If a monster is destroyed in battle then Grave Protector's effect triggers before Banisher's effect gets a chance to trigger. Now in any other case of a monster being destroyed Grave Protector's effect never triggers and Banisher's effect would trigger.

Sorry about my previous statement, I should have read Banisher's effect instead of trying to remember it off the bat.

 

[novastar]

It does matter.

Thats why monsters like Lesser Fiend and Dark Magician of Chaos cannot remove from play the monsters they "Destroy in Battle" if Grave Protector is active.

Care to explaing that one...?

Explain it...Konami said so...

There is absolutely no explaination of this, since they are all the same effect. Continuous Effects that replace the same event based on the same condition being met. These effects are also never "Activated" they are continuous.

Banisher of the Light however is different, as it will pre-empt all of these.

 

[masterwoo0]

This is not an example of "one over the other". Both effects can be activated differently.

Grave Protector will send back cards that have been in battle and destroyed.

Grave Protector WILL NOT send back monsters that have been destroyed by flip effects or effects like "Old Vindictive", "Man-Eater Bug", "Zaborg the Thunder Monarch".

Banisher of the Light takes ALL cards that are, or will be sent to the Graveyard, and removes them from play.

Since the potential of both cards having a conflict on the definition of "destroyed" can happen, Grave Protector says,

"Look Banisher, you can have any monster card that gets destroyed by effect, like Mystic Swordsman LV2/4/6 attacking a face-down monster, and I'll take the ones that get destroyed in battle! How's that?"


"Activated" is only a term use to describe the effect that will occur. You cant have an "effect" if there is no occurence for "activation".

 

[novastar]

A monster that is destroyed by this monster as a result of battle is removed from play instead of going to the Graveyard.

monsters destroyed by this monster in battle are removed from play instead of being sent to the Graveyard.

monsters that are destroyed as a result of battle are returned to the owner's Deck instead of being sent to the Graveyard.

All 3 of these are the exact same effect, the ruling is Konami's way of deciding which one they want to take precendence. Probably because Grave Protector applies to all monsters destroyed in battle not just ones destroyed by it, but its a best guess at best.

Realistically it should be determined by timestamp, but of course this is yugioh...

One thing that remains true however, is that Banisher of the Light will take precedence over all three or any other like them...thus suggesting that either Konami decided that Banisher pre-emts them or a simple order has been predetermined in the event any of them are active at the same time and "just because".

 

[novastar]

"Activated" is only a term use to describe the effect that will occur. You cant have an "effect" if there is no occurence for "activation".

"Activation" indicates a Chain Link, Continuous Effects are NEVER "Activated"

 

[spotsknight]

MasterWoo0,

Normally you are right on target for most rulings but this time you are mistaken. Your logic is sound but it is not what the ruling states. The ruling is that
"If "Banisher of the Light" and "Grave Protector" are both active, destroyed monsters are removed from play."

This does not state unless it is destroyed in battle. Destroyed in battle is still destroyed. Therefore the above ruling applies and it is removed from play due to Banisher of Light's effect.

Nova gave a logical possible explanation for why this is the case but sadly unless Kevin gives us the logic that Konami used (or issues an updated ruling), we can only speculate and follow the ruling given.

Spot's Knight

 

[masterwoo0]

Grave Protector doesnt need to destroy monsters to get the effect. That's why its name is "Protector" and carries a "0" attack with "2000" defense.

It's job is to KEEP monsters out of the Graveyard that are destroyed in battle.

No timestamp is needed here. Its just a simple matter of did I die in battle, yes or no. If no, remove from play, do not pass go.


This isnt a case to see who can try to discredit one viewpoint over another. As a Judge, whatever ruling we decide at a Tourney is going to be law and until its decided otherwise by more accurate ruling from UDE, it will be washed, rinsed, and repeated.

I feel a lot more comfortable with the explanation I have given than "Konami said so", especially since I wouldnt even be able to quote for sure what they are saying "So" about.

But again, no one is above reproach. I could be wrong, but I think I am more correct than incorrect and would be able to accept that I am not as long as it comes with a better explanation than mine and "Cause Konami said so!"

 

[novastar]

The Banisher vs. Grave Protector (or Lesser Fiend or DMoC) can be explained...as i did, and no Timestamp resolution is needed.

The Grave Protector vs. DMoC/Lesser Fiend is most definately a "Konami said so"... as a Timestamp resolution is the only proper way of working it out, but Konami decided (maybe for the kids) that a set resolution order was best for them.

 

[masterwoo0]

For the sake of "Discussion", anything is possible.

For the sake of logic, "Konami said so" just doesnt fit with the reason why Grave Protector prevents DMoC and Lesser Fiend from activating their effects as well as, "Since the monsters were destroyed in battle, Grave Protector sends them back to the Deck" does.

This just looks like a Judge List-type question.

If you can honestly say to yourself that if push comes to shove, any explanation that makes you think, "Its probably" or "Not really sure, but", chances are that its not going to be a good answer.

But again, even if its wrong, if the player can see the logic of your explanation, they are more willing to accept the "plausible" versus the "Geez, even he doesnt know" answer.

I can "see" everyones point, but it just doesnt sound right when you match it up with the fact that Banisher, Lesser Fiend, and Dark Magician of Chaos all have basically the same effect, but from what Im getting outside of "my" reasoning is, only DMoC and Lesser Fiend get negated by Protector's effect.

Buts that's whats great about this site. I can "respectfully disagree" and have a reasonable discussion at the same time!!!

 

[novastar]

Here's how i see it in a nutshell...and maybe this will makes more sense to you as to why the latter scenario is really a Konami said so.

Grave Protector/DMoC/Lesser Fiend/DD Crazy Beast (or any other like them) are what is called Replacement Effects. They "replace" an event that is absolutely positively going to happen, with whatever event is written in the card text.

Banisher of the Light is slightly different. It is actually a preventative effect, as it will prevent the event of "send to the Graveyard" from ever occuring.

Thus when Banisher is active, Grave Protector/DMoC/Lesser Fiend/DD Crazy Beast never have the opportunity to replace an event that never occurs or never has the potential of occuring.

That i can see as an explaination.

As far as Grave Protector/DMoC/Lesser Fiend/DD Crazy Beast being active vs. themselves, they all do exactly the same thing, and replace the exact same event.

So how do you determine the order?

You have a few choices:

- Predetermine the order through ruling
- Resolve them in Timestamp order based on which effect was brought into play first and so on
- Have the player who is affected by the effects determine the order
- Resolve them is some sort of Turn Player/Opponent type of order based on who controls what effect and Priority, much like Triggers

Konami chose to go with option 1.

Hope that makes sense

 

[skey23]

I'm sorry, but I have to add my two cents worth on this discussion.
The rulings just don't seem to jive with wordings and game mechanics.

I agree with the 'Replacement' type effect that novastar is referring to because the card text specifically states 'INSTEAD OF GOING TO THE GRAVEYARD'.

Now here's my confusion. 'Banisher of the Light's' effect 'SHOULD' only activate if/when a card, ANY card, is SENT to the graveyard, not just destroyed.

So how can a card that was destroyed as a result of battle ever be sent to the graveyard when 'Grave Protector'/'DMoC'/'Lesser Fiend'/'DD Crazy Beast', etc...are face up on the field since the event NEVER OCCURS?

That is the BIGGEST thing confusing me about this ruling conversation.

Thanks!

 

[novastar]

Now here's my confusion. 'Banisher of the Light's' effect 'SHOULD' only activate if/when a card, ANY card, is SENT to the graveyard, not just destroyed.

Well, it never "activates" it is continuous and is always-on, and will prevent any card from ever being "sent" and simply automatically removes the card(s).

Conversely, a card must be on its way to being sent (as a result of battle) for the other effects to apply.

That seems to be the difference for me.