Desert Sunlight and Creature Swap

[BobDoily]

Okay here's the situation.

I activate Creature Swap to give my opponent say a Sheep Token.
They have one face-down monster, say Mask of Darkness or Magician of Faith.
They Chain with Desert Sunlight.

So his monster goes to face-up defense position. Then the switch occurs so at the end of the chain I have his monster in face-up defense position on my side of the field.

Now here's the question. Who has the right to the flip-effect. It was triggered on my opponent's side of the field but the monster at the end of the chain before the new chain starts with the flip-effect is on my side of the field. I forget is this case controller at the time of it being flipped or at the time of chain resolution?

 

[novastar]

His point is an extrapolation of the ruling, but the ruling should not be correct.

Just because Exiled itself is tributed as the cost does not change the fact that it was declared (played/activated) on the field.

There 5 stages to activating an effect

1. You declare the use of an effect and place it on the Chain Block
2. Modal choices are made (ie. Choose 1 of the following effects:...)
3. Targets are chosen
4. Total cost is summed and paid in any order
5. The effect is considered "activated"

The order for those stages (with the exception of 1 and 5) might be different in YGO but they are all there.

In, general where the object is during step 1 is the location of the effect. Whoever controls the object at that time (step 1) is also the controller of the effect.

So in otherwords, whoever controls the location (Zone) also controls the effect.

Anyway, the ruling is what it is, no point in debating it anymore. I think we've (i've) beeten it to death.

 

[StRiKe_NiNjA]

I guess the way they ruled it, you tribute it first in order to activate the effect, and Exiled Force just happens to be "in" the "graveyard" by the time of "activation", making The End of Anubis able to negate it.

It seemed better off when Exiled Force was "thought" to be a field effect.

Anyway, the ruling is what it is, no point in debating it anymore. I think we've (i've) beeten it to death.

Good call, I pretty much had my piece of the cake in this debate, and I think I had enough it, can't stand cake if too much is consumed. It's gettin late anywayz, leavin this party knowing I'm gonna have the worst hangover tomorrow...

//Peace//

 

[John Danker]

As far as Magician is concerned, i have a feeling they will say that it goes to the controller at the time it is placed on the chain.

I don't agree but considering some of the wierdness going on, it wouldn't surprise me.

It has always been that the flip effect goes to the controller at the time it is flipped...which is when it activates.

 

[novastar]

I definately agree, my first posts show that.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

It has always been that the flip effect goes to the controller at the time it is flipped...which is when it activates.

A cost is paid before an effect is considered activated.

Let's replace Magician of Faith with Summoner of Illusions.

Would you pay the cost for Summoner of Illusions in the middle of the chain resolving? Or would you wait until the entire chain resolved?

 

[masterwoo0]

A cost is paid before an effect is considered activated.

Let's replace Magician of Faith with Summoner of Illusions.

Would you pay the cost for Summoner of Illusions in the middle of the chain resolving? Or would you wait until the entire chain resolved?

This really is no different than Magician of Faith. One card retrieves a Spell, another ask for a cost to retrieve a monster. Neither of them can actively pursue the effect if they are already involved in a chain link when flipped face-up.

 

[novastar]

A cost is paid before an effect is considered activated.

Let's replace Magician of Faith with Summoner of Illusions.

Would you pay the cost for Summoner of Illusions in the middle of the chain resolving? Or would you wait until the entire chain resolved?

Cost is paid as "part of" activating an effect.

In the case of Triggers, the controller of the effect is the controller of the object at the time the effect Triggers (or in otherwords, when the event occurs that triggers it).

Since you can't interrupt chain resolution, you wait until the next instance to add it to the chain.

John's wording of "activate" might have been a bit poor, but i'm sure that is what he meant.

 

[jdos]

But in the case of Summoner of Illusions (instead of MoF) who would pay the cost? Player A, who's side of the field the card flipped on, or Player B, the controller of the card at the time the effect is added to the chainblock?

And I have to disagree slightly with this:

Cost is paid as "part of" activating an effect.

EF vs. EoA once again throws in the monkeywrench. The cost is paid before the effect activates, if they were simultaneuos, Exiled Force would activate on the field. (The way it friggin' should be... )

[edit]This thread reminds me of when I had my wisdom teeth pulled...but at least they gave me drugs to dull the pain then.

 

[novastar]

The FAQ states:

"The first kind is activation costs. These are paid when you activate (play) a card. Activation costs cannot be negated by cards that negate the effect of a card."

Not before, it is during. This is getting ridiculous.

I'm ignoring the EoA ruling because it is erroneous.

 

[John Danker]

John's wording of "activate" might have been a bit poor, but i'm sure that is what he meant.

You've caught me red handed there I'm afraid. I need to be more careful about my wording....I knew what he said I thought I meant....well, you know how that saying goes. Never the less, when I'm posting here I should watch my exact wording, my appologies to those whom I may confuse!

 

[jdos]

The FAQ states:

"The first kind is activation costs. These are paid when you activate (play) a card. Activation costs cannot be negated by cards that negate the effect of a card."

Not before, it is during. This is getting ridiculous.

I'm ignoring the EoA ruling because it is erroneous.

I couldn't agree more. The EoA ruling screws things up 6 ways from Sunday. I wish we could just ignore it. But good luck with that happening and then having one (or both) player(s) waving the print out in your face. Kinda' hard to argue with hardcopy.

 

[krazykidpsx]

i wasnt pointing out that you were wrong.

i was pointing out that where the card ends up its the location in which type of effect it will be considered. YOU posted the Policy which states this and still dont understand what im talking about.

if you read the small sentence correctly it states that when a card activates, If it is in the graveyard at activation it is a graveyard effect, if it is removed from play it is a Removed from play effect.

its not very hard its just the rule.

All TCG's dont fallow the same mechanics.

take Magic VS. Yugioh, both games are completly different.

Take VS System Vs. Yugioh, Very big difference.

Take Inuyasha VS. Yugioh, You better belive there is a difference.

thats what TCG's tend to be the one that is the most different cant be compared to anything else. and that is Konami's goal. they dont want a game that is based of Magic the gathering.


They specified a rule. we cant back off it if its there in our face. we arnt using logic we are stating a rule here.

the MOF deal, its the person that flips it that benefits, and i stated this 3 times back to back and the reason why.

The X-force effect isnt erronious untill that Policy rule is changed.


till it is changed we cant say its wrong.

 

[jdos]

...

I'm assuming this was aimed at novastar?? Probably best to quote before you rant just to avoid confusion.

My only comments related to yours are:

1. Don't forget that all you're doing at this point is extrapolating (or even outright guessing) the mechanics based on the ruling. We've seen nothing official to state that Exiled Force is an effect that activates "wherever it happens to be at the time of activation", because franky, there's never been such a thing before this ruling. But I have to give you credit, you're so emphatic about it, it almost sounds official. Wrong, but official.

2. If you can't base a ruling on logic and have to rely on a hardline "that's the rule because we said so" stance, then the ruling is broken. Logic is the only thing you can rely on when attempting to extrapolate rulings from game mechanics. Defying logic, as you seem to be so happy to accept, is what causes smart people to become frustrated. Frustrated people become disillusioned people. Disillusioned people find better things to do with their time.

Either Konami/UDE come out with a logical explaination, perhaps a mechanic change, or at least a better explaination of a mechanic that always existed, or they let illogical rulings stand and allow people to just go back to fighting over rulings that make no sense.

 

[StRiKe_NiNjA]

There doesn't seem to be any straight logic here.

But I'm going to say I'm more on krazykidpsx terms on this.

Because that seems like it is the "only" logic here, regardless of what the FAQs state. Who knows, maybe there will be a change to the FAQs sooner or later.

The End of Anubis here doesn't negate whats activated, it negates what is "resolving" targetting or resolving in the graveyard. You can still activate Premature Burial and effects as such, but when it tries to resolve it will be negated.

Exiled Force just hapens to be caught within the graveyard, pretty mnuch that's how they ruled it.

 

[krazykidpsx]

yea it was for novastar.

and noavatar posted a policy in the EoA vs x-force thread.

It stated it clearly right there and ill quote it :

This would fall under game mechanics.

100.1 In the case of manually Activated or Trigger Monster Effects, at the time activation is fully completed, the location of the Monster Card that generated the effect is considered location of the effect.

That seems to sum it up.

thats the rule right there, and thats what im seeing the only reason why Konami Ruled that EoA would negate X-force.

using that same ruling, we can see that were a card gets activated thats who reaps its benefits unless the card needs to be in a certain owners graveyard or RFP if such card were to exist.

Edit:
IF the effect is manually activated or Trigger monsters effect.

in the MOF case, you are Triggering the effect through another card. so it remains to be that since it was triggered in your area is its location of effect.

 

[novastar]

That was my own personal mechanic that i made up, in an attempt to interpret the ruling.

I don't actually feel that the ruling or the logic behind it is correct. I'm just trying somehow to put it all together.

My feeling is and probably always will be that its not mechanically sound.

 

[krazykidpsx]

::sigh::

thanks for saying that now.

if maybe you would have put [sarcasm] on that maybe i woudlnt have taken it serious.

now i really have to start all over again in trying to figure this out.

great. thanks ey.

 

[novastar]

I'm very sorry ... i was just trying to come up with something concise to sum up the ruling.

It wasn't sarcasm, i meant it, its how i see the ruling, but i don't necessarily agree with it.

Once again sorry, just trying to help.

 

[krazykidpsx]

dude i really though thats what the game mechanic was.

man now i look utter dumb.

 

[novastar]

You don't look dumb at all.

That is what the ruling is suggesting anyway.

Wouldn't it be nice if Konami would issue nice sleek slim comprehensive rules and mechanics like that?

ahhh....one can dream....