Solved Atlantean Armsman
#1
Posted 17 May 2012 - 12:08 AM
The effect is this: "While this card is face-up, once per turn during your Main Phase you can Normal Summon a Level 4 or lower Sea Serpent-Type monster in addition to your Normal Summon or Set per turn. When this card is sent to the Graveyard to activate the effect of a WATER monster: Target 1 face-up card your opponent controls; destroy that target."
I said that even if there are 2 on the field, since the effect is continuous and it says "once per turn", he still only gets 1 additional summon. He thought he was entitled to 2 since he wanted to activate one and then activate the other. He kept using "rescue rabbit" as an example even though one is continuous and one is an ignition effect which work differently. Yugioh wiki and yugico.com didn't have anything on this.
Please clarify so we can get this ruling clear.
#2
Posted 17 May 2012 - 12:13 AM
I recently had the mispleasure of facing GWL who ran duplicates of this card. He had 2 on the field at once.
The effect is this: "While this card is face-up, once per turn during your Main Phase you can Normal Summon a Level 4 or lower Sea Serpent-Type monster in addition to your Normal Summon or Set per turn. When this card is sent to the Graveyard to activate the effect of a WATER monster: Target 1 face-up card your opponent controls; destroy that target."
I said that even if there are 2 on the field, since the effect is continuous and it says "once per turn", he still only gets 1 additional summon. He thought he was entitled to 2 since he wanted to activate one and then activate the other. He kept using "rescue rabbit" as an example even though one is continuous and one is an ignition effect which work differently. Yugioh wiki and yugico.com didn't have anything on this.
Please clarify so we can get this ruling clear.
Yeah, its like Karakuri Ninishi. You do not gain an additional normal summon per copy of Ninishi, and its continuous effect is the same as Armsman.
#3
Posted 17 May 2012 - 12:17 AM
My best reasoning behind this would be that additional normal summons do not stack.
Edit: Hope noone caught my little fail moment there << >>

#4
Posted 17 May 2012 - 12:22 AM

#5
Posted 17 May 2012 - 12:24 AM
#6
Posted 17 May 2012 - 01:24 PM
Constellar leonis says "(You can only gain this effect once per turn.)"It's the same text as constellar leonis. The effect doesn't stack, you only gain 1 additional summon per turn no matter on how many atlantean armed soldier you control.
Same for ninishi.

#7
Posted 17 May 2012 - 01:33 PM
Constellar leonis says "(You can only gain this effect once per turn.)"
It's the same text as constellar leonis. The effect doesn't stack, you only gain 1 additional summon per turn no matter on how many atlantean armed soldier you control.
Same for ninishi.
So does Armsman.
Using Ninishi or Leonis for the ruling standard still gives the right answer.
#8
Posted 17 May 2012 - 02:23 PM
o sorry lolSo does Armsman.
Using Ninishi or Leonis for the ruling standard still gives the right answer.
>.>The effect is this: "While this card is face-up, once per turn during your Main Phase you can Normal Summon a Level 4 or lower Sea Serpent-Type monster in addition to your Normal Summon or Set per turn. When this card is sent to the Graveyard to activate the effect of a WATER monster: Target 1 face-up card your opponent controls; destroy that target."

#9
Posted 17 May 2012 - 02:32 PM
He didn't copy/paste it all.o sorry lol
So does Armsman.
Using Ninishi or Leonis for the ruling standard still gives the right answer.>.>The effect is this: "While this card is face-up, once per turn during your Main Phase you can Normal Summon a Level 4 or lower Sea Serpent-Type monster in addition to your Normal Summon or Set per turn. When this card is sent to the Graveyard to activate the effect of a WATER monster: Target 1 face-up card your opponent controls; destroy that target."
http://yugioh.wikia....n_Armed_SoldierWhile this card is face-up on the field, once per turn during your Main Phase, you can Normal Summon a Level 4 or lower Sea Serpent-Type monster in addition to your Normal Summon or Set. (You can only gain this effect once per turn.) When this card is sent to the Graveyard for the activation of a WATER monster's effect: Target 1 face-up card your opponent controls; destroy that target.

From Skype
From here
#10
Posted 17 May 2012 - 02:48 PM
He didn't copy/paste it all.
o sorry lol
So does Armsman.
Using Ninishi or Leonis for the ruling standard still gives the right answer.>.>The effect is this: "While this card is face-up, once per turn during your Main Phase you can Normal Summon a Level 4 or lower Sea Serpent-Type monster in addition to your Normal Summon or Set per turn. When this card is sent to the Graveyard to activate the effect of a WATER monster: Target 1 face-up card your opponent controls; destroy that target."
http://yugioh.wikia....n_Armed_SoldierWhile this card is face-up on the field, once per turn during your Main Phase, you can Normal Summon a Level 4 or lower Sea Serpent-Type monster in addition to your Normal Summon or Set. (You can only gain this effect once per turn.) When this card is sent to the Graveyard for the activation of a WATER monster's effect: Target 1 face-up card your opponent controls; destroy that target.
Point proven overkill at this point. Even without the clause in parenthesis, the effect itself already says the additional summon is once per turn. Using prior examples that have already been ruled, you could figure out without being told explicitly that you can only get one more normal summon and not just turn normal summons into another special summon mechanic.
#11
Posted 17 May 2012 - 03:15 PM
Nope. If it didnt have the clause in parathensis, the effect could be used as many times as the guy has Armsmans.Point proven overkill at this point. Even without the clause in parenthesis, the effect itself already says the additional summon is once per turn. Using prior examples that have already been ruled, you could figure out without being told explicitly that you can only get one more normal summon and not just turn normal summons into another special summon mechanic.

#12
Posted 17 May 2012 - 03:17 PM
Nope. If it didnt have the clause in parathensis, the effect could be used as many times as the guy has Armsmans.
Point proven overkill at this point. Even without the clause in parenthesis, the effect itself already says the additional summon is once per turn. Using prior examples that have already been ruled, you could figure out without being told explicitly that you can only get one more normal summon and not just turn normal summons into another special summon mechanic.
Really? Here I thought that prior prescient would put a ruling in place that would essentially remove the need for that clause
#13
Posted 17 May 2012 - 03:18 PM
It wouldnt be a game mechanic and that ruling would be BS.
Nope. If it didnt have the clause in parathensis, the effect could be used as many times as the guy has Armsmans.
Point proven overkill at this point. Even without the clause in parenthesis, the effect itself already says the additional summon is once per turn. Using prior examples that have already been ruled, you could figure out without being told explicitly that you can only get one more normal summon and not just turn normal summons into another special summon mechanic.
Really? Here I thought that prior prescient would put a ruling in place that would essentially remove the need for that clause

#14
Posted 17 May 2012 - 03:22 PM
It wouldnt be a game mechanic and that ruling would be BS.
Nope. If it didnt have the clause in parathensis, the effect could be used as many times as the guy has Armsmans.
Point proven overkill at this point. Even without the clause in parenthesis, the effect itself already says the additional summon is once per turn. Using prior examples that have already been ruled, you could figure out without being told explicitly that you can only get one more normal summon and not just turn normal summons into another special summon mechanic.
Really? Here I thought that prior prescient would put a ruling in place that would essentially remove the need for that clause
True. I'd see myself ***** over it being BKSS even it was right.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Sign In
Create Account







This topic is locked
Back to top
Report
















