Rulings you NEED to catch about S:P Little Knight
Vložit
- čas přidán 30. 10. 2023
- Everything not written on the card about S:P Little knight.
#msttv #rulings #splittleknight
Thanks for supporting us on Patreon: / msttv
Support MST via TCGPLAYER: bit.ly/3SIhdge
== MERCH STORE==
Show your support with AWESOME Merch!
www.mstmerch.com
We develop more cool merch and giveaways with your help!
== SOCIAL MEDIA ==
facebook: / msttv
twitter: @tomboxcreations
twitch: twitch.tv/msttv_tombox
Join the Discord: / discord
== PARTNER ==
Support MST via TCGPLAYER: bit.ly/3pbH6HJ
Ewin Racing Gaming Chairs: Use Code "MSTTV" for 20% off at bit.ly/3u695JL - Hry
I just found out this weekend that baronne gets its negate back when banished by SP. Made my day.
Yes one of my favorite moves
Here's another tip: if you manage to flip it face down in defense, then flip it back on your next turn, you're able to use the omni negate again. Apparently, it was flipped summoned.
@@leemay3097It is flipped AND Special Summoned. This is important for effect that consider that (Ex. Floowandereeze Empen.)
@@leemay3097It's even more fun than that. If you manage to flip it on the same turn, you get to overcome the once-per-turn restriction
Only for the pop and reborn, not for the negate
On the last ruling, the player with Snatch Steal automatically gets disqualified because of using a banned card
I guess, but the point was the equip is like Rondo, but I dont wanna add noise to the field.
Tom knew that snatch steal was getting unbanned. He knew what he was doing.
@@ytfsrose1588 🫨 Youre right!
I can't believe that even though I already know very well that this game is unnecessarily complicated, it still doesn't fail to surprise me.
Game needs CONSISTENCY across the board
@ygolocals7672 Whats not consistent?
I would absolutely learn these if I could afford an S:P Little Knight
just pull it 4head
Jokes aside it’s still good to know so you don’t get cheered by an opponent using it
Yeah! Don't let those rich players get away with it!@@Daniel-qy4di @trulysavage9979
I didn’t think I would ever have one then I pulled one out of tournement entry packs.
Have faith bro. You’ll pull one from a pack ;)
Another great video, helps to get my head around these kind of rulings for sure.
2 Effect Monsters
If this card is Link Summoned using a Fusion, Synchro, Xyz, or Link Monster as material: You can target 1 card on the field or in either GY; banish it, also your monsters cannot attack directly this turn. When your opponent activates a card or effect (Quick Effect): You can target 2 face-up monsters on the field, including a monster you control; banish both until the End Phase. You can only use each effect of "S:P Little Knight" once per turn.
As a real ygo player, I'll always attack directly after banishing 2 of my opponent's monsters :)
2 Effect Monsters
If this card is Link Summoned using a Fusion, Synchro, Xyz, or Link Monster as material: You can target 1 card on the field or in either GY; banish it, also your monsters cannot attack directly this turn. When your opponent activates a card or effect (Quick Effect): You can target 2 face-up monsters on the field, including a monster you control; banish both until the End Phase. You can only use each effect of "S:P Little Knight" once per turn.
In the 5th scenario, you touched on end phase control effects like Enemy controller, but since the end phase has no chains and all end phase effects trigger in whatever order you want (for example being able to use Kozmo Tincan to search before emergency teleport makes it banish itself), couldn't you declare Change of Heart wearing off before declaring SP:Little Knight returning since it's all during end phase? Thanks for the great vid! :)
The banished card would still know Change of Heart stopped applying and switch control immeadeatly upon returning, if that makes sense.
The funny part was since I play psy frames many of these rulings listed work hand in hand with Zeta so I got all except for the one that Tombox couldn't even give a good explanation for correct
The main reasoning which again wasn't explained well is that the "also" conjuction in function is the same as "for the rest of this turn," in this context. This is because the restriction is an effect and effects cannot be applied retroactively - think Called By vs Shifter/Droll that has already resolved.
This is different to a condition, such as Branded Fusion which says "You cannot summon from the Extra Deck except Fusion Monsters the turn you activate this card." This is a pre-requisite condition for the card to be activated - no synchro/xyz/link/pendulum monsters have been summoned this turn and cannot be summoned afterwards.
SP on the other hand applies an effect to banish and "also," simultaneously applies an effect that monsters cannot attack directly. But monsters that have already attacked were not yet under that effect at the time they attacked.
You forgot the trap monster part. My understanding is the trap monster realizes it’s not supposed to be in the monster zone and sends itself to the grave, even shade brigandine.
Idk if this is what your saying but this weekend somebody banished my traptrix trap monster and it was allowed to come back. In the text it says “ not treated as a trap card”
it only has that effect when it was activated. When it returns to the field, it forgets it was special summoned as a monster, realizes it's not supposed to be in monster zone and goes to the grave. @@MugetsuKurosaki92
If the turn player resolves S:P Little Knight to banish their opponent's Mirrorjade and Mirrorjade's spite raigeki effect activates, the turn player is forced to return Little Knight to the field during the End Phase before Mirrorjade triggers (and wipes out the field) if both players pass priority during the End Phase as much as possible before the mandatory resolutions are forced, correct?
However if the Little Knight is activated on the opponent's turn, the scenario reverses where the Little Knight can 'dodge' the Mirrorjade's lingering effect by passing priority until the end of the end phase, correct?
At our regionals this weekend the first banish effect was ruled the other way. As in if you attacked directly you couldn’t resolve the effect on summon to banish.
If it was a separate sentence like in Prosperity/Extrav, then this restriction applies for the entire turn (before and after activation).
This case is a little weird because I remember some translations having "for the rest of this turn" unlike the TCG official version, even in the database. This could be a minor mistranslation like with the Altergeist cards originally.
Anyway, the card should work as Tombox said and not how it was ruled at your regionals (although I don't blame them since the wording justifies their action)
That is a mistake, it is not a condition… it is an effect. I had to triple check that one with fellow judges and experts, but it’s an effect not a condition. You should read it as for the rest of the turn to make it more simple
Thank you!
Dont let ppl cheat with the first effect of little knight. Too many times ive seen people use the banish and attack directly for game.
I was going to make a comment about this.
I have a question, if sp banish a a monster i control and a monster my opponent control when we arrive at the end phase in which order do we return the monsters ln the field ?
I have a question regarding the "return" part of sp.
I was going against a branded player and used my sp's effect to banish itself and a normal summoned ablaz. Branded player continues his turn and still ends with a mirrorjade and grangulnir on field as well as albion and alba lenatus in grave.
We proceed to end phase and realize that he has 2 trigger effects in grave But SP needs to resolve to return itself and the fallen of albaz.
The earlier example confirmed that sp could return even tho the albaz it banished was returned to deck via lubellion. But my questin is in what order would these effects activate/resolve?
Would Sp have to come back before the albion/alba lenatus trigger because the effect still needs to resolve? Or after because of the turn player priority?
This is just happened to me earlier today but ive been a little iffy on when exactly during the end phase sp returns and how that interacts with other end phase effects.
Excellent examples. Darn looks like I can't use these rulings against you next time at locals xd
Hi Tom,
About scenario 4/5, say I crack down and the target is booked, the ruling is the monster is now mine when re flipped.
What happens if S:P then banishes it and another target?
Just got an sp little knight, my thought with the attack was right, but for a different reason, my reason was sp wasnt on the field when the direct attacks where declared meaning you can use its effect...
The both ruling is strange. Thought same with the unchained traps vs happy memory. At ycs Dortmund they ruled that only the card you choose with memory is protected
If one of the cards banished leaves the banished zone before the end phase, I'm assuming it would still resolve as much as possible, correct?
Just pulled this card today out of a random pack from Gamestop. It's exciting to watch this video now as someone who will actually be able to play the card.
Hi tombox, great vid! One question, what happens if 2 monsters need to return to 1 field but the player only has 1 zone? Do none return? Does he choose which one returns and the other is sent to GY by mechanic?
I believe the answer is both players will get the card banished back in the end phase then the temp control effects also ends and because all the zones are full it goes to the graveyard.
Basically both cards go to their respective board sides then control of it is returned to whomever should be controlling it.
Where can i learn all the interaction ?
On question 4, is it the wording that says return them vs saying special summon them to the field I.E. Stardust dragon
During the resolution of s:p if one of the monster is flipped face down,does that monster be banished?
Does anyone know the ruling with S:P and Ohime summoned with Great Mikanko Ceremony?
So the Ceremony says that the Monster summoned with it returns to the hand at the opponent's End Phase. Does the Monster return to the hand if it was previously banished with S:Ps effect?
@msttv can you update this with a monster summoned off yeap vs sp little night?
at the last rule: Whats about change of heart? both ends in the endphase. so the turn player can decide witch effect resolves first. so, he can decide to keep the monster right?
The moment it comes back, it goes back to the opponent. Temporary control is no longer applying so you cannot keep it
I have a ruling question from Number 5. If S:P Little Knight targets a monster equipped with Snatch Steal and their opponent’s monster and banishes both, but then TCBOO /Gozen is activated afterwards, what happens during the end phase? If the opponent’s monsters all agree with the requirement for TCBOO/Gozen but yours do not, for that tiny little window of you controlling the opponent’s monster alongside S:P Little Knight, do you send the opponent’s monster to the graveyard before they can get it back?
The monster will automatically go to the GY before any actions can take place due to the nature of continuous effects, yes.
What about lingering temporary control cards like mind control?
What about kaijus vs sp?
Also burial from a different dimension
Hey tombox I am confused by your snatch steal example wouldn't the resummoned monster be a new card effectively since that is what happens to monsters that have soft once per turn effects or is it because it just says banish till the end phase that it implies that you are returning the exact same card
Because you are not resummoning, you are returning a card to the field.
Can S:P activate or resolve either of its effects while chaos hunter is on the field?
For question 2, would the same be applied to coach king giantrainer if you use the effect during mp2 after inflicting battle damage? Or would it be a condition, not an effect
"You cannot conduct your Battle Phase the turn you activate this effect. " Anything that mentions "The turn you activate this efffect" = condition
Thank you Mr. Box 📦
Question: it's my turn.... my opponent uses i:p to go into s:p banishing my card and resolving...... if I let's say change of heart it and summon more monsters.... since I'm now in control of their s:p.... do I fall under the restrictions of none of my monster can attack directly since it did activate this same turn or does that only apply to them since it resolved on their field before I took it?
Does the same ruling apply for like change of heart instead of snatch steal. So if I have little knight and I activate change of heart and something happens and I use little knight to banish the monster I took from change of heart and when end phase does monster come back to me or can I choose the order in which the cards resolve chain 1 little knight and chain 2 change of heart so change of heart doesn’t resolve cuz monster is not there and little knight resolves coming back to my field and I keep the monster
Yes, considering he mentioned it also applies to Mind Control and Enemy Controller. If it's a temporary control effect, it goes back to the opponent. There aren't really "chains" here. Change of Heart expires and S:P Little Knight returns the monsters. The monster that was taken by Change of Heart, no matter the order, goes "Oh, I belong to Player B, not you because Change of Heart is no longer applying," and heads across the table to its proper owner.
What if?
To the Mind Control part..
If we add to the Situation a Gozen that gets Flipped up after SPs effect resolves to banish ur Oppenents and the Monster u stolen.
In the end phase after Gozen is being already flipped face up, does the Monster still returns to ur field and if so does get send to the GY since its a different attribute than SP or does the fire Monster goes to ur field and right back to the original Controller?
Sent to GY before it can return the opponents side
How are the monsters placed back? this came up at the LCS. I was able to place Vanquish Soul razen back in the same column as SP and then used it's effect to destroy it. Do we both place them where we want? Do they go back to the same spots they were before? Does the Little Knight controller chose where the cards are placed? I asked a judge they weren't sure either and so I'm wondering.
You can choose the zone your monster comes back to, same for your opponent
@@nh6574 yeah but who choses first?
@@lucadenti7450 When choosing simultaneously turn player always goes first iirc
**** in instances where mothman triggers, the player that activated the effect to draw and discard resolves first no?
@@nh6574 This is correct. Always the turn player resolves first their cards.
A common practice (i guess due to how simulators work) with cards like "Dark World Dealings" is hiding what you discard until the opponent picks their own card. This is incorrect, since the turn player has to discard first, giving the opponent the opportunity to decide their own discard based on that knowledge.
So going off the reigeki break principle, cl1 little knight target my purely, cl2 noir attempt to spin back little knight, they won’t be able to banish my purely right Bc of the “both” specificaltion? Basically if little knight gets removed before she resolves her effect the effect doesn’t go through right?
If Purrely CL2 Noir spun back the one of hte Targets, (not little knight specifically) then Little Knight does resolve with noe effect.
Another question I ask is: when sp returns, does it have to come back in the same monster zone? Or I can choose where to place him.
You choose main monster zone.
For the condition vs effect
Would the condition be in the cost part of a card then?
My understanding is as follows:
It depends.
If it was a "applies before and after activation" restriction,
like Branded Fusion's "Fusion locked" restriction,
then it would be a separate sentence with no cost attached.
Because it comes after the ";" semicolon it is part of the effect. Also because it uses the "also" conjunction, the card attempts to resolve as much as possible, rather than resolving without effect.
If Little Knight read "If this card is Link Summoned using a Fusion, Synchro, Xyz, or Link Monster as material: You can target 1 card on the field or in either GY, also your monsters cannot attack directly this turn; banish it."
Then you would have to abide by the "no direct attacking" restriction as part of the cost.
But it says you can target monsters. How did you banish the mirror force in example dos?
In the Mirror Force example, he is using the On Summon effect from using a Link mosnter.
so I'm guessing the snatch steal ruling will also be the same for the mikankos rondo?
It was meant to be rondo… but I didn’t want to animate Mikanko board
That change control ruling is conflicting with me cause the monster left the field the original owner I would of thought gets the card back
Snatch Steal.. if my opponent plays this card, yes I call the judge for sure
Mikanko rondo
So if the target goes facedown via BoM will it still resolve and banish both? Usually when Targets go F/D it renders the eff null and void.
Face-downs will still get banished because S:P only needs to target a face-up monsters to activate; they do not need to be face-up to resolve.
If it said "banish both targets" instead of "banish both", then you would be correct in that it would lose its target.
the bom monster would be banished face down and then returned to the field later as well, you just can't target it.
S:P does not state the word "target" in the resolution (Ie it doesn't say banish both "targets" untl the endphase) if it did, then it will not banish. Since it only says Banish Both we continue to resolve.
I think you got that second ruling wrong. Transcode talker has a similar condition. If I special summon let’s divine incarnate before hand I cannot activate the effect of transcode talker.
If S:P said If this card is Link Summoned using a Fusion, Synchro, Xyz, or Link Monster as material: You can target 1 card on the field or in either GY; banish it. Your monsters cannot attack directly the turn you activate this effect. You would be correct but the wording just means after this effect resolves you cannot attacks directly for the rest of the turn.
What happens if I actívate SP effect to banish her and another ligth or dark monster my opponet controls and then I use branded regained to put the monster of my opponent in the deck and then draw a card, in the end phase SP comes back? or she stays banished because the other monster is not banished too?
SP will return to the field
If an extra deck monster that wasn't properly summoned is banished by sp, can their monster still return to the field on end phase, or will it stay banished?
What happens with s:p vs a monster that was summoned though purrleap? does it return to the extra deck or not in the endphase?
TLDR; it should stay on the field.
We had Borreload Dragon VS Farfa's (Interdimensional Matter Transporter) target that immediately gets sent to the GY after returning from the temporary banishment, but this has been reversed and the monster just returns and nothing else happens, so i assume Leap works the same way and the monster isn't returned to the extra.
Ok in case noº4, when both cards got banned they are remove from play right, so why the steal effect still working since they were removed from play and no longer stay in the field, if the resolution works like the explaned in video, that mean that even if the card is sent to the graveyard, that card goes to the graveyard of who take the control and no longer to the former owner, since the S:P does not especify about returning to the position where the was card before being ban, so the card should go back to the original owner.
Because in Case 4: The monster is under permanent control. There is no applied effect keeping them on the opponent's side. Its like someone uses monster reborn takes your Monster, then uses interdimensional transporter to temp banish it. Whose side of the field does it return to? The controller.
Rescue's reborn effect isn't temporary, its just literally a monster reborn. There is No effect that results in "Taking control of that monster"
All thre ever was is special summon a monster from a GY.
@@MSTTV I understand that part the target switched control permanantly, however if it resolves like this isn't it the same as saying that "if i use Monster reborn or rescue's!, even if the mosnter was sent to the greaveyard, that monster goes to my graveyard and not the original owner ?"
This resolution in Rescue/Reborn is kind tricky.
So sp banishment he comes back but the other monsters don’t ?
About question n.5, would you mind to describe how that resolves if during endphase: a.TCBOO is face-up; b. Rivalry Is face up.
Thanks a lot
When you return the monster and the monster cannot be on the field? Send it to the GY after it goes to the side that doesn’t meet the effects of the floodgates.
What about SP vs SP? Say you target another monster your opponent controls and they chain their SP targeting your own SP. Will my SP still banish the opponents monster? I’m assuming it’s like the raigeki break situation but just double checking
Your SP won’t resolve the effect to banish in that case (edit)
@@MSTTVthank you 🙏
Ruling 1) if you bought one, you are part of the problem
Been abusing firewall dragon with sp little knight every turn bounce and banish lol
So if I steal my opponent’s S:P off of F0 Draco Future, and use her effect banishing herself, do I get to keep her when she comes back ???
To my knowledge yes.
This isn’t temporary control.
@@MSTTV welp, I screwed myself last week at locals then. Thanks for the nugget of wisdom Mr. Tombox!
The condition gets applied with the effect. Which means the effect activates, then the "cannot attack directly this turn" applies on resolution.
This is different from something like Rite of Aramesir, which has a condition preventing the activation of.
3/5 that’s why I refuse to become a judge
If i act sp, banishing 2 of my monsters, but during the end phase i only have 1 free monster zone, they both (sp and the banished monster) go to the gy right? Also, if i have redoer and sp coming back during the ep but only 1 free monster zone, i can choose which i can return back ? Thank you
Idk about the first one, but you can choose when their effects resolve during the end phase so you can resolve redoer first to summon it back so you can choose.
SP has an official ruling with Kaiser Coliseum regarding a similar scenario (tho not quite the same), based on it it seems like one would go to GY and the other to the field.
Makes sense since the effect is to banish "both", but it doesnt say "return both", which is why the floo interaction works the way it works
While both will attempt to return at the same time, you have to select zones individually (where they will be placed). Since this is an activated effect it will try to resolve as much as possible, so your first choice will stay on the field while the second banished monster will be sent to the GY by game mechanics.
About Redoer + SP, you may resolve them in the sequence you prefer.
Tombox, ruling question for you. You mentioned in your Branded Chimera video that if your Chimera Fusion monsters have their effects negated, their name change is negated too. So cards associated with it couldn’t activate. Wouldn’t the same be applied to Visas Amritara? If hit by Imperm, wouldn’t the name change also be negated?
Not Tombox but AFAIK yes, it would be negated.
@@nh6574 see I thought so. But I’m also no judge and my opponents come at me with “it’s a condition, not an effect” and it gets confusing
@@Harrowing999Yugipedia is a good tool for that. It lists the types of effects the card has under "effect types". For Amritara it says that the name change effect is a continuous effect, not a condition.
Not bringing up the updated TTT vs I:P into S:P ruling I see 👀
it hasnt been officially updated for tcg yet
Because its OCG not TCG
My understanding is TCG almost never gets rulings updates (last one i know of being in 2021) and most TCG judges go by OCG rulings whenever there isnt an official TCG ruling, which is 98%+ of the time.
If I'm not mistaken, the very reason this interaction has previously been ruled the way it has been was because of OCG rulings, not because there was ever a TCG ruling indicating how to deal with control switch scenarios.
With the raigeki break on sp, it wouldn’t resolve either way, does not matter if it sais them or both, because it targets for cost, and thus making it fizzle because if a card targets for cost, the target has to stay on its original location until the point of resolution in orther to resolve properly. It works the same as lulu target chuche, chain cosmic. It’s does not resolve because it targets for cost, not as part of the effect because there is an “;” before the banishing part.
Question with the little knight direct attack, on xtra HERO Cross Crusader it has the same wording to stop you Summoning none hero monsters that turn, why does cross crusaders restriction come in to play, but little knights doesn't?
Little Knight's is part of the effect while Cross Crusader is a separate restriction. Basically you need to look out for something like "you cannot do X the turn you *activate* this card('s effects)"
Cause Robina effect banish it self , similar as the raigeki break destroy the little knight..
No because the temp removal is caused by little knight , but why robina doesn’t come back because during removal it removed itself
Thanks
Dang. The opponent really set a mirror force, and let the opponent swing with Linkuriboh and Airlifter.
What a misplay.
SP ruling wouldn’t have been needed if the opponent just activated their mirror force.
I legitimately do not understand why in the 3rd example you cant banish hita becsuse you cant banish both, but in the first example you can being back s:p even though you didnt banish both.
You must successfully be able to remove both from the field til the end of the turn. So its considered 1 action. If you were able to apply the effect, the monster is "banished til the end phase" and not just banished
@@MSTTV So in the first example, if S:P Little Knight's text instead read banish both face-down until the end of the turn, would the lingering effect of Robina prevent you from banishing both, and subsequently prevent Robina from coming back?
@@thegreatbambino3358 applying the effect causes robina to remove itself by its own effect, but we were able to remove them. Both monsters technically are affected by S:P.
Therefore we were able to apply the effect. Anything that happens to the monster post effect doesn’t change that S:P successfully resolved her effect to banish til the end phase.
However, there were a few parts that got overridden during and post resolution.
Robina’s self banishing is applied only when it is removed from field, it technically upon being removed applied its own effect while the monster banished by S:P still got banished til the end phase.
Therefore, the owners monster returns because it fully applied S:P’s effect, and the Robina overrides S:P banish via its own Banish while resolving the effect of S:P, so it got removed by S:P but got rerouted via its own effect and stays banished.
Does that make sense?
TLDR, if the monster can be affected and be removed from field we will apply as much as possible and care about the overrides after.
Only when the monster cannot be removed (cannot be banished or unaffected) or is already gone before resolution would the effect fail to apply the effect.
Some food for thought: If you banish your Chaos Angel with one or both of it's additional effects, it will have those same effects because it remembers how it was summoned.
For chaos angel it will remember, but chaos angel can’t get banished with both… as it would be unaffected…
@@MSTTV It's why I mentioned your own Chaos Angel, if banished with your S:P Little Knight. The unaffected is only by your opponent's monster effects.
I dont need tomlearn little night rulings because no-one i know is financially iressponsible enough to spend £100 on it. Im gunna say this for the 100th time but everyone shoukd just stip agreeing to pay these outlandish prices, eventually the scam artist that call them selves vendors will have to proce things more reasonably. And before people start jumping to defend these vendors and their bottom line, allow to point out that no-one has the god given right to profit or even break even on a case.
you don’t understand simple economics if you think it’s vendors are price gouging and set market price. it’s literally supply and demand setting its price, everyone WANTS and is WILLING to pay absurd prices for this card because it’s a competitively ground breaking card. if you’re gonna get mad at anyone, get mad at konami for not printing a ground breaking card in common, rare or super.
It doesnt matter who is right or wrong, we all lose at the end of the day with these unnecessarily complicated card texts
A card has to have as many effects as The Winged Dragon of Ra did in the anime to be worth playing anymore.
At least she's not a Pendulum!
I got the first question wrong like a bozoooo
LETS HELP TOMBOX GET TO 100K, HE DEFINITELY DESERVES IT!!! 🎉🎉🎉
Isn't ruling 1 and 3 the same thing?
Another effect cause 1 of the targets to move?
So why little knight could resolve in ruling 1 and can't resolve in ruling 3?
No because robina banished itself at the resolution of SPs effect where was raigeki break sp was destroyed removing the target thus removing both did not occur
Thanks
S:P is so broken
completely busted card now i see why its behind huge paywall
Sp using the banish in mp2 after attacking is legit aids and should be changed
Little knight is a god card..
how does someone become a judge? i would love to ruin peoples day with my rulings LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
What’s ur master duel name so I can avoid you 😂😂😂 don’t want to get roasted on turn 1
i pulled an SP and i wanna trade so if anyone is interested pls comment!! i need yTCG player friends
Unless the card says sp summon them back to their owners field the monster will always go back to whoever controlled it last . (Perma control)
Example Zileantis if you kaiju the opponents and then use zileantis effect to banish all monster the kaiju will go back to your field where as with little knight it doesn’t
Day 165 of waiting for new floow support. Knowledge is power, it can and will take you far. Stay educated and learn always my kings🐧
can u speak louder? sometimes you speak so low I can't hear what ur saying
Im still not on the attack directly ruling because the completely nulifies the text if thats the case. There is no reason to make it say that if it doesnt have to abide by its own effect.
Because, it’s not a condition. It’s an effect.
If it was a condition it would just say, you cannot activate this effect if you attacked directly. Usually on a separate line too.
This one uses an also conjunction to join it, 100% making it an effect.
You can also check database, the OCG original card text, ask a judge.
@@MSTTV which is why there is no reason to have it even say that in the first place if it doesn't have to abide by its own effect. This is like another "because konami said so"
read things like Transcode Talker or Lava Golem and see how much the text/wording changes when “also” is added. If it said “-banish it. Your monsters cannot attack the turn you activate this effect.” it would be different than how it’s stated in the card.
I still don’t understand what you mean by the S:P can still attack directly after the first effect resolves. Doesn’t make any sense even after you broke it down lol. I understand you can choose whether or not to activate the banish effect, but I don’t see how if you activate that effect that you can ignore it’s stall condition for using said effect. Hell why even have rules in this game at this point 😂
Its an effect. NOT a condition.
@@MSTTV I went over the MP2 part of that discussion, my bad 😂 I thought this was prior to battle but you are correct in regards to MP2 being able to banish due to the wording. Apologies for the confusion