dark deal-no cards in hand?

Sort by date Sort by votes
A ruling said:
You cannot activate this card if you have 0 cards in your hand. If an effect is chained to make you discard all the cards in your hand, the effect of the opponent's Normal Spell Card still changes, but does nothing since you have 0 cards in your hand.
Click to expand...
So, no. The changed effect would still have to do something (we all know you can't activate an effect that does nothing), so you need that card in your hand to make the new effect possible to resolve.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
????

can I activate dark deal if my opponent has no cards in their hand?

both sides of this arguement make complete sense to me.
Click to expand...
---------------------------------------
Quote:
A ruling is quoted to have said:
You cannot activate this card if you have 0 cards in your hand. If an effect is chained to make you discard all the cards in your hand, the effect of the opponent's Normal Spell Card still changes, but does nothing since you have 0 cards in your hand.
---------------------------------------

The ruling applies to the controller of Dark Deal. I think Freak's questions was what if your opponent had no cards in hand. But then I can't see where it would make a difference in that case, since the controller of Dark Deal is the one to discard. Your opponent's hand status should not even be a factor.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yeah, some people can find it confusing.

Your opponent's Normal Spell Card turns into: "Your opponent randomly discards a card". The opponent of your opponent is you. The person who plays Dark Deal will discard a card. It helps with Dark World monsters, mostly.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
sry, I was just waking up. I ment to say MY hand size was 0

we call know you can't activate dragged down into the grave if you don't have any cards in your hand. But as far as my knowledge goes this applies only to activation. By this reasoning you can say that using dark deal on an opponent's normal spell card while you have no cards in your hand is an illegal activation od dark deal. However, one can also argue that you are not causing your opponent to activate a card illegally but changing the effect of an already activated card. You can further argue by giving the following example:

I can't activate confiscation if my opponent has no cards in their hand. But lets say my opponent has one card in their hand and I activate confiscation, my opponent chains with raigeki break discarding the only card in their hand. The end result is the same and confiscation was not activated illegally. Other examples can be given with raigeki etc.

the valitity of this arguement still doesn't take away from the valitity of the first arguement in my head, to me both arguements still make complete sense.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I won't argue the logic of it all, some can not be reasonably defended, but Maruno's quote was an actual card ruling. Like or not we have what we have.

edited for terrible grammer.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
exiledforcefreak said:
sry, I was just waking up. I ment to say MY hand size was 0

we call know you can't activate dragged down into the grave if you don't have any cards in your hand. But as far as my knowledge goes this applies only to activation. By this reasoning you can say that using dark deal on an opponent's normal spell card while you have no cards in your hand is an illegal activation od dark deal. However, one can also argue that you are not causing your opponent to activate a card illegally but changing the effect of an already activated card. You can further argue by giving the following example:

I can't activate confiscation if my opponent has no cards in their hand. But lets say my opponent has one card in their hand and I activate confiscation, my opponent chains with raigeki break discarding the only card in their hand. The end result is the same and confiscation was not activated illegally. Other examples can be given with raigeki etc.

the valitity of this arguement still doesn't take away from the valitity of the first arguement in my head, to me both arguements still make complete sense.
Click to expand...

Actually activation requirements need to be checked "before " (per say) the card is played, this is no different than Creature Swap for instance, you can't activate Creature Swap if you and your opponent have no egible monsters from the beggining regardless of the outcome.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
exiledforcefreak said:
the valitity of this arguement still doesn't take away from the valitity of the first arguement in my head, to me both arguements still make complete sense.
Click to expand...
Only one argument makes sense. Your opponent cannot activate Confiscation if you do not have at least one card in hand, so why would you be able to change a Spell Card they activate to a "Confiscation-Like" effect, when it will not resolve properly? If a chain is created, such as with Raigeki Break, that causes you to discard the last card you have in hand, then Dark Deal was still activated legally. But, if you start off with no cards in hand, it is the same as activating Card Destruction while neither player has any cards to Discard to the Graveyard.

You must be able to fulfill the requirement at "Activation", and not necessarily at Effect Resolution.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top