Mind Crush - & An Admin problem

If you have a ruling question related to the game, search for it here, or ask it if no one else has yet.
Captain Autismo
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2017 5:58 am
Reputation: 0

Mind Crush - & An Admin problem

Post #1 by Captain Autismo » Mon Jan 01, 2018 3:12 am

Just received a game loss for this.

My opponent mind crush'd me, calling "gydria the mysterious dust", showed him my hand that I do not have a card in my hand with that name. I did however have Gadarla the Mysterious Dust Kaiju. Being upset that he called it wrong he called the admin, and the admin (#3312) ruled this in my opponents favour because "he meant that card and meant it"

isn't the point of mind crush to literally get it right? Are we not crossing lines here with "close enoughs"? It wasn't even a simple mistake either, as he completely left Kaiju out of the guessed name. The admin says that since there is no card in the database known as "gydria the mysterious dust" then the closest thing is what he meant.

Just seems a bit ridiculous in my opinion if a card text reads to declare 1 card name but you still get to pull it off for a "close enough".

srn347
User avatar
Posts: 8
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:59 pm
Reputation: 1
Location: Here

Post #2 by srn347 » Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:36 am

Mind crush must declare the name of an actual card in the game. Since there is no card called "gydria the mysterious dust", that would be illegal to activate or resolve at that point. However, if it is clear what card is being referred to (even in the absense of a name, such as "the qli with no monster effect and 1000 atk"), it is considered the same as declaring the card's name. Seems quite clear to me that he meant your kaiju.

Maximillion Pegasus
User avatar
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:10 am
Reputation: 2
Location: Duelist Kingdom

Post #3 by Maximillion Pegasus » Tue Jan 02, 2018 4:35 am

http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Card_Rulings:Mind_Crush

In place of declaring a FULL card name, a precise description of a card's stats, appearance, and/or effects, is considered acceptable so long as both players are in clear agreement over which card is being described.

  • Saying "Dekoichi" instead of "Dekoichi the Battlechanted Locomotive" is acceptable as long as there isn't another card with the name "Dekoichi".
  • In the case of a card like "Luster Dragon", since the original printing of "Luster Dragon #2" did not have the #2 by its card name, you should ask the player for additional information. If they say "The Level 6 one" is then enough information provided so that both players know which card it is.


MadRest
User avatar
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:02 pm
Reputation: 23

Post #4 by MadRest » Tue Jan 02, 2018 11:31 am

Be aware that there are two possible outcomes to your scenario:

1. If they say, "gydria the mysterious dust," and you know they are referring to Gadarla, then you must accept that Gadarla was the one declared. If you know, but decide that it doesn't count since it was misspelled, then this may be considered rule sharking.

2. If they say a misspelled name, but you are honestly unsure if a card exists with that name, then you must ask for additional information. Never say that you do not have that card if you aren't 100% sure that card exists in real life.

chaseer
User avatar
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:22 am
Reputation: 7
Location: Petaling Jaya

Post #5 by chaseer » Tue Jan 02, 2018 2:31 pm

Maximillion Pegasus wrote:http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Card_Rulings:Mind_Crush

In place of declaring a FULL card name, a precise description of a card's stats, appearance, and/or effects, is considered acceptable so long as both players are in clear agreement over which card is being described.

  • Saying "Dekoichi" instead of "Dekoichi the Battlechanted Locomotive" is acceptable as long as there isn't another card with the name "Dekoichi".
  • In the case of a card like "Luster Dragon", since the original printing of "Luster Dragon #2" did not have the #2 by its card name, you should ask the player for additional information. If they say "The Level 6 one" is then enough information provided so that both players know which card it is.



Ugh. Please DO NOT use wikia as the main source of ruling.

@OP: It does not necessarily need to declare a full name, since some of them may cause unnecessary memory strain. As long as you mention its stats, effects, appearances precisely if you are not sure of the full name OR partially giving a full name, and both of you clearly knew what card it is, then it is acceptable.

If your opponent declared a misspelled name but you are unsure of whether the card exist, in future, please ask him to give more details of the card he is specifying. Knowing what card he meant but decided not to discard the card just because of a misspelled name will not only warrant you a good slap from the judge due to rule sharking, but you might also get into big trouble by doing so.

The judge in question is correct in giving his judgment regarding the situation you were in.
DB username: chaseer
Blizzard ID: Elkaz#1410

"First, seek the counsel of the Lord."

MadRest
User avatar
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:02 pm
Reputation: 23

Post #6 by MadRest » Tue Jan 02, 2018 5:31 pm

chaseer wrote:Ugh. Please DO NOT use wikia as the main source of ruling.

Why shouldn't he? The wiki is the only place that has collected the officially posted rulings, and all of them are sourced back to an official source.

chaseer
User avatar
Posts: 47
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:22 am
Reputation: 7
Location: Petaling Jaya

Post #7 by chaseer » Tue Jan 02, 2018 8:07 pm

MadRest wrote:
chaseer wrote:Ugh. Please DO NOT use wikia as the main source of ruling.

Why shouldn't he? The wiki is the only place that has collected the officially posted rulings, and all of them are sourced back to an official source.


For the very same reason why the professors do not accept Wikipedia source when you write a paper. Its not just about how easily wikia can be edited. It also houses multiple citation sites, which doesn't make it a primary source of ruling.
DB username: chaseer
Blizzard ID: Elkaz#1410

"First, seek the counsel of the Lord."

Maximillion Pegasus
User avatar
Posts: 20
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:10 am
Reputation: 2
Location: Duelist Kingdom

Post #8 by Maximillion Pegasus » Wed Jan 03, 2018 2:25 am

chaseer wrote:
MadRest wrote:
chaseer wrote:Ugh. Please DO NOT use wikia as the main source of ruling.

Why shouldn't he? The wiki is the only place that has collected the officially posted rulings, and all of them are sourced back to an official source.


For the very same reason why the professors do not accept Wikipedia source when you write a paper. Its not just about how easily wikia can be edited. It also houses multiple citation sites, which doesn't make it a primary source of ruling.


Except we aren't publishing an academic paper, this is just a quick answer. Unless the content of what I am quoting is erroneous, there is no reason to dismiss it.

Ris3
User avatar
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:15 pm
Reputation: 0

Post #9 by Ris3 » Wed Jan 03, 2018 3:23 am

You know exactly what card he was calling. You deserve your game loss.

Twisted Soul
User avatar
Posts: 885
Joined: Fri Aug 18, 2017 4:52 pm
Reputation: 20
Location: Mind

Post #10 by Twisted Soul » Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:25 am

Hi,

Depends on how you acted in the duel to warrant a game loss (This could be rule-sharking etc or refusing to comply). As stated above and also in what you that judge told you in your main post. Next time you may ask for the stats and other ways for them to describe the card if that issue ever comes up again. MadRest & chaseer stated information you should look through to understand how it works also chaseer is right about not relying on wikia that often as anyone can edit it and possibly add wrong statements to it (they are not an official source).

Have a nice day.
Judge #5937
Until we meet again.

MadRest
User avatar
Posts: 114
Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2017 9:02 pm
Reputation: 23

Post #11 by MadRest » Fri Jan 05, 2018 12:41 am

You guys are seriously underestimating the way the wiki works. If someone adds erroneous or unsourced info on the Card Rulings pages, it will in all likelihood be removed in a short while. The wiki is a trusted source when it comes to the Card Rulings pages.

Genexwrecker
User avatar
Posts: 2665
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 10:52 pm
Reputation: 396

Post #12 by Genexwrecker » Tue Jan 09, 2018 6:26 pm

Yes mad rest you are correct. However i do advise whenever possible to use the actual related offical sources whenever possible
Official Duelingbook Support staff
Official Duelingbook Resource Judge
Official Duelingbook Tournament Admin.(Other tournament Admin is Runzy)

Monarch Snow
User avatar
Posts: 595
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 5:43 am
Reputation: 112

Post #13 by Monarch Snow » Wed Jan 10, 2018 5:01 pm

Don't trust the wiki in rulings that confidently. The only sources I find valid on the wiki are from the OCG Card Database. The wiki's a great place to cite those, however it has an encyclopedia of outdated ruling pages that haven't been updated accordingly and certain information (card ruling pages), that have rulings without any proper source or reference. I can list quite a few.
RC-1, PC-1, & DC-1 Konami® Certified Judge
Retired Duelingbook Tournament Organizer
Retired Ozone Host/Administrator
Retired Judge in DU, DNx, /r/ Subrredit Discord, & The Ruling Zone
Founder of i3 & Harmonic Souls: Organized Play

Soracchi
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 4:57 am
Reputation: 0

Post #14 by Soracchi » Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:21 am

Wiki's rulings are a nice start reference. They can be false but if you have nothing else to go on realize that it may be wrong and try to ask yourself, "why would it work this way?" If you can figure out the why and how it makes sense with how you see other examples handled, you can begin to figure out how this game works. Also keep an open mind. Sometimes things are just strange in this game.


For a scenario like this, there are official resources, which is definitely the best way to go as official TCG rulings tend to work out the best in your favor. So for examples like mind crush it has been long held in the judging community that the player can call a card and it should be a real card. If the player is struggling with the name of the card, then it is appropriate to describe the card with appropriate detail to isolate what the card is. Say my card is blue eyes white dragon that I want to call but I call it "the normal dragon w/ 3k attack you know blue eyes kaiba used in the old anime." That appropriately describes the card that there is no question what is being described.

If you're ever in a scenario and you're not sure if you should show your hand or what that person is describing call for an admin or resource judge to offer assistance in helping you resolve the card.
Welcome
Image

DragonWarrior
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 3:14 pm
Reputation: 0

Post #15 by DragonWarrior » Sat Feb 24, 2018 10:08 pm

Captain Autismo wrote:Just received a game loss for this...

Here pretty late to give information but what Everyone else has said pretty much sums it up on how the card works and it's interaction with not knowing a card name ect.
RC-1 & PC-1 Konami Certified Judge

Shugunou
Posts: 132
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:26 pm
Reputation: 5

Post #16 by Shugunou » Sun May 10, 2020 1:28 pm

If he had guessed the name of a real card but meant a different card, that would count as him calling it wrong, but if he called a card by using slang, fan names, or simple typos/misspellings, but it is obvious as to what he meant, it is considered correct. Konami wouldn't want players raging because the opponent played mostly hard to pronounce or long named cards. So they allow you to use shorter and/or easier versions of the names like MST instead of mystical space typhoon. Some exceptions would be saying BLS as that could refer to SUper soldier, the vanilla, or the chaos.


Return to “Rulings Q&A”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 83 guests