Jump to content

Relinquished: Discussion


Recommended Posts

Guest Chaos Pudding

http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Relinquished

 

"Relinquished" inflicts effect damage to your opponent whenever you take battle damage from a battle involving "Relinquished"' date=' if it is equipped with a monster. This can occur when “Relinquished” battles another Attack Position Monster, [b']or when it attacks a Defense Position monster with DEF higher than its current ATK.[/b]

 

This ruling doesn't make any sense when you look at the actual card.

 

Discuss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing bad can really come of this ruling. Relinquished deserves any bonus it can get imo.

 

That ruling is wrong.

 

But it's Netrep.

 

The card only says the battle damage is inflicted to the opponent if it would be destroyed by battle.

 

Netrep is always official rulings. Always right. Even if it contradicts what's said on the actual card.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Konami KNOWS Relinquished will be the meta. So of course they give it a rediculous ruling >___>

 

3 more Sets with SOVR-magnitude Ritual support and it could start posing contention threats. Of course, 3's just an arbitrary number I thought of and this post doesn't make any sense whatsoever, but it sounds nice so let's just roll with it and not point anything out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Konami KNOWS Relinquished will be the meta. So of course they give it a rediculous ruling >___>

 

3 more Sets with SOVR-magnitude Ritual support and it could start posing contention threats. Of course' date=' 3's just an arbitrary number I thought of and this post doesn't make any sense whatsoever, but it sounds nice so let's just roll with it and not point anything out.

[/quote']

 

Its simple: I posted it from my PSP/I was somewhat lazy.

But now that I actualy re-re-read the card, Hikaru's mentioned ruling actually makes Relinquished pretty lulzy.

So yes, my comment actually does make sence now. Since Konami has this "Diabalogical Mastr Plan"(not thats its bad) of theres, where they try to make Ritural monsters/Relinquish, be a Meta-worthy deck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ruling is, as far as I can tell, an impossible condition to fulfill.

 

Relinquished deals the burn if the controller of it would take battle damage and if Relinquished would be destroyed by the battle while equipped with a monster . As I recall, there is no condition under which a monster attacking a defense monster will be destroyed by battle against the defense monster, so the ruling will never apply.

 

On paper, the ruling makes 100% sense. In practice, it changes nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I found your problem

 

GiantAxeMummyPGD-EN-C.jpg

 

Wouldn't it count as Relinquished being destroyed by an effect? That technically is not "destroyed by battle."

 

If Giant Axe Mummy does indeed count as destroying Relinquished by battle though, the way Relinquished is worded, the burn damage would be dealt even without the ruling.

 

Examining the ruling closer, I realized that my prior statement about it not making a difference may be incorrect. Apparently, Relinquished does damage whether the equipped monster is destroyed or not. It sounds like Relinquished's printed effect is completely replaced by this ruling, essentially an erratum. This makes Relinquished better than it used to be, but the correction should be formalized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...