| Forums: | Index → Yu-Gi-Oh! Ruling Queries → Denko Sekka vs Red reboot | |
| Please sign your comments with ~~~~. See Help:Signature and Help:Talk pages for further information. | ||
 |
This forum thread has been unedited for 1664 days and is considered archived. Please don't add to the discussion, unless absolutely necessary. |
Hello everybody i have some various questions. It is about Denko Sekka vs Red Reboot. In this Video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ToZOYBo3BJk it is said u cannot activate red reboot because the simultaneous effect has to fully resolve when being activated. Why is it so? Transfering this scenario into another situation like an orcust monster activates its effect and banishes itself as costs, is it possible then to react with solemn strike? Because strike also has a mandatory and simultaneous effect, but the banished orcust monster is unable being destroyed. So strike cannot fully resolve, but still u can activate it. Where is the difference?
Please help me with these rulings. Thank you very much!OverRush Soares (talk • contribs) 18:03, May 20, 2019 (UTC)
- In the video, he quotes a specific ruling (and uses a cropped screenshot from this wiki, see the 4th bullet). Notice how this ruling is specific to cards that destroy then banish? Since this is not the case with Red Reboot, he is attempting to interpret the judges train of thought and then extrapolating it to Red Reboot v. Denko Sekka. Without an actual ruling (or one with a more similar situation) it is hard to say for sure. The typical interpretation of "and if you do" means that the part after "and if you do" does not necessarily have to be possible (see the 3rd bullet). If you used this interpretation, then you could still use Red Reboot to negate. However, what do you do with the card after it has been negated? You can't set it. In this sense, the example with Imperial Iron Wall is similar in that you cannot banish the destroyed card; so what do you do?
- Andrewds1021 (talk • contribs) 00:03, September 26, 2019 (UTC)