I do not mind admitting to the incorrect / partial logic to why Magnifica's tagging effect can only be used once per chain, but it doesn't change the fact that it is only once per chain. The logic is a bit harder to deduce as no hard rule has been written regarding these quick effects (unless there is link me), if we are working thru precendences then I don't think it is clearly defined enough. Because it moves itself to another part of the game state. It's fair point. The cost logic doesn't apply to Ehther apparently as it can only be used OPT. Fairy Tail Snow - may seem to be an outlier. However, it is the only monster that is working out of the GY compared to Gamma, Whiptail, Ehther. Even if the conversation was brought forward again, it we would still be in the same space.
Hey TomBox, could you explain why Darktellarknight Batlamyus, when there is 7 or more "tellarknight" monsters with different names in the Graveyard, cannot activate it's effect twice in the same chain? It does have a cost of detaching a xyz material+discard 1 card in the hand...
in the swap frog ruling, wasn't the player technically incorrect for looking through their deck with no cards in it to send? i agree that swap frog must send itself to the graveyard, but doesn't the activating player get a penalty for illegally checking the deck in the first place?
Another thing about appointer is the "Reveal your entire hand... then", you can't activate it with an empty hand. Seen too many people do this illegally
that pretty obviuos , what is not that i noticed playing edopro is if the only card u have is a revealed lord of heavenly prison u can t use appointer cause u can t reveal a card already revelead
BRUH. For Appointer I actually had this misruled against me at a 3v3. I appealed to a judge when the old ruling was used and they said the “next turn’s end phase.” It cost my team that match and I was able to pull up neuron post-match that showed that this was a misruling. Judge felt bad about it but it was like “oof.” I’m glad you mentioned this ruling so that no one has to go through that miscall.
That Swap Frog ruling is a simulator PTSD moment for anyone who's ever played frogs on Master Duel or YGOPro. Kind of sad it's ruled that way, but it's understandable.
As awesome as all this ruling information is, it just highlights further we need an official rulings database in the TCG that doesn't leave rulings open to personal opinions and interpretations. Many a game have been lost or won because the judge was cool with one of the players or had no idea about the ruling so they half assed it ;/ It sounds harsh but I'd imagine making the job the Judges easier not harder in a already complex game an optimal solution. Like seriously that Lotus ruling. It even says it in the card "Until the Next End Phase" as in the next one that opponent currently will enter. Just sounds like something a shady player will use to cheat out a win they don't deserve by not allowing the card to return to hand on the upcoming end phase >.> There are card texts that do say "X until the the phase on the opponents next turn" but Lotus doesn't say that lol. Thats like telling a Branded player who dumped a fusion they don't get a search until their end phase of their next turn lol.
8:15 You're definitely right. It's not up to opinion. That's a misplay, not an illegal play. It's like activating e tele when you only have psychics in hand but wanted to summon from Deck. Or activating small world and realizing a bridge you wanted doesn't exist.
Small world isn't a good example since it only involves the deck When activating something like emergency teleport, you can't pick up your deck and look through it if the only applicable monster is in your hand
@@Chackothewacko If I lack any Psychics in deck and I only have targets in hand (banished all my Psychics off Desires, for example), would it be legal for me to look in my deck to see if I have targets or would I be making an illegal move?
@@GlitchyPikachu if you want to summon from the deck despite not having targets, because the cards banished from desires is private knowledge, you can check for targets in deck, however if there's a legal card to use for e-tele you must resolve it.
10:15 It's a confusing ruling for some, because I've had head judges at regionals say that the card comes back on the next turn's end phase. My friend was playing Paleo Frogs at the time and was siding this card to beat evenly matched (this was years ago), and this was the ruling that was given.
"You wouldn't be able to use Exosister's effect to stop the Chalice, because even though her effect isn't Once Per Turn, you cannot activate a Quick Effect twice in one chain unless that Quick Effect has a cost" I swear to god sometimes it feels like Konami just makes up random bullshit daily lol Edit: Yes future commenter, I know it prevents loops
The magnifica cost is to bounce back a material so there is a cost, also it doesnt specify the "once per chain" restriction, so in theory the play should be call magnifica's effect, then bounce back a material to xyz, then ch4 bounce back the last material and after that there is no way to activate the effect.
I believe the first ruling about magnifica is incorrect. if you go to the yugipedia page about quick effects, it says: "The same Quick Effect can be activated multiple times during the same chain as long as it cannot chain to itself. Quick Effects with the ability to chain to themselves may only be used multiple times per chain when they have an activation cost they can continue to pay." Since magnifica cant chain to herself, she can activate her effect multiple times in the same chain.
The ruling regarding magnifica isn't incorrect, the issue i have is the reason why that was given (cost doesn't matter here at least in theory). Quick effects with the card activating the effect moving itself is generally ruled to be once per chain. Check the rulings for zoodiac whiptail, retaliating C, darktellarknight, brilliant spark, aether heavenly monarch (on the DB.ygorganization page).
@@yoshikagekiller8044 few things: 1. about all the monsters that activate in the hand, I believe they cannot activate their effect again, because you must be able to reveal them to activate their effect, but they are already revealed from the first activation, so you cant. 2. about brilliant spark, I dont see how this card is relavant, perhaps you confused it with a different card. 3. about batlamyus, I did see a ruling in ygorg db, but its in japanease, and the google translate isnt very helpful. 4. about your statement that monsters that move themselves are once per chain, do note the magnifica moving herself is optional, after you retun the xyz material to the extra, you can choose to keep magnifica on field.
@@vladnudel1447 The relevant ruling for darktellarknight on the DB ygorganization was translated. Brilliant spark's gy effect is relevant here (which also has a translated ruling regarding how its once per chain). And while it is true that its optional to summon itself, that doesn't seem to change the ruling (at least according to the database and you can look at yugipedia which links you to the database (which is in japanese)
From what I have been told when a similar situation to the frog scenario came but it was a chain link scenario where the chain links were being built and it went as follows, they intended to use something as cl4 to respond to something at cl2 which is not something you get to do and that even though cl4 is legal to activate because it can negate cl3 due to the intentions of the player using a card as cl4 you would rewind to before they played their card. That is how it was explained to me and as far as I know how it works.
Something similar happened to the Swap Frog thing at OC Champs. A guy uaed Super Poly, i tending to make Mudragon, but misread the requirements. Ended up having to resolve it by using his on Toadally Awesome and Reinoheart
The issue in your swap frog example is the deck is illegally searched (nothing to send) You can’t fix something illegal by forcing something legal. You’d have to go all the way back to when the swap frog would trigger, you don’t go back to at resolution.
Except that.. SWAP FROG doesn't ONLY send from the DECK and It SENDS also from the field. They are NOT separate effects. Nothing is forced to be legal here. The activation and resolution are BOTH legal. The activation was successful, Swap frog's sending effect doesn't target, and there is in public knowledge a card that CAN legally be sent away. "You can send 1 Level 2 or lower WATER Aqua monster from your Deck or face-up field to the GY. " The person resolving Swap Frog should not reveal private information about their deck they just have to upon resolution legally resolve the effect. Now, was the deck illegally searched, that is debatable. This is a private knowledge item. As swap frog's effect does give you access to the deck, it is up to the controller of the swap frog to maintain knowledge of their own deck. If a player activated SWAP Frog and picked up their deck, see a potential target, but wants it in the deck so it can be summoned BY Toadally Awesome, and then sends the one on the field instead by choice. You don't know if that search was illegal or not because its private knowledge and the effect provides access to both field and deck. The player resolving SWAP FROG is essentially is a foolish burial but it can also send from the field. It doesn't target. This isn't even new. During the Nekroz Format, when players activated, their ritual spells, but got their Shurit mind crushed out of the hand. Players said "Oh no I cannot summon ...." but upon confirmation., so they CAN summon and needed to legally resolve the card (as Ritual summons do not target as well) they were pushed to legally ritual summon their Trishula using Brionac and a Clausolas in hand. Unlike Activating A Compulsory Evacuation Device attempting to target Kozmo Dark Destroyer, while controlling a stardust dragon. As the action of targeting Dark Destroyer was Illegal, the activation was illegal and the game state is rewinded to before the activation of Compulsory Evac Device. This Swap scenario, activation is clearly legal by public knowledge. Swap frog can send itself to the GY. The resolution is successful (Player has the option to send from either place a Deck or Face up card on the field, non target). Otherwise, when a player is resolving an effect that is unfavorable to themselves, they can attempt to play dumb and purposely choose an incorrect target to revert the game state. Intentionally doing so is a UC - Cheating infraction. Again, it could be up to the judge's discretion, but this is clearly an inexperienced misplay and a lesson.
@@MSTTV but see you can’t search the deck for a target decide you don’t wanna send that one then pick to send from field. Searching alone causes a broken game state. Say the player is playing the frog package in their tear deck. In the way you said in your reply they search decide they don’t want to send the dupe and instead send the swap on field. Any tearlaments that have been put on the bottom would then be freely shuffled rather than remaining on the bottom. Your example would be giving the frog user a free shuffle whenever they want basically, when in yugioh a search is considered illegal if theres nothing to send and you can’t fail a search like in Magic/Pokémon even when there is a valid search target. You have to decide at resolution where you’re sending from.
@@sh1nypantsgaming661 now we've entered the realm of Procedural Error right? From how I see it: The effect can fully resolve and game state of the deck can be repaired within a physical sense. That particular game state can be repaired even with Tearlament cards at the bottom. As the deck content is considered private knowledge. However whatever else that was applied can be fixed fairly. Previous game states can be undoed to ensure the deck randomized properly and other known parts of the deck still applied.. ie. Pull out fusion material at the bottom (keep the order private), randomize the deck, place them back. Continue play. Either way that deck is going to get shuffled regardless. Tear at the bottom or not. I could possibly see 2 outcomes from this. If picking up the deck caused an improper game state, then a PE Minor will be issued. If we're to rewind the game state to the nearest state where both players agree is legal. The resolution was illegal, then we rewind to where the activation of the effect in which both players know is legal. (Deck is shuffled, and Tear cards can be repaired), Which they would still have to send. Or They rewind the whole effect, to the summon of the frog, (both players would agree it is legal), deck is still shuffled (tear cards can be repaired at the bottom), Player has the option to opt out of the effect. (This case is more lenient and more possible at locals) Both cases PE - Minor - Warning issued for illegally searching the deck. Any future swap frog sending PE resulting in an illegal deck search will result in a penalty upgrade. We don't force activations to become legal, absolutely. If a chain builds on top of it. Swap Frog cL1, effect veiler cl2, called by cl3. Called by hits the veiler, Veiler negated Swap frog (deck pick up),.etc.. All cards played are legal during their point of activation, at this point we don't rewind the entire resolution of all the other cards just for swap to not activate anymore. If the stardust compulse example, compulse target an untargetable card a while I control a stardust and it happened as a chain link 3, we don't undo chain links 1 and 2, we revert back to the latest legal game state at chain link 2.
regarding the gamma ruling i always understood that you COULD activate gamma multiple times in the same chain, however it would only negate the most recent thing it was chained to due to the fact you cannot summon it since it is already on the field, and gamma reads that you have to summon it/driver “and if you do” to negate the effect i.e cl 1 whatever, 2 gamma, 3 ash, 4 gamma again, ash would be negated, but the cl 1 would resolve is that not correct?
Im not sure you got the magnifica ruling right, edo pro lets me use that effect more than once in the same chain. Also I don’t think it’s true that you can’t activate the same quick effect in the same chain because there are cards like horus lvl 8 that I know for a fact can negate multiple cards in the same chain.
I have played in ocg and talked to many tcg judges and i believe is is wrong with magnifica. We have seen it be chained multi times and ocg judges allowed it
When playing master duel, you can chain your gamma to a monster eff on field, you get ashed, then you can gamme the ash with the same gamma on the same chain
@@machinayrequiem8596 i don't really get what you are saying. Naturia beast isn't once per chain. The issue with magnifica and similar cards is that they move themselves
¿If i activate "Link into The Vrains" and special summon 1 "Scareclaw Astra" and use it to link summon 1 "Scareclaw Light-Heart", my opponent can use "Infinite Impermanence" to "Scareclaw Light-Heart" in respond to the effect of add a "Primitive Planet Reichphobia"?
"Next" isnt even necessary and has no meaning in the card text as it leads to more confusion than if it was simply "until your opponents end phase" it is more logical to deduce that it is speaking not of "this" end phase, but the next because "next" should serve a purpose if its worth being added.
According to Section V, Tournament Play, letter C, Note-taking, I do not see how keeping track of Tearlaments activations is legal. What category does that fit into between Life Points, Mandatory effect reminders, and Tracking of turns and turn counters?
Well, it is at their discretion, however if you want to bring it up again: Point #4 on Page 35 in v 2.1 Tournament Policy Document. "• Tracking of effects or actions necessary to maintain a legal Game State." Would support the maintenance of the game state and prevent reactivation. But note that another point also ensures you have to do this in a manner which does not impact the game.
@@MSTTV I guess I could read the policy documents more but I was under the impression this only applied to mandatory effects. Otherwise i feel it'd be a pretty common thing to have note takers. Which can have a various degree of stalling on the timer, which is why it wasn't allowed.
So I had a play in question, my opponent activated psyframe gear gamma on me in a chain and I activated ghost belle in response. Are they able to reactivate gamma in a new chain or no?
What about the swap frog ruling that says : you CAN send one etc..., is the searching in your deck considered intent and therefor it has to resolve? I was under the impression that CAN implied an optional effect?
@Andy4995 thanks a lot for the extensive explanation, really appreciate it! Just to be sure, if you summon swap, you can just opt to not use its effect to summon, right?
The appointer judge call decision that you seem to be referencing looks more like it's complying with the second eratta rather than the third. From what I see on Fandom in the case of the order of the eratta. Only way I see this ruling to be correct is if the eratta on Fandom's website is just plainly in the wrong order.
Now, as a judge and according to many judges, we cannot reference Fandom or Yugipedia as a ruling source. Players in the middle of locals probably reference those pages, but a judge should be exercising, latest errata, PSCT, and fast effect timing and logic. Although players may reference an actual source sometimes, they aren't always correct or up to date. Then that causes errors for players in the moment.
@@MSTTV I can understand that but where else would we reference? Also on that website I only see the difference in the information being the order of the errata. Your logic makes sense for the second errata. But not the final one. Where would we as players be able to find the correct rulling?
No, game state can be reverted. Because you cannot consider that as the only chain link as well. If additional cards were played you cannot revert it. Deck is considered random and private. If they looked they need to randomize, issue a PE minor warning. If there are cards at the bottom of the deck that were Placed via, tearlament then.. pull them out, randomize the rest of the deck. We revert what we can.
Another Ruling: Is it possible to use ghost belle on Toadally Awesome's Negate Effect, even if toad negates a spell/trap or only if it negates monster and what happens to negated linkmonster which cant be set to field? For Refernce time thief redoer can be ashed, even if theres no spell as xyz material under it
If toad chains to any monster effect (regardless of where or how the effect was activated) then belle can be chained. (same with if toad is being chained to the activation of a pendulum scale) The link stays in the gy since it can't be summoned face-down (but even in that scenario, belle can chain to a toad that is trying to negate a link). Belle can't be used if toad is chained to the activation of a spell/trap (except for pendulum scales since they are monster cards)
The reasoning for Magnifica and Gamma is incorrect. You can't activate them multiple times in the same chain because they wouldn't be able to resolve properly (Magnifica can't become an xyz material twice, and Gamma can't summon itself twice without another copy activatibg). Optional effects being safeguarded from infinite activations is now included in card texts, but there is a general rule that you can't purposely perform an action that would not advance the game's state, which goes with infinite activations.
@@Nickcool1996 Cost isn't the issue. Since we have cards like heavenly monarch, darktellarknight and brilliant spark that follow the same principle as gamma/whiptail/retaliating c/magnifica (darktellarknight, brilliant spark and heavenly monarch all have costs for their effects and still follow the same principle.) Who knows why snow works like that (maybe because it banishes 7 potentially but eh)
@@blitzcam As far as I've understood it before you could return a fusion monster to the extra as a material then fusion that same copy as long as you had a legal target to begin with but I've been told recently this is not true or that it no longer works like this
@@cooldeadpunk777 you choose the monster you are summoning before choosing its materials. You can't use, say, a Kitkallos as material for itself, because by the time that Kitkallos is being used as material, you have already made the selection as to what is being Fusion Summoned, and it can't have been that Kitkallos, since it wasn't in the Extra Deck. If you have two Kitkallos, 1 in GY and 1 in Extra, then sure, you can use one for the other. But you can't use Kitkallos for itself.
@@cooldeadpunk777 You should actually reveal what card you want to summon from ED before summoning it. You aren’t allowed to use a monster as fusion material for the same card.
Someone needs to hit up the nexus Twitter and tell them ash can’t negate king back jack…. So many illegal things going on in nexus i fr can’t play it… so many cards in that game that just ignore being sent because they say they can’t be destroyed…..idk who’s running nexus but they’re obviously doing a shit job…
Regarding the magnifica thing, the cost isn't necessarily an issue. You have effects like 1)brilliant spark 2) ether the heavenly monarch 3) Darktellarknight Batlamyus that have costs but also follow the same principle as gamma, magnifica, zoodiac whiptail etc. (they have explict database rulings for these and you can see them on DB ygorganization (they are translated) (however i can't post the links because youtube loves eating comments with links so my whole thing from earlier got deleted). The main commonality between these is that they try to move themselves from one location to another (brilliant spark returning itself to the hand, magnifica/tellarknight using themselves as material, ether effect to summon itself from the hand). Now as for snow, snow is most likely an exception and not the rule. Konami has just said that it works differently (hence its own ruling on the database). (also i hate how youtube eats comments that posts links)
So regarding Question 2, if the opponent activates Polymerization to summon a monster and then realizes the monster they wanted to summon was an illegal target, they would still have to perform a Fusion summon with if possible?
You decide the monster to be summoned upon resolution of Polymerization. Not on activation. It doesn't matter if the monster they originally intended to summon is illegal to summon, if there is something legal to summon off of a legal Polymerization activation, then you will have to summon something.
No he is not. Check the actual database tbh. The issue is that its an effect that moves itself hence why the same copy can only be used once per chain.
@@danstern102 And aether also has the same principle on the database (its also one of the ones that dispute the whole "it has a cost so this logic doesn't apply to x card".
This is incorrect. You would need a second copy of Gamma. For example: CL1 Ash Blossom CL2 Gamma CL3 Baronne CL4 Gamma (this Gamma must be a DIFFERENT copy than the previous Gamma as you cannot attempt to use Gamma's effect again in the same chain).
Most people are not good at the game. I wouldn't assume they're trying to cheat. If they are supposed to be good and got it explained, then I'd prob be mad at them and call a Judge on em. Intentional cheating should be ban worthy imo even at locals.
@@Saens406 No you can't lol. It's a mechanic of the game. Similar to how you can't keep chaining your same copy of PSY-Framegear Gamma over and over. If your opponent has a 12 material AA Zeus and you have one Gamma in hand with no monsters, you can't go cl1 Zeus cl2 Gamma cl3 Zeus and then cl4 your same Gamma. The Zeus detaches for cost so the same copy can activate multiple times per chain. But the Gamma cannot as it has no cost; theoretically certain cards could infinitely loop themselves if this was allowed. That's just a rule of the game, it's not new.
nah its not cheated ,in my local magnifica can still activate its eff like 3rd time ,this ruling still weird since batlamyus ,ahter monarch has same eff like magnifica
I do not mind admitting to the incorrect / partial logic to why Magnifica's tagging effect can only be used once per chain, but it doesn't change the fact that it is only once per chain.
The logic is a bit harder to deduce as no hard rule has been written regarding these quick effects (unless there is link me), if we are working thru precendences then I don't think it is clearly defined enough.
Because it moves itself to another part of the game state. It's fair point. The cost logic doesn't apply to Ehther apparently as it can only be used OPT.
Fairy Tail Snow - may seem to be an outlier. However, it is the only monster that is working out of the GY compared to Gamma, Whiptail, Ehther.
Even if the conversation was brought forward again, it we would still be in the same space.
Hey TomBox, could you explain why Darktellarknight Batlamyus, when there is 7 or more "tellarknight" monsters with different names in the Graveyard,
cannot activate it's effect twice in the same chain? It does have a cost of detaching a xyz material+discard 1 card in the hand...
in the swap frog ruling, wasn't the player technically incorrect for looking through their deck with no cards in it to send? i agree that swap frog must send itself to the graveyard, but doesn't the activating player get a penalty for illegally checking the deck in the first place?
@@tylerkovalskas9780 yes penalty should be issued and game state can be repaired
@@MSTTV thanks for such a quick response! your videos are great too. also i wasn't sure if I was overthinking it, but that makes perfect sense.
Another thing about appointer is the "Reveal your entire hand... then", you can't activate it with an empty hand. Seen too many people do this illegally
Kind of reminds me of trying to play the Swap Hands card in Uno as your final card lol
It’s like mind crush in that regard
that pretty obviuos , what is not that i noticed playing edopro is if the only card u have is a revealed lord of heavenly prison u can t use appointer cause u can t reveal a card already revelead
@@sura1031
A friend of mine has a deck that exclusively utilises this exact ruling to use certain effects without consequence.
What happen if one of the card in their hand is already revealed like King of the sky prison
BRUH.
For Appointer I actually had this misruled against me at a 3v3. I appealed to a judge when the old ruling was used and they said the “next turn’s end phase.” It cost my team that match and I was able to pull up neuron post-match that showed that this was a misruling. Judge felt bad about it but it was like “oof.”
I’m glad you mentioned this ruling so that no one has to go through that miscall.
That Swap Frog ruling is a simulator PTSD moment for anyone who's ever played frogs on Master Duel or YGOPro. Kind of sad it's ruled that way, but it's understandable.
oh we all know :D
As awesome as all this ruling information is, it just highlights further we need an official rulings database in the TCG that doesn't leave rulings open to personal opinions and interpretations. Many a game have been lost or won because the judge was cool with one of the players or had no idea about the ruling so they half assed it ;/
It sounds harsh but I'd imagine making the job the Judges easier not harder in a already complex game an optimal solution.
Like seriously that Lotus ruling. It even says it in the card "Until the Next End Phase" as in the next one that opponent currently will enter. Just sounds like something a shady player will use to cheat out a win they don't deserve by not allowing the card to return to hand on the upcoming end phase >.>
There are card texts that do say "X until the the phase on the opponents next turn" but Lotus doesn't say that lol. Thats like telling a Branded player who dumped a fusion they don't get a search until their end phase of their next turn lol.
8:15 You're definitely right. It's not up to opinion. That's a misplay, not an illegal play. It's like activating e tele when you only have psychics in hand but wanted to summon from Deck. Or activating small world and realizing a bridge you wanted doesn't exist.
Small world isn't a good example since it only involves the deck
When activating something like emergency teleport, you can't pick up your deck and look through it if the only applicable monster is in your hand
@@Chackothewacko If I lack any Psychics in deck and I only have targets in hand (banished all my Psychics off Desires, for example), would it be legal for me to look in my deck to see if I have targets or would I be making an illegal move?
@@GlitchyPikachu if you want to summon from the deck despite not having targets, because the cards banished from desires is private knowledge, you can check for targets in deck, however if there's a legal card to use for e-tele you must resolve it.
@@fireblaze16 checking for a target in deck isn't a legal move but will just result in a minor warning if a judge is called
10:15 It's a confusing ruling for some, because I've had head judges at regionals say that the card comes back on the next turn's end phase. My friend was playing Paleo Frogs at the time and was siding this card to beat evenly matched (this was years ago), and this was the ruling that was given.
It’s very ambiguous card text, but there is an ocg database faq ab it so 🤷♂️
Wow, I’ve been cheated so many times by that magnifica ruling, thanks!
That Magnifica ruling was such good info to now have. Thank you, ToooooooooomBooooooox! 💪
"You wouldn't be able to use Exosister's effect to stop the Chalice, because even though her effect isn't Once Per Turn, you cannot activate a Quick Effect twice in one chain unless that Quick Effect has a cost"
I swear to god sometimes it feels like Konami just makes up random bullshit daily lol
Edit: Yes future commenter, I know it prevents loops
So I thought the switch out part was the cost
@@chrisstanley5210 Nope! All part of the effect. The activation requirement however is that your opponent activates a card effect.
appointer of the red lotus is one of my favorite "bad" cards today I am sad to see it is even lesser lasting than I had hoped :(
The magnifica cost is to bounce back a material so there is a cost, also it doesnt specify the "once per chain" restriction, so in theory the play should be call magnifica's effect, then bounce back a material to xyz, then ch4 bounce back the last material and after that there is no way to activate the effect.
I believe the first ruling about magnifica is incorrect. if you go to the yugipedia page about quick effects, it says:
"The same Quick Effect can be activated multiple times during the same chain as long as it cannot chain to itself. Quick Effects with the ability to chain to themselves may only be used multiple times per chain when they have an activation cost they can continue to pay."
Since magnifica cant chain to herself, she can activate her effect multiple times in the same chain.
The ruling regarding magnifica isn't incorrect, the issue i have is the reason why that was given (cost doesn't matter here at least in theory).
Quick effects with the card activating the effect moving itself is generally ruled to be once per chain.
Check the rulings for zoodiac whiptail, retaliating C, darktellarknight, brilliant spark, aether heavenly monarch (on the DB.ygorganization page).
@@yoshikagekiller8044 few things:
1. about all the monsters that activate in the hand, I believe they cannot activate their effect again, because you must be able to reveal them to activate their effect, but they are already revealed from the first activation, so you cant.
2. about brilliant spark, I dont see how this card is relavant, perhaps you confused it with a different card.
3. about batlamyus, I did see a ruling in ygorg db, but its in japanease, and the google translate isnt very helpful.
4. about your statement that monsters that move themselves are once per chain, do note the magnifica moving herself is optional, after you retun the xyz material to the extra, you can choose to keep magnifica on field.
I also found that ruling weird because I’ve used magnifica in edopro and it lets me chain it multiple times in the same chain
true
@@vladnudel1447 The relevant ruling for darktellarknight on the DB ygorganization was translated.
Brilliant spark's gy effect is relevant here (which also has a translated ruling regarding how its once per chain).
And while it is true that its optional to summon itself, that doesn't seem to change the ruling (at least according to the database and you can look at yugipedia which links you to the database (which is in japanese)
Pretty sure it was mkohl40 said red lotus was 2 turns and confused all his viewers. I refuted his statement in the comments of course.
Wow the first ruling is really something incredible
From what I have been told when a similar situation to the frog scenario came but it was a chain link scenario where the chain links were being built and it went as follows, they intended to use something as cl4 to respond to something at cl2 which is not something you get to do and that even though cl4 is legal to activate because it can negate cl3 due to the intentions of the player using a card as cl4 you would rewind to before they played their card. That is how it was explained to me and as far as I know how it works.
Something similar happened to the Swap Frog thing at OC Champs. A guy uaed Super Poly, i tending to make Mudragon, but misread the requirements. Ended up having to resolve it by using his on Toadally Awesome and Reinoheart
The issue in your swap frog example is the deck is illegally searched (nothing to send)
You can’t fix something illegal by forcing something legal. You’d have to go all the way back to when the swap frog would trigger, you don’t go back to at resolution.
Except that.. SWAP FROG doesn't ONLY send from the DECK and It SENDS also from the field. They are NOT separate effects. Nothing is forced to be legal here. The activation and resolution are BOTH legal. The activation was successful, Swap frog's sending effect doesn't target, and there is in public knowledge a card that CAN legally be sent away.
"You can send 1 Level 2 or lower WATER Aqua monster from your Deck or face-up field to the GY. "
The person resolving Swap Frog should not reveal private information about their deck they just have to upon resolution legally resolve the effect.
Now, was the deck illegally searched, that is debatable. This is a private knowledge item. As swap frog's effect does give you access to the deck, it is up to the controller of the swap frog to maintain knowledge of their own deck. If a player activated SWAP Frog and picked up their deck, see a potential target, but wants it in the deck so it can be summoned BY Toadally Awesome, and then sends the one on the field instead by choice. You don't know if that search was illegal or not because its private knowledge and the effect provides access to both field and deck.
The player resolving SWAP FROG is essentially is a foolish burial but it can also send from the field. It doesn't target.
This isn't even new. During the Nekroz Format, when players activated, their ritual spells, but got their Shurit mind crushed out of the hand. Players said "Oh no I cannot summon ...." but upon confirmation., so they CAN summon and needed to legally resolve the card (as Ritual summons do not target as well) they were pushed to legally ritual summon their Trishula using Brionac and a Clausolas in hand.
Unlike Activating A Compulsory Evacuation Device attempting to target Kozmo Dark Destroyer, while controlling a stardust dragon. As the action of targeting Dark Destroyer was Illegal, the activation was illegal and the game state is rewinded to before the activation of Compulsory Evac Device.
This Swap scenario, activation is clearly legal by public knowledge. Swap frog can send itself to the GY. The resolution is successful (Player has the option to send from either place a Deck or Face up card on the field, non target). Otherwise, when a player is resolving an effect that is unfavorable to themselves, they can attempt to play dumb and purposely choose an incorrect target to revert the game state. Intentionally doing so is a UC - Cheating infraction.
Again, it could be up to the judge's discretion, but this is clearly an inexperienced misplay and a lesson.
@@MSTTV but see you can’t search the deck for a target decide you don’t wanna send that one then pick to send from field.
Searching alone causes a broken game state. Say the player is playing the frog package in their tear deck. In the way you said in your reply they search decide they don’t want to send the dupe and instead send the swap on field. Any tearlaments that have been put on the bottom would then be freely shuffled rather than remaining on the bottom. Your example would be giving the frog user a free shuffle whenever they want basically, when in yugioh a search is considered illegal if theres nothing to send and you can’t fail a search like in Magic/Pokémon even when there is a valid search target. You have to decide at resolution where you’re sending from.
@@sh1nypantsgaming661 now we've entered the realm of Procedural Error right?
From how I see it:
The effect can fully resolve and game state of the deck can be repaired within a physical sense.
That particular game state can be repaired even with Tearlament cards at the bottom.
As the deck content is considered private knowledge. However whatever else that was applied can be fixed fairly. Previous game states can be undoed to ensure the deck randomized properly and other known parts of the deck still applied.. ie. Pull out fusion material at the bottom (keep the order private), randomize the deck, place them back. Continue play.
Either way that deck is going to get shuffled regardless. Tear at the bottom or not.
I could possibly see 2 outcomes from this.
If picking up the deck caused an improper game state, then a PE Minor will be issued.
If we're to rewind the game state to the nearest state where both players agree is legal. The resolution was illegal, then we rewind to where the activation of the effect in which both players know is legal. (Deck is shuffled, and Tear cards can be repaired), Which they would still have to send.
Or
They rewind the whole effect, to the summon of the frog, (both players would agree it is legal), deck is still shuffled (tear cards can be repaired at the bottom), Player has the option to opt out of the effect.
(This case is more lenient and more possible at locals)
Both cases
PE - Minor - Warning issued for illegally searching the deck. Any future swap frog sending PE resulting in an illegal deck search will result in a penalty upgrade.
We don't force activations to become legal, absolutely.
If a chain builds on top of it.
Swap Frog cL1, effect veiler cl2, called by cl3.
Called by hits the veiler,
Veiler negated
Swap frog (deck pick up),.etc..
All cards played are legal during their point of activation, at this point we don't rewind the entire resolution of all the other cards just for swap to not activate anymore.
If the stardust compulse example, compulse target an untargetable card a while I control a stardust and it happened as a chain link 3, we don't undo chain links 1 and 2, we revert back to the latest legal game state at chain link 2.
regarding the gamma ruling
i always understood that you COULD activate gamma multiple times in the same chain, however it would only negate the most recent thing it was chained to due to the fact you cannot summon it since it is already on the field, and gamma reads that you have to summon it/driver “and if you do” to negate the effect
i.e cl 1 whatever, 2 gamma, 3 ash, 4 gamma again, ash would be negated, but the cl 1 would resolve
is that not correct?
Im not sure you got the magnifica ruling right, edo pro lets me use that effect more than once in the same chain. Also I don’t think it’s true that you can’t activate the same quick effect in the same chain because there are cards like horus lvl 8 that I know for a fact can negate multiple cards in the same chain.
I have played in ocg and talked to many tcg judges and i believe is is wrong with magnifica. We have seen it be chained multi times and ocg judges allowed it
@@TCG_HERO same with me
The OCG database literally tells you that its once per chain. Also that was fixed last month
@@yoshikagekiller8044 can you tell me where to find that ruling
When playing master duel, you can chain your gamma to a monster eff on field, you get ashed, then you can gamme the ash with the same gamma on the same chain
Then its most likely bugged. Retaliating "c" has a ruling saying that its once per chain and gamma should follow the same ruling
revealing thr card is like a cost i think you can‘t reveal it a second time because it‘s alreaey revealed and therefore you can‘t chain it again
On the first one: this has been a thing since 2011 with Nat Beast. Cmon mannnn. Give me something hard
Naturia beast doesn't remove itself to another location so its kinda different tbh.
@@yoshikagekiller8044 What are you saying? I never said Nat Beast did move itselself.
@@machinayrequiem8596 i don't really get what you are saying. Naturia beast isn't once per chain.
The issue with magnifica and similar cards is that they move themselves
¿If i activate "Link into The Vrains" and special summon 1 "Scareclaw Astra" and use it to link summon 1 "Scareclaw Light-Heart", my opponent can use "Infinite Impermanence" to "Scareclaw Light-Heart" in respond to the effect of add a "Primitive Planet Reichphobia"?
On the subject of note-taking, is it allowed for tearlements that I have activated during the course of the current turn?
I think cards should just say once per chain if their intended to be once per chain
very helpful, thanks dude.
"Next" isnt even necessary and has no meaning in the card text as it leads to more confusion than if it was simply "until your opponents end phase"
it is more logical to deduce that it is speaking not of "this" end phase, but the next because "next" should serve a purpose if its worth being added.
Dont care for a pic, but can you sign cards while on duty?
the Appointer jank is why we need Dustshoot back at 1
I miss the days of mind crush, dust shoot. Or I guess now, deck dev, mind crush.
According to Section V, Tournament Play, letter C, Note-taking, I do not see how keeping track of Tearlaments activations is legal. What category does that fit into between Life Points, Mandatory effect reminders, and Tracking of turns and turn counters?
"Tracking of effects or actions necessary to maintain a legal Game State."
Page 35 of standing policy.
Are u reading an old doc? Because v.2.1 is pretty clear
Activates rota , adds messengelato . What is wrong with this scenario .
I’ve had judges tell me I can’t take notes on which tearlaments monsters effects were used that turn
Well, it is at their discretion, however if you want to bring it up again:
Point #4 on Page 35 in v 2.1 Tournament Policy Document.
"• Tracking of effects or actions necessary to maintain a legal Game State."
Would support the maintenance of the game state and prevent reactivation.
But note that another point also ensures you have to do this in a manner which does not impact the game.
@@MSTTV I guess I could read the policy documents more but I was under the impression this only applied to mandatory effects.
Otherwise i feel it'd be a pretty common thing to have note takers.
Which can have a various degree of stalling on the timer, which is why it wasn't allowed.
@@Ser-- as long as you’re not taking a long time doing it you should be fine.
Ruling episode is always my favorite
Always let me feel becoming smarter after my watch🤣
So I had a play in question, my opponent activated psyframe gear gamma on me in a chain and I activated ghost belle in response. Are they able to reactivate gamma in a new chain or no?
i'm a new RC-1 judge, and i'm proud of myself for getting all these right :D
The appointer of the red lotus ruling is pretty straightforward. Read and understand.
What about the swap frog ruling that says : you CAN send one etc..., is the searching in your deck considered intent and therefor it has to resolve? I was under the impression that CAN implied an optional effect?
@Andy4995 thanks a lot for the extensive explanation, really appreciate it! Just to be sure, if you summon swap, you can just opt to not use its effect to summon, right?
The appointer judge call decision that you seem to be referencing looks more like it's complying with the second eratta rather than the third. From what I see on Fandom in the case of the order of the eratta. Only way I see this ruling to be correct is if the eratta on Fandom's website is just plainly in the wrong order.
Now, as a judge and according to many judges, we cannot reference Fandom or Yugipedia as a ruling source.
Players in the middle of locals probably reference those pages, but a judge should be exercising, latest errata, PSCT, and fast effect timing and logic.
Although players may reference an actual source sometimes, they aren't always correct or up to date. Then that causes errors for players in the moment.
@@MSTTV I can understand that but where else would we reference? Also on that website I only see the difference in the information being the order of the errata. Your logic makes sense for the second errata. But not the final one. Where would we as players be able to find the correct rulling?
schism as well with that first ruling?
Good luck with judging
Can you do a quiz video that goes through some of the rikka deck cards ?
In master duel i can activate the same gamma a sec. time.
I had no idea Tom was a judge. I thought he was just a great player. The more you know.
I plan to do pack battles with my judge gifts :)
How does super polymerization work with tearalaments effects. Will it trigger there effect to fusion summon
yes they were sent to GY by the card effect of super poly
Only if they are used to fusion summon. If you use a tear to discard for cost, they will not trigger.
But the whole swap frog scenario wouldn't it be a loss since the player looked though the deck?
No, game state can be reverted. Because you cannot consider that as the only chain link as well. If additional cards were played you cannot revert it.
Deck is considered random and private. If they looked they need to randomize, issue a PE minor warning.
If there are cards at the bottom of the deck that were
Placed via, tearlament then.. pull them out, randomize the rest of the deck. We revert what we can.
@@MSTTV thank you, that is great to know for future events
Another Ruling:
Is it possible to use ghost belle on Toadally Awesome's Negate Effect, even if toad negates a spell/trap or only if it negates monster and what happens to negated linkmonster which cant be set to field?
For Refernce time thief redoer can be ashed, even if theres no spell as xyz material under it
If toad chains to any monster effect (regardless of where or how the effect was activated) then belle can be chained. (same with if toad is being chained to the activation of a pendulum scale)
The link stays in the gy since it can't be summoned face-down (but even in that scenario, belle can chain to a toad that is trying to negate a link).
Belle can't be used if toad is chained to the activation of a spell/trap (except for pendulum scales since they are monster cards)
The reasoning for Magnifica and Gamma is incorrect. You can't activate them multiple times in the same chain because they wouldn't be able to resolve properly (Magnifica can't become an xyz material twice, and Gamma can't summon itself twice without another copy activatibg). Optional effects being safeguarded from infinite activations is now included in card texts, but there is a general rule that you can't purposely perform an action that would not advance the game's state, which goes with infinite activations.
The only exception to that is fairy tail snow but :shrug: not sure why it works that way
@@yoshikagekiller8044 Snow has a cost, so the logic with her is different (eventually the player will run out of resources for the effect)
@@Nickcool1996 Cost isn't the issue. Since we have cards like heavenly monarch, darktellarknight and brilliant spark that follow the same principle as gamma/whiptail/retaliating c/magnifica (darktellarknight, brilliant spark and heavenly monarch all have costs for their effects and still follow the same principle.)
Who knows why snow works like that (maybe because it banishes 7 potentially but eh)
@@Nickcool1996 cost isnt the issue tbh ,have you read ahter monarch? or tellarknigt batlamyus
Can you discuss the ruling on fusion summoning using fusion monsters rusing to the extra deck?
Which ruling do you mean?
@@blitzcam As far as I've understood it before you could return a fusion monster to the extra as a material then fusion that same copy as long as you had a legal target to begin with but I've been told recently this is not true or that it no longer works like this
@@cooldeadpunk777 you choose the monster you are summoning before choosing its materials. You can't use, say, a Kitkallos as material for itself, because by the time that Kitkallos is being used as material, you have already made the selection as to what is being Fusion Summoned, and it can't have been that Kitkallos, since it wasn't in the Extra Deck.
If you have two Kitkallos, 1 in GY and 1 in Extra, then sure, you can use one for the other. But you can't use Kitkallos for itself.
@@cooldeadpunk777 You should actually reveal what card you want to summon from ED before summoning it. You aren’t allowed to use a monster as fusion material for the same card.
@@blitzcam what point do you choose? What if game state changed after Choice if I choose on activa
Someone needs to hit up the nexus Twitter and tell them ash can’t negate king back jack…. So many illegal things going on in nexus i fr can’t play it… so many cards in that game that just ignore being sent because they say they can’t be destroyed…..idk who’s running nexus but they’re obviously doing a shit job…
See you at Niagara, Judge ! :))
Last locals I looked like a clown 🤡
I thought red lotus was for 2 turns
Damn u cimooooooo and many other yugitubers 😞 I had bad information
we live we learn
One Question If i use Tearlament Sulliek to negate an opponents Monster Effect is it still negated when the Trap Leaves the Field a Turn Later ?
To my knowledge as the Card does not say (even after this card leaves the field) and it is a continuous trap card. The negation will no longer apply.
@@MSTTV sulliek eff already resolved by then, it shouldn't be undone after leaving field
@@MSTTV Also tbf TCG isn't necessarily consistent with their constructs/reminder text
I knew everything except the first
Yes first here love the content rulings so helpful
Regarding the magnifica thing, the cost isn't necessarily an issue.
You have effects like
1)brilliant spark
2) ether the heavenly monarch
3) Darktellarknight Batlamyus
that have costs but also follow the same principle as gamma, magnifica, zoodiac whiptail etc. (they have explict database rulings for these and you can see them on DB ygorganization (they are translated) (however i can't post the links because youtube loves eating comments with links so my whole thing from earlier got deleted).
The main commonality between these is that they try to move themselves from one location to another (brilliant spark returning itself to the hand, magnifica/tellarknight using themselves as material, ether effect to summon itself from the hand).
Now as for snow, snow is most likely an exception and not the rule. Konami has just said that it works differently (hence its own ruling on the database).
(also i hate how youtube eats comments that posts links)
yeah
So regarding Question 2, if the opponent activates Polymerization to summon a monster and then realizes the monster they wanted to summon was an illegal target, they would still have to perform a Fusion summon with if possible?
If Polymerization's activation was legal, they must resolve it.
You decide the monster to be summoned upon resolution of Polymerization. Not on activation. It doesn't matter if the monster they originally intended to summon is illegal to summon, if there is something legal to summon off of a legal Polymerization activation, then you will have to summon something.
i know you doesnt like exosister but you're inccorect about the ruling tbh
No he is not. Check the actual database tbh. The issue is that its an effect that moves itself hence why the same copy can only be used once per chain.
I can admit to the incorrect logic, but it won't change the fact that you can't chain the Magnifica to multiple times per turn.
@@yoshikagekiller8044 but aether monarch has the same eff tho like magnifica ,
@@danstern102 And aether also has the same principle on the database (its also one of the ones that dispute the whole "it has a cost so this logic doesn't apply to x card".
Your definitely wrong about magnifica especially when using gamma as an example you can 100% use gamma again in the same chain
Only if you have a different copy of Gamma in hand.
Only a different copy. You differently cannot use the SAME gamma in the same chain again.
This is incorrect. You would need a second copy of Gamma. For example:
CL1 Ash Blossom
CL2 Gamma
CL3 Baronne
CL4 Gamma (this Gamma must be a DIFFERENT copy than the previous Gamma as you cannot attempt to use Gamma's effect again in the same chain).
yeah this dude has a wrong explanation
Wow I got cheated by exosister the other day. Cheatin ass
Most people are not good at the game. I wouldn't assume they're trying to cheat. If they are supposed to be good and got it explained, then I'd prob be mad at them and call a Judge on em. Intentional cheating should be ban worthy imo even at locals.
Assume they don't know, once. if they repeat it. then its starts to get sus. innocent until proven guilty.
cheating? Just read the card. You can 100% use the effect again on the same chain
@@Saens406 No you can't lol. It's a mechanic of the game. Similar to how you can't keep chaining your same copy of PSY-Framegear Gamma over and over.
If your opponent has a 12 material AA Zeus and you have one Gamma in hand with no monsters, you can't go cl1 Zeus cl2 Gamma cl3 Zeus and then cl4 your same Gamma. The Zeus detaches for cost so the same copy can activate multiple times per chain. But the Gamma cannot as it has no cost; theoretically certain cards could infinitely loop themselves if this was allowed. That's just a rule of the game, it's not new.
nah its not cheated ,in my local magnifica can still activate its eff like 3rd time ,this ruling still weird since batlamyus ,ahter monarch has same eff like magnifica