Call of the Haunted departure with Gemini Summon Negated (?)

[Genexwrecker]

Master duel is again a videogame produced by konami. all of them do not properly follow all the game mechanics. they have had to patch it twice for mechanics that did not work properly so far. As such since videogames are flawed they are not a ruling source. We discussed it in our judge chat. If a head feels the need to adress it it will be added to that thread. gemini monsters suck so nobody is going to come across this interraction.

[Wek]

There are 2 reasons why it would still be better to have DB Head Judge announce a ruling for this scenario that duelingbook would go by. The first reason is so that, any time this situation does come up in a duel, instead of calling a judge and possibly wasting a judge's time just to come to the duel and explain this ruling, players can simply come to this forum and look at the official ruling given here by DB Head Judge, allowing judges to focus their time towards more important issues.

The second reason is... precedent. Say this situation occurs in a duel of mine, I call a judge, and a judge comes in and rules that Call of the Haunted will be destroyed along with the Gemini monster. Now, whenever a situation like this arises again and there's a disagreement over whether or not Call of the Haunted will stay on the field, I can simply direct the peoples' attention to that replay where the judge ruled in my favor and say "This judge said Call of the Haunted will be destroyed so I'm right and you're wrong".
The only problem is, say some other player tries to pull the same trick but with a replay where a judge rules the opposite — that Call of the Haunted will remain on the field — and then that player tries to use that replay as proof that they're right and I'm wrong. I think things could get ugly at that point since both of us have replays "proving" that our ruling is correct and the other's is wrong, so now a third judge needs to come in and be the tiebreaker, and if that third judge rules in my favor, the other player could end up thinking that the judge who ruled in their favor is now incompetent or something for giving them a wrong ruling. It saves judges time and resources if DB Head Judge gives an official ruling for this so you don't have situations where 2 or even 3 judges get involved in a duel for 1 ruling. You want to minimize the amount of judges that get involved in these kinds of issues so those additional judges can focus on other calls. You generally don't want multiple judges in a single call at once.
It's ultimately better for DB Head Judge to give an official ruling on this so it saves time and allows judges to focus on more important issues instead of having to answer call after call about this same issue, and also so that players don't end up thinking a judge who gave 1 ruling on this is now incompetent because a different judge gave a different ruling.

Think they save those for things that they actually expect to happen in games. If a head judge announcement was needed for every ambiguous part of the game there'd be quite a list of arbitrary nonsense no one cares about. I couldn't tell you the last time I've seen a Gemini revived by Call of the Haunted, let alone that same Gemini getting Gemini summoned into summon negation. Genex told you what they thought the majority of judges would rule.

I'm guessing it's because Master Duel may be programmed to follow OCG rulings instead of TCG rulings, so using Master Duel as a ruling source would be wrong if something is supposed to be ruled differently in the TCG than in the OCG. Master Duel's already programmed to use the OCG banlist I believe, so it's same to assume it's programmed for OCG format and OCG rulings as well.

Alternatively, it could be because, in duelingbook duels where there's a ruling dispute, anyone could then claim "I tested this interaction in Master Duel and it worked out this way" even though judges who get called to the duel(s) in question may not be able to verify if that interaction was actually tested if they don't have Master Duel themselves.

Master Duel doesn't use the the OCG banlist.
One day they might catch up to being as bad as Edopro and Nexus with more time to fix their problems, but they'll never be a reliable source. The programmers will always make mistakes in Yugioh rulings, or how they programmed it, etc. This game is just too big and complex for it to be otherwise.

Yugipedia and https://db.ygorganization.com are the go-to sources for rulings. These are the places you check first when you have a question about a specific ruling.

Yugipedia has footnotes that lead to actual sources, but "Yugipedia said so" isn't a serious source. Db.Ygorganization takes rulings from an actual source like the database so it always cites its work.

Then that must mean X-Sabers were commonly played back when the article was first written. Either way, X-Sabers being common isn't relevant to this discussion. What is relevant is the specific thing that I cited, about how Gemini monsters keep equip cards, and effects like Call of the Haunted, when being normal summoned to gain their bonus effects.

A non-source that hasn't updated information on its page that hasn't been true for nearly a decade? You can safely ignore it. You've given no credible citations for anything you've said. That includes the stuff you said that was actually correct.

Are you saying that if a Gemini monster equipped with an equip card attempts to normal summon itself to gain it's bonus effect, then the equip card will unequip during the normal summon attempt, and then re-equip once the normal summon turns out to be successful? If so, that doesn't really make sense since equip cards have to be equipped to something at all times or else they immediately go to the graveyard, so if this was the case, the equip card wouldn't re-equip. It would instead just immediately go to the graveyard, whether or not the Gemini monster's normal summon turns out to be successful. The article I cited says that the equip cards, and Call of the Haunted effects, "remain" in effect for Gemini summons, not that they stop applying then re-apply.

I'm saying no one knows. Geminis could be the only monsters is the game to ever stay face-up on the field even when they would be summoned, which would be weird. They might act like other monsters and aren't, and the equips don't end up getting removed, which is also a bit weird. Geminis are doing something funny here, but I'm not going to pretend we can fill in the blanks with a 100% answer. If it matters, ask your head judge, and don't get thrown off if you end up with a different answer depending on which head judge is there.

I believe Call of the Haunted stops applying to the monster once that monster is flipped face-down, moves to a Spell & Trap Zone, hand, deck, extra deck, or graveyard, or becomes banished or an xyz material. None of these things happen to the Gemini monster just because it's on-field normal summon is in the middle of being negated by Solemn Judgment, only once Solemn Judgment actually destroys the monster. From there, the monster will then begin it's transition to the graveyard or something, while upon this destruction, Call of the Haunted gets destroyed as well since a destruction of the monster now occurred without the monster yet being flipped face-down or ending up in any of those other locations I mentioned.

What you believe or not isn't really relevant, especially given you're not even properly researching your rulings and have no sources to back your claims on the subject at hand, from the looks of things not even the parts that are actually true and citable. Genex already said the majority of judges would likely rule it isn't going to be destroyed, and I don't see us getting any more of an answer than that.

[itsmetristan]

There are 2 reasons why it would still be better to have DB Head Judge announce a ruling for this scenario that duelingbook would go by. The first reason is so that, any time this situation does come up in a duel, instead of calling a judge and possibly wasting a judge's time just to come to the duel and explain this ruling, players can simply come to this forum and look at the official ruling given here by DB Head Judge, allowing judges to focus their time towards more important issues.

The second reason is... precedent. Say this situation occurs in a duel of mine, I call a judge, and a judge comes in and rules that Call of the Haunted will be destroyed along with the Gemini monster. Now, whenever a situation like this arises again and there's a disagreement over whether or not Call of the Haunted will stay on the field, I can simply direct the peoples' attention to that replay where the judge ruled in my favor and say "This judge said Call of the Haunted will be destroyed so I'm right and you're wrong".
The only problem is, say some other player tries to pull the same trick but with a replay where a judge rules the opposite — that Call of the Haunted will remain on the field — and then that player tries to use that replay as proof that they're right and I'm wrong. I think things could get ugly at that point since both of us have replays "proving" that our ruling is correct and the other's is wrong, so now a third judge needs to come in and be the tiebreaker, and if that third judge rules in my favor, the other player could end up thinking that the judge who ruled in their favor is now incompetent or something for giving them a wrong ruling. It saves judges time and resources if DB Head Judge gives an official ruling for this so you don't have situations where 2 or even 3 judges get involved in a duel for 1 ruling. You want to minimize the amount of judges that get involved in these kinds of issues so those additional judges can focus on other calls. You generally don't want multiple judges in a single call at once.
It's ultimately better for DB Head Judge to give an official ruling on this so it saves time and allows judges to focus on more important issues instead of having to answer call after call about this same issue, and also so that players don't end up thinking a judge who gave 1 ruling on this is now incompetent because a different judge gave a different ruling.

This isn't a ruling that commonly occurs. If the HJ's were to put out a solid ruling that we're following in the site, then expectations would be set for them to do this for every single scenario in the game that doesn't have a documented answer (which is a lot). It's not very practical, and is a huge waste of time. Rulings that don't have concrete answers are unfortunate, but we have to live with them. If you disagree with the way a judge is ruling this situation in your duel, you may appeal it.

[Platinumeye]

Thanks everyone for the help!