Forum:Blue eyes shining dragon

so this monster is kinda unstoppable once your opponet gets enough dragons in the graveyard,only thing i can see that would work is magic cylinders, its not desenating the monster just the attack, and i think it can negate mirror force. is there any way of sending it away after it is summoned72.222.240.70 20:13, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * It can't stop Mirror Force, but it can stop Magic Cylinder...weird, I know. But it can be easily killed by Fissure, Smashing Ground, and Hammer Shot. Dmaster (Contribs • Count) 20:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

you can't kill it with Fissure, Smashing Ground, or Hammer Shot....because they will all target Blue-Eyes Shining Dragon and if he can negate and destroy any magic/trap/monster effect that targets him...so I see how Mirror Force or Lightning Vortex would work but not the others.

Picasso 81189 18:33, 14 December 2008 (UTC)Steve
 * Fissure, Smashing Ground, and Hammer Shot do not target; so those can kill Blue-Eyes Shining Dragon. -- Sub 20:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

ooooooooook.......so how don't they target

They search for the highest attack or highest defense and what not....then they TARGET and destroy it.

At least thats what I have come to believe.

Picasso 81189 20:26, 14 December 2008 (UTC)Steve


 * wrong, in order for a card for be considered a "target card",
 * the player activating it must manually choose which card he or
 * she chooses the effect to be used on. For example, "Shadow Spell" targets
 * because it has to know which card will those effect be used on. A non-target
 * card, "Mirror Force", the card will decide for itself what card will
 * it destroy.

Firesoul1 20:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)Firesoul1

But if the attacks of the monsters are equal when hammer shot is used then the person needs to designate which monster....and in that case the person TARGETS it....so what about that situation?
 * Generally, targetting effects require you to select a monster at activation. If two monsters have equal attack you choose which one to destroy at resolution, so it still doesn't target. -- Sub 21:06, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Please stop being intentionally daft. Trying to be clever doesn't change the way the rules are.  Cards that select the recipient of its effect based on ATK/DEF do not target, period.  (Best way to explain that: if you chain to something that changes the ATK/DEF of the monster that would be designated, it would no longer be hit with the effect.) Danny Lilithborne 20:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

card wording
but the card says designate, it does not say target....im confussed 72.222.240.70 16:21, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

It's the same. ATEMVEGETA 18:15, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe that there is a reason that the wording is peculiar. Designate would seem to mean that it is against ANY card that designates Blue-Eyes as an affected monster. He can be targeted, negating if controller wants, or he can negate even Fissure if it designates him as the affected monster, which it does. There SHOULD be many Blue-Eyes in tournament play, but there isn't because of his impossible summoning conditions and his dubious effect wording. But it does not say "designates a target", just "designate". There's a reason. It makes him VERY powerful once out. Divine Wrath can take him out, though, a Spell Speed 2 vs. a Spell Speed 3. The cardmakers wanted to promote this for various reasons, and so decided to make this monster truly powerful, but felt lazy of wording it so complicated and just put "designate". Perhaps it may have been a rushes careless mistake to not add in a "target" in the effect wording, but the result is the same: Blue-Eyes	Shining is invulnerable to effects. His Monster card zone can almost be considered exempted of the game once out, except for attacks. Reverse Trap does not target, but he would be a designated affected Monster card by the Trap card, so Blue-Eyes can negate it's effect on itself only. The only way to destroy it is with attack. Buster Blader will defeat Blue-Eyes Shining Dragon at ANY instance. But the Blue-Eyes CAN negate any and all effects that designate it as an affected monster, not necessarily as a target. Even though cards like Dark Hole doen't target, they still designate the Dragon as an affected party. So he CAN negate Dark Hole, Fissure, Smashing Ground, and Grand Mole.

heres the real answer
you fools targeting and deignate are the same damn thing things like mirror force and lightning vortex can kil blue eys shining dragon cuase it effects the field not the dragon even if he was the only one on the field why are you making it mor complicated than it is plaind and simple they only cards that can effct blue eys shining are cards that cover the whole field like if cyber jar wasnt band hed be destroyed or red dragon archfiend hed still be destroyed regardless and who cares about speeds jeese you uys make it sound like rocket science its a damn game have fun with it.

whomever was the person that posted the above... wow just wow, the op is/was just covering any and all possible scenarios. Yeah, it's just a game, but come on, ye not need to blow a casket over a simple question~MEOW~ Might of the BIRD Empire 00:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

and besides ever thought of a monster w/ the same effect w/ much higher atack points gain like buster blader

To The Guy Who Called Everyone a Fool
I know you may not like Rocket Science... but using grammar that isn't disgusting isn't rocket science either~ Also, don't call everyone fools when in reality there's only one person who's really confused. The targeting thing is just something that needs to be learnt, otherwise we would see Blue Eyes Shining Dragons everywhere.

--Jsupunited 11:46, 2 April 2009 (UTC)-- (Forgot to sign off xP)


 * Very much agreed. If the rules were 100% understandable to everyone, we wouldn't have this forum.  Targeting happens to be an especially difficult concept, and if you're not willing to post constructively, don't post.  It's silly of the card makers to put "designate" in lieu of "target" for that one card anyway, and it's only natural that such an arbitrary distinction would create confusion.  Don't be so quick to criticize your fellow duelists.

~Specter (cow_pi) 17:33, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Hey guys
hey guys you can also use grand mole to get rid of blue eyes shining dragon since grand moles effect does not target it actvates when it engages in battle so why not just annoy the person by sendin it back to their hand
 * Neo-Spacian Grand Mole will return Blue-Eyes Shining Dragon to the hand. ATEMVEGETA  (Talk) 22:27, 20 June 2009 (UTC)

The Blue-Eyes Shining Dragon should not return to the hand in this case. Neo-Spacian Grand Mole's effect does not target, but the Dragon would be the designated affected monster, so CAN negate that effect.


 * "Target" and "designate" mean the same thing. It is not a generally accepted form of interpretation (as you called it in your incorrect edit to the Rulings Page), it is a fact.  "Blue-Eyes Shining Dragon" will be returned to the hand by  "Neo-Spacian Grand Mole".  --Deus Ex Machina (Talk) 14:59, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Well it is not a so easy matter to distingish which card targets and which not. You are correct, Fissure, Smashing Ground and Hammer Shot do not target and can destroy Blue-Eyes Shining Dragon, but for example, Sakuretsu Armor destroys and attacking monters, I don't choose the target but I choose the time to activate it, and it is considered to target, so dude, you must know the rulings of this cards by practise. Maybe the first three doesn't target because they affect the entire field. Hurin dueler 02:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Here is an idea(?)
Just throwing in my two cents.

the word "designate"...wouldnt that mean anything that would effect it? So if you use THIS type of thinking shining dragon could negate ANY kind of magic/trap/effect that would effect shining. This would make its damn near impossible summoning conditions freaking berable.

Also should we measure the creator's INTENT of what the card should be? Obviously they wanted to release powerful cards that people would want. Dark Magician and the Blue-Eyes families are cannons to the success of the anime, movie, and game. So...what if the creators intended for the card to be "invincible aside from battle". I mean. If you take shining dragon to a tourny what would they say about it? (technically its not banned)

just my two cents :P and i can think of lots of ways to pull out shining dragon EASIER (my personal favorite is summoner of illusions) but still its a thought. -- Kohath Star 1:55 a.m june 25, 2009

That wasn't two cents, Kohath Star, that was a full silver dolla. Really, man, you worded what I had tried to say earlier but in a third of what I wrote. That's EXACTLY what I had tried to say. Since seeing the word "designate" not being paired to a "target" nor "specifically designate", we can't assume it means the same thing. ALL other cards that have the word "designate" in them have it paired with "specifically" or "target" and those that weren't were actually corrected retroactively, like Lord of D. The Blue-Eyes Shining Dragon has no Errata, so the only thing we can take on his effect is take "designates" for its literal meaning, which means in any way affected. If we ASSUME that "designates" means targets, (which it literally does not but for the sake of the card game...) then the dragon can only negate targeting cards. But a simple "designates" means that it can negate ANY card effect that would AFFECT the dragon at all so Grand Mole's effect? Negated. Mirror Force? Negated only portion pertaining to Shining. Buster Blader? Sorry, Shining.


 * It has been explained repeatedly that "designate" is the same as "target". Konami's OCG hotline, all semi-official OCG sources, Curtis Schultz, posts on the Official UDE Judge List, all high-level judges agree.
 * There's also "Big Shield Gardna", whose text also uses "designates". He has been ruled,
 * A face-down "Big Shield Gardna" can only negate a Spell Card that targets 1 face-down monster, so it cannot negate "Riryoku", "Creature Swap" or "Dark Hole", but can negate "Nobleman of Crossout" or "Tribute to the Doomed".
 * --Deus Ex Machina (Talk) 21:52, 25 June 2009 (UTC)