Weird call of the tournament

[John Danker]

I just thought I'd start posting the weirdest rulings call I'm asked to make each tournament for fun.

Des Moines Regional last Sat.

Player 1 special summons Thousand Eyes Restrict and absorbs Player 2's face down monster, ends turn.

Player 2 draws and sets a monsters, ends turn.

Player 1 draws and in main phase 1 activates Nobleman of Extermination on the face down eqip. to his own Thousand Eyes Restrict.

If you want me to tell you how I ruled it I'd be happy to but it's not the intention of this thread. What I want to do is present scenarios to you to rule, on the spot, without looking them up.

It never fails, you always seem to run into at least one scenario you haven't seen before no matter how long you've been judging!

 

[novastar]

Maybe you guys are missing the point....

It is only considered to be an Equip Spell Card. Only Relinquished and Thousand-Eyes Restrict can "absorb" a monster.

The absorbed monster is considered to be an equip spell card REGARDLESS of whether it is face-up or down because of (we'll use Relinquished=REL) REL's effect. If the card that was absorbed is in fact face-down, then it is still counted towards REL's effect as 0/0 stat's and can be targeted by Nobleman of Extermination.

It is not "equipped", it is absorbed, and is only treated as an Equip Card since it is placed in the Spell and Trap Zone.

I think you are missing something.

"Select 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field and equip it to this card"

It IS infact equipped to Rel/TER and is considered an Equip Spell Card while on the field, from that point on.

A face-down Spell/Trap has no card type (Normal/Continuous/Equip), and is a legal target for Nobleman of Extermination.

A card Equipped to Rel/TER is considered an "Equip" and is not a legal target for Nobleman of Extermination, as it is a face-up Equip Spell with no stats. It is no longer considered a face-down card.

My ruling would be that it is an illegal target for Nobleman of Extermination.

 

[CraniumX]

You know, funny enough, I think I'd have to agree that it could be used. Sure, actual "equips" can't be equipped onto something face-down, but even though TER's text says "equip this monster", yadda yadda yadda, it's still ultimately an effect of the card itself causing the monster to become like an equip, but not an actual equip. The card itself is face down, and counts as a spell, which is all that's required to activate Nobleman of Extermination. In a way, compare to what can be done with Magical Hats, and its wording, since it turns non-monsters into "monsters", you can use CED to bounce them back to your hand, plus if Statue of the Wicked for example was still face down after being pulled out of your deck by Magical Hats, it gets "destroyed" by Magical Hats' effect while still face-down, and still activates. TER states that the selected monster is treated "like an equip spell card", but nowhere on TER does it say that the card being equipped is flipped face up, just that it's treated as a 0 ATK 0 DEF power-up. By actual game mechanics, it's still face down. Sure, you can't equip a normal equip spell while it's face down, but that's because like all other spells, you can't activate its effect while it's face down. TER still has to be face-up to "steal" the "equip" to itself, but no other requirements are stated. That's really all it takes, as rule number 1 is generally something like "If a card's text is different from what would normally be required the card to be used, the card rules override the game rule." Fusilier Dragon could be an example of that rule. By the number of stars on it, it /should/ take 2 Tributes to summon, but of course, it doesn't necessarily have to. Its effect will reset if flipped back face down, just like all other effects, so you can "cheat" your way into having a 2800 attacker. Of course, there's also Skill Drain. Hope all this wasn't too confusing...

What I think would be funny, is if the "equipped" monster were treated as a Trap, would that mean they all had to be removed from the game?

John Danker is quoted to have said:
Des Moines Regional last Sat.

Hmmmm, Des Moines, eh?
Any relation to Des Kangaroo, Des Koala, Des Counterblow, etc?
I smell a conspiracy here... and it smells like Aussies! Why, next thing you know, they'll even have a Des Wombat!

 

[skey23]

My ruling would be that it is an illegal target for Nobleman of Extermination.

Which is exactly what most of us were saying as well BEFORE John posted this:

According to the AARJ 1.2 it could be destroyed by Nobleman of Extermination.

Now the question is where did AARJ get the ruling?

I think we were trying to find a justification for this ruling since, usually in the past, if I'm not mistaken, the rulings on the AARJ have been correct.

 

[John Danker]

From the FAQ on Skill Drain....

Monsters equipped to "Relinquished" while "Skill Drain" is active are negated and destroyed because "Relinquished" no longer has an effect that allows it to be equipped with a monster, and "Relinquished"'s ATK and DEF are returned to normal.

Weird huh? Even though the absorbed monster is now considered an equip. Relinquished can't keep it. Of course it's the "considered" part.....<shaking head cartoon style> IEIEIEIEIEIEIEI

I did post the question to the judge's list a bit ago.

 

[novastar]

I see that, and i really don't agree with it.

It doesn't matter if the effect is changing it into an Equip Spell Card, as there are many effects that do the same, such as Blast with Chain.

To me calling it an "Equip" nullifies the fact that it is face-down.

 

[novastar]

From the FAQ on Skill Drain....

Monsters equipped to "Relinquished" while "Skill Drain" is active are negated and destroyed because "Relinquished" no longer has an effect that allows it to be equipped with a monster, and "Relinquished"'s ATK and DEF are returned to normal.

Weird huh? Even though the absorbed monster is now considered an equip. Relinquished can't keep it. Of course it's the "considered" part.....<shaking head cartoon style> IEIEIEIEIEIEIEI

I did post the question to the judge's list a bit ago.

Honestly that could be interpreted 2 ways.

"are negated and destroyed because "Relinquished" no longer has an effect that allows it to be equipped with a monster"

That to me says that the Equip has an illegal target now, and when Equips have an illegal target they are destroyed.

 

[kingpinopie]

I see that, and i really don't agree with it.

It doesn't matter if the effect is changing it into an Equip Spell Card, as there are many effects that do the same, such as Blast with Chain.

To me calling it an "Equip" nullifies the fact that it is face-down.

I agree ..... an equip cant be face down... I think that TER's effect DOES keep it there, but it sort of like snatch steal ..... its on your side till snatch steal is negated or destroyed.... ( ok, so thats as far as that point goes)... I think it should be considered a face up equip, cuz once it is technically face down it isnt equipped anymore, like snatch steal.... the monster get flipped down by book of moon, its technically face down, and not able to be equipped with snatch steal adn you get your monster back.... whereas with TER, its the other way around with TER being the snatch steal. ( sort of)... ok, now i am confusing myself......

Bottomline.. an equip can only be equipped if it is face up...... this equip card just happens to have the appearance of a face down monster card with no boost effect is all.... ( they should make a card that flips S/T cards face down, like Book of Earth or something)....

 

[DimensionalWarrior]

Honestly that could be interpreted 2 ways.

"are negated and destroyed because "Relinquished" no longer has an effect that allows it to be equipped with a monster"

That to me says that the Equip has an illegal target now, and when Equips have an illegal target they are destroyed.

But the equipped cards have no effect! It's relinquished's effect that holds them and based on the position it calculates the Atk and Def!

EDIT: If Relinquished were equipped with Mage Power, Mage would remain on the field if Skill Drain is Activated

 

[masterwoo0]

What's so wrong about it being face-down? The text states, "Select 1 monster..."

Thats the same with Nightmare Wheel. "Select 1 monster..." the monster can be face-up or down when selected.

Being face-down doesnt stop it from being a monster when selected, and it doesnt stop it from becoming an equipped card giving TER/REL 0/0 after it has been absorbed, even if it is face-down.

The effect makes the card an equip. As stated, when Skill Drain is activated, since TER/REL no longer have the ability to retain the monster absorbed, it would be destroyed/sent to the Graveyard because it was only an equip by effect.

 

[CraniumX]

Since I see no published rulings on TER in RONIN at the moment, what about if TER were flipped face-down with Book of Moon? Is there a ruling on this? Would the monster "equip" get destroyed, since it has no legal target, would it just go back to your opponent's monster zone, would it just sit there meaninglessly, or would it get re-equipped as soon as TER is flipped back face-up. Whatever the ruling on this case would be, I would think it would affect the way things work with Nobleman of Extermination. I could honestly easily see this ruling going either way, but I'm still inclined to believe you could use NoE on the face-down "equip" monster, because TER's effect alone overrides the normal fact that you can't equip a normal face-down card to a creature. Just like other cards override the normal game mechanics. Sasuke Samurai/Mystic Swordsman LV2, Fusilier Dragon, Royal Command, Goblin Fan, the list goes on and on.

 

[novastar]

TER states that the selected monster is treated "like an equip spell card"

I don't know where people are getting this from, if you check the Card Registry it clearly shows on both Rel/TER.

"Select 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field and equip it to this card (this effect can only be used once per turn and you can only equip 1 monster at a time to this card)."

It does not say "treated" it simply says "equip it"

This is an interesting question though.

 

[novastar]

Since I see no published rulings on TER in RONIN at the moment, what about if TER were flipped face-down with Book of Moon? Is there a ruling on this?

It would be destroyed. There is no question about that.

 

[kingpinopie]

Book of Moon... hmm.. it goes away cuz TER is not face up to have its effect, AND an equip spell cannot be on a facedown monster.

Do we have any Equip spells that can stay on a monster or even be equipped while face down??? hmmm.... no i dont think so.. But we do have Equip spells that have all kinds of strange effects, the way the monster is equipped to TER or Rel. it is treated as an equip spell card... NOW, as an equip spell card (sort of like Treating the Harpie names)... it IS NOW an equip spell... with no effect but the appearance of either a face up or face down monster whose ATK/DEF are taken on by TER or Rel.....

Thousand Eyes Restrict
As long as this card remains face-up on the field, other monsters cannot change their positions or attack. This monster can take on the ATK and DEF of 1 opponent's monster on the field (a face-down monster results in an ATK and DEF of 0). Treat the selected monster as an Equip Magic Card and use it to equip "Thousand-Eyes Restrict". You may use this effect only once per turn and can equip "Thousand-Eyes Restrict" with only 1 monster at a time.

 

[novastar]

What's so wrong about it being face-down? The text states, "Select 1 monster..."

Thats the same with Nightmare Wheel. "Select 1 monster..." the monster can be face-up or down when selected.

Being face-down doesnt stop it from being a monster when selected, and it doesnt stop it from becoming an equipped card giving TER/REL 0/0 after it has been absorbed, even if it is face-down.

The effect makes the card an equip. As stated, when Skill Drain is activated, since TER/REL no longer have the ability to retain the monster absorbed, it would be destroyed/sent to the Graveyard because it was only an equip by effect.

The question is not whether you can select a face-down monster for Rel/TER's effect.

The question is, once equipped, is it considered a face-down Spell or Trap Card.

I don't beleive it should be, but the ARRJ suggests otherwise.

 

[masterwoo0]

I think the problem lies in the fact that the card really isnt an Equip Card per se. The rule book (and I know this will be an argument in itself) says that even though some cards do not have the "symbol" stating they are equips, some effects cause them to be "treated" as an equip card, like Call of the Haunted.

 

[novastar]

Yeah lets not debate about that.... there is no doubt Call is NOT an Equip or "treated" as one.

Also if what you say is true, and it is not really an Equip Card (which is definately disagree), then it supports the idea that it is an illegal target for Nobleman of Extermination.

Since its not "really" a Spell Card, how is the world can Nobleman target it, it in actuality would be a face-down monster "acting" as an Equip.

In reality it IS an actual Equip Spell Card while equipped to Rel/TER, as Eternal Rest, Collected Power could affect it.

 

[novastar]

Thousand Eyes Restrict
As long as this card remains face-up on the field, other monsters cannot change their positions or attack. This monster can take on the ATK and DEF of 1 opponent's monster on the field (a face-down monster results in an ATK and DEF of 0). Treat the selected monster as an Equip Magic Card and use it to equip "Thousand-Eyes Restrict". You may use this effect only once per turn and can equip "Thousand-Eyes Restrict" with only 1 monster at a time.

That is the old text, the Card Registry has the updated text, and it doesn't use the word "treated"

 

[kingpinopie]

That is the old text, the Card Registry has the updated text, and it doesn't use the word "treated"

Well it should.... ok.. here is the new text.... sorry...

Thousand Eyes Restrict
[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]As long as this card remains face-up on the field, other monsters cannot change their battle positions or attack. Select 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field and equip it to this card (this effect can only be used once per turn and you can only equip 1 monster at a time to this card). The ATK and DEF of this card become the same amounts as the monster equipped to this card. If this card is destroyed as a result of battle, the equipped monster is destroyed instead. [/font]


Well, according to this, its just a monster equipped... Now if that doesnt support the fact that it ISNT an equip spell OR TREATED as one, i dont know what does... I dont think that there is anyway it can be targeted with Nobleman of Extermination now..... hmm but if this is the case, can you use CROSSOUT on it?? maybe this question held some bearing on the ruling that John posted....... *thinking

 

[CraniumX]

Well, I was reading the TER in front of me, instead of looking at the errata from RONIN, etc.

RONIN states:
Thousand-Eyes Restrict
Fusion Monster (Spellcaster / DARK / 1 Star / ATK 0 / DEF 0)

"Relinquished" + "Thousand-Eyes Idol"
As long as this card remains face-up on the field, other monsters cannot change their battle positions or attack. Select 1 monster on your opponent's side of the field and equip it to this card (this effect can only be used once per turn and you can only equip 1 monster at a time to this card). The ATK and DEF of this card become the same amounts as the monster equipped to this card. If this card is destroyed as a result of battle, the equipped monster is destroyed instead.


The original card states:
As long as this card remains face-up on the field, other monsters cannot change their battle positions or attack. This monster can take on the ATK and DEF of 1 opponent's monster on the field (a face-down monster results in an ATK and DEF of 0). Treat the selected monster as an Equip Spell Card and use it to equip "Thousand-Eyes Restrict". You may use this effect only once per turn and can equip "Thousand Eyes Restrict" with only 1 monster at a time.


So really, if you look at both texts, the card seems to need new errata again, because while the old text mentioned a face-down monster resulting in ATK and DEF of 0, nowhere on the new card text is this mentioned, yet, nowhere on the old card text was mentioned that If this card is destroyed as a result of battle, the equipped monster is destroyed instead, yet, it's mentioned on the new card text. That would seem to me that both cards are still messed up, as far as text clarity goes.

Still, on either way, the old card said to "treat it as an Equip Spell Card", but specifically mentioned the face-down part, yet the new text just says "equip it to this card", but makes no mention of it being treated as a spell... so really, without some firm, laid out rules, it's all still left up to interpretation. Both cards are lacking important key words which would make this ruling much more simple.

Edit: Yeesh! Why don't 4 people just post a message while I'm typing this whole thing up. >_>

 

[kingpinopie]

so obviously they know that a face down monster's ATK and DEF are unknown, making them zero for this effect..... and since they no longer mention it being an equip spell card, its not...... cuz they want to avoid matters like this??? maybe?? or maybe they just dropped the ball, and have no clue what they did after all that thinking ...... I still say it is not a proper target for Nobleman of Extermination...... that is my final answer, and is backed by the new errata.... ( thats my story and Im sticking to it.. )lol.... *puts helmet back on*