Enemy Controller question

[kansashoops]

I just want to make sure this works as I think it does:

Opponent has one or more Scapegoat tokens in face up defense position. I have D.D. Assailant in attack position. I declare an attack on a token and ask for a response (assuming that my opponent has one or more cards set in his spell/trap zone). Opponent declines. I then chain Enemy Controller from my hand to the declaration of the attack, switching the token to attack position, and D.D. Assailant destroys him and does 1700 damage.

This is all kosher, correct?

 

[BenjaminMS]

Well, I have no clue it was that, nor can I remember what I say after I click the submit button. Anyone know how wrong that just sounds? Being this tired and trying to follow this thread abour Priority is next to impossible. Lol, one of my questions still hasn't been answered.

@_@ Which happens to be, "So, why am I a judge again?".

LOL because UDE gave you a certificate after a test, which didn't include things like this Study harder

 

[Jason_C]

I'm glad my "non-responsive window" term is really getting some respect

Benjamin: I'm still not entirely sure what's wrong with my example?

Tkwiget: Because you are extremely brilliant and a master of the game... At certain times of the day...

-pssvr

 

[BenjaminMS]

I'm glad my "non-responsive window" term is really getting some respect

Benjamin: I'm still not entirely sure what's wrong with my example?

Tkwiget: Because you are extremely brilliant and a master of the game... At certain times of the day...

-pssvr

Just a little thing: you said after the summon, and passing of priority after that, "And now to the Battlephase". Little thing, I tried to correct with my scheme.

 

[skey23]

This was the initial question posted, for those who had forgotten:

I just want to make sure this works as I think it does:

Opponent has one or more Scapegoat tokens in face up defense position. I have D.D. Assailant in attack position. I declare an attack on a token and ask for a response (assuming that my opponent has one or more cards set in his spell/trap zone). Opponent declines. I then chain Enemy Controller from my hand to the declaration of the attack, switching the token to attack position, and D.D. Assailant destroys him and does 1700 damage.

This is all kosher, correct?

Ok, let's try to go back to the very beginning here...lol. Let's take this example, which is pretty much correct, and expand on it a little bit, shall we, with all that we have hopefully learned from this discussion.

P1 has "D. D. Assailant" in attack position, and an "Enemy Controller" in hand.
P2 has 3 "Sheep Tokens" in defense position.
P1 declares their attack, which does not use the chain, so they retain Priority to activate an Appropriate effect. We have now entered the Attack Response Chain 'window'.
P1 does not wish to activate anything in response to attack, so they pass on to the opponent.
P2 also does not wish to activate anything at this time, so they pass back to Turn Player.
Now, the Attack Response Chain 'window' is now GONE! Cards like "Magician's Circle" and "Sakuretsu Armor" can no longer be activated because the response window is gone; however, other cards CAN be activated now. Cards that do not have any activation restrictions on them, like "Enemy Controller" or "Waboku". This would be the 'Non-response' 'window' that Novastar and pssvr keep referring to.
P1 uses this time to activate "Enemy Controller" from their hand, choosing to change the battle position of the "Sheep Token" being attacked.
P2 now has the right to chain to "Enemy Controller" or pass back.
P2 passes back.
P1 has nothing else to chain. Chain resolves, and the "Token" is changed to attack position, and the attack continues as normal.

Does this 'jive' with everybody's understanding?

 

[Jason_C]

No. I feel that since both players passed consecutively, and they were not responding to a summon, (which has special restrictions on what you can use in response) P1 totally missed their opportunity to play EC.

-pssvr

 

[skey23]

But that's the whole 'Non-response' window you keep talking about. So now you don't agree that it belongs there?

 

[Jason_C]

No. Why? Well, let me ask you this: Is there anything that CAN be activated at some time during the battle step, but CANNOT be activated in RESPONSE to the attack? No. Now, another question: Is there anything that CAN be activated at some time during the main phase, but CANNOT be activated directly after a summon? YES! That is why there is a non-responsive window in the main phase, but not the battle step: There are some things that cannot be activated in response to a summon, there is nothing that cannot be activated in response to an attack.

-pssvr

 

[skey23]

No. Why? Well, let me ask you this: Is there anything that CAN be activated at some time during the battle step, but CANNOT be activated in RESPONSE to the attack?

"Magic Jammer", "Solemn Judgment", "Trap Jammer"..shall I continue?

Let's look at this one:
P1 attacks.
P2 "Sakuretsu"s.
P1 "Trap Jammer"s.
P2 No repsonse.
Chain resolves.
Attack continues.
P2 activates "Waboku".

Is this valid?
If not..why?
If so, then during what response point did they activate "Waboku"? It wasn't during the Attack Response Window. So it must have been during the Non-response window.

 

[Jason_C]

Let me break it down (and I don't mean rap).

Quote:
pssvr is quoted to have said:
No. Why? Well, let me ask you this: Is there anything that CAN be activated at some time during the battle step, but CANNOT be activated in RESPONSE to the attack?

"Magic Jammer", "Solemn Judgment", "Trap Jammer"..shall I continue?

Please don't XD. I mean, would it serve any purpose to have a non-responsive window in the battle step? No.

Let's look at this one:
P1 attacks.
P2 "Sakuretsu"s.
P1 "Trap Jammer"s.
P2 No repsonse.
Chain resolves.
P2 activates "Waboku".

Is this valid?
If not..why?
If so, then during what response point did they activate "Waboku"? It wasn't during the Attack Response Window. So it must have been during the Non-response window.

I am not aware of any mechanic saying that is illegal. It looks just fine to me. Waboku was activated to begin a response chain, responding to the LAST chain. There is such a mechanic.

-pssvr

 

[Tkwiget]

I'm glad my "non-responsive window" term is really getting some respect

Benjamin: I'm still not entirely sure what's wrong with my example?

Tkwiget: Because you are extremely brilliant and a master of the game... At certain times of the day...

-pssvr

Don't know what to say to that. Thanks I guess. Just no one ever has said I'm brilliant or a master of anything, in like, well no one ever has. XD

Believe me, I'm not as good of a judge as you think. I just have a weird way of thinking. Blah, anyone want my judge card? <cries cause he needs a coffee..>

The Non-Response window that pssvr (finally attempted at spelling that...wow..) is talking about can only be created after the Attack-Response window opens and closes. This is where multiple chains in the Battle Phase begins. Which is where on whatever page I started giving my billions of examples and lengthy explainations behind them.

Non-Response window is only created, IF and I strongly put meaning on that word, the Attack-Response window creates a chain block and then it resolves. Then and ONLY then will the Non-Response Window become created.

This is why I say that.

If both players pass the priority from one another in a response round, you can't create the non-response window without the attack-response window.

 

[Jason_C]

Perhaps that is a better way of explaining the non-responsive window than what I put. Damnit, how can you eplain *MY IDEA* better than me? And yes, you most definetely are brilliant.
-pssvr

 

[novastar]

Non-Response window is only created, IF and I strongly put meaning on that word, the Attack-Response window creates a chain block and then it resolves. Then and ONLY then will the Non-Response Window become created.

Actually, its the other way around...

Response Chains are optional, and only exist if an event triggers a response timing. Non-Response Chains are present in pretty much every Phase/Step.

Its even unclear as to whether the a Battle Step in general only exists IF you declare an attack. Some stuff ive read suggest that there is actually a Non Response prior to the attack declaration.

As far as the Chain Block is concerned, it really hasn't been defined, but my guess is that the Chain Block is ever-present ...it is not directly tied to activation windows. An activation window is just a chain point where the game allows you to create an effect chain and use the Block.

In fact the "window" idea seems to suggest that, and is a sort of visualization of when you have specific spots where the Block is open to be used...like a "window" opening.

Gotta love this wacked out game...

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

Player one begins his / turn by drawing a card, and by default receives priority.
Both players pass, on to standby phase.
Player one retains priority and passes.
Player two also passes, and on to main phase.
Player one still has priority from the last phase, and uses it to summon a monster.
Player one retains priority after the summon since it does not use the chain.
Player one passes, player two passes.
And on to battle phase.

How was that?
-pssvr

Player one still has the opportunity to either respond to the summon, or perform a different action, or request to end the phase, but player 2 would also have the opportunity to activate spell speed 2 cards in the main phase, not in response to the summon.

 

[skey23]

Well, after re-reading all 12 pages of this thread again, I'm still sticking to my guns on the following items:

1. Drawing, Summoning, Attacking, IMHO, are not priority based, they are built-in game facts that only the Turn Player can do during that specific time during the Appropriate Phase.

2. There are a minimum of 2 response points before you can consider the last 'step' or 'phase' to be ended. This applies to all phases/steps of the game (except the ever popular Damage Step).
a. The Response Window is the window directly after an event occurs. The Turn Player always has Priority to respond to this event, unless another effect forces itself automatically into Link 1. Once this window is closed or passed, effects that respond to that event cannot be activated in response to that event anymore.
b. The Non-response window occurs immediately after the Response window has closed. Again, the Turn Player has Priority here. It is NOT dependant upon anything happening during the Response Window.

Well, that's it..I won't budge..nuh uh..can't make me!

 

[Tkwiget]

Perhaps that is a better way of explaining the non-responsive window than what I put. Damnit, how can you eplain *MY IDEA* better than me? And yes, you most definetely are brilliant.
-pssvr

If being hungry, mentally exhausted, cranky, annoyed, frustrated, and above all stressed out to the end of time during every given moment of the day during school makes me brilliant. Wow, then I must be brilliant all the time. -_-

I've got some good news though.

Turn player ALWAYS maintains priority to begin a chain entering a phase (assuming a continuous one doesn't activate immediately by it's own effect)

As far as does turn player maintain priority to activate a spell speed 2 or higher card effect before leaving end phase....turn player maintains priority to activtate ENTERING end phase, if then their opponent chains and the chain resolves, non-turn player now has priority, if they pass that priority by not activating a card effect, turn player resumes priority in end phase and may begin a new chain.


Concerning who has priority after an attack is announced....as I said, the whole battle response chain hasn't been clearly defined, let me do some reasearch.

John

I PMed him about it and he's gonna do a little digging for us.

I don't know if anything he finds will help us out. But if he does uncover some information, it will be VERY interesting to see where the information is laid down on, who was more accurate, who was more wrong, and above all, if all of our time was wasted if it turns out all of us involved in this thread are wrong.

I'm right now just going to drop out of this discussion on the grounds I can't handle it. This stuff is starting to be the only thing I can think of. Not a good sign, not a good sign at all.

 

[novastar]

1. Drawing, Summoning, Attacking, IMHO, are not priority based, they are built-in game facts that only the Turn Player can do during that specific time during the Appropriate Phase.

It's true that they do not "use" Priority when you do them... but you still are required to have Priority in your possession in order to perform them.

There is only 1 event that is a use of Priority, manually activating an effect.

 

[skey23]

It's true that they do not "use" Priority when you do them... but you still are required to have Priority in your possession in order to perform them.

OMG! THAT just made perfect #$%*ing sense to me! Ping Pong! It doesn't matter that I'm the Turn Player..duh! If I enter Main Phase 1, pass priority to my opponent, who activates something that starts this big long chain, I can't even attempt to Summon or Set until that chain has resolved and 'Priority' has been passed back to me. God I feel so stoopid now!..lol.

Ok, but I'm not budging on the response ones!..no way! You can't make me!...no really!

[edit]See, this is why Nova has been like my UBER IDLE since day 1 for me on this forum. He's the shizzle!

 

[Jason_C]

In no way is it necessary (well, Nova had some luck making you budge, so I'm gonna try for the heck of it) for there to be a non-responsive window in the battle step. POSSIBLE, but not necessary. Let me revisit an old scenario:

P1 attacks, and passes priority
P2 passes back, response window now closed.
P1 uses Enemy Controller

Huh? How? Why? what's different about now than before? Nothing. In this example, there was no REASON to enter a non-responsive window, and the game will not enter it if there is no reason to.

-pssvr

 

[Tiso]

This was the initial question posted, for those who had forgotten:
Ok, let's try to go back to the very beginning here...lol. Let's take this example, which is pretty much correct, and expand on it a little bit, shall we, with all that we have hopefully learned from this discussion.

P1 has "D. D. Assailant" in attack position, and an "Enemy Controller" in hand.
P2 has 3 "Sheep Tokens" in defense position.
P1 declares their attack, which does not use the chain, so they retain Priority to activate an Appropriate effect. We have now entered the Attack Response Chain 'window'.
P1 does not wish to activate anything in response to attack, so they pass on to the opponent.
P2 also does not wish to activate anything at this time, so they pass back to Turn Player.
Now, the Attack Response Chain 'window' is now GONE! Cards like "Magician's Circle" and "Sakuretsu Armor" can no longer be activated because the response window is gone; however, other cards CAN be activated now. Cards that do not have any activation restrictions on them, like "Enemy Controller" or "Waboku". This would be the 'Non-response' 'window' that Novastar and pssvr keep referring to.
P1 uses this time to activate "Enemy Controller" from their hand, choosing to change the battle position of the "Sheep Token" being attacked.
P2 now has the right to chain to "Enemy Controller" or pass back.
P2 passes back.
P1 has nothing else to chain. Chain resolves, and the "Token" is changed to attack position, and the attack continues as normal.

Does this 'jive' with everybody's understanding?

OMG thank you, no more. I am sticking to that way of thinking.

 

[skey23]

Huh? How? Why? what's different about now than before?

What's the difference. Well now that the Attack Response window is closed, neither player can activate a card that requires the attack declaration, like "Sakuretsu Armor" or "Magic Cylinders". They are now both locked into being able to only activate cards that don't have activation restrictions.

OMG thank you, no more. I am sticking to that way of thinking.

Was that a good response thing, or a bad one?...lol.