"You Can't Do That" Card #2: Question

[Dementuo]

[quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1354477124' post='6083402']
No, because if that were true, then a player could say "Poop" and then the judge could say "Yes, he meant interplanetarypurplythorny dragon", just because of interpretation. It has to be something verifiable.
[/quote]
Then you appeal the ruling and call the judge out on that. If a judge rules in someone's favor unfairly like that, they get the axe.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

[quote name='Dem The Magic Dragon' timestamp='1354477269' post='6083407']
Then you appeal the ruling and call the judge out on that. If a judge rules in someone's favor unfairly like that, they get the axe.
[/quote]
So if another judge interprets something differently then you have to follow their ruling? That doesn't make sense. The game is based on rules, not "what do you think". Anyways, if someone is describing the monster then when does detail become enough, and when is it not enough? Cards can also have the same effects. While Mystic Tomato doesn't have an exact partner in its effect, they could be describing something that does not exist, but end up with the exact description of an actual card. If that's the real ruling then sure, but based on card text, that's not what it should be.

[Miror B]

[quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1354477456' post='6083412']
So if another judge interprets something differently then you have to follow their ruling? That doesn't make sense. The game is based on rules, not "what do you think". Anyways, if someone is describing the monster then when does detail become enough, and when is it not enough? Cards can also have the same effects. While Mystic Tomato doesn't have an exact partner in its effect, they could be describing something that does not exist, but end up with the exact description of an actual card. If that's the real ruling then sure, but based on card text, that's not what it should be.
[/quote]
You can say the same thing about Mind Crush but you'll still be wrong.
And somebody who describes something that doesn't exist will more than likely be wrong in the first place.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

I don't get where that came from, but okay. Anyways, I need more suggestions for cards. I guess Darkness Approaches counts.

[D.A._Sakuyamon]

I did mention Curse of Fiend............

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

[quote name='♥ D.A._Siegfried ♥' timestamp='1354479317' post='6083435']
I did mention Curse of Fiend............
[/quote]
Curse of Fiend is a unique card, but it doesn't create rulings for the game by itself. Only creates an exception for itself.

[Azuh]

Pole Position

[Cute Rotten Yoshika]

[quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1354471582' post='6083328']
Well, you misinterpreted what I was talking about. I was saying they activated Call and automatically summoned the monster before you could chain your MST, then when you do chain your MST to its activation they put the monster on the top of the grave when it shouldn't have been summoned in the first place to be sent to the grave.

However, that does being up a question about when cards go to the graveyard. In the case of Call of the Haunted, if it did successfully activate and THEN was destroyed, it would go to he grave and THEN activate its effect to send the monster to the grave, meaning by ruling your monster should go above Call of the Haunted. In the case of multiple cards being destroyed and other certain effects, however... I haven't a clue if there is a specific timing that cards are placed in the grave.
[/quote]

im pretty sure they used to talk about the order of sending cards to the graveyard in the rulebook. its not that hard anyways. basically you can send multiple cards to the graveyard in any order if the card doesnt specify the order its sending things (ie you blow up your own facedown with darkworld lightning, in which case the facedown has to go first and then the card you discard and finally darkworld lightning) but if the card that activates that effect is also going to grave it goes on top. so if you activate dark hole while you control multiple monsters you can put those monsters in any order but dark hole has to go on top.

[King of Games]

Now if I declare "Mystic Tomato" for Question/Prohibition/Psi-Blocker, should I pronounce it "Mystic To(may)to" or "Mystic To(mah)to"? assuming pronunciation does matter.

[BehindTheMask]

[quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1354476898' post='6083396']
Either way, you can always say you don't know what they're talking about, even if you actually do, so it doesn't matter. If they can't properly call the name, then there's no way to legitimately verify that it's the card they meant. Plus, there is the ruling that you cannot choose a card name in Mind Crush for a card that does not exist, it has to be an actual card.
[/quote]

Except Meta~ is right.

Let's say you have 3 monsters in the graveyard, - Mystic Tomato(The monster that he is guessing), Inzektor Centipede, and D.D. Crow. You activate "Question", and your opponent thinks, after a minute, he declares

A) "Mystic Tomato"
- The monster is banished.

"The monster that special summons a DARK 1500 attack monster from the deck. It is a level 4 DARK plant with 1400 attack"
- You try to resolve "Question" by special summoning Mystic Tomato. He calls a judge over and the judge comes over.

C) "Inzektor Centipede"
- "Question" resolves, by special summoning Mystic Tomato

The scenario that is troubling is . Let us examine it in detail.

Now, as a judge, how should we rule this. It is clear that a legal yugioh card was described but not named. This is basically Spirit of the Law vs. Rule of Law. We as judges have to determine the intent of both players, and if there is any malicious intent. We should ask questions to determine what he meant, and why he didn't name "Mystic Tomato." As we proceed with the interview, and discussing with both players, if we determine that the opposing player meant to say "Mystic Tomato" but forgot the name, then "Question" resolves by banishing "Mystic Tomato." If we determine that the opposing player did not mean to say "Mystic Tomato" and was either thinking of a different card or a non existent card OR was trying to cheat.

As a judge, you have to make sure that the rules are upheld, and that there is no unfair advantages to either player. One thing to note is that the spirit of the law is upheld.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

Like I said, if that's the ruling then it is, but as described on the card it wouldn't seem that way. Anyways, the main point of this thread, while the card itself is important to discussion as well, is education of the rule that nobody actually follows. Also, it might not be ruled, thinking about it, that it has to be a card that actually exists, so my own point was rather moot there.

Thinking about it, though, this card could cause stalling on the part of the opponent, though of course if it were excessive they would get in trouble.

[Cherz]

Oh Karakuri. >:3

I photographicly memorsed all there modle numbers cause my friend trolled me with that. :/

[Miror B]

[quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1354575068' post='6084399']
Like I said, if that's the ruling then it is, but as described on the card it wouldn't seem that way.
[/quote]
It's a whole deal on whether we should punish someone for not memorizing 6000+ cards.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

[quote name='Meta~' timestamp='1354590409' post='6084645']
It's a whole deal on whether we should punish someone for not memorizing 6000+ cards.
[/quote]
No, it would be punishing the opponent for not bothering to read their opponent's cards.

[Miror B]

[quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1354590994' post='6084654']
No, it would be punishing the opponent for not bothering to read their opponent's cards.
[/quote]
No they still have to memorize the monster's name the moment it hits the grave because you play this and they have literally no chance.
People hardly ever read monsters in the Grave unless they're important. Tell me why you expect me to take note of the Mystic Tomato when it does nothing in the grave?

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

You don't have to actively attempt to remember it. If you literally don't know the game at all then you will probably struggle, but you also couldn't say "the plant-type dark monster with 1400 ATK that Special Summons a DARK monster when destroyed by battle", either. Otherwise, you should have some clue as to what went on near the start of the duel. Either way, the card is SUPPOSED to be based on the opponent's memory.

[Miror B]

[quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1354597688' post='6084741']
You don't have to actively attempt to remember it. If you literally don't know the game at all then you will probably struggle, but you also couldn't say "the plant-type dark monster with 1400 ATK that Special Summons a DARK monster when destroyed by battle", either. Otherwise, you should have some clue as to what went on near the start of the duel.
[/quote]
And what if it was some not-well-known monster?
Like what if it was Wattkid?
Or Air Eater?
If they can describe it well enough (Like saying Wattkid's that one Watt vanilla, or that Air Eater's a lvl 6 WIND with "Air" in it's name) then they should be given the guess due to knowing the card enough.

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

[quote name='Meta~' timestamp='1354597828' post='6084743']
And what if it was some not-well-known monster?
Like what if it was Wattkid?
Or Air Eater?
If they can describe it well enough (Like saying Wattkid's that one Watt vanilla, or that Air Eater's a lvl 6 WIND with "Air" in it's name) then they should be given the guess due to knowing the card enough.
[/quote]
There is more than 1 Watt monster with no effect, for starters. So right there you show that there comes a point when you have to ask "is that enough information?". There's a ruling for the card about Rai-Mei too, since there is another card pronounced the same way. You have to state "the monster card Rai-Mei".

Either way, the card is meant to test your opponent's memory, so if they can only remember vague details, it would make perfect sense to me that they would be punished for it. It is [b]not[/b] a rational card in any way, since it expects your opponent to not have been paying attention 50% of the time. Anyways, this isn't going to get us anywhere, because both of us have our own ideas, and in the end, they're just ideas. What's applied is applied. We're just going to talk in circles about semantics.

[Miror B]

[quote name='slayer_supreme' timestamp='1354598058' post='6084745']
There is more than 1 Watt monster with no effect, for starters. So right there you show that there comes a point when you have to ask "is that enough information?".
[/quote]
I derped and forgot Wattail existed >->
That wouldn't be enough information and they'd either have to specify more or accept a wrong guess.

[BehindTheMask]

"While you don't need to give an exact name, you need to give enough description to differetiate the card from other possibilities. If I say, "The Warrior monster that is also an Earth monster and you use it's ignition effect to tribute it to destroy a monster." That effectively differentiates the card (Exiled Force) from any other possibility and is acceptable."

- John Danker

[url="http://duelistgroundz.com/index.php?showtopic=124855&st=0&p=2660312&#entry2660312"]http://duelistground...2[/url]

Although this is about "Mind Crush" it also applies to "Question"

[Zeppeli Gyro Supreme]

Thank you for reminding me to make another one of these.