Yu-Gi-Oh! » Rulings Q&A

Hi everyone, I have a question that has been bothering me a lot regarding this interaction. The question is: can I tribute a set Fusilier Dragon that was not Tribute Summoned in order to activate Deck Devastation Virus?

Now, there are multiple sources that state yes, it is indeed possible. For example: https://db.ygoresources.com/qa#6403 (Konami FAQ)


The issue is that far too often, while playing on Duelingbook, this exact scenario happens: a judge is called, and they say it is not possible to tribute Fusilier Dragon. You might think it was just a mistake and that it won’t happen again, but as of the day I’m writing this post, it has already happened three times. Three different judges plus one head judge were called, and all of them gave the same negative answer. The last time, I was quite annoyed—after providing my sources, I asked for theirs. They sent me this document, which (as they wrote) is “a popular ruling timeline for retro formats” that they apparently use as their main reference for ruling disputes (even though, at the very start of the document, it is clearly stated that it’s still unfinished). Here’s the link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/19lgGXbrRTKfGwCtBrPaIYE3M1ByyjMFtb2uaVy7niSg/edit?tab=t.0


According to them, the situation is as follows: they agree that yes, in the current format this interaction is legal; however, before 2008 (including Goat Format), it was not possible.
While it is true that the first documented ruling on this exact topic is dated 2008 (as confirmed by the Wayback Machine on Upper Deck Entertainment’s website), the document states that in 2008 there was an “update,” and that the previous ruling was “changed” to the current one. The problem is that there is absolutely no source for this supposed “change,” and no earlier ruling explicitly stating that this interaction was invalid.

Based on all this information, here’s my interpretation: up until 2008 there was no clear ruling on the matter, which caused confusion among players. Upper Deck Entertainment then issued the ruling that is still applied today—not as a change from a previously different interpretation, but as a clarification of how the interaction should always have been ruled. Therefore, the interaction should be considered valid in Goat Format as well.

Am I wrong in this reasoning? Is there any source I may have overlooked? If my interpretation is correct, is there any way to update this document and/or notify the judges about the ruling? Thanks for your attention.

I just wanted to add that I checked on EdoPro as well, and this interaction with GOAT format rules is totally valid.
While it's no official source whatsoever, still it's another hint that this is the right interpretation on the matter.

hm.

That doc contains:

September 28, 2005
A few ruling updates. . . Flame Wingman now checks the ATK of a destroyed Fusilier Dragon in the grave (so the effect will do 2800 damage, even if the Fusilier Dragon was Summoned without Tribute). Previously, it used the ATK on the field.

the one you mention:

May 30, 2008
Lots of rulings updates. Fusilier Dragon the Dual-Mode Beast is now treated as having 2800 ATK, etc. while Set, even if he was Set without Tribute with his effect. So you can use him with DDV now.


Also:

October 13, 2008
FAQ updated. Shrink now interacts properly with monsters with indefinite original ATK values. For monsters with effects that set their original ATK to a certain value when Summoned, Shrink will set the ATK to 0 and keep it there after it wears off; previously, it would just halve the set value. For monsters with effects that continuously recalculate the ATK value, Shrink will halve the calculated value and continue to halve the value as it recalculates throughout the turn; previously, it wouldn’t have any effect at all. It continues to have no effect on Gradius’s Option, though.

it appears that most of the entries on that doc that are reversals are relatively explicit with mentioning how it worked previously, and the fusilier/ddv entry doesn't really imply that it was a ruling change, so it feels more like a clarification than a reversal.


I'm personally curious whether when a Behemoth/Fusilier summoned with reduced stats gets equipped by TER/Relinquished it indeed gains the printed stats in goat, or if it's the reduced stats.

I understand your point of view. If confirmed, it would be another argument in favor for the eligibility of this interaction in GOAT format too.
Yet, I still think the original author of the document on this topic at best made a very poor choice of words, and at worst was totally wrong; they write:

“Lots of rulings updates. Fusilier Dragon the Dual-Mode Beast is now treated as having 2800 ATK, etc. while Set.. So you can use him with DDV now.”

The words “updates” and “now” clearly point to a different situation from a previous one, and simple logic tells us that before that “update” the ruling would not have allowed Fusilier Dragon to be “used with DDV” while set without tributes.
That interpretation isn’t supported by any source, and I do not support it as well for the reasons I already stated.

Also, another piece of evidence I overlooked in my previous posts; from the official goatformat.com rulings (https://www.goatformat.com/rulings3.html):

• “If you Set ‘Fusilier Dragon, the Dual-Mode Beast’ without Tribute, it has ATK 1400 and DEF 1000 when flipped face-up.”

So no, Fusilier Dragon is indeed treated as 2800 ATK while Set, at least up to the point it gets flipped—whether manually, by effect, or by an attack.

According to common knowledge of the game, when a monster is tributed while face-down, it is not considered face-up at any phase of the game. I don’t remember a case where Magician of Faith could activate its effect while being tributed for Mystik Wok or similar cases.
I’d then say that this is by far the biggest source that overcomes any different interpretation on that matter.

Regarding your question with Thousand-Eyes Restrict, again the ruling comes to help (https://www.goatformat.com/rulings7.html
):

• “Monsters equipped to ‘Thousand-Eyes Restrict’ do not have effects and are treated as Equip Spell Cards.”

So Thousand-Eyes gets 2800 ATK.

I invite again any potential reader who has any kind of contact with judges, or with the author of this document, to share the link to this discussion and address this topic, which I care quite a lot about.

I was always convinced of what you say, thank you for your very interesting considerations. Let's wait for answer at this point.