Jump to content

Konami did something good [Ruling]


Recommended Posts

i just realized that konami could make it work in the tcg just to promote igknights

 

Unlikely. The TCG hasn't really been ruling cards differently from the OCG ever since PSCT. And it'll actually be EASIER to maintain this ruling in the TCG by simply stating to destroy both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I forget what he did to Mirror Gate. What happened to that?

 

OOoooooh

Right.

 

He decided that because Mirror Gate with PSCT says to revert control of "both" during the End Phase, that control was permanent if one of them could not be returned. Such as if one of them died during that battle. And it will. Because it's Mirror Gate.

 

Thankfully, Mirror Gate is a terrible card so this had no impact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How was there confusion in the effect?  It clearly says "You can destroy both, and if you do".  If the effect of Igknight Magnum did not destroy both, then it would not be able to apply the "Add 1 Fire Warrior-Type monster".

 

Was this an issue with the TCG in some way?  I still haven't played yugioh regularly in a few years, but I don't see how this could be misunderstood.

 

Definitely not something to be called "BKSS" in any way, just TCG being TCG as usual, or so i'm assuming.

 

Not sure how Mirror Gate is ruled, but just from reading the card, what should happen is that regardless of what which of the affected monsters are remaining, the other should still return to its owner at the End Phase.  I assume this is another TCG thing to say it does otherwise.  For example, Scrap Dragon also uses the term "both" and applies the destruction regardless of whether one of the targets no longer exists.  The difference with Igknight Magnum is that the "and if you do" implies that Igknight Magnum did destroy both, otherwise, it cannot perform the last effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How was there confusion in the effect?  It clearly says "You can destroy both, and if you do".  If the effect of Igknight Magnum did not destroy both, then it would not be able to apply the "Add 1 Fire Warrior-Type monster".

They were translated as "destroy ALL" at first, that's why we assumed they work like Acid does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

 

Not sure how Mirror Gate is ruled, but just from reading the card, what should happen is that regardless of what which of the affected monsters are remaining, the other should still return to its owner at the End Phase.  I assume this is another TCG thing to say it does otherwise.  For example, Scrap Dragon also uses the term "both" and applies the destruction regardless of whether one of the targets no longer exists.  The difference with Igknight Magnum is that the "and if you do" implies that Igknight Magnum did destroy both, otherwise, it cannot perform the last effect.

 

It is. When PSCT debuted (so years ago), Tewart re-ruled Mirror Gate so that it now operates completely differently from how it had always worked in both TCG and OCG, purely because the text now said "both".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is. When PSCT debuted (so years ago), Tewart re-ruled Mirror Gate so that it now operates completely differently from how it had always worked in both TCG and OCG, purely because the text now said "both".

 

Monster "control" is a different beast though, my friend.  If the English Text is wrong, then PSCT can't do its job.  Wish they would make a better attempt that keeping the rulings of both the same.  Considering PSCT was introduced a few years ago, its probably overdue, although how many people play Mirror Gate anyway?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's why I cite it as Tewart's biggest fail. Of course it shouldn't work that way, but because it's never been officially retracted, it's considered the official TCG ruling, despite that by now, PSCT has evolved to the point where these mistakes are very unlikely to happen. PSCT was young when it was made, but again...

 

Though yeah, Mirror Gate is "better" with this ruling, but it's still an inferior card to numerous other options, which keeps the misruling isolated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

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

×
×
  • Create New...