Master Monk

[masterwoo0]

I didnt think my question was that hard, but it only took about 4 to 5 months to answer....


Master Monk vs Book of Moon or Tsukuyomi 2006-03-30 15:59:00 <James Johnson>


1. Okay, Master Monk's effect allows him to attack twice in the same Battle Phase,
but not necessarily back to back, so he can attack, then let another monster
attack, and resume Battle himself.

That being said, if Master Monk attacks a monster, and after the Damage
Calculation is complete, my opponent activates Book of Moon to flip him
face-down, does this reset his effect if he is somehow flipped face-up in attack,
allowing him to again attack twice in the same Battle face, ignoring the fact
that he already attacked once,

or

Will he only be able to carry out his second attack, if he can still attack
at all?

2. Same scenario as above, only substitute attacking a face-down Tsukuyomi.

Thanks!

----------------------------------------------------

If you attack once (or twice), and then after the attack "Master Monk" is flipped-face down by "Tsukuyomi" or "Book of Moon",
you could activate "Desert Sunlight" then "Final Attack Orders" and attack 2 more times.

Dan Scheidegger
Jr. Game Designer
Yu-Gi-Oh! TCG R&D
Upper Deck Entertainment

 

[slither]

So it would really be safe to say that Master Monk has no free attack (game mechanic wise), just an effect of attacking twice...

Oooooh man I feel dumb , that really busted my head open trying to understand why and it was just so easy , thanks DJ and masterwoo0, it's all clear now.

 

[Kyhotae]

Mataza the Zapper must attack back-to-back and his effect doesn't state he can have another Battle Phase, just another attack.

Actually, his effect is that he can attack twice in the same Battle Phase. They don't have to be back-to-back. If you have another monster out and want to attack with that one in between "Mataza the Zapper"s attacks, you can.

As for the "Master Monk" attack reset thing. You guys seem be to missing an important concept. Face down monsters are considered "not summoned" until they are flipped face up. Essentially, the game doesn't think they are even a real monster, just a wall to the opponent's attack. So, with a monster face-down, the game thinks "no monster."

If "Twinheaded Beast" attacks twice and then the player activates "Beast Soul Swap", he returns to the hand (game says "no monster") and then the player can Special Summon him back to the field (game says "new monster") and attack twice more because the game thinks it's a completely different monster even though it's the exact same one that already got his "turn" to attack.

It's the same situation when a monster is flipped face-down. The game "loses sight" of the monster when it's flipped face-down, and when it's flipped back up, the game sees it as an entirely new monster with all it's effects/priveleges intact.

ANY monster flipped face-down during the Battle Phase after attacking and flipped face-up again during the same Battle Phase is treated as a brand new monster and gets to attack again.

 

[masterwoo0]

ANY monster flipped face-down during the Battle Phase after attacking and flipped face-up again during the same Battle Phase is treated as a brand new monster and gets to attack again.

That is so categorically wrong on so many levels, I am not even going to try to argue why....

I'll just leave it at, under normal conditions, an "attack" is not an effect that you can "reset".

 

[Kyhotae]

It's not an effect that's reset. As far as the game is concerned, it's a new monster that hasn't attacked yet.

 

[HorusMaster]

Actually, his effect is that he can attack twice in the same Battle Phase. They don't have to be back-to-back. If you have another monster out and want to attack with that one in between "Mataza the Zapper"s attacks, you can.

As for the "Master Monk" attack reset thing. You guys seem be to missing an important concept. Face down monsters are considered "not summoned" until they are flipped face up. Essentially, the game doesn't think they are even a real monster, just a wall to the opponent's attack. So, with a monster face-down, the game thinks "no monster."

If "Twinheaded Beast" attacks twice and then the player activates "Beast Soul Swap", he returns to the hand (game says "no monster") and then the player can Special Summon him back to the field (game says "new monster") and attack twice more because the game thinks it's a completely different monster even though it's the exact same one that already got his "turn" to attack.

It's the same situation when a monster is flipped face-down. The game "loses sight" of the monster when it's flipped face-down, and when it's flipped back up, the game sees it as an entirely new monster with all it's effects/priveleges intact.

ANY monster flipped face-down during the Battle Phase after attacking and flipped face-up again during the same Battle Phase is treated as a brand new monster and gets to attack again.

ABSOLUTELY!! If a face down monster is considered ?UNKNOWN? then why wouldn't the effect reset itself? As already established by previous rulings, a face down monster is unknown and if it is unknown, how can you say that just because he has already attacked when normal summoned the first time than his effect doesn't reset when flipped face down by a card effect. Flipping him face down makes the monster an "unknown" and as such, you cannot say you know what the card is and what his effect is. He is unknown and as such, his effect has not be activated. Game mechanics, remember?

 

[slither]

It's not an effect that's reset. As far as the game is concerned, it's a new monster that hasn't attacked yet.

Incorrect, attacking is something the game state will ALWAYS remember, regardless of what happened to the monster.

 

[masterwoo0]

It's not an effect that's reset. As far as the game is concerned, it's a new monster that hasn't attacked yet.

How do you presume to say it is a new monster? For one, you can only summon a monster during the Battle Phase by effect, so merely flipping it face-down with Book of Moon and face-up with Desert Sunlight does not summon it.

A monster is only normal summoned by manually flipping it face-up from face-down. So if it is not summoned, it is not a new monster, and it has already had its "non-effect", normal attack per turn.

A monster's effect only, resets by flipping it face-up from face-down, by effect. That's the reason a monster (for sake of argument, a YELLOW Colored Coded monster) cannot attack twice, because he is still the same monster that was already face-up.

Master Monk's effect allows him to attack twice per turn. That is what gets reset when he is flipped face-up. A monster that has already attacked, does not get to attack again just because he does the "dance of darkness".

As I and Digital Jedi have already pointed out, Master Monk's effect is the ability to attack twice per turn, NOT just to attack one more time.

 

[Tkwiget]

Just for the record, there is no card in this game yet that allows you to Flip Summon in the Battle Phase..Sorry, that's just how it is for right now. So flipping a monster face down and then flipping it face up in the Battle Phase manually is a violation of game mechanics because Flip Summoning manually can't happen in the Battle Phase. It's a Main Phase action.

Another thing to consider is their's been two kinds of "Double Attack" monster effects. The Continuous and the Trigger. BLS's Double Attack is a Trigger effect because of that Divine Wrath Ruling and it requires to have destroyed a monster. Mazata the Zapper is Continuous because it doesn't require that and because the effect is worded more as a statement.

Things like monster attacks can't reset in the Battle Phase without a manual battle position change. You don't have more than 1 Battle Phase in a turn anyway and since their isn't any card that allows you to Flip Summon in your Battle Phase, you will never have the chance to attack with a previously attacked monster unless a card effect permits it. Attacks don't reset, only effects.

 

[masterwoo0]

Attacks don't reset, only effects.

Well said.

Although, I am wondering... If Master Monk's first attack is negated by Negate Attack, which also ends the Battle Phase; since he can attack twice per turn, does that allow him to start ANOTHER Battle Phase?

Of course, if he did, he would only be able to attack once more, but it is interesting....

 

[Tkwiget]

Yeah, well until they rule that Double Attackers have the ability to start another Battle Phase right after one ends, I say that if you put Negate Attack into the situation the whole Battle Phase ends and no more attacking. Which is how it has been ruled for quite some time from dozens of judges and has been asked on the Judge's List a few times I believe.

Cheer, Masterwoo0! XD

<holds up his mug of morning brew oranage juice and nods> ARRRRRRRR! <to be all piratey cause pirates own..>

 

[Digital Jedi]

I don't think anyone questioned whether a monster could be flipped summoned during tha Battle Phase. But there are fairly simple ways for the monster to be flipped down and back up during the attack without summong being involved.

 

[Kyhotae]

Just for the record, there is no card in this game yet that allows you to Flip Summon in the Battle Phase..Sorry, that's just how it is for right now. So flipping a monster face down and then flipping it face up in the Battle Phase manually is a violation of game mechanics because Flip Summoning manually can't happen in the Battle Phase. It's a Main Phase action.

Things like monster attacks can't reset in the Battle Phase without a manual battle position change. Attacks don't reset, only effects.

First of all, no one has said that there is a card that allows you to Flip Summon during the Battle Phase. Flip Summoning is not the issue. The issue is the monster that Disappeared and the new monster that reappeared (as far as the game is concerned) during the Battle Phase. Since it was flipped face-down, the game no longer recognizes it as a monster. If it gets flipped face-up by the route described on the judge's list, it is now a new monster (as far as the game is concerned) that has not had it's turn to attack this turn.

If it doesn't happen this way, then the ruling for "Master Monk" at the beginning of this thread would not be possible. His effect lets him declare two attacks, but game mechanics don't allow several attempts to declare two attacks unless it's considered a monster that didn't get his turn to attack yet (which is what the flip-down, flip-up effect does).

Secondly, the attack isn't reset. As far as the game is concerned, the newly flipped monster hasn't had a chance to attack yet.

 

[Digital Jedi]

First of all, no one has said that there is a card that allows you to Flip Summon during the Battle Phase. Flip Summoning is not the issue. The issue is the monster that [ycrdi="DB2-EN198"]Disappear[/ycrdi]ed and the new monster that reappeared (as far as the game is concerned) during the Battle Phase. Since it was flipped face-down, the game no longer recognizes it as a monster. If it gets flipped face-up by the route described on the judge's list, it is now a new monster (as far as the game is concerned) that has not had it's turn to attack this turn.

If it doesn't happen this way, then the ruling for "[ycrdi="TLM-EN020"]Master Monk[/ycrdi]" at the beginning of this thread would not be possible. His effect lets him declare two attacks, but game mechanics don't allow several attempts to declare two attacks unless it's considered a monster that didn't get his turn to attack yet (which is what the flip-down, flip-up effect does).

Secondly, the attack isn't reset. As far as the game is concerned, the newly flipped monster hasn't had a chance to attack yet.

Uh, where did you get the notion that a monster flipped face-down and back up again are considered new monsters by the game state? The only thing the game state forgets is the name and stats of the monster and if it's effect was used this turn. Its Attack and Summoning status are always remembered. This is not something that can be erased by flipping the monster face-down. I'm curious as to where your getting your information, because this has always been the case and fundamental mechanic of Yu-Gi-Oh!.

Flipping a monster face-down does not create a new monster as far as the game is concerned. The game knows full well that that's a monster on the field and what it's done this turn.

 

[Kyhotae]

It's an extrapolation from the "if a monster is face-down, it's not considered 'on the field'" mechanic. That along with this ruling for "Master Monk" make a strong case for what I'm saying. Read my other post. It's like they're saying that "Master Monk" being flipped face-down then face-up during the Battle Phase is the same as "Twinheaded Beast" being swapped out and back from your hand with "Beast Soul" swap. The monster is there, then it's not there, so it can declare another round of attacks.

 

[Digital Jedi]

Well, the only problem with your extrapolation is that there is no "if a monster is face-down, it's not considered 'on the field'" mechanic.

 

[Kyhotae]

Then why doesn't a monster that is flipped face-down after being using "Snatch Steal" doesn't go back to the opponent? Because the monster is not there anymore as far as the game is concerned, so there's nothing to send back.

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

What I was saying is maybe Master Monk's attacks are purely effect granted abilities. Effect: Attack twice.

Whereas something like Mataza the Zapper or Hayabusa Knight has an effect that gives you one more attack in addition to the usual. Effect: Attack once more.

One would be something you can reset the same turn. The other would be something you burn for the turn.

And there's the problem.

No official ever said "why" Master Monk gets to attack again, or forgets that it already attacked.

Like i said, the judge's list post made no explanation, and because of that it should be ignored.

You can assume all you want why this might be true, and all your explanations will be based on assumptions.

And should this ruling appear on the OFFICIAL site, it would require us to make assumptions to explain it.

But its not an official ruling, and there is nothing to support such assumptions previous to this post.

Until they give a reason why this ruling should be true, it would require more assumptions to explain than to just declare it wrong.

And that's why it should be ignored.

 

[slither]

It's an extrapolation from the "if a monster is face-down, it's not considered 'on the field'" mechanic. That along with this ruling for "Master Monk" make a strong case for what I'm saying. Read my other post. It's like they're saying that "Master Monk" being flipped face-down then face-up during the Battle Phase is the same as "Twinheaded Beast" being swapped out and back from your hand with "Beast Soul" swap. The monster is there, then it's not there, so it can declare another round of attacks.

What does not considered "on the field" mean?? it takes a slot in the monster zone it is still a monster.

Now in the example of Beast Soul Swap is another COMPLETELY different case as it is a summon, the monster left the field, therefore no more monster, it returns to the field by a summon which means that it is a completely different monster.

 

[Kyhotae]

You can assume all you want why this might be true, and all your explanations will be based on assumptions.

But its not an official ruling, and there is nothing to support such assumptions previous to this post.

Until they give a reason why this ruling should be true, it would require more assumptions that to just declare it wrong.

And that's why it should be ignored.

I like this guy. We are all making judgments about this ruling that cannot be backed up by anything but our understanding of how the game works. I have my reasons, you have yours and no one will know which is "right" until Konami says so...

 

[Digital Jedi]

Then why doesn't a monster that is flipped face-down after being using "Snatch Steal" doesn't go back to the opponent? Because the monster is not there anymore as far as the game is concerned, so there's nothing to send back.

The Monster doesn't go back because control issues are irrelavent when a monster is flipped-face down after taken by Snatch Steal. But the game still knws it's a monster. It would have to know in order to allow it to remain in a Monster Card Zone. Otherwise Embodiment of Apophis could remain in a Monster Zone when it's flipped face-down. But instead it has to return to the Trap Zone it orginated from.