strike ninja
- Thread starter mikoal
- Start date
Yes, but ... Im weeeaaaring you dooooooooown, baby! I'm Im weeeaaaring you dooooooooown! lol 
LOL. I must admit I'm seeing a possibility that it could have a Remove Brainwashing effect. But I always saw the D. D. Scout Plane ruling as saying something more like this. "Removed from play is not my removed from play area and his removed from play area it is one big removed from play area where cards go. Now while they are there there are certain monsters which still have effects that can be activated and as such only the Owner of the card has the capability to use them. Regardless of which side of the field they were on when removed or which side they will be brought back to if a card effect is still affecting the monster such as IMT or Different Dimension Gate.
I also believe that if my opponent were to IMT one of my monsters from play on his side of the field and I activate Dimension Fusion only I could summon my monster that is removed from play. This has nothing to do with who would be "Controlling" the monster when it comes back to the field. Rather it is a simple game fact that monsters removed from play are identified as the owner's monster for such effects and interact primarily only with the owner when it comes to their own effects being able to activate from RFP. An effect such as IMT shouldn't erase "Control" of the monster and hand it back to the Owner. It could I guess. I just have never seen anything published that states that it does.
Anyway, yes you are making me question this possibility. Want to take odds on how long it takes UDE to answer the question?
I also believe that if my opponent were to IMT one of my monsters from play on his side of the field and I activate Dimension Fusion only I could summon my monster that is removed from play. This has nothing to do with who would be "Controlling" the monster when it comes back to the field. Rather it is a simple game fact that monsters removed from play are identified as the owner's monster for such effects and interact primarily only with the owner when it comes to their own effects being able to activate from RFP. An effect such as IMT shouldn't erase "Control" of the monster and hand it back to the Owner. It could I guess. I just have never seen anything published that states that it does.
Anyway, yes you are making me question this possibility. Want to take odds on how long it takes UDE to answer the question?
Well, thinking on it a little more I should say that it isn't that Removed from Play = Removing Brainwashing, but Remove Brainwashing that = Removed from the Field. This is actually what I was getting at.
If a Spirit Monster is taken by Exchange's effect and then summoned, it returns to the owners hand at the End Phase, not the summoner's. Use Complusory activation device on a "stolen" monster regardless of what effect "stole" it and it returns to the owner's hand. Shuffle monster cards back into the deck with Morphing Jar #2 and they return to the owner's deck. Monster that "reborn" themselves when destroyed and sent to the Graveyard return to the owners side of the field regardless of which side they were destroyed on. Apparently, D. D Scout Plane reacts the same way.
Everything I've seen indicates that control issues are reset when a monster leaves the field. I don't see how that would change because a monster was removed from play.
If a Spirit Monster is taken by Exchange's effect and then summoned, it returns to the owners hand at the End Phase, not the summoner's. Use Complusory activation device on a "stolen" monster regardless of what effect "stole" it and it returns to the owner's hand. Shuffle monster cards back into the deck with Morphing Jar #2 and they return to the owner's deck. Monster that "reborn" themselves when destroyed and sent to the Graveyard return to the owners side of the field regardless of which side they were destroyed on. Apparently, D. D Scout Plane reacts the same way.
Everything I've seen indicates that control issues are reset when a monster leaves the field. I don't see how that would change because a monster was removed from play.
A monster bouncing back to the hand does go back to the "Owner's Hand". And a monster that triggers when sent to the graveyard is activating in the "Owner's Graveyard." Monsters returning to the deck return to the "Owner's Deck".
Okay I'm with you on all of that. And the Scout Plane activation I just discussed as it can only be activated by the owner while it is out of play. But Interdimensional Matter Transporter changing Control of an Exchanged monster? That I have not heard of. And it doesn't follow the same logic. The other circumstances are dependent upon ownership. I see nothing at all that states removing from the field = returning control. I see that a destroyed monster goes to his Owner's Graveyard. And when returned to Hand or Deck it again is the Owner's Hand or Deck. IMT and Strike Ninja are only taking the monster out of play to typically save it from some type of effect you want to avoid. The monster should go right back to the field where it left from. In the event that that monster was affected by Change of Heart or Snatch Steal the monster returns to the original owner as IMT is not going to make the control change that was only temporary permanent. But it also doesn't erase the current controller of the monster. If my opponent used Exchange to take my Gemini Elf and then I used Snatch Steal to take it back. Next round he activates MST to destroy Snatch Steal and I chain with IMT. In the End Phase Gemini Elf will return to my side of the field and then revert to my opponent's side of the field. Why? Because he is the current controller of Gemini Elf. I'd need a permanent method of changing control to change that. Book of Moon instead of IMT would make her mine again. Creature Swap could make her mine again. Bouncing her back to the hand would make her mine again. Returning her to the deck would make her mine again. Destroying her would make her mine again. Control is not altered by Interdimensional Matter Transporter.
Okay I'm with you on all of that. And the Scout Plane activation I just discussed as it can only be activated by the owner while it is out of play. But Interdimensional Matter Transporter changing Control of an Exchanged monster? That I have not heard of. And it doesn't follow the same logic. The other circumstances are dependent upon ownership. I see nothing at all that states removing from the field = returning control. I see that a destroyed monster goes to his Owner's Graveyard. And when returned to Hand or Deck it again is the Owner's Hand or Deck. IMT and Strike Ninja are only taking the monster out of play to typically save it from some type of effect you want to avoid. The monster should go right back to the field where it left from. In the event that that monster was affected by Change of Heart or Snatch Steal the monster returns to the original owner as IMT is not going to make the control change that was only temporary permanent. But it also doesn't erase the current controller of the monster. If my opponent used Exchange to take my Gemini Elf and then I used Snatch Steal to take it back. Next round he activates MST to destroy Snatch Steal and I chain with IMT. In the End Phase Gemini Elf will return to my side of the field and then revert to my opponent's side of the field. Why? Because he is the current controller of Gemini Elf. I'd need a permanent method of changing control to change that. Book of Moon instead of IMT would make her mine again. Creature Swap could make her mine again. Bouncing her back to the hand would make her mine again. Returning her to the deck would make her mine again. Destroying her would make her mine again. Control is not altered by Interdimensional Matter Transporter.
You see this is the problem we have with this game. There are no seperate removed from game zones. Effects activate out of play. and affect whoever controlled the effect thatplaced them there. But ownership is still a factor.
so what exactly have we decided?
i personally think that there are 2 separate out of play zones
player a's out of play cards and player b's
and if player B removes player a's Strike Ninja, it should go to player a's zone, how can u have player A's card in your out of play zone?
i personally think that there are 2 separate out of play zones
player a's out of play cards and player b's
and if player B removes player a's Strike Ninja, it should go to player a's zone, how can u have player A's card in your out of play zone?
So far they really haven't stated that there are two seperate RFG zones.
masterwoo0
NINJA4LIFE
Removed from game has always been confusing language as far as where each card "does" go.
I see some players remove their own cards from play, and place them near their side, and when they happen to remove a card of their opponents (from their side), they give it to the opponent to place near their area.
But, when you read card effects that require you to summon monsters removed from play, some say "Summon as many monsters as possible..." Would that include monsters that you have removed of your opponents as well since there does not seem to be a separation of Zones (even though there is no defined zone)?
Although, when you read the card text from Dimension Fusion though, it seems as though there is clearly 2 separate responses; you summon yours, and they summon theirs.
I think that it is all dependent on the side a monster is removed from, and that monster can only return by the controller that removed him, so that if my opponent removes my Sacred Phoenix of Nephthys from play on his side of the field, even though it is my monster, I would not be able to summon it by Return from the Different Dimension since I did not remove it.
If that is true, then there really is a need to define where a monster goes when it is removed from play as that can have a big affect on the game in terms of eligible monsters returning to the field.
Also, Ruling #6 (Dimension Fusion) seems to acknowledge that there may be separate areas, and it does muddy the waters again as far as who regains/retains control of a monster that they are not the original owner of.
Wouldn't it just be EASIER to replace the Fusion Zone of the Playmat, and make it the "Removed from Game Zone"??? I mean, Fusions are pretty much optional for play, while there are so many effects in the game that make use of the other areas more frequently. At least frequently enough to warrant their placement on the mat.
I think it is even more plausible to do so now that you can have ALL THE FUSIONS (except Thousand-Eyes Restrict) in sets of 3, not just 20 different ones. I really dont see someone stacking a couple hundred (are there that many?? Don't feel like counting) Fusions on the field.
The first 10 or so released sets (well, there was Miracle Dig from Labyrinth of Nightmare) didnt really have this problem as the removed from game cards were pretty much, GONE. It wasnt until more access became available to those cards that it is now an issue. One that really deserves consideration as "Removed from Game" has now become the second "Graveyard".
I see some players remove their own cards from play, and place them near their side, and when they happen to remove a card of their opponents (from their side), they give it to the opponent to place near their area.
But, when you read card effects that require you to summon monsters removed from play, some say "Summon as many monsters as possible..." Would that include monsters that you have removed of your opponents as well since there does not seem to be a separation of Zones (even though there is no defined zone)?
Although, when you read the card text from Dimension Fusion though, it seems as though there is clearly 2 separate responses; you summon yours, and they summon theirs.
I think that it is all dependent on the side a monster is removed from, and that monster can only return by the controller that removed him, so that if my opponent removes my Sacred Phoenix of Nephthys from play on his side of the field, even though it is my monster, I would not be able to summon it by Return from the Different Dimension since I did not remove it.
If that is true, then there really is a need to define where a monster goes when it is removed from play as that can have a big affect on the game in terms of eligible monsters returning to the field.
Also, Ruling #6 (Dimension Fusion) seems to acknowledge that there may be separate areas, and it does muddy the waters again as far as who regains/retains control of a monster that they are not the original owner of.
Wouldn't it just be EASIER to replace the Fusion Zone of the Playmat, and make it the "Removed from Game Zone"??? I mean, Fusions are pretty much optional for play, while there are so many effects in the game that make use of the other areas more frequently. At least frequently enough to warrant their placement on the mat.
I think it is even more plausible to do so now that you can have ALL THE FUSIONS (except Thousand-Eyes Restrict) in sets of 3, not just 20 different ones. I really dont see someone stacking a couple hundred (are there that many?? Don't feel like counting) Fusions on the field.
The first 10 or so released sets (well, there was Miracle Dig from Labyrinth of Nightmare) didnt really have this problem as the removed from game cards were pretty much, GONE. It wasnt until more access became available to those cards that it is now an issue. One that really deserves consideration as "Removed from Game" has now become the second "Graveyard".
Each player has their own Removed from Play pile. They (UDE) have stated it several times before, if I'm not mistaken.
When a monster is removed from play it goes to the owner's RFP pile, not the controller's. Give me a little bit and I'll try to find direct quotes from the FAQ about this.
And if I'm coming in waaaay too late and have mis-read what's going on, then I apologize, but let me know if I am..lol.
When a monster is removed from play it goes to the owner's RFP pile, not the controller's. Give me a little bit and I'll try to find direct quotes from the FAQ about this.
And if I'm coming in waaaay too late and have mis-read what's going on, then I apologize, but let me know if I am..lol.
Good.anthonyj said:
Ok, not that I have seen or can remember. I do believe that I did ask this question on the Judge's List sometime last week.
I answered it how I thought it would work waaay back in post #6. But I'm not sure how correct that is now. I was basing that opinion on the fact that "Strike Ninja" didn't mention anything about the owner's side vs. the controller's side. But after reading the 1st ruling for "D. D. Scout Plane", I'm not so sure anymore..lol...because neither does "D. D. Scout Plane", but it is the owner that get's to special summon it, no matther who removed it from play.
All the evidence has been presented in this thread already, so i won't reiterate.
Strike Ninja would return to the side of the field of the player who activated his effect during the End Phase, and then return to the owners side of the field immediately.
The IMT ruling clearly points in that direction, specifically the Snatch Steal part of it, since SS's effect is removed from the monster (by SN's effect) in the same fashion BoM would.
Strike Ninja would return to the side of the field of the player who activated his effect during the End Phase, and then return to the owners side of the field immediately.
The IMT ruling clearly points in that direction, specifically the Snatch Steal part of it, since SS's effect is removed from the monster (by SN's effect) in the same fashion BoM would.
But that ruling deals with the monster still equipped with "Snatch Steal". There isn't anything that deals with the monster after it's been flipped face-down while equipped with "Snatch Steal".novastar said:
Also there is nothing at all under the IMT rulings to suggest that this is the case. I still don't see anywhere any clear ruling that suggests that removing the monster from the field will negate a current controller and send the monster back to the original owner. I see rulings where a monster that should be returned by Change of Heart, or by no longer being equipped with Snatch Steal are returned. But that is a far cry from concrete evidence that Removed From Play = Remove Brainwashing.
Has there been an OCG ruling that states anything about this?
Has there been an OCG ruling that states anything about this?
After more review, i'll retract my statements because they were off (not because the contradict with Scout Plane )
The JERP states that anthonyj is correct...and his logic is pretty much correct as well.
Because Change of Heart and Snatch Steal are creating an artificial control at the time of Strike Ninja's removal, he will return to the owner's side of the field.
If you control Strike Ninja with no effect, just regular plain jane permanent control, as would be the case of BoM taking SS away. Strike Ninja would return to the previous controllers field, and remain under his/her control.
My point about Special Summoning is valid though, as a Special Summon would reissue control to the player that recieved the Special Summon.
However, since this is not a Special Summon, and the previous controller had a "permanent" control of Strike Ninja, it would return to him/her (whoever activated the effect).
Good stuff anthony... i gotta make sure to check everthing before i post getting caught too many times here...
However, if you want UDE to answer it, the Board is where to go...
)The JERP states that anthonyj is correct...and his logic is pretty much correct as well.
Because Change of Heart and Snatch Steal are creating an artificial control at the time of Strike Ninja's removal, he will return to the owner's side of the field.
If you control Strike Ninja with no effect, just regular plain jane permanent control, as would be the case of BoM taking SS away. Strike Ninja would return to the previous controllers field, and remain under his/her control.
My point about Special Summoning is valid though, as a Special Summon would reissue control to the player that recieved the Special Summon.
However, since this is not a Special Summon, and the previous controller had a "permanent" control of Strike Ninja, it would return to him/her (whoever activated the effect).
Good stuff anthony... i gotta make sure to check everthing before i post
getting caught too many times here...However, if you want UDE to answer it, the Board is where to go...