|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jevan R. H. Divinitive Crew
|
 Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2008 11:20 am
 Keep your eyes peeled because soon the new structure deck "Zombie World" will soon be released. It will contain the powerful "Zombie World" Field Spell Card which will turn all the monsters on the entire field and Graveyard into Zombies. Also "Shrink" has been updated. -- If “Shrink” affects a monster whose original ATK is set by its effect when it is Summoned, like “Maju Garzette”, “Chimeratech Overdragon” or “Megarock Dragon”, that monster’s ATK will become 0, and remain 0 even after the effect of “Shrink” wears off. -- If “Shrink” affects a monster with ATK that varies due to its Continuous Effect, like “Gren Maju Da Eiza” or “King of the Skull Servants”, that monster’s ATK will be halved. If its ATK changes due to its own effect in the same turn, recalculate the effect of "Shrink" based on the new original ATK. When the effect of “Shrink” wears off, that monster’s ATK will be calculated as normal. The following ruling has been added to "Gradius' Option": -- ”Shrink” has no effect on “Gradius’ Option”.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 15, 2008 10:51 am
Shrink halves the original attack of all monsters. Monsters that gain attack due to an effect are obviously not original, but modified. In short, they changed the rulings os Shrink despite all common knowledge in its text, therefore making it bogus. Link plz? surprised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jevan R. H. Divinitive Crew
|
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 8:46 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:41 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 16, 2008 2:53 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Oct 21, 2008 6:32 am
Wow. I think I'll actually deck shrinks now. I usually prefer Enemy Controller, but now that there are more uses for that card it might be worth it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 23, 2008 4:14 pm
Saniichi Wow. I think I'll actually deck shrinks now. I usually prefer Enemy Controller, but now that there are more uses for that card it might be worth it. Shrinks became good tech once Stardust was released, actually.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:07 pm
I have a big question regarding Shrink
monster like Goggle Golem who's effect turn the original attack of this card into 2100 while it previous to that is 1500, let say they use it on me at the begging of the turn but then I use Golem's effect to turn its original attack tio 2100 how does that work? Do my 1500 remain cut in half or does my 2100 get cut in half?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:13 pm
Renton Noah I have a big question regarding Shrink monster like Goggle Golem who's effect turn the original attack of this card into 2100 while it previous to that is 1500, let say they use it on me at the begging of the turn but then I use Golem's effect to turn its original attack tio 2100 how does that work? Do my 1500 remain cut in half or does my 2100 get cut in half? once gemini summoned, the golem will change his 1500 atk to 2100, so you halve the 2100.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2008 2:16 pm
Dracomancer Barrelex Renton Noah I have a big question regarding Shrink monster like Goggle Golem who's effect turn the original attack of this card into 2100 while it previous to that is 1500, let say they use it on me at the begging of the turn but then I use Golem's effect to turn its original attack tio 2100 how does that work? Do my 1500 remain cut in half or does my 2100 get cut in half? once gemini summoned, the golem will change his 1500 atk to 2100, so you halve the 2100. thank you
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 01, 2009 6:55 pm
Would ruryoku work like that as well on gren maju da eiza?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 12:56 am
Mr_dragon Would ruryoku work like that as well on gren maju da eiza? Ruryoku only halves the ATK, not the Original ATK. Shrink would make Gren Maju Da Eiza half, Ruryoku would make it half of it's current ATK. Copy Cat would have 0 ATK with Shrink, and half ATK with Ruryoku.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jevan R. H. Divinitive Crew
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:01 am
Jevan R. H. Divinitive Mr_dragon Would ruryoku work like that as well on gren maju da eiza? Ruryoku only halves the ATK, not the Original ATK. Shrink would make Gren Maju Da Eiza half, Ruryoku would make it half of it's current ATK. Copy Cat would have 0 ATK with Shrink, and half ATK with Ruryoku. Gren Maju Da Eiza has a continuous effect, not one that would give it a set original attack. It would be unaffected by both Shrink and Ruryoku, or in the case stated above, the attack would be halved, and its effect would recalculate, returning the attack to normal after Shrink or Ruryoku resolve. Either way, the end result is that its attack is unaffected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 1:27 am
Sieg Selwyn Jevan R. H. Divinitive Mr_dragon Would ruryoku work like that as well on gren maju da eiza? Ruryoku only halves the ATK, not the Original ATK. Shrink would make Gren Maju Da Eiza half, Ruryoku would make it half of it's current ATK. Copy Cat would have 0 ATK with Shrink, and half ATK with Ruryoku. Gren Maju Da Eiza has a continuous effect, not one that would give it a set original attack. It would be unaffected by both Shrink and Ruryoku, or in the case stated above, the attack would be halved, and its effect would recalculate, returning the attack to normal after Shrink or Ruryoku resolve. Either way, the end result is that its attack is unaffected. My sources are above, let's see yours. ^_^
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jevan R. H. Divinitive Crew
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2009 9:22 am
Jevan R. H. Divinitive Sieg Selwyn Jevan R. H. Divinitive Mr_dragon Would ruryoku work like that as well on gren maju da eiza? Ruryoku only halves the ATK, not the Original ATK. Shrink would make Gren Maju Da Eiza half, Ruryoku would make it half of it's current ATK. Copy Cat would have 0 ATK with Shrink, and half ATK with Ruryoku. Gren Maju Da Eiza has a continuous effect, not one that would give it a set original attack. It would be unaffected by both Shrink and Ruryoku, or in the case stated above, the attack would be halved, and its effect would recalculate, returning the attack to normal after Shrink or Ruryoku resolve. Either way, the end result is that its attack is unaffected. My sources are above, let's see yours. ^_^ Your source above is from which I made that statement, also from the wording of the card. Jevan R. H. Divinitive -- If “Shrink” affects a monster with ATK that varies due to its Continuous Effect, like “Gren Maju Da Eiza” or “King of the Skull Servants”, that monster’s ATK will be halved. If its ATK changes due to its own effect in the same turn, recalculate the effect of "Shrink" based on the new original ATK. When the effect of “Shrink” wears off, that monster’s ATK will be calculated as normal. Do you even understand what that means? You're to automatically recalculate the attack of the monster with its own continuous effect from the new original attack. "This card's ATK and DEF are each equal to the number of your removed from play cards x 400". That is a constant continuous effect. If it were a set attack that would bring its attack to 0 forever, like Montage Dragon, then it would be more like "When this card is summoned, its attack becomes the number of your removed from play cards x 400", As also shown above in your post. It's simple wording and common sense. Gren Maju Da Eiza has an attack of "?". And from your ruling, Shrink brings its attack to 0, then the attack is recalculated from its own effect, returning the attack to normal. It does nothing in the end. Another example. You have Buster Blader and your opponent has a total of 7 Dragon-type monsters on their field and graveyard. An attack total of (original)2600+(continuous effect gain)3500 = 6100. Your opponent plays Shrink. That would cut the original attack in half, making it 1300. (New original attack)1300+(continuous effect gain)3500 = 4800. Same principle. The only difference is, since Gren Maju Da Eiza's original attack is ?, the entire attack is brought to 0, and then you recalculate its attack again for its own continuous effect.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
