Master Monk

masterwoo0

masterwoo0

NINJA4LIFE
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
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Kyhotae said:
Well then, can I get an acknowledgement that my theory, though you don't seem to like the way it was worded, could explain the thinking behind this ruling? Is there any documented ruling or post to the judges list that confirms that a monster that is flipped down then up during the same Battle Phase cannot attack again if it attacked before being flipped face-down? I don't remember reading one.
Click to expand...
There is no documentation that you can, if flipped-flopped, which is of more significance here. Certainly something of this nature, with such significant impact on the way the game is played would ave been addressed years ago. As it stands events, which are different from effects, are not something the game forgets for the turn. The rule book states: "a single monster can only attack once per turn." and we've never been instructed that this changes if flipped face-down and back up again.

Now one thing we have encountered, whcih I can't seem to find at the moment, is that if an attacking monster is flipped down and then up during the same Battle Step, that the attack continues as normal. One more reason to indicate that knowlege of an attack cannot be erased by a simple flip-flop.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The only thing I remember similar to that is if a card is turned into defense position when "Final Attack Orders" is on the field. Of course, that doesn't address the "face-down" issue.

Considering there's only one Battle Phase per turn, I would think that "Master Monk"s effect and the other effects are really the same thing. Probably just a slightly different translation from the Japanese that has the same meaning. Like saying "two times" instead of "twice." Different words, pretty much the same meaning.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
masterwoo0 said:
At some point in time, even a cornered animal realizes he has two choices, give up, or fight your way out.

There has never been to the best of my knowledge, a Game Rule or Game Mechanic that would support your saying that a monster flipped face-down becomes a new monster. If that were indeed the case, I could flip summon Swarm of Scarabs, use his effect to flip him face-down, use Desert Sunlight to flip him face-up again, and since he is now a "new monster" again, I could use his effect to flip himself face-down again, or, I could just flip summon him again to destroy a monster and just keep doing that because everytime I flip him face-down, he becomes a new monster.

The only time a monster becomes a new monster is when he is removed from the field and sent to the Graveyard, Removed from play Pile, or returned to hand or deck, and back to the Field. Flipping a monster face-down does not erase the fact that he was previously summoned to the field. The only thing it does is remove all stats for purposes of targeting or SOME external effects that require the use of a Specific Monster.

That, in itself, does not create a new monster upon flipping it face-up.

The statement you made about Twinheaded Beast being a new monster if returned to hand by Beast Soul Swap is indeed a true statement, and one I can agree with, solely based upon the fact that it WAS returned to hand, and Special Summoned to the field, making it a new monster for purposes of Attacks and Effects (curiously, I played the GX GBA Game, and my comnputer opponent used Snatch Steal on my Goblin Attack Force, attacked with it, and on my next turn, I returned it to hand with Penguin Soldier and summoned it, but it couldn't attack. How strange...). This is a basic mechanic, compared to using Call of the Haunted on a monster destroyed during the same Battle Phase.

We are all aware of the "without logic" rulings that we get from Konami. While some are very undesireable, that does not excuse the fact that certain things will always be the same.

1. A monster only gets one attack per turn, unless an effect states otherwise.

2. A monster's effect will be reset if he is flipped face-down.

3. A monster can only be summoned face-up to the field by manual placement, or the effect of a Spell, Trap, or Monster Card. A Spell or Trap Card Effect that flips a face-down monster face-up does NOT summon it.

Snatch Steal gives you or your opponent temporary control of a monster. If it is destroyed whle the equipped monster is face-up, the monster is returned to its original owner.

If the monster is flipped face-down, Snatch Steal is destroyed by Game Mechanics and no attempt is made to send the monster back to its opponent, as there is no "face-up" monster to return, and Snatch Steal has no condition to return a face-down monster to the original controller, unlike Change of Heart.

Not knowing what a monster is face-down does not make it a new monster. It just makes it unknown to your opponent, as they are unable to specifically designate it as a target by type, attribute, or monster effect, ie, I cannot tribute your face-down "Dark" monster for an effect, using Soul Exchange, because as your opponent, I do not know what your card is, as a normal Game Mechanic. If I use Change of Heart, the monster is now under my control, and I can now tribute the same monster for the effect.

Debate is debate. Arguing is arguing. No one is asking you to submit to our way of thinking, but you are not using adequate material to bolster support for your point of view, which is decidely "different" from the majority of those who have posted here.

As for those who would say to "ignore" the ruling from the Judge List, I say that is a hypocritical statement, as many times that same individual would solicit action from the Judge List for answers to many of the questions we have had that couldnt be resolved here. What makes "this one question" different?

You cant play mom against pop here. The Judge List is either acceptable as a source of Rulings, in conjunction with the "slow to update Konami Rulings", or not.
Click to expand...

Actually, what you said about Swarm of Scarabs is correct in that you can flip him face up, use both his effects, then flip him again with Desert Sunlight to flip him again. It's already established that you have already "manually" changed his battle position and that you cannot "manually" change his battle position again but with a card effect. You haven't attacked, just reset the card effect when it was flipped face down. Is this not correct?

EDIT: Never mind about Swarm of Scarabs. I was thinking of another "flip" effect monster, not a monster that can only be flip summoned. Understanding effect "flip" does not equal "flip summon".
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Kyhotae said:
Considering there's only one Battle Phase per turn, I would think that "Master Monk"s effect and the other effects are really the same thing. Probably just a slightly different translation from the Japanese that has the same meaning. Like saying "two times" instead of "twice." Different words, pretty much the same meaning.
Click to expand...

There is only one Battle Phase (unless you killed a Swords of Revealing Light with Weather Report), but a monster can have more than one Battle Step if an effect allows it to attack more than once per turn.

What needs to be defined further is the difference between "attack twice during the same turn" vs "attack twice during the same Battle Phase".

I still say that they, meaning Mataza the Zapper, Hayabusa Knight, Mermaid Knight, Cyber Twin Dragon, and the like must attack back-to-back if they attack twice, but that concept is skewed by Armed Samurai - Ben Kei, who also has the same text, but is allowed to alternate attacks with other monsters controlled by the turn player.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
masterwoo0 said:
There is only one Battle Phase (unless you killed a Swords of Revealing Light with Weather Report), but a monster can have more than one Battle Step if an effect allows it to attack more than once per turn.

What needs to be defined further is the difference between "attack twice during the same turn" vs "attack twice during the same Battle Phase".

I still say that they, meaning Mataza the Zapper, Hayabusa Knight, Mermaid Knight, Cyber Twin Dragon, and the like must attack back-to-back if they attack twice, but that concept is skewed by Armed Samurai - Ben Kei, who also has the same text, but is allowed to alternate attacks with other monsters controlled by the turn player.
Click to expand...

Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Beginning:
This card cannot be Normal Summoned or Set. This card can only be Special Summoned by removing from play 1 LIGHT and 1 DARK monster in your Graveyard. Once during each of your turns, you can select and activate 1 of the following effects:
- Remove from play 1 monster on the field. If you activate this effect, this card cannot attack during this turn.
- If this card destroyed your opponent's monster as a result of battle, it can attack once again in a row.




Ruin, Queen of Oblivion:

This card can only be Ritual Summoned with the Ritual Spell Card, "End of the World". If this card destroys your opponent's monster as a result of battle, it can attack once again in a row.

Mataza the Zapper:
This monster can attack twice during the same Battle Phase. While this card is face-up on the field, control of this card cannot switch.

See the difference? If it says "Once again in a row", it means it has to be back to back.

If it says "This monster can attack twice during the same Battle Phase", it means it don't have to attack back to back.

Other than that, Ben Kei wasn't the first with such an effect which had a ruling that it don't have to attack back to back (which is obvious to me), Asura Priest was the first, as far as I know.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Chillout1984 said:
Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Beginning:
This card cannot be Normal Summoned or Set. This card can only be Special Summoned by removing from play 1 LIGHT and 1 DARK monster in your Graveyard. Once during each of your turns, you can select and activate 1 of the following effects:
- Remove from play 1 monster on the field. If you activate this effect, this card cannot attack during this turn.
- If this card destroyed your opponent's monster as a result of battle, it can attack once again in a row.




Ruin, Queen of Oblivion:

This card can only be Ritual Summoned with the Ritual Spell Card, "End of the World". If this card destroys your opponent's monster as a result of battle, it can attack once again in a row.

Mataza the Zapper:
This monster can attack twice during the same Battle Phase. While this card is face-up on the field, control of this card cannot switch.

See the difference? If it says "Once again in a row", it means it has to be back to back.

If it says "This monster can attack twice during the same Battle Phase", it means it don't have to attack back to back.

Other than that, Ben Kei wasn't the first with such an effect which had a ruling that it don't have to attack back to back (which is obvious to me), Asura Priest was the first, as far as I know.
Click to expand...
Other than showing me the obvious, which is why I didnt list Black Luster Soldier or Ruin, because both of those effects are trigger effects, (not continuous) and already say that they must attack in a row in order to attack once again, you still didnt explain why they are different.

That's like saying an Apple is an "Apple" because it's shaped like an Apple. All I did was say the same thing over and over without any real explanation.

Ben Kei at least says in his ruling that he does not have to attack back to back. I have already stated that using another card to explain another is not always the safest route to go, as witnessed by Demise, King of Armageddon and Levia-Dragon - Daedalus.

An explanation of Battle Phase versus Same Turn is the key here, and I think it has a underlying meaning that I may have hit upon when I used Weather Report as an example.

Weather Report gives you a second Battle Phase if you destroy a Swords of Revealing Light.

1. Mataza the Zapper can attack twice in the same Battle Phase.

2. Master Monk (as long as he remains face-up on the field) can ONLY attack twice in the same turn.

In this example, Mataza the Zapper would get 4 attacks, while Master Monk will only get his two attacks, so if he attacked only once in the first Battle Phase, he could then attack again in the second one, but if he attacked twice in the first, he would not be able to attack again in the second.

So really, Master Monk's effect is a "restriction", rather than an actual "additional" effect attack.

Just my thoughts....
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I do believe the key difference is not how the "attack" text is stated but the Battle Phase and turn text are stated. I believe that cards like Matazza and Hayabusa are completely restricted by the twice during the Battle Phase, because the game, keeps record of what monsters have attacked and what phase is the game in.

Master Monk's case is slightly different, because is consitutes the "whole" turn, once he's effect is "reset" it is still the same turn there is no record of a phase nor a record of restriction.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
Now one thing we have encountered, whcih I can't seem to find at the moment, is that if an attacking monster is flipped down and then up during the same Battle Step, that the attack continues as normal. One more reason to indicate that knowlege of an attack cannot be erased by a simple flip-flop.
Click to expand...

Excellent Point.

Now what happens if Master Monk is flipped face-down and back up in its Battle Step?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
Now one thing we have encountered, whcih I can't seem to find at the moment, is that if an attacking monster is flipped down and then up during the same Battle Step, that the attack continues as normal. One more reason to indicate that knowlege of an attack cannot be erased by a simple flip-flop.
Click to expand...

I remember that post, and it refered to a monster being turned to face-up defense position, and then back to face-up attack position within the same chain, it didn't involve flips.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
Let's theorize then. Suppose I declare and attack and then for no apparent reason, someone activates Light of Intervention. For another non-apparent reason, Book of Moon is chained to Light of Intervention before it resolves targeting my attacking monster.

I think most of us know the chain we'll enough to know what would happen, but what happens to the attack?
Click to expand...

It will be cut off, because the monster is face-down...

But the monster can't attack again if somehow it's changed to face-up attack position, because you already declared an attack with it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Digital Jedi said:
Let's theorize then. Suppose I declare and attack and then for no apparent reason, someone activates Light of Intervention. For another non-apparent reason, Book of Moon is chained to Light of Intervention before it resolves targeting my attacking monster.

I think most of us know the chain we'll enough to know what would happen, but what happens to the attack?
Click to expand...
Im following this, but not getting what you are trying to do here. The attack is halted because of the followng resolution

Book of Moon resolves, flipping Master Monk face-down

Light of Intervention resolves, and since Master Monk is already face-down Light of Intervention doesnt force it face-up.

Chillout1984 said:
It will be cut off, because the monster is face-down...

But the monster can't attack again if somehow it's changed to face-up attack position, because you already declared an attack with it.
Click to expand...
You are talking about another monster other than Master Monk, right?

If the monster is not returned to face-up attack in the same chain, it will not be able to declare a second (which is in reality, the "initial" declaration) attack.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Whew. I wish someone would just post back to the judges list asking if this ability to declare an additional attack (or two) is special to "Master Monk" or something that all monsters now share.

If I could, I would.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I dont see what the confusion is. If you declare an attack with a monster that does not have an effect allowing it to attack more than once in the same Battle Phase or Same turn, it can ONLY declare one attack.

If that attack would be responded to by Book of Moon, and the turn player activates Light of Intervention, Light of Intervention would resolve first, and the effect of Book of Moon would Disappear as monsters cannot go face-down, and the attack would continue.

If Book of Moon is allowed to resolve, and the monster is later flipped face-up in attack in the same Battle Phase, it would be unable to declare a attack as the turn player has already declared an attack previously with the same monster.

Flipping a monster face-down does not make it forget it tried to attack. As long as the monster does not end the chain face-down, it can still resume the attack.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Upvote 0 Downvote
Okay, what I needed was to create a resolving chain that would flip-flop the monster. Bad choice of card effects on my part.

Okay, look at it this way. If I attack and a Book of Moon tries to flip it face-down and then a Desert Sunlight flips it back up and then a Level Limit - Area A put it into Attack Positition again, then what determines the battle Step is over? Can an attack be halted before the chain resolves fully? Is the monster still attacking? And if not, why?

I ask this because the answer points towards the essence of what an attack is.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I stated the scenario somewhat wrong, after I had made the complete chain I remembered that the attack could not interrupt the chain. Take that same scenario, but DNA Transplant being activated Later during that same Battle Phase:


P1 -> Attacks with Berserk Gorilla, selecting Giant Rat as an attack Target.
P2 -> activates Rush Recklessy selecting his Giant Rat.
P1 -> activates Gravity Bind.

Attack stops

P2 -> activates DNA Transplant calling out WATER.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
slither said:
I stated the scenario somewhat wrong, after I had made the complete chain I remembered that the attack could not interrupt the chain. Take that same scenario, but DNA Transplant being activated Later during that same Battle Phase:


P1 -> Attacks with Berserk Gorilla, selecting Giant Rat as an attack Target.
P2 -> activates Rush Recklessy selecting his Giant Rat.
P1 -> activates Gravity Bind.

Attack stops

P2 -> activates DNA Transplant calling out WATER.
Click to expand...

In this scenario I'm assuming that you are allowing the current chain to resolve so that the attack actually stops. And then in a new chain you are activating DNA Transplant (which won't make a difference because the attack was declared and stopped by the introduction of Gravity Bind to the field).

Now just as to DJ's question let's say I have Goblin Attack Force in attack position, a set Magician of Faith, an active The A. Forces on my side of the field and a set Desert Sunlight. My opponent has an Attack Position Summoned Skull, a set Book of Moon and an active Final Attack Orders.

I declare an attack with Goblin Attack Force and begin a chain with Desert Sunlight (I'll get a spell out of the graveyard and boost my GAF with the extra 200 I need to kill Summoned Skull instead of a suicide attack), my opponent chains to my Desert Sunlight with Book of Moon (obviously a mistake as it would have been smarter to wait and start a second chain after Desert Sunlight had resolved but he is nervous and didn't think it through). So we resolve the chain and my GAF has indeed flip-flopped and wound right back in attack position with a 2700 ATK and an attack that has been declared, but no ruling available on whether he will continue his attack or if it has now been stopped by his short sojourn as a face-down monster.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top