Jump to content

Photo

Solved  Necrovalley vs Fire Ring


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
8 replies to this topic

#1
hasugian

hasugian

    Junior Member

  • Junior Member
  • 5 posts
    • Time Online: 4h 59m 43s
i am duel few second ago ...

my opponent has Necrovalley face up ...

when my Fire King Avatar Garunix touch the field, he use his Bottomlesstrap Hole

i chained it use Fire King' Fire Ring to destroy my Garunix ...

=========

the admin come and say all the effect of Fire Ring is negated by necrovalley, including destroying my monster

i ask that admin, is that true ? so why in this rule : http://yugioh.wikia....ngs:Necrovalley
even if Trishula cannot banish the card from the grave, it still banish card from hand and field ?

so anyone can explain to me ?

#2
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! MS

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! MS

    // Falling in Love Again //

  • Veteran Members
  • 1,667 posts
    • Time Online: 142d 1h 36m 11s
  • Country: Country Flag
  • Location:Does it matter?
That's because you have to be able to summon a monster from your graveyard in first place, otherwise "Fire King's Fire King" won't resolve properly and will end being negated by Necrovalley.

Trishula is a completely different card, since banishing a card from X place isn't mandatory like the Fire Ring.

#3
Ahim de Famille

Ahim de Famille

    Elite Member

  • Member
  • 1,886 posts
    • Time Online: 164d 18h 42m 51s
  • Country: Country Flag
Target 1 FIRE monster you control and 1 FIRE monster in your Graveyard; destroy the first target on the field, and if you do, Special Summon the second target. You can only activate 1 "Fire King Fire Cycle" per turn

since u cant target the card in grave....so fire king fire cycle is negate....

#4
mido9

mido9

  • Veteran Members
  • 3,713 posts
    • Time Online: 206d 15h 44m 1s
  • Location:Lurk More.

since u cant target the card in grave

You can,just that it wont matter on resolution.

Who the fuck are you people even trying to convince by making completely weightless blanket statements? Like people are actually putting some sort of effort to make good posts giving legitimate reasoning as to why RPS is not, has not, and never will be a balanced way to "randomly" pick who goes first, while you fucking toolbags just post the most irrelevant and pointless shit thinking that you're adding some sort of weight to the discussion.

All you're really contributing to at this point is the massive list of problems that DNF has in terms of post quality. Stop.

/rant


#5
Unorthodoxical-Princ

Unorthodoxical-Princ

    Elite Member

  • In-Game Administrator
  • 1,803 posts
    • Time Online: 111d 23h 14s
I told you in duel the card has a new errata to make it all clear, and those previous UDE rulings were ambiguous to begin with.

http://i.imgur.com/nNnrK.png

Head Judge of Pink Bunny Games LLC

YCS Chicago 2012 Judge

Evo Game Regionals Judge 2012

Misty Mountain Judge 2012

Lindenhurst Regional Floor Lead Judge 2012

Future Evo Game Regionals Judge 2013


#6
hasugian

hasugian

    Junior Member

  • Junior Member
  • 5 posts
    • Time Online: 4h 59m 43s

Target 1 FIRE monster you control and 1 FIRE monster in your Graveyard; destroy the first target on the field, and if you do, Special Summon the second target. You can only activate 1 "Fire King Fire Cycle" per turn

since u cant target the card in grave....so fire king fire cycle is negate....


just target monster in the grave not disturbing graveyard


That's because you have to be able to summon a monster from your graveyard in first place, otherwise "Fire King's Fire King" won't resolve properly and will end being negated by Necrovalley.

Trishula is a completely different card, since banishing a card from X place isn't mandatory like the Fire Ring.


why all the effect is being negated by necrovalley ...

since the first effect after target 1 monster in my field and 1 graveyard is destroying my monster ...
and the part : " If you do " is second effect

i can accept if the first is summon and the second is destroying >.<

so to the end ... if there a card that make you cannot mill your deck, so "ryko, lightsworn hunter" destruction effect will not work ?


@princ

why you not just give me that pict at that time @.@


sorry if i am debate with you all ...
i just need a clear rule in my mind :)

Edited by hasugian, 29 January 2013 - 03:25 AM.


#7
Unorthodoxical-Princ

Unorthodoxical-Princ

    Elite Member

  • In-Game Administrator
  • 1,803 posts
    • Time Online: 111d 23h 14s

just target monster in the grave not disturbing graveyard




why all the effect is being negated by necrovalley ...

since the first effect after target 1 monster in my field and 1 graveyard is destroying my monster ...
and the part : " If you do " is second effect

i can accept if the first is summon and the second is destroying >.<

so to the end ... if there a card that make you cannot mill your deck, so "ryko, lightsworn hunter" destruction effect will not work ?


@princ

why you not just give me that pict at that time @.@


sorry if i am debate with you all ...
i just need a clear rule in my mind :)


Because it isn't ruling class. I give the ruling, and I briefly explain it. The ruling works, because it works that way. You can't negate part of an effect.

Head Judge of Pink Bunny Games LLC

YCS Chicago 2012 Judge

Evo Game Regionals Judge 2012

Misty Mountain Judge 2012

Lindenhurst Regional Floor Lead Judge 2012

Future Evo Game Regionals Judge 2013


#8
aiwotorimodose

aiwotorimodose

    Blue Mage Apprentice

  • Member
  • 1,720 posts
    • Time Online: 47d 8h 39m 30s
  • Country: Country Flag
  • Location:GMT/UTC +7

why all the effect is being negated by necrovalley ...

since the first effect after target 1 monster in my field and 1 graveyard is destroying my monster ...
and the part : " If you do " is second effect

i can accept if the first is summon and the second is destroying >.<

fire ring had a single effect with two part, negating the effect means none will resolve.

so to the end ... if there a card that make you cannot mill your deck, so "ryko, lightsworn hunter" destruction effect will not work ?

depends, does it says negate? or just prevent cards to be sent from deck to grave?
if it negate then ryko FLIP effect would be negated, else ryko can destroy a target then won't mill.

Posted Image


#9
bilaterus

bilaterus

    Evil for Extra Credit

  • Retired Staff
  • 1,074 posts
    • Time Online: 130d 15h 12m 2s
  • Team:Gemini
  • Country: Country Flag
  • Location:Selling Doofenshmirtz Quality Bratwurst
(Firstly I should quickly point out that Necrovalley does not prevent effects being activated that may move stuff from the grave; it merely negates that effect at resolution.)

The key to this is Necrovalley's text:

All "Gravekeeper's" monsters gain 500 ATK and DEF. Cards in either player's Graveyard cannot be banished. Negate any card effect that would move a card in the Graveyard, other than itself, to a different place.

Since part of Fire Ring's effect summons a monster from the Graveyard, Necrovalley negates it. This is different to if, say, DD Crow was chained to Fire Ring. In that case, Fire Ring would still destroy the monster on field. But here, because of Necrovalley's text, Fire Ring's entire effect is negated.

Posted Image


How I Play Infernity
How I Play Wind-Up

Here is every Ruling Link you ever wanted!
Skulblaka98's Profile

I have access to the DN card database so if you spot any card texts that need correcting, PM me ^_^




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Welcome to the Dueling Network Forums!

To sign in, use your duelingnetwork.com account. If you do not have one, register here.