Ring of Destruction vs. Bottomless Trap Hole

T

Tkwiget

Da Twiggy Man!
Turn Player summons a Gemini Elf onto the field. Turn Player activates Ring of Destruction due to priority to destroy Gemini Elf knowing Player B has only 100 life points. Player B activates Bottomless Trap Hole.


Last time I checked Bottomless Trap Hole could only be activated in a response to a summoning. If Ring of Destruction is activated due to the fact Turn Player has priority to activate Spell Speed 2 cards from hand or on the field before opponent can activate cards, this means Bottomless Trap Hole wouldn't be activating in response to a summoning but would be placed in an illegal chain with Ring of Destruction.

This is just from thinking about it for a while that I've concluded that. Now if someone could please tell me what's wrong with the above situation? I feel as if Bottomless Trap Hole can't be activated because it's a non-chainable card.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
Steve visits here like once in blue moon. Or at the very least he only posts every once in a blue moon. Very rarely does he ever he come to clarify things unless a thread gets 90 pages long. And that may only be becasue the discussion is so heated that someone who knows him directs him to it. A little more interactivity would be welcome.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
novastar said:
It would stifle this forums great discussions.
Click to expand...
Not if he waited for the right moment. He could let the discussions bloom and blossom and laugh at us behind our backs, then BAM!, pop in and lay the smack down upon us!, and then sit back and watch us grovel by the mere fact he graced us with his presence.

Or something like that..;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
CerezScypher said:
Would this be correct gameplay structure in the same scenario?

TP summons Gemini Elf
TP passes on response window
OP passes on response window
TP activates Ring of Destruction
OP cannot chain Bottomless Trap Hole because the response window is gone and you're back to the "blank slate" of the main phase
Click to expand...
That 'should' be the correct way it's played. However, there was at one time a post from Kevin that stated something close to the following was a valid play:

TP Summons
TP Passes priority
OP Passes priority
TP then activates Torrential Tribute.

As you can clearly see, the 'response window' should have passed when the OP passed priority back to TP, but for some reason it didn't. We haven't heard anything more about whether this is actually the way it is or not, though.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
skey23 said:
That 'should' be the correct way it's played. However, there was at one time a post from Kevin that stated something close to the following was a valid play:

TP Summons
TP Passes priority
OP Passes priority
TP then activates Torrential Tribute.

As you can clearly see, the 'response window' should have passed when the OP passed priority back to TP, but for some reason it didn't. We haven't heard anything more about whether this is actually the way it is or not, though.
Click to expand...

Maybe John can explain if it's good or not and why.


Is this good the Turn Player can use his/her Priority when he/she summons a monster if the monster got a Iginition-Effect (Multi-Trigger too ?) and use his/her Priority to activate a Spell/Trap with Spell Speed 2 and 3 (3 only to the kind of action that stands on the card) after a summons.

And you got ''Priority'' in a chainlink to chain to a card of your oppent before he chains to his own card ?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
I'll quote myself!
skey23 said:
The turn player has priority to activate Appropriate Monster effects AND Spell Speed 2 and 3 Spell/Trap cards. The monster effects can be both Spell Speed 1 and 2, but the Spell/Trap cards can only be Spell Speed 2 and 3.
Click to expand...
So, yes, what you said is true.

Duelmaster said:
And you got ''Priority'' in a chainlink to chain to a card of your oppent before he chains to his own card ?
Click to expand...
Yes, you have the right to respond to what your opponent plays BEFORE they can chain something else to it.

Example:
TP summons
OP activates Ring of Destruction
OP then immediately chains Barrel Behind the Door

This is NOT allowed as you are given the opportunity to respond to Ring of Destruction. ONLY when you have no response to your opponents card or effect do they then get to chain to their own card/effect.

Hope this helps.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
TP Summons
TP Passes priority
OP Passes priority
TP then activates Torrential Tribute.

I've sat down and went over this with Kevin at the SJ Championship last Dec. in Anehiem. Since that time when I've stated it here people wanted it to be officially answered. I've given this scenario multiple times to the judge's list and have recieved no response.

I'm betting that until Kevin gets his essay on priority approved from Konami, (if ever) then and only then will we get the "official" answer to this question. You can bet though that will be how it's ruled come nationals or any other major event at which L3 judges are present.

Is it correct? <shrug> Can I explain why it's correct or not....nope....no more than you can.

Obviously the last thing to resolve was the summon. At this point that's the last "fact" to happen. The response chain has yet to be defined I'm afraid. We'd all love to see that definition.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
John Danker said:
TP Summons
TP Passes priority
OP Passes priority
TP then activates Torrential Tribute.

I've sat down and went over this with Kevin at the SJ Championship last Dec. in Anehiem. Since that time when I've stated it here people wanted it to be officially answered. I've given this scenario multiple times to the judge's list and have recieved no response.

I'm betting that until Kevin gets his essay on priority approved from Konami, (if ever) then and only then will we get the "official" answer to this question. You can bet though that will be how it's ruled come nationals or any other major event at which L3 judges are present.

Is it correct? <shrug> Can I explain why it's correct or not....nope....no more than you can.

Obviously the last thing to resolve was the summon. At this point that's the last "fact" to happen. The response chain has yet to be defined I'm afraid. We'd all love to see that definition.
Click to expand...

If that ruling *is* correct, then wouldn't this have to be correct as well:

TP summons Gemini Elf
TP passes
OP passes
TP activates Pot of Greed
OP activates Torrential Tribute

Since the last fact to resolve here was the summon, this *should* be legal if the above (the one John mentioned) ruling is true, and to my knowledge, this ruling that I've mentioned is not correct.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Fiendish Envoy said:
If that ruling *is* correct, then wouldn't this have to be correct as well:

TP summons Gemini Elf
TP passes
OP passes
TP activates Pot of Greed
OP activates Torrential Tribute

Since the last fact to resolve here was the summon, this *should* be legal if the above (the one John mentioned) ruling is true, and to my knowledge, this ruling that I've mentioned is not correct.
Click to expand...
Pot of Greed can't be activated in response to a summon.

Let's expand it a little further:

TP summons
TP passes
OP passes
TP must now declare:
-- "I activate a card in response to a summon, or
--i won't respond to the summon, and make a different move

So you may or not be able to chain Torrential Tribute to Ring of Destruction when both players passed first, it *should* be up to the turn player to decide how its being activated.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Pot of Greed is Spell Speed 1 and not Spell Speed 2 which is what the TP has to activate in response to his/her own summoning.

With your example Fiendish Envoy, you clearly state from both players passing any response to the summoning to make it successful. With that being said, the TP activates Pot of Greed and now Torrential Tribute can't chain to Pot of Greed because Pot of Greed isn't activated in a response to a summoning.

I think that's right....=/
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DaGuyWitBluGlasses said:
Pot of Greed can't be activated in response to a summon.

Let's expand it a little further:

TP summons
TP passes
OP passes
TP must now declare:
-- "I activate a card in response to a summon, or
--i won't respond to the summon, and make a different move

So you may or not be able to chain Torrential Tribute to Ring of Destruction when both players passed first, it *should* be up to the turn player to decide how its being activated.
Click to expand...

Isn't it

"I activate a card in response to a summon if I don't do that
than my opponent may respond the summons. You must give your opponent the change to respond to the summons isn't it ?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
So both players an pass on consecutively on a empty chain but the turn player can still start a new chain in responce to the same summon? What the crap!? That's just irritating. That would mean that the responce window just keeps cycling back onto itself each time a player passes. That makes absolutly no sense.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DJ, I don't think TP can. Because at that point if neither player has anything they want to activate in response to the summoning the summoning was then deemed complete and then other cards can start a new chain but not when priority passes from one person to the next and then back to the turn player without anything happening. That means the summoning was merely completed and something else can happen.

That's how I see it.

EDIT: I feel like that was poorly worded...sorry..xD
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
My problem is if this is what Kevin has said, then you can. And that just doesn't make any sense.
TP Summons
TP Passes priority
OP Passes priority
TP then activates Torrential Tribute.
Click to expand...
Two players pass in succession and the TP gets to repond to his own summon. The responce window has just cycled back on itself. No sense.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The mechanics should be that the summoning was complete. That's how I see it. It makes complete sense and it flows with chaining and activation rules doesn't it? So naturally I would think this would be correct. =/
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top