Talk:Contact Fusion

This is the talk page for discussing the page, Contact Fusion.
This page is for discussing how to improve the page. For general discussion and comments, use the general discussion forum. To ask about rulings or how cards work, use the ruling queries forum. To get help with building a Deck, use the Deck help forum. Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.	Please try to Be polite Assume good faith Be welcoming

Special Summon from GY?

I have noticed that new user decided to removing the line about them be able to Special Summoning from the Graveyard - therefore treated them as NOMI. So I just ask here to be sure if that is true? --iFredCat 21:32, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

It depends on the fusion monsters. If it says, "Must first be special summoned (from your extra deck) by.....", then it can be summoned from the graveyard if special summoned properly. I don't know any fusion monsters that use contact fusion that are nomi, so I believe the user is wrong. Neos01 (talk • contribs) 22:01, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, Neos01, I was just be sure to know this point. I even asked him on his own Talk Page, but he didn't respond back so that's obviously vandalism. --iFredCat 22:18, September 9, 2012 (UTC)

I didn't respond because I had to deal with a personal issue after editing it. The summary that was intended to go with it was not that they're nomi, but that the second line conflicts with what the article 'fusion monsters' read. It says you can not special the cards unless they are summoned with polymerization or read 'this summon is treated as a fusion summon'. Since they do not contain this line it would be assumed that they were not fusion summoned, and therefore did not meet the conditions for fusions to be summoned by game mechanics. Either the article about fusion monsters or contact fusions needs to be written to resolve this, as simply being written as semi-nomi does not change the mechanics of the game itself. (Armytile is the only one that uses semi-nomi phrasing as well, the rest saying you can't special them from the extra or at all except by that specific way)PainfulElegy (talk • contribs) 01:11, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

Don't forget that Polymerization's text also doesn't say 'this Special Summon is treated as a Fusion Summon'. This is because Polymerization (Or 'Fusion' in the OCG) is the only card that truly Fusion Summons a Fusion Monster. Other cards, like Miracle Synchro Fusion, Dragon's Mirror, Overload Fusion, etc... are alternative special methods to fusion summon specific types of Fusion Monsters, and that's why they must have the text 'this special summon is treated as a fusion summon' or else they would work just like cards like Summoner of Illusions or Cyber-Stein. Fusion Monsters that don't use Polymerization and instead use Contact Fusion treat their own special summon as a fusion summmon because their special summon is the only real way to summon them. Should Miracle Contact have had the text 'this Special Summon is treated as a Fusion Summon', then the card could have been a truly alternate method to fusion summon a specific type of Contact Fusion Monster, in this case, the Elemental HERO Neos' fusions.

Kentaru Z (talk • contribs) 01:59, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

However, Polymerization is the only fusion spell card that does not specify that it is a fusion summon. In any case the 'Fusion' article needs to clarify that contact fusion is a proper fusion summon and 'Contact Fusion' article needs the same alteration if this is the case. The ruling issue should also be presented to konami as well for a clarified ruling on whether contact fusion is an actual proper fusion due to a lack of errata on cards with it, as it seems to be a jump in logic made only because of the way Armityle is worded in comparison to the others. Also, The reason Miracle Contact could not have 'this is treated as a fusion summon' is because the neos monsters are NOMI, and you're summoning it ignoring it's summoning conditions anyways, and would actually be a strike against contact fusion being considered fusion (due to not having that line of text to clarify that it is emulating a fusion summon). These cards that have alternate, specified ways of summoning should be following the pattern of non poly fusions, since it affects GB and Armytile. PainfulElegy (talk • contribs) 03:56, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

Take a look at "Elemental HERO Chaos Neos" first line - Must be first Special Summoned (from your Extra Deck) by shuffling the above cards you control into the Deck. (You do not use "Polymerization"). - It made each Contact Fusion monster be able to summoning back onto the field without requiring "Polymerization" as the method. You're correct about naturally of Fusion Monster, but the Fusion Monster that do contact fusion don't do that - they are unique compare to the normal Fusion Monster. It's like "Shooting Quasar Dragon" compare to "Stardust Dragon". Former required all Material to be Synchro Monster(s), while latter do not (flexible). And in anime, "Shooting Quasar Dragon" was summon via Limit Over Accel Synchro - like Contact Fusion, it was unique kind of Summon. You traveled through space to gain the monster from nowhere. "Contact Fusion" don't required Polymerization and you gain a monster just by combining two or more monsters into one (and shuffled/banished the materials, regards theme). --iFredCat 11:38, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

"... However, Polymerization is the only fusion spell card that does not specify that it is a fusion summon..." that's the first thing I said... also the Fusion page does list the Contact Fusion as a proper way to fusion summmon a Fusion Monster. And the Contact Fusion page says and I quote: "... is a different type of Fusion used by... ", it does say it is a different kind of Fusion Summon. Also Elemental HERO Neos' Fusions are Semi-Nomi, not Nomi. Their text says: Must be first Special Summoned (from your Extra Deck) by shuffling the above cards you control into the Deck. (You do not use "Polymerization")., if the text was something like this: This card cannot be Special Summoned except by shuffling the above cards you control into the Deck; then you can Special Summon this card from your Fusion Deck (You do not use "Polymerization")., then they would have been Nomis. A similar kind of text was present in the Fusion Monsters XY-Dragon Cannon, XZ-Tank Cannon and YZ-Tank Dragon and that made them Nomi monsters, then an errata was made to correct the mistake and leave them in the same condition as all other Contact Fusion monsters. You must not think about them as being the same as common Fusion Monsters, because they are not, they have their own set of rules by themselves.

Kentaru Z (talk • contribs) 13:01, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

Then I have one thing left to ask. Is this based on rulings konami has given, or is this assumptions we are making based on the wording of cards (which it sounds like it is)? Because if the latter, I still think someone should be sending this into konami for clarification, rather than assume that contact fusions are considered fusion summons, as this is a somewhat important card text (similar to how we still work under the assumption of the UDE ruling for ALO and Harpie Lady cards, which does need to be revalidated). Assuming the negative in a situation where we can not be sure tends to be better, because then we don't have people misplaying under false assumptions. Also, I wouldn't refer to them as Nomi in this condition, I would refer to them as 'Mechanically Semi-Nomi that can not meet the initial condition', and shooting quasar is a terrible example, because the difference between it and normal synchros is already printed on the card (it's not treated as any kind of special synchro summon because it's just a regular synchro with more specific materials). This is a case of discussing whether contact fusion is implicitly the same as actual fusion, since fusion monsters are the only ones that have the ability to be summoned from extra by their own effects, (excluding constellar ptolemys messier 7, which is probably how contact fusions should be worded):PainfulElegy (talk • contribs) 13:16, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

Not just "Constellar Ptolemys Messier 7", but also "Number C32: Shark Drake Vice" and "Number C39: Utopia Ray", they also overlaying their respective Number (without Chaos/C in their name) rather than just overlaying WATER/LIGHT Materials. But I agreed with you for that point - why Fusion Monster if they do not meet the certain condition? --iFredCat 13:41, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

The thing is, the problem solving text was meant to make issues like this easier to understand. All contact fusion monsters say "Must first be special summon by......(you do not use polymerization)". According to the rules, any monster that has the "Must FIRST be special summoned" clause are able to be special summoned from the graveyard if they were special summoned correctly. This is stated in the "Special summon-only monster" page on the wiki. If it was "Must be fusion summoned and CANNOT be special summoned by other ways", that is when they can't be summoned any other way. Also, some fusion monsters aren't fusion summoned, like Neo spacian Marine dolphin or the masked heroes. They are not treated as being fusion summoned when summoned from the extra deck. Just because they are fusion monsters doesn't mean they are fusion summoned when summoned from the extra deck. In this case, I don't believe contact fusion is treated as a fusion summon, it is just a phrase coined by Judai in the anime when he used this method with his neo spacians. In real life, I believe it is just an alternate summoning method for a fusion monster and not really an official game term. Neos01 (talk • contribs) 13:58, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

I will answer your question PainfulElegy, and the answer is yes, this is based on rulings Konami has given, they are not assumptions as you want to believe. Besides everything that Neos01 has already said, I would like to add that in the last Yu-Gi-Oh! Videogames, by Konami itself, the Contact Fusion is treated as a kind of Fusion Summon. This is because every time a Contact Fusion happens a special animation is played showing the Fusion Material Monters "fuse" into the Fusion Monster, and this animation looks like almost the same as the one played for traditional Fusion Summons, BUT, that is only in the case of Elemental Hero Neos' Fusions. In the case of the Gladiator Beasts, Chimeratech Fortress Dragon, Armityle and the VWXYZ Fusions, they are probably treated as just another special summon, because they lack the special animation of the monsters fusing. But they can still be special summoned from the graveyard or the banished zone if they were properly special summoned first anyway. Also the term Contact Fusion does exist and it is in the flavor text of Elemental HERO Neos, making it an official term in both TCG and OCG.

Kentaru Z (talk • contribs) 18:24, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

Like Kentaru said, take a look at the article we are discussing on - it's focus on "Elemental HERO Neos", not other kind of monsters you wished to fixing on. If you wish to make it more clearly comparing to the other Contact Fusion Monster(s), I will go ahead and add the line to that of what you had removing recently. --iFredCat 18:53, September 10, 2012 (UTC)

"Contact Fusion (コンタクト融合 Kontakuto Yuugou), sometimes referred to as "Fusion Tag", is a different type of Fusion used by Elemental HERO Neos, VWXYZ, or by Gladiator Beasts, where the Fusion Material Monsters are sent from the field to the Deck, and "Polymerization" is not used." The article is focusing on more than just neos and his fusions. Neos only happens to be the prominent example in the article. And I will reiterate, this ruling does pertain to every contact fusion monster (especially since the errata from their original text which had them labeled as true NOMI, without clarification that this is a fusion summon). I will still stand by the need for someone who has an understanding of japanese to attempt to send this to the official OCG rulings site to clarify.PainfulElegy (talk • contribs) 03:20, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

I seriously don't understand where you're trying to get with this discussion anymore. Are you trying to prove that Contact Fusion monsters are all NOMI? Or it is to just prove that their special summon is not a Fusion Summon? The errata of cards is made to correct and/or ease the understanding the effect of a card. Even if the original text made them NOMI monsters, which is actually not the case because I just doubled checked the erratas of all Contact Fusion Monsters and the only ones who where for some time NOMI monsters, during their first errata, were the XYZ Fusions (And I think that Konami turn them back into Semi-NOMI during their second errata, because they realize that the XYZ Fusions' Special Summon was a type of Contact Fusion, don't forget that the XYZ Monsters came before Elemental HERO Neos and the concept of Contact Fusion). The Contact Fusion Monsters can be special summoned from the graveyard if they were properly special summoned from the extra deck first, this is official by Konami, again a mayor proof are all the Yu-Gi-Oh! videogames, specially the last ones which has the last erratas of the cards. For example in Over the Nexus, you can special summon from the Graveyard all the different types of Contact Fusion monsters, except the ones which text specifies that they can't be special summoned from the Graveyard, like XYZ-Dragon Cannon, but they can still be special summoned from the Banished Zone.

Kentaru Z (talk • contribs) 04:48, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Like Kentaru said, Konami just mistook their lore back then. They are current correcting the lore and made the XYZ Puzzle the only Contact Fusion Monsters to not be able to Special Summoned ever after their Contact Fusion Summoning successful (except for "XYZ-Dragon Cannon"). So cut the crap and accept that they are correcting right now. --iFredCat 13:07, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

This needs to be in the forums. The talk page of an article is to discuss the article itself ----SharkTenjo 13:13, September 11, 2012 (UTC)

Believe so, because that user who tried to prove it seemed to get offtopic lately. --iFredCat 13:30, September 11, 2012 (UTC)