Forum:Curse of darkness conflict with old ruling

I notice a conflict with this card on 2 of tcg previously offical rulling.

"Curse of Darkness" inflicts 1000 damage right after the Spell Card is activated, not when it resolves. If the Spell Card's activation is negated however, such as with "Magic Jammer", then no damage is inflicted because the activation was negated.Supernickid (talk • contribs) 01:20, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

"Curse of Darkness" does not form a new chain and cannot be chained to. You can chain to the Spell Card itself, after "Curse of Darkness" inflicts its 1000 damage.Supernickid (talk • contribs) 01:20, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

So which one is correct and which one is incorrect?Supernickid (talk • contribs) 01:16, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Why does it ad the scrollbar to the two different rulings that I past from this site?Supernickid (talk • contribs) 01:19, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Because you add in space between the left margin of the edit window and the word. To indent just add a ":" in front of the word/group of words you want to indent. Also, what's the conflict? Both of those rulings seem perfectly fine from where I'm standing. --Dark Ace SP (Talk) 02:16, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

You pasted in some whitespace. That causes it to scroll. As for the 1000 damage infliction window, this is a curious case of game mechanics; if the Spell Card's activation is negated, the damage is deemed to not have been inflicted. However, if another card simply chains an unrelated effect (including one that just negates just the effect of the Spell Card), then the 1000 damage is inflicted as usual. The two don't contradict each other, moreso they describe what happens in each scenario. Scenario #1 applies when a card effect negates the Spell Card's activation, Scenario #2 only describes what happens when any other non-activation negating card is chained to the Spell Card in question.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 02:18, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

The 2nd ruling says you can only chain a card after "curse of darkness" already did damage.

The 1st ruling if you chain a negate activation, you do not receive damage.

The first ruling cannot be right if the 2nd one is correct: example

1. I activated a spell card I receive damage from curse of darkness, then my opponent chain a card that does not negated the activation.

example 2: will try to applied rules 1 when rules 2 is correct.

I actived a spell card I receive damage from curse of darkness, my opponent chain a negated activation of spell card *after the damage* his receive, since the card activation is negated I do not receive damage, to late the damage has already been done so it cannot be undone.Supernickid (talk • contribs) 11:25, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

• to be able to follow the 2nd ruling*Supernickid (talk • contribs) 11:25, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

This is why I said it's a case of game mechanics. Both are legitimate scenarios, and the course of what happens depends on the card being chained.--TwoTailedFox (My Talk Page) 12:01, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

I will make example base on what you said:

Example 1: I Activated a spell card Curse of darkness wait for a chain, a card that negated the activation of spell card, I do not received damage because the spell card's activation is negated( this example follows rules 1, both does not follow rules 2)

Example 2 : I activated a spell card Curse of darkness wait for a chain, my opponent activated imperial order in chain to my spell card, after imperial order resolve but before the spell card that has it's effect negated resolve the damage from curse of darkness is applied.(Rules 2 is broken to make sense with rules 1)

Video game example: Video game will try to place rules 1 with rules 2.

I activated a spell card, receive damage from curse of darkness, now my opponent is allowed to chain, he chain Magic jamer negated the activation of my spell card and my spell card is sent to the graveyard, game freeze, because the game try to applied rules 1 after already applying rules 2, so the game did not know what to do.

the possibility of a fix in future game would be the two example I give above the video game example however it would break rules 2, it is the only way to make sense out of it.Supernickid (talk • contribs) 12:44, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

When a Spell is activated, ask both players if they would like to use an eff to negate it or not. If not, inflict damage. Simple.--Lê (talk • contribs) 13:14, July 31, 2013 (UTC)

Also, Imperial Order doesn't stop the activation, it stops the effects. So Curse of Darkness will inflict the 1000 damage, even if you used Imperial Order to stop the effect. --Dark Ace SP (Talk) 13:18, July 31, 2013 (UTC)