Re: Most Ridiculous Thing Somebody Has Said To You On Duel Network

**Farls_Barkley** 2012-02-26, 11:48

Another exciting tale in Farls_Barkley's Adventures in Administration!!!!

Most Ridiculous Thing Somebody Has Said To You On Duel Network - Page 7 0Yxqr

Most Ridiculous Thing Somebody Has Said To You On Duel Network - Page 7 0Yxqr

**PerseusStoned** 2012-02-26, 14:47

TankDragon wrote:He has a F/D Emissary of the afterlife, and I attack and destroy it. We both look through our decks and pull out our last exodia piece.

At the same time: EXODIA! I WIN!

We both just stared at each other, everyone around us cracked up laughing, and we called it a draw.

Epic draw is epic.

**draco595** 2012-02-26, 15:01

Thanks to this guy my respect for dark world players has droped even more

draco595: you cant
kukerson: yes i can
kukerson: read the rulling
draco595: morphing jar was never fliped up
kukerson: is by effec of other monster i can
kukerson: I can wait go and read the rulling
draco595: I could just call a admin
kukerson: IS not sent Is destroy
kukerson: yes you can
kukerson: destroy all other monsters on the field.
draco595 has called an admin
draco595: well do take a long time I suppose...
kukerson: yes
kukerson: read the rulling is better
draco595: a monster destroyed by a card effect is not fliped but if it was destroyed by battle it is
kukerson: whrn you destroy my set obiusly is flip
kukerson: but if yopu sent , of course not
draco595: if a monster is destroyed by a effect it is NOT flipped face up
kukerson: YEp is flip
draco595: if it was destroyed by battle it but not by a effect
kukerson: lol
kukerson: kk wait the gm
draco595: gm?
kukerson: is destroy = flip by effec or batke
draco595: no its not its flipped up during damage calculation but if it is destroyed by a effect it never goes into damage calculation
draco595: thuse it is not flipped face up
kukerson: wait the admin
Goddess: ?
draco595: Goddess ok if morphing jar is destroyed by thunder end dragons effect will morphing jar's effect activate?
kukerson: yes coz you destroy not sent
Goddess: if it was destroyed facedown by thunder end's eff then no
kukerson: Or something
kukerson: :S
Goddess: that has nothing to do with it
Goddess: if a flip effect monster is destroyed facedown
Goddess: it will not get its eff
Goddess: period
Goddess: shuffle deck

**Brutality** 2012-02-26, 17:52

"If you don't do a match then I'll quit"
"You only won because I misplayed with Tengu"

**storyteller** 2012-02-26, 19:30

In a friend's duel. Opponent activates creature swap, and my friend chains BoM.

"You can't do that. It's not a Quickplay."

**thehostplayer** 2012-02-26, 19:37

Farls_Barkley wrote:Another exciting tale in Farls_Barkley's Adventures in Administration!!!!

Brilliant.

Smh.

**Galkin** 2012-02-26, 20:58

Apparently, you can skip your own draw phase and proceed straight to the main phase, activate malefic world, and return to your draw phase: [The following is paraphrased]

Opponent: *Activates Malefic World* Malefic World eff. *Searches deck*
Me: ?
Opponent: Eff
Me: But its not your draw phase!
Opponent: Yes it is. Malefic World eff.
Me: It can't be. To activate malefic world you need to enter your main phase, hence your draw phase had to pass. You have to wait a turn.
Opponent: Yes I can, I didn't draw. Malefic World eff, I choose 3 malefics you pick 1.
Me: But you can't!
Opponent: yes read the rulings man.
Me: You think I would be using *insert complicated deck here* if I didn't? [That was a fail argument of mine]
Opponent: No. Choose.
Me: ...

Eventually, I decided I was about to lose anyways and that I wasn't about to waste my time telling him to call an admin and argue with him. So I let it go, chose red-eyes, then 10 seconds later he quits...

**CheyMcFly** 2012-02-26, 21:09

Galkin wrote:Apparently, you can skip your own draw phase and proceed straight to the main phase, activate malefic world, and return to your draw phase: [The following is paraphrased]

Opponent: *Activates Malefic World* Malefic World eff. *Searches deck*
Me: ?
Opponent: Eff
Me: But its not your draw phase!
Opponent: Yes it is. Malefic World eff.
Me: It can't be. To activate malefic world you need to enter your main phase, hence your draw phase had to pass. You have to wait a turn.
Opponent: Yes I can, I didn't draw. Malefic World eff, I choose 3 malefics you pick 1.
Me: But you can't!
Opponent: yes read the rulings man.
Me: You think I would be using *insert complicated deck here* if I didn't? [That was a fail argument of mine]
Opponent: No. Choose.
Me: ...

Eventually, I decided I was about to lose anyways and that I wasn't about to waste my time telling him to call an admin and argue with him. So I let it go, chose red-eyes, then 10 seconds later he quits...

I don't ubderstand what the problem was

**Crosswinds** 2012-02-26, 21:18

CheyMcFly wrote:
Galkin wrote:Apparently, you can skip your own draw phase and proceed straight to the main phase, activate malefic world, and return to your draw phase: [The following is paraphrased]

Opponent: *Activates Malefic World* Malefic World eff. *Searches deck*
Me: ?
Opponent: Eff
Me: But its not your draw phase!
Opponent: Yes it is. Malefic World eff.
Me: It can't be. To activate malefic world you need to enter your main phase, hence your draw phase had to pass. You have to wait a turn.
Opponent: Yes I can, I didn't draw. Malefic World eff, I choose 3 malefics you pick 1.
Me: But you can't!
Opponent: yes read the rulings man.
Me: You think I would be using *insert complicated deck here* if I didn't? [That was a fail argument of mine]
Opponent: No. Choose.
Me: ...

Eventually, I decided I was about to lose anyways and that I wasn't about to waste my time telling him to call an admin and argue with him. So I let it go, chose red-eyes, then 10 seconds later he quits...
I don't ubderstand what the problem was

He used Malefic World's effect in the same turn he activated it. Malefic World's effect activates during the draw phase. Hence, he essentially thought he could skip his draw, go to the main phase to activate Malefic World, THEN head back 2 phases to the draw phase to use his malefic World.

**kangtuji** 2012-02-27, 18:40

https://imgur.com/JcbDP

Nothing can say more... I have witnesses

**S.S.A.** 2012-02-27, 18:48

yea...i witnessed you not explain why he was wrong and just quit...and now your on here bitching...

**kangtuji** 2012-02-27, 19:37

^ Either you are trolling and cann't read english, its already explained in the screenshot

Anyway, another ridicilous screenshot :
https://imgur.com/TkbMe <--- notice the answer Laughing

https://imgur.com/aM2E7
https://imgur.com/IrFmM

**{EX} TheVoid** 2012-02-27, 19:50

Tuji, I personally am sick of you screenshotting new players, whom don't know rulings, then coming on here and making fun of then. We were all new players at one point.

**dest** 2012-02-27, 19:57

having fun reading users garbage part 3423547324:
I'll report DN!!!!!

Spoiler:

I wonder how I was able to sound so serious all the time I nearly dropped of the chair here^^

**kangtuji** 2012-02-27, 20:01

{EX} TheVoid wrote:Tuji, I personally am sick of you screenshotting new players, whom don't know rulings, then coming on here and making fun of then. We were all new players at one point.

Funny thing, my screenshot wasn't about new players
and the last one is not even about ruling at all, (I bet you didn't even bother to click them)

Besides, I was forbid to keep posting the same repetitive stuff about people not knowing the rules of the game. This topic is NOT for that.

**Szadek** 2012-02-27, 20:33

dest wrote:having fun reading users garbage part 3423547324:
I'll report DN!!!!!
Spoiler:
I wonder how I was able to sound so serious all the time I nearly dropped of the chair here^^

This made my day

**S.S.A.** 2012-02-27, 21:19

you said it once, he responded obviously still confused, because to be honest your hard to understand, and rather than explaining it again like a real person would do, you laughed at him, then posted it here in a mocking fashion

**nimmons** 2012-02-28, 11:30

S.S.A. wrote:you said it once, he responded obviously still confused, because to be honest your hard to understand, and rather than explaining it again like a real person would do, you laughed at him, then posted it here in a mocking fashion

I agree. What he is doing is kinda stupid. No one that plays yugi can truefully say that they have never got a card ruleing wrong or misunderstood a card. Happens to the best of us.

**CheyMcFly** 2012-02-28, 11:49

kangtuji wrote:https://imgur.com/JcbDP

Nothing can say more... I have witnesses

What was said after that?
You actually did try to explain in this one, but how is this ridiculous o.O

**nimmons** 2012-02-28, 11:56

I was playing my GK stun deck against glad beasts and he was trying to tell me that my T-king couldn't negate him special summoning after him tagging out.

**S.S.A.** 2012-02-28, 11:59

CheyMcFly wrote:
kangtuji wrote:https://imgur.com/JcbDP

Nothing can say more... I have witnesses

What was said after that?
You actually did try to explain in this one, but how is this ridiculous o.O

nothing...kang quit after, so i dont even count it as trying to explain

**thehostplayer** 2012-02-28, 12:01

nimmons wrote: I was playing my GK stun deck against glad beasts and he was trying to tell me that my T-king couldn't negate him special summoning after him tagging out.

I hate the TKRO rulings - so stupidly confusing.

**nimmons** 2012-02-28, 12:04

thehostplayer wrote:
nimmons wrote: I was playing my GK stun deck against glad beasts and he was trying to tell me that my T-king couldn't negate him special summoning after him tagging out.

I hate the TKRO rulings - so stupidly confusing.

The really are. I think he was trying to use some OCG ruleing off of the wiki that said you can't use him to negate a summon involved in a chain or something to that effect. It wasn't really anyone doing anything stupid but it was just really confuseing lol.

**thehostplayer** 2012-02-28, 12:13

nimmons wrote:
thehostplayer wrote:
nimmons wrote: I was playing my GK stun deck against glad beasts and he was trying to tell me that my T-king couldn't negate him special summoning after him tagging out.

I hate the TKRO rulings - so stupidly confusing.

The really are. I think he was trying to use some OCG ruleing off of the wiki that said you can't use him to negate a summon involved in a chain or something to that effect. It wasn't really anyone doing anything stupid but it was just really confuseing lol.

Yeah, I don't even know for sure, what the rulings are.

I'm guessing it can't negate Special Summons caused by an effect or another card, but it can negate SS like XYZ/Synchros etc.

**nimmons** 2012-02-28, 12:14

thehostplayer wrote:
nimmons wrote:
thehostplayer wrote:
nimmons wrote: I was playing my GK stun deck against glad beasts and he was trying to tell me that my T-king couldn't negate him special summoning after him tagging out.

I hate the TKRO rulings - so stupidly confusing.

The really are. I think he was trying to use some OCG ruleing off of the wiki that said you can't use him to negate a summon involved in a chain or something to that effect. It wasn't really anyone doing anything stupid but it was just really confuseing lol.

Yeah, I don't even know for sure, what the rulings are.

I'm guessing it can't negate Special Summons caused by an effect or another card, but it can negate SS like XYZ/Synchros etc.

Yeah but then if you go by that it can't negate things summoned by monster reborn, which I have been told a time or two that it can. I have no clue to tell the truth lol.

**S.S.A.** 2012-02-28, 12:26

95% suer tkro cant touch mr

**thehostplayer** 2012-02-28, 12:28

I don't even know the rulings. I honestly don't.

**dest** 2012-02-28, 12:56

tkro can't negate summons that use the chain somehow. tkro can negate any summon that doesn't use the chain. It's as simple as that...

**Drago Arcaus** 2012-02-28, 14:26

nimmons wrote: I was playing my GK stun deck against glad beasts and he was trying to tell me that my T-king couldn't negate him special summoning after him tagging out.

I laughed the moment I read this... because the opponent was correct XD

**CheyMcFly** 2012-02-28, 14:27

S.S.A. wrote:
CheyMcFly wrote:
kangtuji wrote:https://imgur.com/JcbDP

Nothing can say more... I have witnesses

What was said after that?
You actually did try to explain in this one, but how is this ridiculous o.O

nothing...kang quit after, so i dont even count it as trying to explain

what a great person

**nimmons** 2012-02-28, 15:04

Drago Arcaus wrote:
nimmons wrote: I was playing my GK stun deck against glad beasts and he was trying to tell me that my T-king couldn't negate him special summoning after him tagging out.

I laughed the moment I read this... because the opponent was correct XD

I don't guess you know where a ruleing is for this would you? It does not make sense to me why it couldn't.

**S.S.A.** 2012-02-28, 15:10

the tag out is used by the eff of the gb, so it tkro cant touch it

**nimmons** 2012-02-28, 15:20

S.S.A. wrote:the tag out is used by the eff of the gb, so it tkro cant touch it

Still makes no sense... A monster is being summoned and you are negateing it. A chain wouldn't start till the GB being summoned hits the field and it's eff goes off (which it would never hit the field if you t-kinged it) and as was posted a second ago:

dest wrote:tkro can't negate summons that use the chain somehow. tkro can negate any summon that doesn't use the chain. It's as simple as that...

**S.S.A.** 2012-02-28, 15:29

the tag out would use the chain

**dest** 2012-02-28, 15:36

glad beast triggers -> returns to the deck as a cost -> summons other glad beast -> trigger effect resolved
new chain -> summoned beast activates its effect

only chains are involved. And as a side note, summons that are negatable by tkro can only happen in the main phase...

**dabestgamer** 2012-02-28, 17:30

nimmons wrote:
S.S.A. wrote:the tag out is used by the eff of the gb, so it tkro cant touch it

Still makes no sense... A monster is being summoned and you are negateing it. A chain wouldn't start till the GB being summoned hits the field and it's eff goes off (which it would never hit the field if you t-kinged it) and as was posted a second ago:

dest wrote:tkro can't negate summons that use the chain somehow. tkro can negate any summon that doesn't use the chain. It's as simple as that...

Negating a Summon means hitting the monster before it gets to the field. If an effect is used, the time at which you would negate a Summon is during resolution of said effect.

However, you cannot interrupt resolution by activating new cards. By the time the effect finishes resolving, the monster is already on the field. You cannot negate a Summon that is already successful since it is already on the field, making the activation of your Summon-negating effect illegal.

...

"Too long; didn't read" Version: You can never negate the Summon of a monster by an effect. You MUST negate the effect Summoning the monster.

**Drago Arcaus** 2012-02-28, 19:34

This TKRO stuffs come up in here multiple times...

How long till the next time. Taking all bets

**thehostplayer** 2012-02-28, 19:39

dabestgamer wrote:
nimmons wrote:
S.S.A. wrote:the tag out is used by the eff of the gb, so it tkro cant touch it

Still makes no sense... A monster is being summoned and you are negateing it. A chain wouldn't start till the GB being summoned hits the field and it's eff goes off (which it would never hit the field if you t-kinged it) and as was posted a second ago:

dest wrote:tkro can't negate summons that use the chain somehow. tkro can negate any summon that doesn't use the chain. It's as simple as that...

Negating a Summon means hitting the monster before it gets to the field. If an effect is used, the time at which you would negate a Summon is during resolution of said effect.

However, you cannot interrupt resolution by activating new cards. By the time the effect finishes resolving, the monster is already on the field. You cannot negate a Summon that is already successful since it is already on the field, making the activation of your Summon-negating effect illegal.

...

"Too long; didn't read" Version: You can never negate the Summon of a monster by an effect. You MUST negate the effect Summoning the monster.

Thanks for simplifying this.

Also, I had someone tell me I couldn't SS Glow up Bulb by milling the card. Nonsense.

**nimmons** 2012-02-28, 19:45

dabestgamer wrote:
nimmons wrote:
S.S.A. wrote:the tag out is used by the eff of the gb, so it tkro cant touch it

Still makes no sense... A monster is being summoned and you are negateing it. A chain wouldn't start till the GB being summoned hits the field and it's eff goes off (which it would never hit the field if you t-kinged it) and as was posted a second ago:

dest wrote:tkro can't negate summons that use the chain somehow. tkro can negate any summon that doesn't use the chain. It's as simple as that...

Negating a Summon means hitting the monster before it gets to the field. If an effect is used, the time at which you would negate a Summon is during resolution of said effect.

However, you cannot interrupt resolution by activating new cards. By the time the effect finishes resolving, the monster is already on the field. You cannot negate a Summon that is already successful since it is already on the field, making the activation of your Summon-negating effect illegal.

...

"Too long; didn't read" Version: You can never negate the Summon of a monster by an effect. You MUST negate the effect Summoning the monster.

I am going to second that thanks. I really didn't know the ruleing on that haha =P *Feels like a noob*

**kangtuji** 2012-02-28, 20:22

Jesus... how did this thread turned into about player didn't knew the rule ?
This thread isn't for that

Also for self note, This is why I prefer to post complete screenshot instead only just one, people trying to make me looks bad, even I already did explaining, I knew I shouldn't have post one screenshot only, which I misses the part I giving the explanation before the screenshot... oh whatever, no point cries over spilled milk)

Back to most ridicilious thing : https://imgur.com/CEkK5

**S.S.A.** 2012-02-28, 22:47

...not peverted...or funny

**Cheren** 2012-02-28, 22:54

... but innapropriate

**DuelKing** 2012-02-28, 23:44

I'm sure everyone is familiar with "Good luck and have fun". Well, there was this one person who replied with "I will not have fun". I was in a good mood, so all I said was "more fun for me". At the end of the game, I don't remember if he won or if I did, but before they left they said "I refuse to have fun!" Gave me a good laugh for the day.

Sponsored content