Jump to content

Welcome!


Be sure to register in order to take full advantage of all of the awesome features this forum has!

Photo

Royal Tribute


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
22 replies to this topic

#1 Apollo

Apollo

    You Can't Handle The Truth!

  • » Ex-Staff
  • PipPipPip
  • 12,011 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 01:16 PM

Royal Tribute
Normal Spell
This card can only be activated when "Necrovalley" is on your side of the field. Both players discard all Monster Cards in their hands to the Graveyard.

Can I play Royal Tribute if I have no other cards in hand? Let's say I have GK Guard, 3 spells/traps, and Royal Tribute. I set Guard, set my 3 spells/traps, and play Royal Tribute. Is that a legal play?

I've asked about 10 people, including Val who isn't sure, and the vote is 50/50

Posted Image

 


#2 Nomad

Nomad

    Next to be inspired

  • » Ex-Staff
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,647 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 01:41 PM

Well the thing is, going by the general rules of activation legality, a player shouldn't be able to activate a card like Royal Tribute unless they've got at least 1 monster in their hand. That's because unless that's the case, its not known for sure if that player is able resolve their chain link with effect. However, while my position is also supported by a Magician's Circle ruling (that you need at least 1 legal spellcaster, I'm reluctant to put this to rest for a couple of reasons.

- Familiar Knight & Inferno Tempest come to mind as other possible precedents, but much like Royal Tribute, neither card has a relevant ruling.

- Out of the few threads that I could find on the subject, a couple of reliable people seem to be saying that the contents of your hand don't matter. While nobody should be expected to be 100% correct, 100% of the time, I find it hard to believe that multiple people (by this I mean people who actually hold themselves accountable & make it a point to mention when they're not 100% sure) would have answered this way without a reason. As in, my assumption is that we've either been doing it wrong, or were given a BKSS ruling (likely on the UDE boards) that sided in favor of Royal Tribute not caring about having a monster in your hand, and I just don't remember reading about it.

Edited by Val, 28 April 2010 - 02:46 PM.

Posted Image

work by Johnny :)

Trade List / Refs

- Twitter - Midnight TCG - Youtube -

 

Don't hate on the bitches.

 

#3 BlitzPlayer

BlitzPlayer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 16,190 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 02:22 PM

hell yea
Refs:
http://forums.yugioh...hl__BlitzPlayer




Trades:

http://forums.yugioh...g-yugioh-again/





SELLING MY YUGIOH CARDS. AIM ME @ TheCodeMan822

#4 Nomad

Nomad

    Next to be inspired

  • » Ex-Staff
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,647 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 02:44 PM

hell yea

Ok?

Posted Image

work by Johnny :)

Trade List / Refs

- Twitter - Midnight TCG - Youtube -

 

Don't hate on the bitches.

 

#5 Michael

Michael

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 272 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 02:58 PM

I wouldn't think that you need to have monsters in your hand to activate Royal Tribute. It says discard all monsters not "a" monster or "1" monster. Specific cards like Hand Destruction can't activate if your opponent has no hand, simply because the card specifically states that your opponent has to "discard 2 cards". Royal Tribute isn't specific. Just like you can Heavy Storm or Giant Trunade even if the field is empty.

Edited by Michael, 28 April 2010 - 03:01 PM.


#6 BlitzPlayer

BlitzPlayer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 16,190 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 03:17 PM

Ok?

yeah, you can.


I don't have a ruling, but people like Hoban, Soul, etc, etc all say that you can.
Refs:
http://forums.yugioh...hl__BlitzPlayer




Trades:

http://forums.yugioh...g-yugioh-again/





SELLING MY YUGIOH CARDS. AIM ME @ TheCodeMan822

#7 1upization

1upization

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 820 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 03:51 PM

yes,you can play it,i saw this at a reg right next to me and he appeled it and the head judge even said you can ,so yes you can.

#8 Nomad

Nomad

    Next to be inspired

  • » Ex-Staff
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,647 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 03:57 PM

I wouldn't think that you need to have monsters in your hand to activate Royal Tribute. It says discard all monsters not "a" monster or "1" monster. Specific cards like Hand Destruction can't activate if your opponent has no hand, simply because the card specifically states that your opponent has to "discard 2 cards". Royal Tribute isn't specific. Just like you can Heavy Storm or Giant Trunade even if the field is empty.

Well the things is, cards like Heavy Storm & Giant Trunade can't be activated if there aren't any Spell or Trap Cards on the field before the activation, cards like Mind Crush & Rope of Life can't be activated without any cards in your hand, and cards like Zombie Master & Beckoning Light can't even be activated if the conditions would become correct part way through the activation.

This is all because generally speaking, the activation conditions need to be correct before you try, and the activating player & game'state need to recognize that you can do something before you try.

Heck, even if you bring up Card Destruction (which is a lot more lenient than most with when its activation is legal), you still need at least 1 player to have at least 1 card in their hand other than Card Destruction. With Royal Tribute, there's no way to make the contents of your opponent's hand public knowledge (even with something that shows you their hand), logically speaking, your hand should need to contain at least 1 monster in order to legalize the activation.

That's why I find it strange that I'm apparently alone right now and saying this, especially since I can't find any proof outside word of mouth to suggest that Royal Tribute breaks the rule of thumb.



yeah, you can.

I don't have a ruling, but people like Hoban, Soul, etc, etc all say that you can.

I don't really know anything about Soul, but I wouldn't consider Pat to be a reliable source for anything like this. Not saying that I'd discredit anyone off the bat, but taking part in the discussion & providing reasoning counts a lot more than just saying "yes because this person would say yes", or "yes because I did it at a tournament".


Jzimm - I didn't see you post, but that's looking to be the consensus. It just seems really strange that so many people are saying this without having any close precedent or ruling to back it with.

Edited by Val, 28 April 2010 - 04:02 PM.

Posted Image

work by Johnny :)

Trade List / Refs

- Twitter - Midnight TCG - Youtube -

 

Don't hate on the bitches.

 

#9 BlitzPlayer

BlitzPlayer

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 16,190 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 04:07 PM

Pat knows rulings as good as you, and people like Pat and Soul know it from being around the sjc circut
Refs:
http://forums.yugioh...hl__BlitzPlayer




Trades:

http://forums.yugioh...g-yugioh-again/





SELLING MY YUGIOH CARDS. AIM ME @ TheCodeMan822

#10 Nomad

Nomad

    Next to be inspired

  • » Ex-Staff
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,647 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 04:22 PM

You're missing the point.

For something like this, its not a matter of being told "yes/no because so & so says so (unless that person could or can pass an official ruling)", or "yes/no because it was ruled this way at my tournament". Its a matter of figuring our why they would say this, and where this information ultimately came from. If nothing else, someone should use the card in their DS game & throw that result into the mix.

Inb4NewEdgeSmash

Posted Image

work by Johnny :)

Trade List / Refs

- Twitter - Midnight TCG - Youtube -

 

Don't hate on the bitches.

 

#11 WolfangSD

WolfangSD

    The Wolf is back!

  • Members
  • 3,437 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 04:31 PM

ok, so in this case there's 9 different situations to consider here when looking at whether or not the activation is legal:

Player A/B has:
1) no cards in hand,
2) nothing but Spells/Traps in hand, and
3) a mix of Monsters, Spells, and Traps.
where Player A will be the controller of "Royal Tribute". I'll abbreviate these situations as Player/Choice - Player/Choice, i.e.: A1-B1 would be when both players have no cards in hand.

A1-B1 is an obvious case of illegal activation.
A1-B2 and A1-B3 are both legal activations since, as stated before, there is no [popular] way to make each player's hand contents public knowledge prior to activation (unpopular ways include cards like "Ceremonial Bell" but that's a moot point considering the game today), although as the controller of the card your cards do have knowledge of your own contents (re: tributing face-down monsters to pay costs for specific cards like CCV). In the case of A1-B2, the resolution of "Royal Tribute" would be similar to that of "Mind Crush" if there are no cards to discard.

A2-B1 is the same illegal activation, and A2-B2 and A2-B3 are the same as above.

all A3 cases are legal activations.

Take all this for the grain of salt it is, and I know I have a mixed history of being wrong just as much as I am right, but I'm fairly sure this is the reasoning behind judges ruling the way they do regarding "Royal Tribute"




As for card rulings precedents regarding why "Royal Tribute's" activation would still be legal if neither player has Monsters in hand is the ruling for "Neo-Spacian Aqua Dolphin's" which says that if the opponent has no Monster Cards in hand, its effect disappears.

Edited by NewEdge, 28 April 2010 - 04:35 PM.

Texas Area Head Judge

N-Heroes for the new format

#12 Michael

Michael

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 272 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 06:18 PM

A1-B2 and A1-B3 are both legal activations since, as stated before, there is no [popular] way to make each player's hand contents public knowledge prior to activation (unpopular ways include cards like "Ceremonial Bell" but that's a moot point considering the game today), although as the controller of the card your cards do have knowledge of your own contents (re: tributing face-down monsters to pay costs for specific cards like CCV). In the case of A1-B2, the resolution of "Royal Tribute" would be similar to that of "Mind Crush" if there are no cards to discard.


what if the opponent has Mind on Air on the field?

#13 Nomad

Nomad

    Next to be inspired

  • » Ex-Staff
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,647 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 06:38 PM

For you model, which player is activating Royal Tribute?

I'm asking because the way I see it (see the Magician's Circle example), Royal Tribute's activation legality shouldn't factor my opponent's hand at all. As in, even if something like Ceremonial Bell, Mind on Air or Respect Play is in active, "the game" still wouldn't add the contents of their hand to my "things I know" list, and as far as "The Game" is concerned, I still have no way of knowing "for sure" that I'll discard anything, (outside influence excluded of course). I just happen to know for my own strategical reasons.

For example, I can tribute my face-down Dark Magician for the cost of Deck Devastation Virus. However, if I target my opponent's monster with Soul Exchange, and then see it with The Stern Mystic, I can't tribute my opponent's face-down monster for it, as that card isn't part of my "things I know" list.


Instead, it should work like Reinforcement of the Army by looking at my side of the "things to know list", make sure that at least 1 monster can be affected (in this case discarded), and then proceed to let me try my luck with what (if anything) my opponent will need to discard when the effect resolves.

...


When it comes to Neo-Spacian Aqua Dolphin's effect, I think its a little different, as it only deals with an opponent's unknown card, rather than my card as well. However, as I think a lot of you guys are saying, its also possible that Royal Tribute works differently for whatever reason (and only looks for a "possible" discard from either player), and this is why I suspected that we had a ruling that said so. I just don't see why we'd assume this road without it.

Edited by Val, 28 April 2010 - 06:38 PM.

Posted Image

work by Johnny :)

Trade List / Refs

- Twitter - Midnight TCG - Youtube -

 

Don't hate on the bitches.

 

#14 WolfangSD

WolfangSD

    The Wolf is back!

  • Members
  • 3,437 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 07:03 PM

what if the opponent has Mind on Air on the field?

That would be one of the "unpopular" methods I spoke about. Cards like "Mind on Air" cause the contents of each player's hand to be revealed to the gamestate, meaning if neither player has Monster Cards in hand it would become illegal to activate "Royal Tribute"


For you model, which player is activating Royal Tribute?

I stated that Player A is the controller of "Royal Tribute" after I set up my model.

I mentioned Aqua Dolphin because it is also a card which, at resolution, affects a possible Monster Card in the opponent's unknown hand. "Mind Crush" and "Trap Dustshoot" are also examples, and if anything "Card Destruction" is the BEST analogy. To a lesser extent, the over-explanation applies to the much older cards which affect only Spells or Traps like "Armed Ninja", "Fake Trap", etc.

The fact of the matter is that, unless the contents of the opponent's hand is public knowledge, as long as they have at least 1 possible card in hand to discard it is not illegal to activate "Royal Tribute", just like you're able to activate "Trap Dustshoot" even though you don't know if the opponent has a Monster Card in hand. The contents of your own hand are irrelevant in this case, as long as either you definately have a Monster Card to discard or your opponent has any cards in their hand.


As for your refute to my comparison with Aqua Dolphin and that both players need Monsters to discard, how many cards that affect both players have effects that disappear if both players don't have the cards in question at resolution of the effect? Activation is not an issue since the only activation requirement is that "Necrovalley" be face-up on the field. Illegal Activation means you are activating a card's effect knowing it cannot resolve properly. In this case, as long as the opponent has any cards in hand and they are not public knowledge, you do not know if the card can resolve with an effect or not. As for "Reinforcement of the Army", as a player you are responsible for the contents of your own deck so after looking at your field, graveyard, hand, and RFG pile you should know what level 4 or lower Warrior Monsters you have remaining in your deck.

Edited by NewEdge, 28 April 2010 - 07:13 PM.

Texas Area Head Judge

N-Heroes for the new format

#15 Michael

Michael

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • 272 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 07:15 PM

Activation is not an issue since the only activation requirement is that "Necrovalley" be face-up on the field.



The Necrovalley has to be yours to activate Royal Tribute.

#16 WolfangSD

WolfangSD

    The Wolf is back!

  • Members
  • 3,437 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 07:27 PM

The Necrovalley has to be yours to activate Royal Tribute.

that is totally not the point here
Texas Area Head Judge

N-Heroes for the new format

#17 Casey

Casey

    SIP MY HATERADE

  • Members
  • 7,693 posts

Posted 28 April 2010 - 07:31 PM

Even though its not an official ruling, at locals when i have tried this while playing dw, it has always been allowed. I was even allowed to play it back @ sjc detroit in 08.
Posted Image
PSN ID: Mman12251990
If you friend request me leave a message like "this is _____ from ETC" or ill ignore it.

#18 Nomad

Nomad

    Next to be inspired

  • » Ex-Staff
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,647 posts

Posted 30 April 2010 - 01:49 AM

That would be one of the "unpopular" methods I spoke about. Cards like "Mind on Air" cause the contents of each player's hand to be revealed to the gamestate, meaning if neither player has Monster Cards in hand it would become illegal to activate "Royal Tribute"

Looks like we've got another debate on our hands... >.<


I stated that Player A is the controller of "Royal Tribute" after I set up my model.

I mentioned Aqua Dolphin because it is also a card which, at resolution, affects a possible Monster Card in the opponent's unknown hand. "Mind Crush" and "Trap Dustshoot" are also examples, and if anything "Card Destruction" is the BEST analogy. To a lesser extent, the over-explanation applies to the much older cards which affect only Spells or Traps like "Armed Ninja", "Fake Trap", etc.

The fact of the matter is that, unless the contents of the opponent's hand is public knowledge, as long as they have at least 1 possible card in hand to discard it is not illegal to activate "Royal Tribute", just like you're able to activate "Trap Dustshoot" even though you don't know if the opponent has a Monster Card in hand. The contents of your own hand are irrelevant in this case, as long as either you definately have a Monster Card to discard or your opponent has any cards in their hand.

As for your refute to my comparison with Aqua Dolphin and that both players need Monsters to discard, how many cards that affect both players have effects that disappear if both players don't have the cards in question at resolution of the effect? Activation is not an issue since the only activation requirement is that "Necrovalley" be face-up on the field. Illegal Activation means you are activating a card's effect knowing it cannot resolve properly. In this case, as long as the opponent has any cards in hand and they are not public knowledge, you do not know if the card can resolve with an effect or not. As for "Reinforcement of the Army", as a player you are responsible for the contents of your own deck so after looking at your field, graveyard, hand, and RFG pile you should know what level 4 or lower Warrior Monsters you have remaining in your deck.

I'm sorry, it seems that I missed the part about who was the Turn Player. Guess I shouldn't have said anything until I'd slept, hah.

Getting back to Card Destruction, that card doesn't care "what" gets discarded, so I donno how good it is either. If anything, I think it fits closer to my side of the story, as you need to know that something will be resolved before you activate it. I suppose this is kinda pointless, what with the number of cards in a players hands always being public, but yeah.

Also, the underlined part is what I'm talking about. If there isn't at least 1 monster card that's in my line of vision (in this case in my hand), I don't know whether it'll resolve with effect or not. With Reinforcement of the Army, I have the responsibility of knowing what's in my deck, my hand, etc, but not in my opponent's deck, hand, etc. That's why I'm allowed to activate something like that of Trap Master (inb4mandatoryeffect) without their card being face-up, and Aqua Dolphin/Trap Dustshoot in general.

I suppose the difference we're having here is that you (& most others) believe that the card can be activated as long as there's a possibility of it resolving with effect (as long as you don't know for sure that it won't) because it affects the opponent, and I believe that it can't be activated unless the gamestate knows for sure that it'll resolve with effect because that's something that the activating player has the ability to know.


Even though its not an official ruling, at locals when i have tried this while playing dw, it has always been allowed. I was even allowed to play it back @ sjc detroit in 08.

The issue here (at least for me) isn't whether or not we've allowed it in the past, but whether it should be allowed or not, and why that is. As of right now, its pretty much everyone else against me, so you can ignore what I say. It just doesn't seem completely sound.

Posted Image

work by Johnny :)

Trade List / Refs

- Twitter - Midnight TCG - Youtube -

 

Don't hate on the bitches.

 

#19 WolfangSD

WolfangSD

    The Wolf is back!

  • Members
  • 3,437 posts

Posted 30 April 2010 - 04:41 PM

I have the responsibility of knowing what's in my deck, my hand, etc, but not in my opponent's deck, hand, etc. That's why I'm allowed to activate something like that of Trap Master (inb4mandatoryeffect) without their card being face-up, and Aqua Dolphin/Trap Dustshoot in general.

I suppose the difference we're having here is that you (& most others) believe that the card can be activated as long as there's a possibility of it resolving with effect (as long as you don't know for sure that it won't) because it affects the opponent, and I believe that it can't be activated unless the gamestate knows for sure that it'll resolve with effect because that's something that the activating player has the ability to know.

And why would you be able to activate Trap Dustshoot? According to your interpretation of whether the gamestate knowing an effect will resolve properly, if an opposing player does not have a Monster Card in their hand Trap Dustshoot's activation becomes illegal. This is why certain cards have activation requirements where, as long as the activation requirements are correct, the card effect can be activated. Whether or not the effect resolves properly is irrelevant, the activation is put onto the chain for the game to handle. A player cannot put that effect onto the chain knowing it will resolve without effect (example: activating Heavy Storm without any other Spell or Trap Cards being on the field). A player cannot possibly know the contents of the opposing player's hand without another effect causing it to become public knowledge.
Texas Area Head Judge

N-Heroes for the new format

#20 Nomad

Nomad

    Next to be inspired

  • » Ex-Staff
  • PipPipPip
  • 27,647 posts

Posted 30 April 2010 - 07:01 PM

You know what, that makes perfect sense (to me anyway), and its just a matter of flipping some wording around.

I still don't think that having the hand shown with an effect would change what "the game" lets you see for technical purposes, but yeah. The idea of needing to know that it "wont resolve without effect" instead of needing to know "that it will resolve with effect" solves the problem that I was having, and without creating any new ones along the way.

Good discussions are good.

Posted Image

work by Johnny :)

Trade List / Refs

- Twitter - Midnight TCG - Youtube -

 

Don't hate on the bitches.

 




Powered by Multacom Dedicated Servers