For what it's worth, there's not a lot of unique variety of Yugioh content out there RUclips that's also higher quality, so you bring so much to the table with these yugioh ruling videos that you supplement with your knowledge AND your ability to speak clearly AND be super entertaining!
The ruling about rivarly and flip effects is absolutely correct, but I want to add that the official FAQ for rivarly/gozen on the eu page is outdated and says on the other hand that flip effects will activate OCG has updated this ruling, but TCG literally does not care and left this incorrect ruling on an OFFICIAL source… I’ve contacted them so that they can update the page, but I doubt they’ll ever look at the mail I’ve sent
@@MikeDCWeld they can but the tcg ruuling is frm a time prior to the rules change that made it so that cards need to be in the placce where the effect trigger was met in order to activate that effect. Prior to that the uling matcched the rules but now it doesn't
@@MikeDCWeld They do have different rulings in some scenarios. But the TCG no longer applies this ruling after the update on Trigger effect activation locations. Konami just never updated this page to reflect that.
They still have not updated the rulkallos ruling with IP, I believe. Even though OCG has technically reversed it their initial ruling. However at my locals, it’s already been ruled that Caesar/Rulkallos can negate IP like effects (player performs the synchro/xyz/link summon).
Know Your Rulings was the original reason I liked/subscribed to your channel. For such a complex game, situations I asked myself "WHY GAME BUGGED?!?" weren't uncommon, and learning the actual reasons behind them (and many others I never even thought or questioned) lifted a weight off my shoulders. I was a bit surprised and saddened when I've heard these kind of videos weren't as popular as the others and were going to get axed, but I still enjoyed the other content well enough to stay. While I do hope to see a comeback to your rulling videos, regardless of how it turns out, I'll support your decision. Cheers~
same for me but i think its because in the end people arent interested in the logic of the rulings so much as the verdict, like there is no shortage of people complaining about how choosing isnt targeting no matter how clearly you explained that to target a card is something specifically conducted through a game mechanic to denote a subject while the other is just some generic act of designation required of the player instead, 1 utilizes the game mechanic while the other is jsut an action like any other
Yes, we very would like to see this return, seeing yugitubers agonize over rulings from their favorite decks is entertaining. Maybe monthly or bi-weekly to give you time to set it all up properly. And maybe even with your twitch subs or your twitch mods.
Great and interesting questions and replies! I love this segment. I have a couple speciffic questions that might be interesting: 1) Mimighoul Fork says: target a face down monster your opponent controls, and he chooses either to flip it face up, or send it to the graveyard and you draw two cards. What happens if you're under Droll and Lockbird when using this card? 2) Tenpai Dragon. I declare attack with Chundra, use it's effect, special summon Fadra, use it's effect, special summon Paidra, use it's effect to set. Does all of this occurs before Damage Calculation and can't be interacted by the opponent? Or in which part of the Damage Step would this happen? Can Fadra or Paidra be interrupted in this case? I'd be really happy to know the answer to these! Thanks and keep going with this series, it's a huge help!
1) They cannot choose to make you draw cards. 2) All of this applies before Damage Calculation. (Specifically at Start of Damage Step). Nothing about this series of Chains prevents your opponent interacting with your Trigger effects. There are just many restrictions on what can activate in the Damage Step which could hinder them (no Ash Blossom for example).
Very happy to see this series again. There has been a void in this area of the community with its absence. Content like this is great for both new and returning players. Especially when new interactions arise from new cards.
Here's a deceptively simple question from a TCG Head Judge. Is a Trigger-like effect of a Continuous Trap, chainable to a Fast effect, if the Trap Card is *already* Face-up? For example, in what way could the following Chain be built? 1) CL1 Hugin, CL2 Crystal Conclave, CL3 No Response. 2) CL1 Hugin, CL2 Ash Blossom, CL3 Crystal Conclave. Turn-Player A controls Hugin and Crystal Conclave. Player B possesses Ash Blossom. Assume a Crystal Beast was destroyed and Hugin Special Summoned in the prior Chain. I find that trigger effect timing in general, is something a *lot* of people struggle with (most of my Judge calls), and even more struggle to even identify a Trigger-like effect on a Continuous Trap. So this topic can be worth bringing up in a ruling video. But this question is a little unique in that we technically have no (or rather conflicting) official answers. The Japanese Perfect Rulebook 2017 (somewhat outdated), says that all effects of Face-up Trap Cards are Spell Speed 2. However, in the OCG, Spell Speed 1 Trigger effects can be treated as Spell Speed 2 Quick Effects under certain conditions. Which means that it's not impossible that the inverse is true, that Spell Speed 2 Fast effects, could be treated as Spell Speed 1 Trigger effects under certain conditions. Or that this entry is simply outdated or was initially incomplete. Additionally, the official Fast Effect Timing Chart puts "Continuous Spell/Traps which Trigger" in the Trigger effect activation box along with Monsters, making them Spell Speed 1 Trigger effects. For the record, most TCG Judges will rule that the Trigger-like effects of face-up Continuous Traps are Spell Speed 1Trigger effects - example 1). Master Duel I believe rules them as Spell Speed 2 Fast effects - example 2). Asking Konami directly will result in conflicting or non-definitive answers.
Here is a ruling question I’ve had for years! Player 1 controls a steelswarm roach and a set trap card Player 2 controls a set trap card Player 2 attempts to special summon dark armed dragon Player 1 uses roach eff to negate Player 2 chains his set breakthrough skill targeting roach Player 1 chains his set vanity’s emptiness. The chain resolves. What happens to the dark armed dragon ?
Vanity's Emptiness will not prevent a monster being Special Summoned during the Summon negation window. It only prevents players attempting to Special Summon, but the attempt has already been made.
can you even activate vanity's emptiness in the first place? i thought the summon negation window was like the damage step, and only specific cards and effects can be activated
@@hi-i-am-atan Any Fast effect can be activated during the Summon Negation window as long as a Summon negation was activated at Chain Link 1. It is not like the Damage Step. The reason people sometimes think this is because common Counter Traps negate Summons (e.g. Solemn Judgment) and only Counter Traps can Chain to Counter Traps. For example, if you try to Special Summon Cyber Dragon, the opponent activates a Spell Speed 2 effect to negate the Summon, you can activate Imperm from the hand, assuming you control no other cards, the opponent can Chain Runick Tip, you can Chain Vanity's Emptiness.
So this is probably a no brainer, but the Zealantis Colossus example also applies to Phantom of Yubel because it has the same restriction as Thunder Dragon Colossus.
I am enjoying this, and I do like it, and want to see more. I'd like more rulings like why Hugin can't protect against a board wipe, while you can still discard Psy-Frame Multi-Threader when your Psy-Frame make Black Rose Dragon, to avoid destroying all of your psy-frame cards.
Substitution effects like Hugin, cannot be applied by substituting a card which is already going to be destroyed by the effect it's trying to substitute. This also explains why you can still discard. The card in the hand generally isn't going to be destroyed by the effect as well. (You can replace destroy with any form of removal).
Unfortunately Coder Farfa doesn’t temporarily banish cause I still haven’t gotten those braincells back from watching him review Master Duel Meta Meme Review
In regards to redirecting battle damage, there are instances where both can apply. This is only the case if there is an effect which makes battle damage be taken by both players (e.g. Double-Edged Sword). In which case both redirect effects are applied simultaneously to the damage each player would be taking at that point.
Like he said in the video, you still only apply the redirection once for each instance of battle damage. Effects that make the opponent also take the damage just create a new instance of battle damage, to which you apply all the battle damage modifying effects independently.
Practicing my skills: 1. Thunder's dragons summoning condition doesn't allow it to be summoned by Zelantis. Also happens to any fusion that was not summoned with its proper summoning method (such as a Mirrorjade that one revivies with Adlibitum or Quem). 2. Things you cannot do under Macro-Cosmos like effs: Pay costs that require sending to graveyard (Veiler, DD-Crow). Things you can do: Send cards to the GY by effect (they get banished). Examples: Foolish burial. Since Sulliek sends by effect, it can be activated and resolves by negating and then banishing one of your monsters. Fun fact, even if you have no monsters on resolution, you can still negate, since it uses the "then" conjuction. 3. Flip the monster before damage calculation, send the monster to GY at the end of the damage step, resolve the Flip Effect after damage calculation, apply Gozen Rivalry After damage calculation. (After watching the video) I forgot to mention field check is the first thing to occur so flip effects don't activate. 4. Yes, it is an equip spell, and also a Monster Card (like Therion King equips, that can be send to pay its cost), but not monsters (i.e. so can't be destroyed by cards that destroy monsters). The attack of the token is the one "printed" by the card that summoned it. 5. There is a resource I don't know by heart, which details the order on how battle damage effects should be resolved. (After consulting qa#24055) Both are 03 "your opponent takes any battle damage you would take instead" and it only applies once, so you redirect first by turn player the damage would be taken by non turn player.
5. It is not the turn player who redirects damage first. It is the player who is initially taking damage. If both players are initially taking damage (e.g. Double Edged Sword), both players redirect that damage simultaneously.
I forgot to comment when this video came out, but I had to come back to leave some words of appreciation for bringing this series back. There's a weird genre of content on RUclips that really scratches an itch in my brain: smart people discussing things they're really good at, especially in relation to fun pop culture subjects. When I found your ruling content back in the day, it scratched that itch, and I was an instant fan. The judge call videos are still some of the funniest Yugioh content on the platform, and even though this isn't exactly the same, I'm still beyond happy to see it come back. Here's to a fun and bright future.
Some dude in a comment section was trying to call me an idiot projecting my inability to comprehend the English language onto others by saying "Must be Special Summoned by X.(period)" is a terrible change. "Must be Special Summoned-" and "Must first be Special Summoned-" are 1 word apart and not having the text "-and cannot be Special Summoned by other ways." is the perfect way to mix up the players. It gets even more confusing with cards like Sky Striker Ace - Azalea which says "Must be Link Summoned.(period)" but then later on says "If this card is *SPECIAL SUMMONED-",* not "If this card is Link Summoned-". "-and cannot be Special Summoned by other ways." *NEEDS* to come back because this situation without it is Problem Causing Card Text.
I wish they kept the "Can only be Special Summoned by..." approach of some cards, although stating "Can't be special summoned other ways" work as well yugioh is complicated for no reason, most rulings are "because konami said so" stuff... like try explaining a simple ruling such as avramax VS avramax or honest cl1 vs honest cl2 to someone who plays other card games such as magic or HS, they will look at you like: "why the hell do you play this game?"
You are absolutely right about the ignoring Summoning Conditions part. To me it also just infers that the card can be Special Summoned like normal on a glance which is an issue. Very confusing design choice to have a Monster that can't be Special Summoned except by Link Summon have an effect when it's cheated out but that's not our fault. I don't want this comment to come off like I'm saying "You're right but you're missing the point." but my mind thinks I've worded this harshly. You are very smart for bringing it up and I thank you.
@@findout-YGOavramax vs avramax or honest vs honest scenario isnt even complicated in the first place, just like mtg it all resolves backwards so the 1 that went first wins
For sky stiker the reason is linkage!. It special summons one of the architypal links bypassing the need to link summon. I'm not sure why azalea would confuse you though? They have an architypal spell to special summon a link. The reason why the difference is so important is because most effects follow formal english. Formal english is just really strict... and kinda annoying sometimes.The simpliest way to explain the difference to a new player is to say the effect with "first" in it places a limit on itself. It's like employee only areas, must be employee. It's not once you become an employee you're always allowed there. This also leaves the potential for konami to make cards with effects that say "Must first be X summoned Y times." So kinda like a (low power?) mix of tear and salad. Or decks are gonna synchro and xyz from the gy/banishment/face-up extra deck Edit: linkage! Doesn't treat the summon as a link summon, so you can't summon azalea. Both our points still stand though lol
Can you make a Yugioh Judge Tower series? The concept is simple: -Players draw from a common main deck and can see each other's hands (let's say this doesn't count as the card being revealed for the sake of e.g. Dangers) -They must perform every legal action they are allowed to as soon as possible. If multiple options are simultaneous, you can pick. (For example, if I hold two Bean Soldiers, I may normal summon either one, and I have to attack with that Bean Soldier assuming it's not turn 1) -Life Totals and game losses are tracked normally but they don't matter for the end result -If your opponent makes a rules inaccurate play, you call them out. You get a point if you interjected correctly and your opponent does if the call was wrong -First to a certain number wins
i wish these ruling vids did better numbers for coder cuz i feel this is the area he exceeded at compared to other yugitubers which couldnt offer this kinda content. the series where other yugitubers were asked ruling questions was kino
I love the ruling content! It’s nice to be able to have explanations for why the game we play works the way it does. Really helps my knowledge of the game, ultimately helping me improve!
I really enjoy these rulings videos, it's a great resource for learning and genuinely interesting to see you turn more complex scenarios into more simplified versions to explain rulings that apply to both.
Ruling question: what happens if I activate question and my opponent chains something like dd crow, can they target something in gy without looking at it?
@@MrMariosonicmancannot, question’s graveyard restriction is on activation so its already in place as soon as its activated what happens is the player can only target the top most monster assuming its at the very top of the grave so they can see it or simply target and banish a monster purely through memory, if not then dd crow cannot legally be activated
ooo boy we are indeed back! Thank you, I adore Rulings discussions! YGO is such a Lawyer-y game at times, and I think that learning YGO Rulings is genuinely both super interesting, and highly useful even in hyper-specific examples.
The Ohime/Nightmare Pain scenario reminds me of a ruling I took at locals once where I had to do some digging on the answer. I forget the exact scenario on what happened, but it resulted in me finding a list to follow when multiple effects changing battle damage apply "at once". Basically, you follow this list in sequence, skipping any point that doesn't apply: 1. Doubling battle damage (i.e. Chaos MAX) 2. Both players taking battle damage (i.e. Relinquished) 3. Damage you take is also inflicted to your opponent/your opponent takes the damage instead (i.e. Ohime) 4. Battle Damage is treated as Effect Damage (i.e. Gravekeeper's Vassal) 5. Battle Damage becomes LP Gain (i.e. Rainbow Life) 6. Battle Damage becomes 0 (i.e. Kuriboh) 7. Battle Damage becomes halved (i.e. Pot of Prosperity) 8. Battle Damage becomes doubled (i.e. Garura) 9. Battle Damage becomes a fixed value (i.e. Rod of the Mind's Eye) 10. Battle Damage more/less than or equal to a fixed value is not dealt (i.e. Performage Trapeze Magician) Yes, there's a subtle nuance between points 1 and 8, and it's all involved in the wording of the card.
It’s always nice to have more ruling knowledge. Keep making ‘em. If you ever get around to that damage step video you mentioned I’ve gotta scenario that could be a nice one to touch on. A few years ago in a tournament I was on the back foot against my opponent. I had a single D hero mali on field in attack position and a face down forbidden droplets with no cards in hand. My opponent had 2 monsters on the field and halving only one of their attacks would not have prevented them from dealing lethal damage. I would have had to half one and negate the other attack in order to survive. Knowing this I held off on activating droplets until my opponent declared his attack. I then asked my opponent if he had any effects at the start of the damage step and he declined. I then activated droplets at the before damage calculation stage and sent mali to grave and instead of halving the attacking monster’s attack I halved the remaining monster’s attack stat. My opponent seemed confused and then tried to redeclare the attack with the same monster, but I informed him that it had already attacked that turn and could not declare another attack in the same turn. Having done this on master duel many times I was confident that it would be the case, but both my opponent and the judge did not agree. We ended up going with the judges ruling and I lost. I checked my top deck afterwards and it was a useless card in the situation so I would have still lost anyway albeit a turn later. My understanding of this situation and The way I tried explaining it is that once you enter the start of damage calculation the game can no longer move backwards to the start of the damage step and will first try to calculate damage as much as possible before ending the damage step. Since Mali was sent to the graveyard at this time, when damage was attempting to calculate there was no monster being destroyed so no damage was applied. Then when the damage step ended the attacking monster was already considered to have declared an attack this turn and that attack had progressed to damage calculation and thus could not attempt to replay the battle. Am I correct in this explanation, if not what would happen in this scenario.
You are correct. Once the Damage Step is reached, an attack replay cannot occur. As a monster involved in the battle no longer exists, Damage Calculation cannot occur and the Damage Step skips Damage Calculation and proceeds from After Damage Calculation. That monster has already declared an attack this turn, it cannot declare another attack. Only their other (halved ATK) monster can now attack. If this was not the case, Ally of Justice Catastor could attack every non-DARK monster on the opponent's field, and destroy all of them, lmao.
I was confused as to why a Fallen of Albaz who was banished by Phalanx during my turn, didnt activate it's effect when it was summoned back during my opponent's standby. I thought Ignition Effects activated regardless of whose turn it was.
Another thing to add is that even IF you can activate Albaz's effect, in order to properly work, it needs to stay on the field to do so, since it's required to use itself as part of said Fusion. It's the same reason why banishing a Tear name from the grave when it's performing a fusion will blank the effect.
@@foxyfan999 Sorry I didn't fully parse your comment when I replied. I just saw the last line. Fallen of Albaz's effect is a Trigger effect. It can activate on either player's turn if its activation condition is met. It can activate when Special Summoned by the effect of Phalanx. If you were unable to, something else about the game state was preventing it e.g. no card to discard, no legal fusion summon could be performed etc...
Love to see more of these! I do like how it covers content that seems fairly basic (the Thunder Dragon example) and stuff that is more niche (the damage redirection example).
For the future ruling questions if u gonna make it i absolutly love this content, started watching you from ruling videos tho. Keep up the vibe. Ruling question, Player A: activates Triple Tactic Talents. Player B chains IP:masq Resolves: B summons any link monster with eff on link summon(example: sp;little knight) A :takes that link monster in resolution. Question, who is able to activate on summon link eff
Damage step sucks... Also, can I get a super dumbed-down explanation of "When, you can" interactions with the chain? Still missing timings with House Dragonmaid at the start of the battle phase.
"When" Trigger effect activation conditions will check the very last thing that happened before the current Chain began. If that thing is not the activation condition being met, it cannot activate.
To put it very simply, they don't. You can only activate them after the chain, so the activation requirement (meaning the "when" part) has to be the last thing to happen in the chain, as in chain link 1, as in whatever got responded to to start the chain. For an example, if one of your dragonmaids gets hit by a destruction effect and you respond with Dragonmaid Send-Off to dodge the effect, the chain would start resolving and your dragonmaid would return to hand during the chain, which means you cannot activate House Dragonmaid. For another example of when it would work, if you use Dragonmaid Send-Off, your opponent responds with a negate and you negate their negate, to keep it simple, the chain would start resolving and after the Dragonmaid Send-Off, the chain ends. You can now activate House Dragonmaid, because the chain is no longer active and the last effect in the chain returned a dragonmaid to your hand.
After you resolve the chain with an effect that bounces a dragon monster,House checks if the effect that bounces is the last one in that chain. It can be activated if it is and misses timing if it isn't.
Regardless of whether I have a ruling question or not, or even know the cards in question, I come out of these videos feeling a little bit smarter about the game than I went in. Great content as always.
In MD, my Berserkerion's graveyard effect (to special summon banished magnets) keeps getting negated by Ghost Belle. But from what I understand, there is no part of Berserkerion's effects that should trigger Ghost Belle as a response. What am I not seeing?
You are correct. Neither the Ignition effect, nor Trigger effect of Berserkion the Electromagna Warrior can be responded to by Ghost Belle. This may be a bug.
From what I see if it's a glitch it's that the effect of her middle bullet point is somehow not conneting right or something like that because technically it is a card that "special summons a monster(s)""from the graveyard." Unless she does nevate those effects too and we've just been wrong this whole time
I'm not using Belle so idk if I'm right, but it says "When a card or effect is activated that includes any of these effects", and one oh those effects is banishing cards from the GY. Berserkion has an effect when he can banish magnet warrior from the GY to destroy 1 card. So when he's destroyed and attempts to activate his effect to summon banished magnets, you technically attempt to activate a card that includes 1 of these effects. You do not attempt to activate the included effect, but a card that includes this effect.
@@unoreyno129 This is not the case. Ghost Belle and Ash Blossom, only look at how an effect can possibly resolve in the previous Chain Link. They are not looking at all the card's effects. Regardless. None of Berserkion's effects include an effect to Special Summon from the GY (or anything else listed on Belle).
Your rulings videos are the reason I went from not knowing rulings for almost any complex interaction to being a sort-of unofficial judge. You got me hooked on knowing rulings.
I have a question. So I was playing MD and my opponent flips a set Book of Eclipse. I then Chain Time Thief Redoer's Trap effect to set it on top of his deck but for some reason I'm not able. My question is: If a set card is flipped and I chain to it, does it only count as face-up by the time it resolves in the chain? Because that's is the only explanation that makes sense to me for what happened.
If i remember is something like the card being marked to go to the gy for game mechanics, so you can't flip/bounce it back on resolution. Unless of course it's a card that would stay on the field like a continuous/equip/etc.
A normal/quickplay spell/normal trap is marked as being sent to the GY at the end of the chain once it is activated. If a card is marked for being sent to the GY, or marked for destruction, you can no longer return the card back to the hand or deck, unless the effect specifically states that it returns a card instead of it being sent to the GY (i.e. something like Blizzard).
@@ze2896 it's the same ruling for something like torrential tribute vs a bunch of six samurai monsters, yes the six samurais can usually destroy another samurai to save themselves, but in this case since torrential tribute will destroy all of them anyways, they are all "marked for destruction" and thus you can't keep any of them on board
YES! I love your rulings content and it was how I got into your channel initially (and how I first got interested in knowing a lot of rulings)! I love that you’re doing this again!
Double Edged Sword creates a 2nd battle damage instance, to which you independently apply each battle damage modifying effect. If only you control a monster that redirects damage, your opponent takes damage twice (once because Double Edged Sword made him take damage, and once, because you reflected the damage you took back), if both players control a damage reflector, you take the damage your opponent would have taken due to Double Edged Sword, and your opponent takes the damage you would have taken, so both players still take damage.
Coder is back!! It's nice to have you back Coder, and especially with this content, which I think is so important and made me start following you. Video rehearsals were too a great format, I say, I've watched yours a few times and I believe they can still be valued more, not just with game history, but discussions like Power Creep and the impacts on the game. Good luck at this new moment!
This video was actually super helpful for me because I'm the head judge of a custom card server and one of the top decks specifically uses the Plasma interaction. It's so crazy unintuitive sometimes, like the Relinquished attempt to equip ruling, so getting all the help I can with that makes my job a lot easier.
Thanks for explaining my ruling! Was really helpful and understandable. But the ruling with face down monsters in Battle face against floodgates was a crazy topic! keep up the good content!
Definitely love the ruling content coder! I would love to see like a "Master Duel Ruling Misconceptions" video. I feel like a lot of people play MD have not played the TCG really and there are some common card interactions that MD players get wrong or forget all the time!
wasn't expecting my question would have been picked but I'm glad it was 😅 thanks coder and also to your community who also helped explain it on Twitter ❤
It is great to see this section back! this made 90% of the knowledge I needed when I started playing. SO, to my question: Let's say I had a Schuberta the Melodious Maestra on the field that got negated by Effect veiler. Then, I was able to fusion summon Bacha the Melodious Maestra on to my field (whose effect is: "While you control this Fusion Summoned card, the activated effects of your "Melodious" Fusion Monsters cannot be negated."), without using the Schuberta. Then, I activate the Schuberta targeting the impermanence to banish it and gain 200 ATK. Will the effect of the Schuberta resolve negated or will it banish the impermanence and gain the ATK? Thank you so much for the answer Mr.Coder!
Even though Schuberta is already negated by Effect Veiler. Its activated effect will resolve not negated instead, due to Bacha's Continuous effect. However, they could chain Imperm targeting Bacha. Then Bacha's effects would be negated, and then so too would Schuberta's effect resolve negated. You're Welcome, Signed - Not Mr.Coder.
Absolutely love this content. Helps me truly appreciate Yugioh and help with comprehension. Can't wait for the battle phase and damage step explanations please.
Rulings were my bread and butter, glad to see them back. If you want to branch out I’d love to hear you try to guess rulings from other games’ interactions with someone
I mean... Coder, you were or are at least in my knowledge one of the few judges making fun content and answering genuine questions about rulings and stuff more in-depth of the game. Yes, we have Jesse and Josh making competitive content like testing for WCS, handtraps that are good in the format and everything like that but few making content about the ruling nightmares that this game can produce in some instances.
Alright, here is an extremelly silly ruling question I've been thinking about for some time: I control a "the Wicked Avatar" on my field, and my opponent controls literally any monster, for example, a Blue Eyes White Dragon. I have "Hero Mask" on my hand with any Elemental Hero on deck to use as it's cost, let's say, Neos. So the question is: what happens if I activate "Hero Mask" to target "The Wicked Avatar" and change it's name to "Elemental Hero Neos"? Hero Mask is unique among the cards that change a monster's name because it does NOT change it's effects as well. As a result of this interaction, we would have a monster named "Elemental Hero Neos" but with the effects of "The Wicked Avatar". Now here is where it gets interesting. "The Wicked Avatar's" effect states that it's atk is always 100 higher than the highest atk of the monster in the field, except for "the Wicked Avatar". But now, there is no monster on the field named like that. So, what happens in this scenario? Would our monster's atk continuously check for the highest atk on the field, only to find that there is now a higher atk that does not belong to the wicked Avatar, therefore be forced to increase it by 100 points, then perform the check again and again ad infinitum? Would this create an infinite loop? Or would be just set the atk to be higher than Blue Eyes by 100 points? Would I even be allowed to activate "Hero Mask" targeting the Avatar in the first place?
Oh god, I remember this being debated some 15 years ago, lmao. The Wicked Avatar's effect never considers itself when determining its ATK (changing its name does not affect this), so its ATK becomes 100 + the other monster on the field with the highest ATK. So no infinite loop, and you can activate Hero Mask.
Yes absolutely want more of this ❤ In all honesty i was sad when you said you would stop doing them Its one of the main things i liked about your channel personally
I'd love to see a video dedicated to the strange unique properties of pendulum monsters. I was shocked to learn that Shifter will send cards meant for the face up extra deck to the banishment. I feel like there's a lot of nitty gritty to get into there.
This is actually pretty simple. It has to do with "rules vs. card effects". In this case: Rules say "Pendulums that would go from the field to the GY go to the Extra Deck face-up instead". Shifter's effect says "Cards that would go from (any non-GY or non-banishment location) to the GY are banished instead". This interaction creates a discrepancy between the rules and a card effect, and according to the rulebook, the card effect takes precedence. Thus Pendulums that would go to the Extra Deck face-up are instead banished under Shifter.
in the case of swords woman and dimension wall I look at it as this: After the BATTLE damage has been redirected by an effect it no longer counts as battle damage, but now counts as EFFECT damage. Well, again, this is just how I see it.
I'm glad I correctly understand flip effect rulings with gozen/rivalry after the april 2020 rules revisions. Ive several times had to explain this to people confused why the flip effect isn't activating.
Making a full, complete, comprehensive "THIS is how the damage step works" guide is actually such a good idea. Even if it ends up a 45 min video. Partially cause there still isn't an official ygo rulebook for some fuckin reason.
YES! I'm so glad you are doing more of these! :-]]] --- My requested ruling is: I control Crystron Tristalos and Crystron Citree. My opponent activates a card, and I respond with Tristalos to summon from deck. What happens if my opponent chains Book of Moon on my Tristalos, and then I resolve to summon a Lv5 "Crystron" monster? I do have an F.A. Dawn Dragster in my Extra Deck.
Crystron Tristalo's effect resolves normally, as long as you can perform an appropriate Synchro Summon using the Summoned monster as material. If you cannot, only that part of the effect is not applied.
I got into rulings thanks to your content, it is my personal favorite type of content you make. I like testing random interactions in master duel, some of them I put in my channel if you want to check it out, not trying to promote my channel, I just get really excited about niche interactions and want to share the joy with others who are like me.
Yes, i do want to see more of this. i enjoyed watching ruling questions because it helps me learn more about what happens in between steps of attck and what to do if it happens in a dule agents my friends
Dang, I learned something new about Damage Redirection. If Nightmare Pain and a Mikanko are both on the field, the attacking player applies the redirection, so whoever attacks does matter. The simplified version does in fact remove that aspect where it matters who attacked because you used a monster vs. a trap card, instead of a monster vs. a monster. The reason why it came to mind that the attacking player matters is, both Damage Redirection effects are non-activated, and just like Lost World vs. Lost World, the turn player's non-activated effect applies first.
I love the ruling questions by distant coder, I don’t actually play modern Yugioh, haven’t played since 2009. But I watch yugi content have learned a lot from creators like DistantCoder. As a rules advisor and at one point a local judge for Magic the Gathering, I very much appreciate this content. I can tell that distant coder wants to move on and do other things. I can see why, at a certain point you end up just repeating yourself over and over again
Really love to see you doing Ruling Content again! Here is something I thought about the other day: If I have a field with Hugin and my opponent uses Raigeki I can not protect because Hugin is already marked for Destruction. But what happens if I chain Slumber to that Raigeki. Does the state of being marked for destruction vanish while the chain resolves or can I still not protect the rest of the field with Hugin?
Understanding this is a little tricky, but I'll try to explain as best I can. In short, you still cannot apply Hugin's effect as Hugin is still marked for Destruction. This is true even if Slumber applied before Raigeki was activated. Slumber's effect will substitute the destruction of Raigeki, when Raigeki's effect applies. But at that point it's now too late to apply Hugin's effect as Raigeki has already resolved. It cannot banish itself to substitute the destruction before Slumber prevents the destruction (at the point Raigeki applies), because then Hugin itself is still marked for destruction at that point. It's a bit of a chicken and egg situation but all answers lead to Hugin not being able to substitute the destruction.
One really fun interaction I had in MD once, relating to the Anima/Relinquished equipping a monster, was my opponent targeted one of my face down monsters to equip and when it went to the S/T zone, it not only didn't flip it face up, but because it was still face down, no stat modulation was applied. It actually ended up saving me lmao
FINALLY! The goated series is back! And I must say, I feel so proud that after all these videos, I FINALLY got almost every question correctly. The only thing I missed was the damage redirection. I had no idea, but I speculated that it may be based on whose turn it is since the turn player has priority. So if you attack with a damage redirecting monster and your opponent tries to redirect, then you win since your redirection happens last, even if it is not an activated effect. After Coder answearing the question, I learnt something new and I can't for the life of me now think how the double redirection would happen since most of the times, only one will be able to apply beforehand. Besides the flip-gozen ruling, which I knew for some reason, this was surely the second hardest question here, since there are so limited cards that do this to the point that a doible redirection is EXTREMELY unlikely to happen anyway.
You've misunderstood damage reflection. It is only applied once. The player who applies their damage reflection, is the player who is initially going to take damage. It has nothing to do with turn player priority.
@@monkfishy6348 Ik. I didn't say that that was what was true. I just said that my initial thought was that it depends on whose turn it is. Now that Coder explained it, I know that I was wrong. It is even mentioned in my initial comment.
Great to see you back doing this type of content, wishing you the best for the next episodes! I also have a question regarding the interaction between 2 cards : Redoer and Piercing the Darkness. Does Redoer still keep the "knowledge" of being summoned by using a Normal Monster as Material after using its effect to banish himself? Thanks in advance for your answer!
Ahh yes, now I know I in-fact CAN use Kalut in the Damage Step. Thanks for clarifying!
.... "Damage step" 😇
@@maki6569THE TRIPLE KALUT!!!
Never gets old 😂😂
Don't bring up gages ptsd
Gage: I hate you, Alex....
still don’t understand sorry
Im pretty sure he said MST negates
Yooooo
MBT negates intelligence i fear
You're too much in Farfas chat and it shows
Getbm gud scrub
For what it's worth, there's not a lot of unique variety of Yugioh content out there RUclips that's also higher quality, so you bring so much to the table with these yugioh ruling videos that you supplement with your knowledge AND your ability to speak clearly AND be super entertaining!
These kind of ruling videos are extremely helpful for getting a finer grasp on the game, please keep doing them!
The ruling about rivarly and flip effects is absolutely correct, but I want to add that the official FAQ for rivarly/gozen on the eu page is outdated and says on the other hand that flip effects will activate
OCG has updated this ruling, but TCG literally does not care and left this incorrect ruling on an OFFICIAL source…
I’ve contacted them so that they can update the page, but I doubt they’ll ever look at the mail I’ve sent
I've emailed them a few times to fix this over the years. Maybe you will have more luck.
If the OCG and TCG can have different ban lists, then surely they can have different rulings on some situations.
@@MikeDCWeld they can but the tcg ruuling is frm a time prior to the rules change that made it so that cards need to be in the placce where the effect trigger was met in order to activate that effect. Prior to that the uling matcched the rules but now it doesn't
@@MikeDCWeld They do have different rulings in some scenarios. But the TCG no longer applies this ruling after the update on Trigger effect activation locations. Konami just never updated this page to reflect that.
They still have not updated the rulkallos ruling with IP, I believe. Even though OCG has technically reversed it their initial ruling. However at my locals, it’s already been ruled that Caesar/Rulkallos can negate IP like effects (player performs the synchro/xyz/link summon).
Know Your Rulings was the original reason I liked/subscribed to your channel. For such a complex game, situations I asked myself "WHY GAME BUGGED?!?" weren't uncommon, and learning the actual reasons behind them (and many others I never even thought or questioned) lifted a weight off my shoulders. I was a bit surprised and saddened when I've heard these kind of videos weren't as popular as the others and were going to get axed, but I still enjoyed the other content well enough to stay. While I do hope to see a comeback to your rulling videos, regardless of how it turns out, I'll support your decision. Cheers~
same for me but i think its because in the end people arent interested in the logic of the rulings so much as the verdict, like there is no shortage of people complaining about how choosing isnt targeting no matter how clearly you explained that to target a card is something specifically conducted through a game mechanic to denote a subject while the other is just some generic act of designation required of the player instead, 1 utilizes the game mechanic while the other is jsut an action like any other
They are also the reason I became a Judge.
Coder with the new Hairstyle? Well darn. Or maybe I didn't see it until now, because of the caps you wear.
fr no cap
Yes, we very would like to see this return, seeing yugitubers agonize over rulings from their favorite decks is entertaining. Maybe monthly or bi-weekly to give you time to set it all up properly. And maybe even with your twitch subs or your twitch mods.
This is your best content, I hope it becomes more popular so you can keep doing it.
Great and interesting questions and replies! I love this segment. I have a couple speciffic questions that might be interesting:
1) Mimighoul Fork says: target a face down monster your opponent controls, and he chooses either to flip it face up, or send it to the graveyard and you draw two cards. What happens if you're under Droll and Lockbird when using this card?
2) Tenpai Dragon. I declare attack with Chundra, use it's effect, special summon Fadra, use it's effect, special summon Paidra, use it's effect to set. Does all of this occurs before Damage Calculation and can't be interacted by the opponent? Or in which part of the Damage Step would this happen? Can Fadra or Paidra be interrupted in this case?
I'd be really happy to know the answer to these! Thanks and keep going with this series, it's a huge help!
1) They cannot choose to make you draw cards.
2) All of this applies before Damage Calculation. (Specifically at Start of Damage Step).
Nothing about this series of Chains prevents your opponent interacting with your Trigger effects. There are just many restrictions on what can activate in the Damage Step which could hinder them (no Ash Blossom for example).
Very happy to see this series again. There has been a void in this area of the community with its absence. Content like this is great for both new and returning players. Especially when new interactions arise from new cards.
Here's a deceptively simple question from a TCG Head Judge.
Is a Trigger-like effect of a Continuous Trap, chainable to a Fast effect, if the Trap Card is *already* Face-up?
For example, in what way could the following Chain be built?
1) CL1 Hugin, CL2 Crystal Conclave, CL3 No Response.
2) CL1 Hugin, CL2 Ash Blossom, CL3 Crystal Conclave.
Turn-Player A controls Hugin and Crystal Conclave. Player B possesses Ash Blossom. Assume a Crystal Beast was destroyed and Hugin Special Summoned in the prior Chain.
I find that trigger effect timing in general, is something a *lot* of people struggle with (most of my Judge calls), and even more struggle to even identify a Trigger-like effect on a Continuous Trap. So this topic can be worth bringing up in a ruling video. But this question is a little unique in that we technically have no (or rather conflicting) official answers.
The Japanese Perfect Rulebook 2017 (somewhat outdated), says that all effects of Face-up Trap Cards are Spell Speed 2. However, in the OCG, Spell Speed 1 Trigger effects can be treated as Spell Speed 2 Quick Effects under certain conditions. Which means that it's not impossible that the inverse is true, that Spell Speed 2 Fast effects, could be treated as Spell Speed 1 Trigger effects under certain conditions. Or that this entry is simply outdated or was initially incomplete. Additionally, the official Fast Effect Timing Chart puts "Continuous Spell/Traps which Trigger" in the Trigger effect activation box along with Monsters, making them Spell Speed 1 Trigger effects.
For the record, most TCG Judges will rule that the Trigger-like effects of face-up Continuous Traps are Spell Speed 1Trigger effects - example 1). Master Duel I believe rules them as Spell Speed 2 Fast effects - example 2). Asking Konami directly will result in conflicting or non-definitive answers.
Here is a ruling question I’ve had for years!
Player 1 controls a steelswarm roach and a set trap card
Player 2 controls a set trap card
Player 2 attempts to special summon dark armed dragon
Player 1 uses roach eff to negate
Player 2 chains his set breakthrough skill targeting roach
Player 1 chains his set vanity’s emptiness. The chain resolves. What happens to the dark armed dragon ?
Vanity's Emptiness will not prevent a monster being Special Summoned during the Summon negation window. It only prevents players attempting to Special Summon, but the attempt has already been made.
can you even activate vanity's emptiness in the first place? i thought the summon negation window was like the damage step, and only specific cards and effects can be activated
@@hi-i-am-atan Any Fast effect can be activated during the Summon Negation window as long as a Summon negation was activated at Chain Link 1. It is not like the Damage Step. The reason people sometimes think this is because common Counter Traps negate Summons (e.g. Solemn Judgment) and only Counter Traps can Chain to Counter Traps.
For example, if you try to Special Summon Cyber Dragon, the opponent activates a Spell Speed 2 effect to negate the Summon, you can activate Imperm from the hand, assuming you control no other cards, the opponent can Chain Runick Tip, you can Chain Vanity's Emptiness.
I LOVE THESE RULING VIDS.
These are what got me into judging a couple years ago! I’ve missed em so much 🥲
So this is probably a no brainer, but the Zealantis Colossus example also applies to Phantom of Yubel because it has the same restriction as Thunder Dragon Colossus.
I am enjoying this, and I do like it, and want to see more. I'd like more rulings like why Hugin can't protect against a board wipe, while you can still discard Psy-Frame Multi-Threader when your Psy-Frame make Black Rose Dragon, to avoid destroying all of your psy-frame cards.
Substitution effects like Hugin, cannot be applied by substituting a card which is already going to be destroyed by the effect it's trying to substitute. This also explains why you can still discard. The card in the hand generally isn't going to be destroyed by the effect as well. (You can replace destroy with any form of removal).
Unfortunately Coder Farfa doesn’t temporarily banish cause I still haven’t gotten those braincells back from watching him review Master Duel Meta Meme Review
I love those videos when you're chilling and teaching us so much interesting stuff! Whatever you do it's always fire 🔥
In regards to redirecting battle damage, there are instances where both can apply. This is only the case if there is an effect which makes battle damage be taken by both players (e.g. Double-Edged Sword). In which case both redirect effects are applied simultaneously to the damage each player would be taking at that point.
Like he said in the video, you still only apply the redirection once for each instance of battle damage. Effects that make the opponent also take the damage just create a new instance of battle damage, to which you apply all the battle damage modifying effects independently.
Practicing my skills:
1. Thunder's dragons summoning condition doesn't allow it to be summoned by Zelantis. Also happens to any fusion that was not summoned with its proper summoning method (such as a Mirrorjade that one revivies with Adlibitum or Quem).
2. Things you cannot do under Macro-Cosmos like effs: Pay costs that require sending to graveyard (Veiler, DD-Crow). Things you can do: Send cards to the GY by effect (they get banished). Examples: Foolish burial. Since Sulliek sends by effect, it can be activated and resolves by negating and then banishing one of your monsters. Fun fact, even if you have no monsters on resolution, you can still negate, since it uses the "then" conjuction.
3. Flip the monster before damage calculation, send the monster to GY at the end of the damage step, resolve the Flip Effect after damage calculation, apply Gozen Rivalry After damage calculation. (After watching the video) I forgot to mention field check is the first thing to occur so flip effects don't activate.
4. Yes, it is an equip spell, and also a Monster Card (like Therion King equips, that can be send to pay its cost), but not monsters (i.e. so can't be destroyed by cards that destroy monsters). The attack of the token is the one "printed" by the card that summoned it.
5. There is a resource I don't know by heart, which details the order on how battle damage effects should be resolved. (After consulting qa#24055) Both are 03 "your opponent takes any battle damage you would take instead" and it only applies once, so you redirect first by turn player the damage would be taken by non turn player.
5. It is not the turn player who redirects damage first. It is the player who is initially taking damage. If both players are initially taking damage (e.g. Double Edged Sword), both players redirect that damage simultaneously.
Thank you for the observation that's correct
Rulings are back pog
I forgot to comment when this video came out, but I had to come back to leave some words of appreciation for bringing this series back. There's a weird genre of content on RUclips that really scratches an itch in my brain: smart people discussing things they're really good at, especially in relation to fun pop culture subjects. When I found your ruling content back in the day, it scratched that itch, and I was an instant fan. The judge call videos are still some of the funniest Yugioh content on the platform, and even though this isn't exactly the same, I'm still beyond happy to see it come back. Here's to a fun and bright future.
YES we have been listened to!
Thanks for listening and posting this. I really hope the numbers reflect me and many other's wishes here because this is my favorite content you do.
Some dude in a comment section was trying to call me an idiot projecting my inability to comprehend the English language onto others by saying "Must be Special Summoned by X.(period)" is a terrible change. "Must be Special Summoned-" and "Must first be Special Summoned-" are 1 word apart and not having the text "-and cannot be Special Summoned by other ways." is the perfect way to mix up the players.
It gets even more confusing with cards like Sky Striker Ace - Azalea which says "Must be Link Summoned.(period)" but then later on says "If this card is *SPECIAL SUMMONED-",* not "If this card is Link Summoned-".
"-and cannot be Special Summoned by other ways." *NEEDS* to come back because this situation without it is Problem Causing Card Text.
I wish they kept the "Can only be Special Summoned by..." approach of some cards, although stating "Can't be special summoned other ways" work as well
yugioh is complicated for no reason, most rulings are "because konami said so" stuff...
like try explaining a simple ruling such as avramax VS avramax or honest cl1 vs honest cl2 to someone who plays other card games such as magic or HS, they will look at you like: "why the hell do you play this game?"
I imagine when a card says something like that they're future proofing in case they make a card that ignores summoning conditions
You are absolutely right about the ignoring Summoning Conditions part. To me it also just infers that the card can be Special Summoned like normal on a glance which is an issue.
Very confusing design choice to have a Monster that can't be Special Summoned except by Link Summon have an effect when it's cheated out but that's not our fault.
I don't want this comment to come off like I'm saying "You're right but you're missing the point." but my mind thinks I've worded this harshly. You are very smart for bringing it up and I thank you.
@@findout-YGOavramax vs avramax or honest vs honest scenario isnt even complicated in the first place, just like mtg it all resolves backwards so the 1 that went first wins
For sky stiker the reason is linkage!. It special summons one of the architypal links bypassing the need to link summon. I'm not sure why azalea would confuse you though? They have an architypal spell to special summon a link.
The reason why the difference is so important is because most effects follow formal english. Formal english is just really strict... and kinda annoying sometimes.The simpliest way to explain the difference to a new player is to say the effect with "first" in it places a limit on itself. It's like employee only areas, must be employee. It's not once you become an employee you're always allowed there.
This also leaves the potential for konami to make cards with effects that say "Must first be X summoned Y times." So kinda like a (low power?) mix of tear and salad. Or decks are gonna synchro and xyz from the gy/banishment/face-up extra deck
Edit: linkage! Doesn't treat the summon as a link summon, so you can't summon azalea. Both our points still stand though lol
Can you make a Yugioh Judge Tower series? The concept is simple:
-Players draw from a common main deck and can see each other's hands (let's say this doesn't count as the card being revealed for the sake of e.g. Dangers)
-They must perform every legal action they are allowed to as soon as possible. If multiple options are simultaneous, you can pick. (For example, if I hold two Bean Soldiers, I may normal summon either one, and I have to attack with that Bean Soldier assuming it's not turn 1)
-Life Totals and game losses are tracked normally but they don't matter for the end result
-If your opponent makes a rules inaccurate play, you call them out. You get a point if you interjected correctly and your opponent does if the call was wrong
-First to a certain number wins
i wish these ruling vids did better numbers for coder cuz i feel this is the area he exceeded at compared to other yugitubers which couldnt offer this kinda content.
the series where other yugitubers were asked ruling questions was kino
I love the ruling content! It’s nice to be able to have explanations for why the game we play works the way it does. Really helps my knowledge of the game, ultimately helping me improve!
Rulling content is back!! Let's goooo
pend
I really enjoy these rulings videos, it's a great resource for learning and genuinely interesting to see you turn more complex scenarios into more simplified versions to explain rulings that apply to both.
Ruling question: what happens if I activate question and my opponent chains something like dd crow, can they target something in gy without looking at it?
since chains go backwards, DD crow should allow you to see the graveyard before the question gets asked denying you the graveyard.
@@MrMariosonicmancannot, question’s graveyard restriction is on activation so its already in place as soon as its activated
what happens is the player can only target the top most monster assuming its at the very top of the grave so they can see it or simply target and banish a monster purely through memory, if not then dd crow cannot legally be activated
They must adequately describe a card in your GY.
Question will get on the forbidden list as soon as someone tries to get ruling question over it
@@YukiFubuki. Why only the top most monster? D.D. Crow can banish any card.
ooo boy we are indeed back! Thank you, I adore Rulings discussions! YGO is such a Lawyer-y game at times, and I think that learning YGO Rulings is genuinely both super interesting, and highly useful even in hyper-specific examples.
Yooo! Rulings are back!!
The Ohime/Nightmare Pain scenario reminds me of a ruling I took at locals once where I had to do some digging on the answer. I forget the exact scenario on what happened, but it resulted in me finding a list to follow when multiple effects changing battle damage apply "at once". Basically, you follow this list in sequence, skipping any point that doesn't apply:
1. Doubling battle damage (i.e. Chaos MAX)
2. Both players taking battle damage (i.e. Relinquished)
3. Damage you take is also inflicted to your opponent/your opponent takes the damage instead (i.e. Ohime)
4. Battle Damage is treated as Effect Damage (i.e. Gravekeeper's Vassal)
5. Battle Damage becomes LP Gain (i.e. Rainbow Life)
6. Battle Damage becomes 0 (i.e. Kuriboh)
7. Battle Damage becomes halved (i.e. Pot of Prosperity)
8. Battle Damage becomes doubled (i.e. Garura)
9. Battle Damage becomes a fixed value (i.e. Rod of the Mind's Eye)
10. Battle Damage more/less than or equal to a fixed value is not dealt (i.e. Performage Trapeze Magician)
Yes, there's a subtle nuance between points 1 and 8, and it's all involved in the wording of the card.
iirc, only three cards fall under category 1. Chaos MAX, some Metalfoes Fusion monster and one of the White Woods Synchro. So pretty easy to remember.
We are so back like it's a transaction and there's a trap in the graveyard to roll
It’s always nice to have more ruling knowledge. Keep making ‘em. If you ever get around to that damage step video you mentioned I’ve gotta scenario that could be a nice one to touch on.
A few years ago in a tournament I was on the back foot against my opponent. I had a single D hero mali on field in attack position and a face down forbidden droplets with no cards in hand. My opponent had 2 monsters on the field and halving only one of their attacks would not have prevented them from dealing lethal damage. I would have had to half one and negate the other attack in order to survive.
Knowing this I held off on activating droplets until my opponent declared his attack. I then asked my opponent if he had any effects at the start of the damage step and he declined. I then activated droplets at the before damage calculation stage and sent mali to grave and instead of halving the attacking monster’s attack I halved the remaining monster’s attack stat. My opponent seemed confused and then tried to redeclare the attack with the same monster, but I informed him that it had already attacked that turn and could not declare another attack in the same turn. Having done this on master duel many times I was confident that it would be the case, but both my opponent and the judge did not agree. We ended up going with the judges ruling and I lost. I checked my top deck afterwards and it was a useless card in the situation so I would have still lost anyway albeit a turn later.
My understanding of this situation and The way I tried explaining it is that once you enter the start of damage calculation the game can no longer move backwards to the start of the damage step and will first try to calculate damage as much as possible before ending the damage step. Since Mali was sent to the graveyard at this time, when damage was attempting to calculate there was no monster being destroyed so no damage was applied. Then when the damage step ended the attacking monster was already considered to have declared an attack this turn and that attack had progressed to damage calculation and thus could not attempt to replay the battle.
Am I correct in this explanation, if not what would happen in this scenario.
You are correct. Once the Damage Step is reached, an attack replay cannot occur. As a monster involved in the battle no longer exists, Damage Calculation cannot occur and the Damage Step skips Damage Calculation and proceeds from After Damage Calculation. That monster has already declared an attack this turn, it cannot declare another attack. Only their other (halved ATK) monster can now attack. If this was not the case, Ally of Justice Catastor could attack every non-DARK monster on the opponent's field, and destroy all of them, lmao.
I swear the Damage Step can be it’s own college course
real
You can easily make a School out of Yugioh rulings. Some sort of... Dueling Academy.
Love to see you back with this content! Being a rules laywer myself I am also so happy to see complicated interactions in games.
I was confused as to why a Fallen of Albaz who was banished by Phalanx during my turn, didnt activate it's effect when it was summoned back during my opponent's standby. I thought Ignition Effects activated regardless of whose turn it was.
Ignition effects can only be activated in its controller's Main Phases.
Fallen of Albaz is a Trigger effect.
@@monkfishy6348 ah, I thought they triggered regardless, thanks!
Fallen of albaz is a trigger effect that activates on summon, an example of a ignition effect is samasara d lotus to summon Spirit of yubel.
Another thing to add is that even IF you can activate Albaz's effect, in order to properly work, it needs to stay on the field to do so, since it's required to use itself as part of said Fusion.
It's the same reason why banishing a Tear name from the grave when it's performing a fusion will blank the effect.
@@foxyfan999 Sorry I didn't fully parse your comment when I replied. I just saw the last line.
Fallen of Albaz's effect is a Trigger effect. It can activate on either player's turn if its activation condition is met. It can activate when Special Summoned by the effect of Phalanx. If you were unable to, something else about the game state was preventing it e.g. no card to discard, no legal fusion summon could be performed etc...
Love to see more of these! I do like how it covers content that seems fairly basic (the Thunder Dragon example) and stuff that is more niche (the damage redirection example).
ITS BACK!!!!!!!!
For the future ruling questions if u gonna make it i absolutly love this content, started watching you from ruling videos tho. Keep up the vibe.
Ruling question,
Player A:
activates Triple Tactic Talents.
Player B chains IP:masq
Resolves:
B summons any link monster with eff on link summon(example: sp;little knight)
A :takes that link monster in resolution.
Question, who is able to activate on summon link eff
In the OCG, the current controller. In the TCG, the player who Summoned, but ask the Head Judge as it varies.
Damage step sucks...
Also, can I get a super dumbed-down explanation of "When, you can" interactions with the chain? Still missing timings with House Dragonmaid at the start of the battle phase.
"When" Trigger effect activation conditions will check the very last thing that happened before the current Chain began. If that thing is not the activation condition being met, it cannot activate.
To put it very simply, they don't. You can only activate them after the chain, so the activation requirement (meaning the "when" part) has to be the last thing to happen in the chain, as in chain link 1, as in whatever got responded to to start the chain.
For an example, if one of your dragonmaids gets hit by a destruction effect and you respond with Dragonmaid Send-Off to dodge the effect, the chain would start resolving and your dragonmaid would return to hand during the chain, which means you cannot activate House Dragonmaid.
For another example of when it would work, if you use Dragonmaid Send-Off, your opponent responds with a negate and you negate their negate, to keep it simple, the chain would start resolving and after the Dragonmaid Send-Off, the chain ends. You can now activate House Dragonmaid, because the chain is no longer active and the last effect in the chain returned a dragonmaid to your hand.
After you resolve the chain with an effect that bounces a dragon monster,House checks if the effect that bounces is the last one in that chain. It can be activated if it is and misses timing if it isn't.
Regardless of whether I have a ruling question or not, or even know the cards in question, I come out of these videos feeling a little bit smarter about the game than I went in. Great content as always.
fresh cut coder
The community needs videos like these, hopefully the support keeps coming and the videos keep coming too!
In MD, my Berserkerion's graveyard effect (to special summon banished magnets) keeps getting negated by Ghost Belle. But from what I understand, there is no part of Berserkerion's effects that should trigger Ghost Belle as a response. What am I not seeing?
You are correct. Neither the Ignition effect, nor Trigger effect of Berserkion the Electromagna Warrior can be responded to by Ghost Belle. This may be a bug.
From what I see if it's a glitch it's that the effect of her middle bullet point is somehow not conneting right or something like that because technically it is a card that "special summons a monster(s)""from the graveyard." Unless she does nevate those effects too and we've just been wrong this whole time
I'm not using Belle so idk if I'm right, but it says "When a card or effect is activated that includes any of these effects", and one oh those effects is banishing cards from the GY.
Berserkion has an effect when he can banish magnet warrior from the GY to destroy 1 card.
So when he's destroyed and attempts to activate his effect to summon banished magnets, you technically attempt to activate a card that includes 1 of these effects.
You do not attempt to activate the included effect, but a card that includes this effect.
@@unoreyno129 This is not the case. Ghost Belle and Ash Blossom, only look at how an effect can possibly resolve in the previous Chain Link. They are not looking at all the card's effects. Regardless. None of Berserkion's effects include an effect to Special Summon from the GY (or anything else listed on Belle).
@@unoreyno129 That "banish one magnet to destroy one card" is a cost and should not trigger Ghost Belle as a response.
Your rulings videos are the reason I went from not knowing rulings for almost any complex interaction to being a sort-of unofficial judge. You got me hooked on knowing rulings.
I have a question. So I was playing MD and my opponent flips a set Book of Eclipse. I then Chain Time Thief Redoer's Trap effect to set it on top of his deck but for some reason I'm not able.
My question is: If a set card is flipped and I chain to it, does it only count as face-up by the time it resolves in the chain? Because that's is the only explanation that makes sense to me for what happened.
If i remember is something like the card being marked to go to the gy for game mechanics, so you can't flip/bounce it back on resolution.
Unless of course it's a card that would stay on the field like a continuous/equip/etc.
A normal/quickplay spell/normal trap is marked as being sent to the GY at the end of the chain once it is activated. If a card is marked for being sent to the GY, or marked for destruction, you can no longer return the card back to the hand or deck, unless the effect specifically states that it returns a card instead of it being sent to the GY (i.e. something like Blizzard).
@@TiagoODuelista Ok , I didn't know that. I thought it just worked like a regular destruction effect. Thx for clarification.
Non-continuous spells and traps cannot be returned to hand/deck during the chain they were activated
@@ze2896 it's the same ruling for something like torrential tribute vs a bunch of six samurai monsters, yes the six samurais can usually destroy another samurai to save themselves, but in this case since torrential tribute will destroy all of them anyways, they are all "marked for destruction" and thus you can't keep any of them on board
YES! I love your rulings content and it was how I got into your channel initially (and how I first got interested in knowing a lot of rulings)! I love that you’re doing this again!
14:44 What about double edged sword?
It applies first, both redirect effects apply simultaneously to the damage each player is receiving at that time.
Double Edged Sword creates a 2nd battle damage instance, to which you independently apply each battle damage modifying effect. If only you control a monster that redirects damage, your opponent takes damage twice (once because Double Edged Sword made him take damage, and once, because you reflected the damage you took back), if both players control a damage reflector, you take the damage your opponent would have taken due to Double Edged Sword, and your opponent takes the damage you would have taken, so both players still take damage.
One thing I learned in 05 was the battle step happens before the damage step, thanks Spear Dragon!
I like how most of these are just yugioh players not knowing how to read
You have such a great way of explaining rulings, freaking incredible. Would love to have this as a recurring series man!
Coder is back!! It's nice to have you back Coder, and especially with this content, which I think is so important and made me start following you. Video rehearsals were too a great format, I say, I've watched yours a few times and I believe they can still be valued more, not just with game history, but discussions like Power Creep and the impacts on the game. Good luck at this new moment!
This video was actually super helpful for me because I'm the head judge of a custom card server and one of the top decks specifically uses the Plasma interaction. It's so crazy unintuitive sometimes, like the Relinquished attempt to equip ruling, so getting all the help I can with that makes my job a lot easier.
I found you originally from your ruling quizzes and now watch all your content. I'm glad to see ruling stuff back
started watching your vids back in the day for this content. love that you are getting back to it
I would love to see more ruling videos in the future! This one of my favorite kinds of videos to watch/listen to.
Thanks for explaining my ruling! Was really helpful and understandable.
But the ruling with face down monsters in Battle face against floodgates was a crazy topic!
keep up the good content!
Definitely love the ruling content coder! I would love to see like a "Master Duel Ruling Misconceptions" video. I feel like a lot of people play MD have not played the TCG really and there are some common card interactions that MD players get wrong or forget all the time!
Glad to see ruling content back, this is my favorite type of thing you produce
wasn't expecting my question would have been picked but I'm glad it was 😅
thanks coder and also to your community who also helped explain it on Twitter ❤
Ruling videos were my favorite, glad to see that you want to bring them back
It is great to see this section back! this made 90% of the knowledge I needed when I started playing. SO, to my question:
Let's say I had a Schuberta the Melodious Maestra on the field that got negated by Effect veiler. Then, I was able to fusion summon Bacha the Melodious Maestra on to my field (whose effect is: "While you control this Fusion Summoned card, the activated effects of your "Melodious" Fusion Monsters cannot be negated."), without using the Schuberta. Then, I activate the Schuberta targeting the impermanence to banish it and gain 200 ATK. Will the effect of the Schuberta resolve negated or will it banish the impermanence and gain the ATK? Thank you so much for the answer Mr.Coder!
Even though Schuberta is already negated by Effect Veiler. Its activated effect will resolve not negated instead, due to Bacha's Continuous effect. However, they could chain Imperm targeting Bacha. Then Bacha's effects would be negated, and then so too would Schuberta's effect resolve negated.
You're Welcome, Signed - Not Mr.Coder.
@@FudgeGoogol Thank you for the prompt answer, Mr. Not Coder , now I can play a little better melodious XD
Ruling content is why I subscribed to you in the first place. I would love to see some more!
I really love these! I started watching you because of them, so please, continue to do them!
Absolutely love this content. Helps me truly appreciate Yugioh and help with comprehension.
Can't wait for the battle phase and damage step explanations please.
I'm so glad to see more of this again! Really hoping to see more in the future!
Rulings were my bread and butter, glad to see them back. If you want to branch out I’d love to hear you try to guess rulings from other games’ interactions with someone
Please more!! I love the complexity and rulings talk!!
I mean... Coder, you were or are at least in my knowledge one of the few judges making fun content and answering genuine questions about rulings and stuff more in-depth of the game.
Yes, we have Jesse and Josh making competitive content like testing for WCS, handtraps that are good in the format and everything like that but few making content about the ruling nightmares that this game can produce in some instances.
Alright, here is an extremelly silly ruling question I've been thinking about for some time:
I control a "the Wicked Avatar" on my field, and my opponent controls literally any monster, for example, a Blue Eyes White Dragon.
I have "Hero Mask" on my hand with any Elemental Hero on deck to use as it's cost, let's say, Neos.
So the question is: what happens if I activate "Hero Mask" to target "The Wicked Avatar" and change it's name to "Elemental Hero Neos"? Hero Mask is unique among the cards that change a monster's name because it does NOT change it's effects as well. As a result of this interaction, we would have a monster named "Elemental Hero Neos" but with the effects of "The Wicked Avatar".
Now here is where it gets interesting. "The Wicked Avatar's" effect states that it's atk is always 100 higher than the highest atk of the monster in the field, except for "the Wicked Avatar". But now, there is no monster on the field named like that. So, what happens in this scenario?
Would our monster's atk continuously check for the highest atk on the field, only to find that there is now a higher atk that does not belong to the wicked Avatar, therefore be forced to increase it by 100 points, then perform the check again and again ad infinitum? Would this create an infinite loop? Or would be just set the atk to be higher than Blue Eyes by 100 points? Would I even be allowed to activate "Hero Mask" targeting the Avatar in the first place?
Oh god, I remember this being debated some 15 years ago, lmao. The Wicked Avatar's effect never considers itself when determining its ATK (changing its name does not affect this), so its ATK becomes 100 + the other monster on the field with the highest ATK. So no infinite loop, and you can activate Hero Mask.
This was always some of my favourite of your favorite content so super happy to see it back and hope to see more
Yes absolutely want more of this ❤
In all honesty i was sad when you said you would stop doing them
Its one of the main things i liked about your channel personally
Glad to see you so totally back coder!
LETS GOOOOO! Senior level damage calculation class please!
I love this content personally. I really enjoy getting into the nitty gritty of how cards interact in yugioh and magic.
SO GLAD THIS SERIES CAME BACK! 💥💥🔥🔥 We definetely need more
I'd love to see a video dedicated to the strange unique properties of pendulum monsters.
I was shocked to learn that Shifter will send cards meant for the face up extra deck to the banishment. I feel like there's a lot of nitty gritty to get into there.
This is actually pretty simple. It has to do with "rules vs. card effects". In this case:
Rules say "Pendulums that would go from the field to the GY go to the Extra Deck face-up instead".
Shifter's effect says "Cards that would go from (any non-GY or non-banishment location) to the GY are banished instead".
This interaction creates a discrepancy between the rules and a card effect, and according to the rulebook, the card effect takes precedence. Thus Pendulums that would go to the Extra Deck face-up are instead banished under Shifter.
in the case of swords woman and dimension wall I look at it as this: After the BATTLE damage has been redirected by an effect it no longer counts as battle damage, but now counts as EFFECT damage.
Well, again, this is just how I see it.
This is not the case. There are effects which treat battle damage as effect damage. See Gravekeeper's Vassal.
I'm glad I correctly understand flip effect rulings with gozen/rivalry after the april 2020 rules revisions. Ive several times had to explain this to people confused why the flip effect isn't activating.
Making a full, complete, comprehensive "THIS is how the damage step works" guide is actually such a good idea. Even if it ends up a 45 min video.
Partially cause there still isn't an official ygo rulebook for some fuckin reason.
This is, in fact, the kind of content i love seeing from you.
YES! I'm so glad you are doing more of these! :-]]]
---
My requested ruling is:
I control Crystron Tristalos and Crystron Citree. My opponent activates a card, and I respond with Tristalos to summon from deck. What happens if my opponent chains Book of Moon on my Tristalos, and then I resolve to summon a Lv5 "Crystron" monster? I do have an F.A. Dawn Dragster in my Extra Deck.
Crystron Tristalo's effect resolves normally, as long as you can perform an appropriate Synchro Summon using the Summoned monster as material. If you cannot, only that part of the effect is not applied.
@@monkfishy6348 Yeah, I specifically asked this because Citree says "that monster and this card", and Tristalos only says "that monster".
Damn, i didn't even know about the d'amare redirection one. Amazing content❤I'm really happy that this format is finally back
I got into rulings thanks to your content, it is my personal favorite type of content you make. I like testing random interactions in master duel, some of them I put in my channel if you want to check it out, not trying to promote my channel, I just get really excited about niche interactions and want to share the joy with others who are like me.
Yes, i do want to see more of this. i enjoyed watching ruling questions because it helps me learn more about what happens in between steps of attck and what to do if it happens in a dule agents my friends
Dang, I learned something new about Damage Redirection. If Nightmare Pain and a Mikanko are both on the field, the attacking player applies the redirection, so whoever attacks does matter. The simplified version does in fact remove that aspect where it matters who attacked because you used a monster vs. a trap card, instead of a monster vs. a monster. The reason why it came to mind that the attacking player matters is, both Damage Redirection effects are non-activated, and just like Lost World vs. Lost World, the turn player's non-activated effect applies first.
Please keep making this kind of content. I’ve missed these videos so much.
I would love to see more Lawyer-yugioh content!
I love ruling videos what got me watching your content was your old judge ruling videos
I love the ruling questions by distant coder, I don’t actually play modern Yugioh, haven’t played since 2009. But I watch yugi content have learned a lot from creators like DistantCoder. As a rules advisor and at one point a local judge for Magic the Gathering, I very much appreciate this content.
I can tell that distant coder wants to move on and do other things. I can see why, at a certain point you end up just repeating yourself over and over again
So glad to see you back at the rulings always was so fun to watch keep up the good work.
Absolutely love these videos, i could watch them all day long
Really love to see you doing Ruling Content again!
Here is something I thought about the other day:
If I have a field with Hugin and my opponent uses Raigeki I can not protect because Hugin is already marked for Destruction.
But what happens if I chain Slumber to that Raigeki. Does the state of being marked for destruction vanish while the chain resolves or can I still not protect the rest of the field with Hugin?
Understanding this is a little tricky, but I'll try to explain as best I can. In short, you still cannot apply Hugin's effect as Hugin is still marked for Destruction. This is true even if Slumber applied before Raigeki was activated.
Slumber's effect will substitute the destruction of Raigeki, when Raigeki's effect applies. But at that point it's now too late to apply Hugin's effect as Raigeki has already resolved. It cannot banish itself to substitute the destruction before Slumber prevents the destruction (at the point Raigeki applies), because then Hugin itself is still marked for destruction at that point.
It's a bit of a chicken and egg situation but all answers lead to Hugin not being able to substitute the destruction.
One really fun interaction I had in MD once, relating to the Anima/Relinquished equipping a monster, was my opponent targeted one of my face down monsters to equip and when it went to the S/T zone, it not only didn't flip it face up, but because it was still face down, no stat modulation was applied. It actually ended up saving me lmao
FINALLY! The goated series is back!
And I must say, I feel so proud that after all these videos, I FINALLY got almost every question correctly.
The only thing I missed was the damage redirection.
I had no idea, but I speculated that it may be based on whose turn it is since the turn player has priority.
So if you attack with a damage redirecting monster and your opponent tries to redirect, then you win since your redirection happens last, even if it is not an activated effect.
After Coder answearing the question, I learnt something new and I can't for the life of me now think how the double redirection would happen since most of the times, only one will be able to apply beforehand.
Besides the flip-gozen ruling, which I knew for some reason, this was surely the second hardest question here, since there are so limited cards that do this to the point that a doible redirection is EXTREMELY unlikely to happen anyway.
You've misunderstood damage reflection. It is only applied once. The player who applies their damage reflection, is the player who is initially going to take damage. It has nothing to do with turn player priority.
@@monkfishy6348 Ik. I didn't say that that was what was true.
I just said that my initial thought was that it depends on whose turn it is.
Now that Coder explained it, I know that I was wrong.
It is even mentioned in my initial comment.
@@NoirEmperor18 The way you phrased your comment made it seem like that is how you thought it worked now.
Really enjoy the ruling videos hope they keep showing up.
Great to see you back doing this type of content, wishing you the best for the next episodes!
I also have a question regarding the interaction between 2 cards : Redoer and Piercing the Darkness.
Does Redoer still keep the "knowledge" of being summoned by using a Normal Monster as Material after using its effect to banish himself?
Thanks in advance for your answer!
No it does not. Properties of the monsters used for its Summon are forgotten when temporarily banished (or flipped face down).
Poggers Coder! Good to have you back on the Ruling Videos, wish for more to come!~
Congrats~ nwn