Basic Priority Questions

[carlossilva]

... or they should be, but while browsing through several forums I've often read contradictory answers ( whether direct or implied ) so I've decided to place them here.

1. After the turn player draws a card in his/her draw phase, who has priority to activate a quickplay spell or trap card?

2. After an attack is declared by the turn player, who has priority to activate a card in response to the attack ?

3. After a chain has completely resolved, who has priority to respond to the end of the chain? ( I've read it's the turn player, I've read it's the opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve - this last one actually came from UDE ... )

Thanks

Carlos

 

[novastar]

Forgot this one...

Notice that chain ended by the non-turn player having a special summon. The chain, when ending in a summon passes back to the turn player regardless of who special summoned the monster in the chain.

Thats kind of skirting the issue here John... it's the series of events here that details what he is in essence saying (or possibly what you are extrapolating from it).

First he says this:

He Summons Tsukuyomi. Its trigger effects starts a chain. (After a
Summon player A would normally retain priority to activate an Ignition
Effect or Spell Speed 2 Spell or Trap, but Tsukuyomi's Trigger Effect
must start a chain).

He targets Jinzo. The opponent may chain an effect, but does not. The
turn player may chain an effect, but does not.

Jinzo is flipped face-down.

Priority is now passed to Player B.

Then this:

Player B activates "Call of the Haunted". Neither player chain anything,
and Player B finishes his Special Summon.

Priority is passed pack to Player A.

That, to me, is insinuating that the reason Player A ends up with Priority at the end is not because it's his/her turn, but because the last effect to resolve was Player B's Call of the Haunted.

He could have easily flipped it completely around and made the Turn Player's effect Call, and the outcome would have been the same.

...of course, Dan might not have intended for the post to be that detailed.

EDIT: darn! i think you already addressed this in your post above, saying it was an assumsion on your part.

 

[novastar]

If judging by thoughts <let's say in an official tournament> instead of what has been written by officials in UDE and another judge brings this issues up, there is not much that one can do, nevertheless not one being wrong.

My real issue with the whole thing is that the story keeps changing over and over and over again... like a never ending Lightning Vortex. I know bishop would have a field day with this and LOVES this topic...

People can say "who cares, Priority is not a big deal" but the truth is, the players want to know. I don't know a single player that doesn't want official concrete rules on Priority.

All they can seem to muster after countless put offs, delays, teases, bit rulings here and there for several years... is a vague post on a LV3 board.

Now i'm not currently a LV3, or 2 for that matter (haven't bothered to write them), but... and this is the only time you will ever see me print this, i could be... and knowing the many of the solid guys/gals on that board... if you can't get a "dramatic explanation" ...where can you get it? these are top notch Judges...

 

[slither]

All they can seem to muster after countless put offs, delays, teases, bit rulings here and there for several years... is a vague post on a LV3 board.

No, no, don't get me wrong, im totally on board with you in this issue and I couldn't agree more either, I was emphasizing some things that we just can't control, due to the fact that it isn't in our close reach.

Believe me that ever since I read my very first post involving you, I say that you were an awesome player and you had an excellent understanding of the ruling, I could never doubt that you'd be an amazing Lv3.

But bear in mind that even if we wanted to, we still have something to follow, and I know that sometimes it's even frustrating to not get a clear and unlikely vague response at least once, but all we can do is discuss about the problems and after there is a sort of concense between all of the discussion, send the results of it to the boards and hope for the best.

 

[John Danker]

I can't think of anyone I'd rather having judging with me novastar <broad smile> I'm an L3 because I'm a stubborn SOB and refused to take no for an answer. (it took me three times taking the test) You, on the other hand, have the blessing of a wonderful thought pattern of logic, scientific analysis, and a gift for templating. YOU have the tools, I'm just onery!

One thing we can all be thankful for on this forum, we have (in comparison) very mature members who take great pride in concerned and meaningful debate which enlightens many...most of the time including those directly involved in the debate.

Though I tend to often be the "trouble maker" ....at least give me --> <-- that much credit for bringing the news and presenting it for digesting eh? <smirk>

 

[skey23]

I'd just like to mention the still unanswered questions I posed back on page 5 post #73.

Thanks.

 

[Jason_C]

I'd just like to mention the still unanswered questions I posed back on page 5 post #73.

Thanks.

It has been answered, but two different ways. I stick to my guns that when the chain resolves, you retain priority as the turn player. Because you're the turn player, and therefore you retain priority. I realize Mr. Tewart may have instructed judges to rule it differently.

 

[John Danker]

This is actually starting to make better and better sense to me the more I re-read this thread and Dan's response.

I do have a few questions though.

I understand that the opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve will 'gain' priority, but what happens when that last effect resulted in a Special Summon? Dan mentioned the 'only' hiccup being when the Turn Player Summoned, but does that extend to a Special Summon via an outside effect?

Example:

P1 Summons "Sangan" in face-up attack position.
P1 passes on response.
P2 passes on response.
Now P1 activates "Call of the Haunted" targeting "Cannon Soldier".
P2 responds with "Threatening Roar".
P1 responds with "Royal Decree".
P2 responds with "Dust Tornado".
P1 does not respond.

Chain resolves with the last thing happening is "Cannon Soldier" being Special Summoned to the field by P1. Now, Does P1 retain Priority to use "Cannon Soldier"s effect? Or since the last effect to resolve was controlled by P1, is Priority passed to P2 at this time?

Player 1 (turn player) has priority to use activate Cannon Soldier's effect....exactly the same as if the summon was a normal summon during MP1 or MP2.

 

[Jason_C]

Player 1 (turn player) has priority to use activate Cannon Soldier's effect....exactly the same as if the summon was a normal summon during MP1 or MP2.

So you and I agree on what happens. But not the reason why. I say it's because a chain resolved, which happens to be a non-chainable event, and so whoever had priority before (TP, of course) will retain it afterwards. You say it's because of a summon. Which, interestingly enough, is also a non-chainable event.

 

[skey23]

Ok, so let's make it the Non-Turn Player this time.

It's P1s turn.
P1 Special Summons "Cyber Dragon".
P1 retains Priority, but passes.
P2 passes on response.
They both agree to move into Battle Phase.
P1 declares attack with "Cyber Dragon".
P1 does not want to respond to attack, thereby passing priority to P2.
P2 activates "Call of the Haunted" targeting "Strike Ninja".
P1 responds with "Royal Decree".
P2 responds with "Mystical Space Typhoon" targeting the "Royal Decree".
P1 does not respond.
Chain resolves and the last thing to happen is "Strike Ninja" being Special Summoned by P2.

Now, does P2 retain Priority to activate "Strike Ninja"s effect, since it IS a Multi-Trigger? Or does Priority automatically pass back to P1, the Turn Player, who wants to activate "Bottomless Trap Hole"?

Thanks.

 

[Jason_C]

Ok, so let's make it the Non-Turn Player this time.

It's P1s turn.
P1 Special Summons "Cyber Dragon".
P1 retains Priority, but passes.
P2 passes on response.
They both agree to move into Battle Phase.
P2 asks if P1 would like to activate anything before attacking.
P1 says no, thereby passing Priority to P2.
P2 activates "Call of the Haunted" targeting "Strike Ninja".
P1 responds with "Royal Decree".
P2 responds with "Mystical Space Typhoon" targeting the "Royal Decree".
P1 does not respond.
Chain resolves and the last thing to happen is "Strike Ninja" being Special Summoned by P2.

Now, does P2 retain Priority to activate "Strike Ninja"s effect, since it IS a Multi-Trigger? Or does Priority automatically pass back to P1, the Turn Player, who wants to activate "Bottomless Trap Hole"?

Thanks.

The non-turn player would retain priority in this example. Because he had it before the non-chainable event, hence he shall retain it afterwards.

 

[masterwoo0]

Well, Cannon Soldier's summon is a event that can be responded to, since it WAS a summon, by the opponent.

Since a summon by the turn player still gives him priority to activate, in this case, either a Spell Speed 2 Trap or Quick-Play, or, use Cannon Soldier's effect, starting a new chain, the opponent can either decide to respond to the summon, or chain to the effect.

 

[skey23]

The non-turn player would retain priority in this example. Because he had it before the non-chainable event, hence he shall retain it afterwards.

But if Priority means the Turn Player has the ability to respond 1st, then your answer would be incorrect. Also, there's that thing going around about the opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve. In this case, the controller of the last effect to resolve, was P2, so P1 should get Priority, regardless of being the Turn Player or not.

 

[daivahataka]

the opponent can either decide to respond to the summon, or chain to the effect.

I don't think people should keep saying it this way as it will only confuse others who read it, possibly risk them thinking it's a separate chain or something, when you "respond to the summon" here you are in fact chaining to the effect's activation, it just so happens that the timing is still correct for you to activate a summon response trap. You aren't actually responding to the summon at all, responding to the summon is the terminology used should your opponent pass priority after summoning, since (as summoning has no spell speed) you cannot chain to the summon itself, so instead we say that you are responding to it.

 

[masterwoo0]

The non-turn player would retain priority in this example. Because he had it before the non-chainable event, hence he shall retain it afterwards.

I don't think it has anything to do with the opponent having priority.

It's a Multi-Trigger Effect, and it can chain to Bottomless Trap Hole's effect. So, regardless of priority, this probably wasnt a good example to use.

 

[masterwoo0]

I don't think people should keep saying it this way as it will only confuse others who read it, possibly risk them thinking it's a separate chain or something, when you "respond to the summon" here you are in fact chaining to the effect's activation, it just so happens that the timing is still correct for you to activate a summon response trap. You aren't actually responding to the summon at all, responding to the summon is the terminology used should your opponent pass priority after summoning, since (as summoning has no spell speed) you cannot chain to the summon itself, so instead we say that you are responding to it.

You can only respond to a summon with certain cards. Torrential Tribute cannot be chained to an effect from a card that has already been on the field for a turn.

That fact that it would have to be chained if your opponent activates an effect is the only reason to state that. Otherwise, you could chain Mystical Space Typhoon or Dust Tornado or Royal Decree to a monsters effect, which in that case, would be more of a chain, than a response to a summon.

 

[Jason_C]

But if Priority means the Turn Player has the ability to respond 1st, then your answer would be incorrect. Also, there's that thing going around about the opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve. In this case, the controller of the last effect to resolve, was P2, so P1 should get Priority, regardless of being the Turn Player or not.

Priority has NOTHING to do with the Turn Player per se, beyond the initial gift of priority at the beginning of the duel. After that, it is simply passed back and forth between the two players. Non-chainable events are non-chainable (stating the obvious) and therefore do not pass priority. So whoever had priority before a non-chainable event will still have it afterwards. Being the Turn Player does not change this. It just so happens that in 99% of cases where priority after a non-chainable event occurs, it is the Turn Player who gets it. But you have stated an example of the other 1%.

<EDIT: Welcome to my sig, woo0>

 

[skey23]

I don't think it has anything to do with the opponent having priority.

It's a Multi-Trigger Effect, and it can chain to Bottomless Trap Hole's effect. So, regardless of priority, this probably wasnt a good example to use.

It being a Multi-Trigger Effect was the ONLY example to use with my scenario. It's the only kind of Optional Ignition Effect the Non-Turn Player can use during the Turn Player's turn.

It puts into question Turn Player Priority retention, as well as the 'opponent of the controller of the last effect to resolve' issue.

 

[John Danker]

Ok, so let's make it the Non-Turn Player this time.

It's P1s turn.
P1 Special Summons "Cyber Dragon".
P1 retains Priority, but passes.
P2 passes on response.
They both agree to move into Battle Phase.
P2 asks if P1 would like to activate anything before attacking.
P1 says no, thereby passing Priority to P2.
P2 activates "Call of the Haunted" targeting "Strike Ninja".
P1 responds with "Royal Decree".
P2 responds with "Mystical Space Typhoon" targeting the "Royal Decree".
P1 does not respond.
Chain resolves and the last thing to happen is "Strike Ninja" being Special Summoned by P2.

Now, does P2 retain Priority to activate "Strike Ninja"s effect, since it IS a Multi-Trigger? Or does Priority automatically pass back to P1, the Turn Player, who wants to activate "Bottomless Trap Hole"?

Thanks.

Wait, back up to this point....

They both agree to move into Battle Phase.
P2 asks if P1 would like to activate anything before attacking.
P1 says no, thereby passing Priority to P2.

What leads you to believe that P2 can activate anything at this point? P1 hasn't begun a chain and still has priority. P2 is going to have to wait until P1 attacks, at that point they can respond to the attack declaration. Just as if it where if P1 entered their MP1, at that point P2 can't say, "Is there anything you want to do before you summon? If not I want to begin a chain" P2 would have to wait patiently until either P1 begins a chain or summons a monster and chooses not to begin a chain...then P2 can respond to the summon.

 

[slither]

I believe the statement was right there JD, in skey's example it is player 1's turn:

P2 asks if P1 would like to activate anything before attacking.

P2 is asking P1 if he/she's going to activate something, it's still P1 turn therefore being P1 with priority in hand.

EDIT: let's remember that this is entering a new phase, therefore either player can activate a Spell Speed 2.

 

[Jason_C]

Wait, back up to this point....

They both agree to move into Battle Phase.
P2 asks if P1 would like to activate anything before attacking.
P1 says no, thereby passing Priority to P2.

What leads you to believe that P2 can activate anything at this point? P1 hasn't begun a chain and still has priority. P2 is going to have to wait until P1 attacks, at that point they can respond to the attack declaration. Just as if it where if P1 entered their MP1, at that point P2 can't say, "Is there anything you want to do before you summon? If not I want to begin a chain" P2 would have to wait patiently until either P1 begins a chain or summons a monster and chooses not to begin a chain...then P2 can respond to the summon.

I couldn't disagree more. When asked if P1 wanted to do anything, he said no. This is effectively passing priority (the proper term may be, "I now officially choose to pass my priority to you," but the meaning was clearly conveyed) and now the ball is in P2's court.

This is what has led to so many long debates in such threads as "Enemy Controller Question". The belief that passing priority doesn't mean really passing it. It does indeed mean that. When a person passes priority, they surrender control of the duel to the opponent. They say, "I've got nothing, so you go ahead and do what you want." This is not something that can be reversed. By passing priority, P1 has given P2 the right to activate something.

<EDIT: Welcome to my sig, Slither>