[What-if Series] What if untargetable cards worked under a Dark World ruling?

[Tinkerer]

Hello, fine peoples!

 

This kinda popped into my head when I saw the effect of Divine Serpent Geh and it's target protection.

 

So the discussion topic is this: what if the target protection effects ("Cannot be targeted by card effects") was ruled to work like Dark World effects ("is discarded ... by a card effect")? Namely, what if this protection could not prevent something from targeting it as part of a cost, but it protects the card from being targeted as part of an effect?

 

I know, very "out there" as a discussion topic, but what are peoples' thoughts?

[Bellringer Angel]

99% of targeting effects are something like "You can target (something); (do something)", so it wouldn't really work, because targeting is normally a cost (I think?).

[Azuriena]

You mean it can't be chosen by stuff like Ignister?

[宇佐見 蓮子@C94]

then can we lock this thread if no discussion is to be had?

[Tinkerer]

then can we lock this thread if no discussion is to be had?

I mean, ya could've... You know... NOT bumped this thread at all, right?

 

In any case, just a semi-related thought: Obelisk the Tormentor's card texts specifies that it "cannot be targeted by Spells, Traps, or card effects". As far as I can recall, that's the only time a card that can't be targeted specifies BOTH that it cannot be targeted by Spells/Traps AS WELL AS by card effects as a whole.

 

To draw some more discussion, if the no targeting worked as I'd hypothesized in the OP, Obelisk's effect would make perfect sense, but in terms of how the game actually is, it's redundant. So, question: could Obelisk's effect possibly been made with this ruling in mind or, if not, why then is it so redundant?

[Azuriena]

I mean, ya could've... You know... NOT bumped this thread at all, right?

Perhaps you could've answered my question above. I still don't really get what you mean in the OP.

 

In any case, just a semi-related thought: Obelisk the Tormentor's card texts specifies that it "cannot be targeted by Spells, Traps, or card effects". As far as I can recall, that's the only time a card that can't be targeted specifies BOTH that it cannot be targeted by Spells/Traps AS WELL AS by card effects as a whole.

 

To draw some more discussion, if the no targeting worked as I'd hypothesized in the OP, Obelisk's effect would make perfect sense, but in terms of how the game actually is, it's redundant. So, question: could Obelisk's effect possibly been made with this ruling in mind or, if not, why then is it so redundant?

 

It's redundant because it was written that way to dispel confusion. Like how cards today say "Spell/Trap Card or effect," rather than just "Spell/Trap effect," for clarity.

 

There is no Spell/Trap Card that targets a card without its effect targeting that card. Spell/Trap Cards can't do anything without their (card) effects, so Obelisk's text is 100% redundant. It shouldn't have to be said that it wasn't made with this thread's ruling in mind.

[Tinkerer]

You mean it can't be chosen by stuff like Ignister?

 

I thought Ignister didn't target?

[Azuriena]

I thought Ignister didn't target?

 

It doesn't target the card that it shuffles into the Deck, no.

 

This is what I understand of the OP: Currently, all targeting protection card effects say something along the lines of "Cannot be targeted by card effects." So you're asking what would happen if they were ruled to only work on card effects that target as part of their effect, rather than on ones that target as part of their cost*. Ignoring the fact that no card effects target for cost (targeting is not a cost in YGO), why would you be presenting us with this hypothetical if no card effects that target "as part of their effect" (i.e. at resolution rather than at activation, I'm assuming) currently exist in the game?

 

That is, unless you were referring to card effects like Ignister's, which chooses a card at resolution to affect. But, apparently, you're not?

[~~~~]

Targeting happens at the point of activation, yes, but it is part of the effect, not the cost. This is why Spells that target that you activate with Diamond Dude still target despite not paying costs. This is also why it is worded "..targeted by [a] card effect...".