Rulings

**Sofronio** 2011-08-20, 14:13

It seems most people lack an extensive or even basic understanding of certain rulings. And even where as I don't understand every ruling I do know Thunder King Ra-oh negates the effect of Pot of duality.

So I would say my idea is for specific positions, like a War leader, or a Forum/DN mod, a Ruling test could be in order. Ranging from simple rulings to complicated rulings that can't just be easily searched on the Wikia. I'd even personally write up such a test. Example questions would be as some of the following..

"Player A uses Future Visions and summons Fortune Lady Light to the field, which gets removed. However Fossil Dyna Pachycephalo is also face up on the field. Will Fortune Lady still be special summoned back on the field due to Future visions?"

Then make certain questions harder like...

Which of the following doesn't belong.

Pot of Duality
Pot of Greed
Card Trader
Hand Destruction
Cup of Ace
Graceful Charity

In which would be a good trick question seeing as they would immediately think Pot of Greed since it's banned, but then smarter players will realize its Duality since its the only card that doesn't allow you to draw.

thoughts?

**Zero2Hero** 2011-08-20, 14:21

Actually, I'm in the process of becoming a Judge, and I can tell you that there are test.
TamA is excellent at tests, and is really turning me into an Expert at Rulings.

He gives me the impression that he wants me to pass, and that he won't give up on me, so I will not give up in return.

Whether I become a Judge or not, TamA is an amazing guy, I enjoyed being in his Judge Class.

**Sofronio** 2011-08-20, 14:24

Emolga 0 wrote:Actually, I'm in the process of becoming a Judge, and I can tell you that there are test.
TamA is excellent at tests, and is really turning me into an Expert at Rulings.

He gives me the impression that he wants me to pass, and that he won't give up on me, so I will not give up in return.

Whether I become a Judge or not, TamA is an amazing guy, I enjoyed being in his Judge Class.

Well I would take that as you agree with my idea. I would even say that several players can log on and just go in a "Ruling class" in a big watcher's chat.

But again this is just optimism.

**Key** 2011-08-21, 11:23

Thunder King Rai-Oh doesn't negate Pot of Duality.
It prevents Duality from being played or resolved properly.
Big difference.

**Sofronio** 2011-08-22, 01:10

Key wrote:Thunder King Rai-Oh doesn't negate Pot of Duality.
It prevents Duality from being played or resolved properly.
Big difference.

Sorry I'm loose with my words.

**kangtuji** 2011-08-22, 01:20

Here a lil question for you drunken

1) Jinzo / E.Hero wildheart : Negate the trap / Unaffected by traps
Macro cosmos, A trap, active on field
Q: What happen to those unaffected by trap when they dies ?

2) Macro Cosmos active on field... opp MST it
Q: Where macro cosmos gone ?

**Key** 2011-08-22, 01:31

Continuous effects stops applying if the card is destroyed but not sent to grave yet.

1. Removed
2. Grave.

Had a confusion there ...

**Kaiba** 2011-08-22, 02:35

Sofronio, you aren't very good at rulings at all.

Sofronio wrote:"Player A uses Future Visions and summons Fortune Lady Light to the field, which gets removed. However Fossil Dyna Pachycephalo is also face up on the field. Will Fortune Lady still be special summoned back on the field due to Future visions?"

This is a terribly flawed question. Future Visions doesn't special summon the monster to the field. It returns it.

To say "still be special summoned back to the field" is misleading, as the card is incapable of doing such a thing. The card says "return", so the question should say "return" as well.

This coupled with your "Thunder King negates Duality" mess-up makes me never want to take a test written by you ever.

**TamACOPY** 2011-08-22, 03:38

You'd find a test written by me totally disgusting then, Kaiba. If you know what you're doing, flawed questions are one of the best methods to test someone. For example, if a testee had answered yes or no to that Future Visions question, the failure would be imminent.

On the other hand, "which of the following doesn't belong" questions serve no purpose. They are too subjective, ambiguous and don't provide a true insight of the testee's knowledge.

**Ruf_Pup13** 2011-08-22, 03:46

I need to test with you tamA..

**Key** 2011-08-22, 04:10

Pssssttttt.
TamA's test is not that hard xDD

**TamACOPY** 2011-08-22, 04:10

Key wrote:Pssssttttt.
TamA's test is not that hard xDD

You're a total ruling freak, that's something different lol!

**Ruf_Pup13** 2011-08-22, 04:12

Well i am confident that id know the rulings or at least a partial amount.

Still confident.

**kangtuji** 2011-08-22, 10:29

Heres another lil rulings question for you Laughing

turn 1: Player A activate Swords of revealing lights on
turn 2: Player A activate Macro Cosmos

2 turns later... where did swords gone Laughing

(assuming both cards survives)

**Key** 2011-08-22, 10:35

kangtuji wrote:Heres another lil rulings question for you

turn 1: Player A activate Swords of revealing lights on
turn 2: Player A activate Macro Cosmos

2 turns later... where did swords gone (assuming both cards survives)

Removed, why ?
What gives you any doubt ?

TamA wrote:
Key wrote:Pssssttttt.
TamA's test is not that hard xDD

You're a total ruling freak, that's something different

Wait ... WHAT ?!?!

**Badass_Bunny** 2011-08-22, 10:49

Key wrote:
kangtuji wrote:Heres another lil rulings question for you

turn 1: Player A activate Swords of revealing lights on
turn 2: Player A activate Macro Cosmos

2 turns later... where did swords gone (assuming both cards survives)

Removed, why ?
What gives you any doubt ?

Except that Swords Of Revealing Light stay on the field for 3 of opponents turns?

**Key** 2011-08-22, 11:04

Controller's Turn 1: Swords
Opponent's turn 1
Controller's Turn 2: Macro
Opponent's turn 2

-----2 turns later------

Swords has been over 3 turns.

**Douron** 2011-09-01, 16:23

Key wrote:Pssssttttt.
TamA's test is not that hard xDD

**Badass_Bunny** 2011-09-01, 16:29

Key wrote:Controller's Turn 1: Swords
Opponent's turn 1
Controller's Turn 2: Macro
Opponent's turn 2

-----2 turns later------

Swords has been over 3 turns.

3 of your opponent turns...

**Ruf_Pup13** 2011-09-01, 16:34

Badass_Bunny wrote:
Key wrote:Controller's Turn 1: Swords
Opponent's turn 1
Controller's Turn 2: Macro
Opponent's turn 2

-----2 turns later------

Swords has been over 3 turns.

3 of your opponent turns...

Im guessing Kang means when the three turns end, Will swords get removed or sent to the grave. its Effect at the end..

My question is on the Xyz rulings, I don't want to give bad rulings on it.

**Key** 2011-09-02, 01:08

Douron wrote:
Key wrote:Pssssttttt.
TamA's test is not that hard xDD

Did you not pass :/ ?

**TamACOPY** 2011-09-02, 01:09

Key wrote:
Douron wrote:
Key wrote:Pssssttttt.
TamA's test is not that hard xDD

Did you not pass :/ ?

Who is he anyway? o_Ô

**Ruf_Pup13** 2011-09-02, 01:18

Well...He is obviuosly not a rule shark like Key is..

Sponsored content

Rulings

Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings

Re: Rulings