Game Related Question

[Christen57]

Your some previous answers were incorrect, I do not know as sure I should trust this time of your those answers.

What do you mean?

[ijveraar]

Hi there, it's me you know who is it.

Question #6:

During their Main Phase 1: Opponent is Special Summoned of their "Silent Wobby" in Attack Position on my side of the field, while I have 5 cards. So, I have to discard 2 of them to the Graveyard that moment or I don't have to do that until my End Phase is come?

You have to discard during your own end phase so you can keep the cards for your entire turn.

[ijveraar]

wow I did not realise over 60 questions have been asked after that one

[gaemr_o]

Why isn't bluffing allowed? I hear that it's legal in Magic, and IMO it should be in Yugioh as well. If your opponent decides to reveal private information shouldn't it be up to to the player decide what to do with that info instead of getting shielded by the rulebook?

[Cromat]

Why isn't bluffing allowed? I hear that it's legal in Magic, and IMO it should be in Yugioh as well. If your opponent decides to reveal private information shouldn't it be up to to the player decide what to do with that info instead of getting shielded by the rulebook?

How old are you, 12 or 13?

So, let's defend the same thing after you share your parents' credit card information with others and those others siphon your money. After that, you will realize why those private information must have been shielded by Rulebook. But when that happened; do not call law or police forces to defend you or your money because like you said that it is up to you and others' for decide, to do what about those informations which was published from you to others.

Also, do not ask your nonsense questions at my topic. I do not think that you are allowed to ruin my topic. Also, I am not sure that you are aware about what are you talking about.

[gaemr_o]

I'm 11 btw. And so what if your opponent is stupid enough to reveal important info and get taken advantage of? It's entirely under his control and does not affect the game itself, just the knowledge the other player has. Allowing bluffing will filter out idiots who do stuff like that and add an interesting new aspect which I think would be an improvement. Your point is unnecessary to the discussion, what you should be arguing is whether or not Yugioh would improve with that extra seasoning of poker-like mind gaming.

[Cromat]

I'm 11 btw. And so what if your opponent is stupid enough to reveal important info and get taken advantage of? It's entirely under his control and does not affect the game itself, just the knowledge the other player has. Allowing bluffing will filter out idiots who do stuff like that and add an interesting new aspect which I think would be an improvement. Your point is unnecessary to the discussion, what you should be arguing is whether or not Yugioh would improve with that extra seasoning of poker-like mind gaming.

Yu-Gi-Oh! is allowing to player(s) to improve themselves, and also itself. And it is improvable game; if you built your own Main Deck with your own strategy you would have done to improve your Yu-Gi-Oh!. It is like chess instead of one specific thing which is that, there is no luck option at chess instead of Yu-Gi-Oh!, may be some kids around who think they are geniuses by saying something about hypergeometric distribution, but knowing to hypergeometry won't help you, when system and/or Deck gave you the worst hand regarding your Main Deck. Therefore, again.. You will have to use the Meta Deck(s), because those are only have the capacity for allow you to use the vulnerabilities in the system with maximum efficiency at that moment. If we consider the current format as a system, that format's Meta Deck would be considered as bug of the system, and player who using that Meta Deck is.. ..Let's call them as cheaters.. OK..? ..So, my examples are explaining the situations as certain and solid way(s) like. Also, I am not discussion with you anything. Just like I said, you're child and I am sure you are not aware about what you are talking about.

Since the goal here is sustainable sales, you will always be forced to use the current format's Meta Deck(s).

Anyways.. Again I am saying that create your own topic to ask your own questions, this is my topic and my (personal) "Ruling Issue Archive".

[Christen57]

Why isn't bluffing allowed? I hear that it's legal in Magic, and IMO it should be in Yugioh as well.

Depends on what kind of bluffing you're talking about exactly. There's a fine line between bluffing and outright lying / cheating — a line super easy to cross.

I'm 11 btw. And so what if your opponent is stupid enough to reveal important info and get taken advantage of? It's entirely under his control and does not affect the game itself, just the knowledge the other player has. Allowing bluffing will filter out idiots who do stuff like that and add an interesting new aspect which I think would be an improvement. Your point is unnecessary to the discussion, what you should be arguing is whether or not Yugioh would improve with that extra seasoning of poker-like mind gaming.

Yu-Gi-Oh! is allowing to player(s) to improve themselves, and also itself. And it is improvable game; if you built your own Main Deck with your own strategy you would have done to improve your Yu-Gi-Oh!. It is like chess instead of one specific thing which is that, there is no luck option at chess instead of Yu-Gi-Oh!, may be some kids around who think they are geniuses by saying something about hypergeometric distribution, but knowing to hypergeometry won't help you, when system and/or Deck gave you the worst hand regarding your Main Deck. Therefore, again.. You will have to use the Meta Deck(s), because those are only have the capacity for allow you to use the vulnerabilities in the system with maximum efficiency at that moment. If we consider the current format as a system, that format's Meta Deck would be considered as bug of the system, and player who using that Meta Deck is.. ..Let's call them as cheaters.. OK..? ..So, my examples are explaining the situations as certain and solid way(s) like. Also, I am not discussion with you anything. Just like I said, you're child and I am sure you are not aware about what you are talking about.

Since the goal here is sustainable sales, you will always be forced to use the current format's Meta Deck(s).

Anyways.. Again I am saying that create your own topic to ask your own questions, this is my topic and my (personal) "Ruling Issue Archive".

I see nothing wrong with others using this thread to post ruling questions as well. If each person created their own thread for their ruling questions it would clutter up the forum anyways.

[Cromat]

I see nothing wrong with others using this thread to post ruling questions as well. If each person created their own thread for their ruling questions it would clutter up the forum anyways.

I told them so, because; I couldn't figure it out if it was about deliberately misusing private information or not, and I wasn't sure if they were joking about to use those information for malicious purpose(s). Whatever.. It seems we solved the issue(s) with that kid.

[Cromat]

Question #69:
When my opponent activated a Spell Card from their respective hand, and if I responded it with my "Spell Vanishing" while my opponent has 2 copies of that activated Spell Card with same name in their GY, does my opponent have any right(s) about say me those: "No, you're seeing already, that I've other copies at my GY; and I do not want to show you my hand and/or also my Main Deck."?

[greg503]

Why isn't bluffing allowed? I hear that it's legal in Magic, and IMO it should be in Yugioh as well. If your opponent decides to reveal private information shouldn't it be up to to the player decide what to do with that info instead of getting shielded by the rulebook?

"Why doesn't this game have the same rules as this other game?"

[Christen57]

Question #69:
When my opponent activated a Spell Card from their respective hand, and if I responded it with my "Spell Vanishing" while my opponent has 2 copies of that activated Spell Card with same name in their GY, does my opponent have any right(s) about say me those: "No, you're seeing already, that I've other copies at my GY; and I do not want to show you my hand and/or also my Main Deck."?

The player resolving Spell Vanishing still gets to see the other player's hand and deck even if there are no remaining copies of the negated spell card in question. Spell Vanishing doesn't care if all remaining copies of that negated spell are in the graveyard.

[Cromat]

Question #70:
When a player activated "Pot of Prosperity", they have to say that "I will banish 3 cards." or "I will banish 6 cards.", or they do not have to say anything? It seemed to me like they banished 3 cards as face-down then checked my reaction by closing their "Viewing Extra Deck" windows, and when they realized if I do not have any card in my hand to prevent my opponent to add card(s) from their Main Deck to hand, they are banishing 3 cards more as face-down, is that appropriate?

[greg503]

Question #70:
When a player activated "Pot of Prosperity", they have to say that "I will banish 3 cards." or "I will banish 6 cards.", or they do not have to say anything? It seemed to me like they banished 3 cards as face-down then checked my reaction by closing their "Viewing Extra Deck" windows, and when they realized if I do not have any card in my hand to prevent my opponent to add card(s) from their Main Deck to hand, they are banishing 3 cards more as face-down, is that appropriate?

They have to choose the cost and then pay it, it's probably an angle shoot to pause at 3 before banishing another 3, but it doesn't matter if you ask them to clarify which cost they chose.

[Cromat]

Question #71:
I am activating of "Quick Launch" from my respective hand, at one of the my previous phase than my Main Phase 1; and Special Summoning from my Main Deck of "Anesthrokket Dragon". If I activate of "Purrely Happy Memory" before my End Phase executes by selecting that Special Summoned and mentioned Dragon-Type monster at previous sentence by mentioned Quick-Play Spell at previous sentence. What would happen that Dragon Effect Monster when I entered my End Phase of that turn?

Question #71.1:
I am activating of "Quick Launch" from my respective hand, at one of the my previous phase than my Main Phase 1; and Special Summoning from my Main Deck of "Shelrokket Dragon". If I activate of "Dragon Shield" from my respective hand or activate (that Equip Spell) while it was Set on the field, at my Main Phase 1; what would happen that Dragon Effect Monster when I entered my End Phase of that turn?

[Christen57]

Question #71:
I am activating of "Quick Launch" from my respective hand, at one of the my previous phase than my Main Phase 1; and Special Summoning from my Main Deck of "Anesthrokket Dragon". If I activate of "Purrely Happy Memory" before my End Phase executes by selecting that Special Summoned and mentioned Dragon-Type monster at previous sentence by mentioned Quick-Play Spell at previous sentence. What would happen that Dragon Effect Monster when I entered my End Phase of that turn?

Question #71.1:
I am activating of "Quick Launch" from my respective hand, at one of the my previous phase than my Main Phase 1; and Special Summoning from my Main Deck of "Shelrokket Dragon". If I activate of "Dragon Shield" from my respective hand or activate (that Equip Spell) while it was Set on the field, at my Main Phase 1; what would happen that Dragon Effect Monster when I entered my End Phase of that turn?

Can you not use weird confusing phrases like "at previous sentence by mentioned Quick-Play Spell at previous sentence"?

I assume your #71 question is what would happen to the special summoned monster in the end phase. Happy Memory would use up its one-time protection protecting it from destruction during the end phase of the turn Quick Launch summoned it, but Quick Launch would attempt to destroy it again the next end phase since it simply says "the End Phase" and not "the End Phase of this turn".

To answer your #71.1 question, Quick Launch would keep attempting to destroy the summoned monster every End Phase until that face-up monster is no longer available to attempt to destroy, and the Dragon Shield equipped to that monster would keep protecting it from said destruction in each of those End Phases until it no longer could.

[Cromat]

Question #72:
If I activate my Set "Skill Drain" by paying 1000 LP while my opponent is controlling a "Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon" face-up, and if my opponent responds to that with their Fusion Monster's Quick-Effect by activating it; and to that, if I activate my Set "Purrely Happy Memory" by selecting my Continuous Trap Card during my opponent's Main Phase, what would happen that Continuous Trap Card as result? (Initiatives; which attempted by Judge(s), about to set a beginner status of person who wrote this question, is negated until end of their next Judge Call(s).)

[greg503]

Question #72:
If I activate my Set "Skill Drain" by paying 1000 LP while my opponent is controlling a "Red-Eyes Dark Dragoon" face-up, and if my opponent responds to that with their Fusion Monster's Quick-Effect by activating it; and to that, if I activate my Set "Purrely Happy Memory" by selecting my Continuous Trap Card during my opponent's Main Phase, what would happen that Continuous Trap Card as result? (Initiatives; which attempted by Judge(s), about to set a beginner status of person who wrote this question, is negated until end of their next Judge Call(s).)

It negates the activation, so even though it won't destroy it, the Skill Drain is still going to the GY, just that Dragoon won't gain ATK

[Cromat]

Question #73:
(I just realized this, after I watched the Duel's replay): I am Special Summoning of "Santa Claws" in Defense Position, by Tributing 1 monster my opponent's control which was Set on their field. Then, I activated "Sinful Spoils of Subversion - Snake-Eye" from my hand by targeting "Santa Claws" which is in my opponent's field now while I was controlling 2 "Skill Drain" and 1 "Guiding Ariadne" as face-up, and also 1 Set "Ultimate Providence" at my Spell & Trap Zone. My opponent placed that to their Spell & Trap Zone as a Continuous Spell Card, is it OK, or is there an issue at here; since that Normal Spell Card contains this in its text; "Target 1 face-up monster on the field; place it face-up in its owner's Spell & Trap Zone as a Continuous Spell."? (Initiatives; which attempted by Judge(s), about to set a beginner status of person who wrote this question, are skipped for 2 Judge Calls.)

● Duel replay: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=168328-53899972 (Between [7:36] and [7:47].)

[greg503]

Question #73:
(I just realized this, after I watched the Duel's replay): I am Special Summoning of "Santa Claws" in Defense Position, by Tributing 1 monster my opponent's control which was Set on their field. Then, I activated "Sinful Spoils of Subversion - Snake-Eye" from my hand by targeting "Santa Claws" which is in my opponent's field now while I was controlling 2 "Skill Drain" and 1 "Guiding Ariadne" as face-up, and also 1 Set "Ultimate Providence" at my Spell & Trap Zone. My opponent placed that to their Spell & Trap Zone as a Continuous Spell Card, is it OK, or is there an issue at here; since that Normal Spell Card contains this in its text; "Target 1 face-up monster on the field; place it face-up in its owner's Spell & Trap Zone as a Continuous Spell."? (Initiatives; which attempted by Judge(s), about to set a beginner status of person who wrote this question, are skipped for 2 Judge Calls.)

● Duel replay: https://www.duelingbook.com/replay?id=168328-53899972 (Between [7:36] and [7:47].)

Snake Eye attempts to put Santa Claws in its owner's (your) Spell/Trap Zone, since all of yours are filled (2 Skill Drain, Ariadne, a Set card, and the resolving Snake Eye), Santa is put into the GY (see similar interactions with flipping Trap Monsters like the Golden Lands or Embodiment of Apophis with no zones).