Last Trick [ANIME]

[玄魔の王]

So when I was looking at old anime cards, I found this from the 3rd season of GX. Back then it was a plot device, but now it would have a very strong purpose...

 

 

Normal Trap

If your opponent activates a Spell Card that would be sent to the Graveyard this turn, add that card to your hand instead.

 

EDIT: There are currently two theories on how this effect works, driven by the fact the actual lore was never shown and the translation is funky:

 

1) It's a one-time event like Necro Gardna, that can activate whenever and just returns the first valid target to your hand; OR

2) It's a lingering effect like Maxx C, that adds every viable spell your opponent sends to your hand.

 

Oh man this thing in the Prophecy Mirror Match... discuss what that would do...

[Dementuo]

This card is actually absolutely broken.

[Zazubat]

Stupid design, but awesome troll card.

[Superdoopertrooper]

This card is actually absolutely broken.

 

No it's not. Think about it, they activate a normal or quick-play spell, the effect goes through, then after that you add it to your hand. So in other words, this card becomes the card they just activated, but you get it a turn later. And there's no guarantee at all they'll activate anything that's useful for you either. That's called being situational, which generally means it rarely gets played outside of fun decks. Card is fine and could be released as is.

[.codex]

And there's no guarantee at all they'll activate anything that's useful for you either.

Cause Decks don't run Heavy Storm, Monster Reborn, Pot of Duality, Pot of Avarice, Dark Hole, Book of Moon, Gold Sarcophagus, Forbidden Lance, Mystical Space Typhoon... the list goes on. I mean, if they MST or Heavy Storm this card, you can just use it, and then you get that card in return. That just isn't very fair now is it? You clearly don't know much about this game do you?

[玄魔の王]

Trooper, this thing works like Maxx C in that every spell that would go to their Graveyard returns to your hand, not just that one. So they're forced to either kill you then, stop playing spels, or give you everything they play.

[Zazubat]

Trooper, this thing works like Maxx C in that every spell that would go to their Graveyard returns to your hand, not just that one. So they're forced to either kill you then, stop playing spels, or give you everything they play.

Actually, I don't think that's how it works. It should only work for the card that you activate it againts.

[玄魔の王]

Except it doesn't say "When your opponent activates a Spell Card", it says "if" and "during this turn". That makes it seem like a lingering effect.

[Zazubat]

Except it doesn't say "When your opponent activates a Spell Card", it says "if" and "during this turn". That makes it seem like a lingering effect.

What it means is that if that card would be sent to the Graveyard this turn (or in other words, is a Normal or Quick-Play card) then it would add it. As the card was used once, and only one card was gotten, it isn't possible to know what they really meant, though I have the feeling that it is only 1 card.

[Dementuo]

What it means is that if that card would be sent to the Graveyard this turn (or in other words, is a Normal or Quick-Play card) then it would add it. As the card was used once, and only one card was gotten, it isn't possible to know what they really meant, though I have the feeling that it is only 1 card.

It's a lingering effect that will take every spell your opponent plays during that turn, after this card resolves.

[Zazubat]

It's a lingering effect that will take every spell your opponent plays during that turn, after this card resolves.

Which card works the same as this card? You cannot say otherwise unless you have proof that it would do. Maxx C was mentioned, but not only does it use different wording, it also says "each time" where this doesn't.

[Dementuo]

Which card works the same as this card? You cannot say otherwise unless you have proof that it would do. Maxx C was mentioned, but not only does it use different wording, it also says "each time" where this doesn't.

You're asking for an example that doesn't exist. I've no idea why you're being so stubborn on this anyways.

[Zazubat]

You're asking for an example that doesn't exist. I've no idea why you're being so stubborn on this anyways.

Yes, I am. You said, and I quote "it's a lingering effect that will take every spell your opponent plays during that turn, after this card resolves." You must have another card like that, otherwise it is impossible to take your word on it.

[Dementuo]

Yes, I am. You said, and I quote "it's a lingering effect that will take every spell your opponent plays during that turn, after this card resolves." You must have another card like that, otherwise it is impossible to take your word on it.

As far as you're concerned, that is. If you want to believe that it isn't a lingering effect, then, okay. You can go on believing that. I just happen to have a strong belief that the card works differently.

[Zazubat]

As far as you're concerned, that is. If you want to believe that it isn't a lingering effect, then, okay. You can go on believing that. I just happen to have a strong belief that the card works differently.

I happen to have the opposite believe, yet you in your statement, you seemed quite sure of it, almost as if you knew it. If you were to give your beliefs, maybe you should have used such as "I think that this is how it works" instead of "This is what how it works", as that was pretty much your response to me.

[玄魔の王]

It's true, the card's lore was never shown and its effect ambiguously worded. From here out, discuss under the two proposed models:

1) It works like Necro Gardna
2) It works like Maxx C

[Dementuo]

I happen to have the opposite, yet you in your statement, you seemed quite sure of it, almost as if you knew it. If you were to give your beliefs, maybe you should have used such as "I think that this is how it works" instead of "This is what how it works", as that was pretty much your response to me.

I fail to see a point in continuing this conversation if you're going to nitpick at how I make my posts.

[Zazubat]

I fail to see a point in continuing this conversation if you're going to nitpick at how I make my posts.

How is it nitpicking at all? You state that it is NOT what I said. Then you later say "I believe this is true". Try to present your statements the way YOU want them to appear, not how they actually do appear.

 

 

It's true, the card's lore was never shown and its effect ambiguously worded. From here out, discuss under the two proposed models:

1) It works like Necro Gardna
2) It works like Maxx C

I would say neither. My thinking is that it is suppose to work as that Spell Card is activated, and that is that, not that it is the next time, nor that it is each time. The wording I would think would match it the most is this "When your opponent activates a Spell Card, after that Spell Card is sent to the Graveyard: Add that Spell Card to your hand." or something like that.

[Dementuo]

How is it nitpicking at all? You state that it is NOT what I said. Then you later say "I believe this is true". Try to present your statements the way YOU want them to appear, not how they actually do appear.

ITT: I'm not allowed to make a sure-of-myself statement, and also say that I hold it as my opinion of how the card works.

[Zazubat]

ITT: I'm not allowed to make a sure-of-myself statement, and also say that I hold it as my opinion of how the card works.

Of course you are. But you didn't.

[Dementuo]

Of course you are. But you didn't.

Actually, that's exactly what I did. I made a statement in an attempt to clear up confusion. You chose not to believe it, demanding that I give some form of proof or evidence outside of the card's own wording, so I clarified that I didn't have any other examples, and made note that we had clashing opinions. I made a statement that I believe to be true, phrasing it in a for-certain way, and when you started to argue it, I put out that same statement as a belief that was different than yours.

[Zazubat]

Actually, that's exactly what I did. I made a statement in an attempt to clear up confusion. You chose not to believe it, demanding that I give some form of proof or evidence outside of the card's own wording, so I clarified that I didn't have any other examples, and made note that we had clashing opinions. I made a statement that I believe to be true, phrasing it in a for-certain way, and when you started to argue it, I put out that same statement as a belief that was different than yours.

I asked for it since in your response, you seemed clear. Afterwards, you said you weren't actually 100 % sure, but was making assumptions. I'm fine with that, but if you are making assumptions, at least don't say state you wording in a way that looks like you knew exactly how it worked.

[Dementuo]

I asked for it since in your response, you seemed clear. Afterwards, you said you weren't actually 100 % sure, but was making assumptions. I'm fine with that, but if you are making assumptions, at least don't say state you wording in a way that looks like you knew exactly how it worked.

I never once said that I wasn't 100% certain. Rather, I am certain of how this card works. I was just stating that it was my own belief, which is different than yours. Belief =/= uncertainty.

[Aerion Brightflame]

Zazu drop the point already. Picking someone out for the phrasing they used is nit picking when Dem changed what he meant. People on this forum in particular have a tendency to portray opinion as fact.

 

OT: The current wording make it seem like it is a lingering effect. If it is a lingering effect it's broken, if it's not it's mediocre.

 

That's essentially the toss up here.

[Zazubat]

I never once said that I wasn't 100% certain. Rather, I am certain of how this card works. I was just stating that it was my own belief, which is different than yours. Belief =/= uncertainty.

So what you're saying here is that you know that is how it works? Why havn't you presented that proof that I asked for then?

Zazu drop the point already. Picking someone out for the phrasing they used is nit picking when Dem changed what he meant. People on this forum in particular have a tendency to portray opinion as fact.

No. I'm not going to stop. People need to learn the differnce, and I don't want any misinterpretations, I want it to be clear.