Forum:Orichalcos VS Stardust

Hello there. I'm not sure of a ruling. If I play The Seal of Orichalcos while I have a Stardust Dragon on the field, and I activate Stardust's effect, what will be negated : the activation of the Seal or the effect that destroys special summoned monsters? Because of the writing : "When this card is activated: Destroy all Special Summoned monsters you control" (it's not the activation of the Seal itself that destroys the special summoned monsters), I think it's the second choice, but I want to be absolutely sure before playing this combo in a duel. Thanks for the answer. Takame9 (talk • contribs) 14:24, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

the effect will be negated, not the activation, because if the activation would be negated, the monsters didn't even have a chance to be destroyed by the seal.D-range (talk • contribs) 14:51, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

Stardust Dragon says that it negates the activation of a card, so wouldn't the activation be negated? 2.126.180.53 (talk) 15:41, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

no, stardust can negate effects of continuous spell and traps, as long as the effect can be chained against. so this also counts for field spellsD-range (talk • contribs) 16:04, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

Super. So it means that Stardust will come back in the end phase ant will have 3000 ATK (if the opponent don't have a setted MST or else). Works with Prime Material Dragon too. Thanks. Takame9 (talk • contribs) 15:15, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

Why the ATK of "Stardust Dragon" will be 3000? Won't "Stardust" negate and destroy the "Seal"? --Missign0 (talk • contribs) 17:53, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

he will, unless you activate the seals effect of not being destroyed, since not the activation but an effect is activated that is negated. — This unsigned comment was made by D-range (talk • contribs)

I understand that, but what I was thinking is:

• "Stardust" negates the effect of the "Seal" that destroy monsters;
• The "Seal" tries to protect itself from the destruction of "Stardust";
• The "Seal" will still be destroyed because its effects was negated by "Stardust";
• Unless, even if one of the effects of the card is negated (in this case, the Destroy all your Special Summoned monsters), it can use the others effects. If it is the case, then you're right.

--Missign0 (talk • contribs) 18:09, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

as far as i'm concirned(don't know how to spell this since i'm dutch) and as far as i know, the other effects will still work since only the activation of THAT partibulair effect has been activated.D-range (talk • contribs) 18:18, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

I think the same. Only the effect that desroy is negated, not the entire card. So The Seal can use its effect to avoid being destroyed. What a nice combo ^^ Takame9 (talk • contribs) 21:16, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

D-range, it's concern, with an E in the place of an "I".

Takame; The "Seal" will still be destroyed because its effects was negated by "Stardust" - Read that line again and again till you realize how it work like "Magic Jammer" was to the Spell Card's action. --iFredCat 21:19, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

Stardust Dragon will only negate that one Trigger Effect, it will not negate other effects.

It's the same as what happens when you use Divine Wrath on Red Nova Dragon.

-Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 23:16, October 3, 2012 (UTC)

The trigger-like effect of Orichalcos (to destroy special summoned monsters) is part of a chain (as stated on the page Trigger-like Effect). Would it be in the chain when the field spell is activated? Or after the card resolves, and the trigger-like effect starts a new chain? In the first scenario, Stardust chained to that would destroy the Seal because it hasn't resolved yet and it doesn't have its continuous effect to not be destroyed right?--99.229.110.222 (talk) 01:55, October 4, 2012 (UTC)

First the seal is activated, then, if no one wants to do anything, like Dark Bribe the seal, a new chain starts with the destruction of the seals effect as chain link 1. you all know the rest.D-range (talk • contribs) 04:41, October 4, 2012 (UTC)

• There was a misinterpretation of the effect type. It's not a Trigger effect. It's an effect that applies when you place the card onto the field, the same as Ancient Forest.

The TCG lore has the effect in the middle of the card, so I didn't expect it to be like that. The OCG lore much clearer.

This means Stardust is actually negating the activation of the card (not that trigger effect), since it is negating the activation, the Seal is not on the field yet and its other Continuous Effects have not had the chance to apply. The Seal cannot save itself and will be destroyed.

-Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 23:36, October 4, 2012 (UTC)

To Falzar's comment, he's supporting Missign0's prove. If it's negated, then it never been on the field. Just closely identity to Black Rose Dragon vs. Solemn Warning/Judgment on her Synchro Summon, only that Stardust Dragon is Speed Spell 2 instead of Speed Spell 3 (Counter Trap >_> ) --iFredCat 23:39, October 4, 2012 (UTC)

Missign0 said Stardust negates all the effects of the Seal, this is incorrect, and this is not what I said.

-Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 00:25, October 5, 2012 (UTC)

According to ATEMVEGETA, The Seal of Orichalcos needs to resolve in order to apply its Continous Effect that protects itself. Stardust destroys it before it resolves so "The Seal of Orichalcos" will be destroyed and sent to the graveyard normally, so yeah D-range, the seal can't protect itself from stardust. 2.126.180.53 (talk) 15:53, October 6, 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it can protect itself. The activation of the Field Spell Card must resolve, not the activation of the effect. The activation of the Field Spell Card can be negated with something like Dark Bribe or Solemn Judgment; if not, the activation is successful. After the activation is successful, its first effect triggers as Chain Link 1, then Stardust triggers as Chain Link 2. Chain Link 2 resolves first; the effect which destroys Special Summoned monsters is negated, but at this time Orichalcos's Continuous Effect of not being destroyed once per turn applies. Stardust does 2 things: Negating the effect, and destroying the card which effect was negated. It first negates the effect, but it cannot destroy it because of Orichalcos's other effect. After this, no monsters will be destroyed because of Orichalcos, since that effect was negated; but since it wasn't destroyed, its other effects will continue as normal. MadRest 17:19, October 6, 2012 (UTC)

It's not Trigger. Read what I said. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 00:39, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

Can someone just ask this to konami? then we will know how it works.D-range (talk • contribs) 05:51, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

The OCG lore is clear enough and makes it the same effect type as Ancient Forest. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 05:54, October 7, 2012 (UTC)

*facepaw* Well, sorry, Falzar... I was not clearly enough - I mean the timing of card's activation: Like this; "When you activate this card" before comma/colon, that's an effect, yes? Well, that's how I compared that as "Stardust Dragon" being a Counter Trap (Solemn Judgment OR Warning, whatever that negate the activation of the card) only that "Stardust Dragon" is a slowly (in Spell Speed) pace. Like IP-Addressed User code 2.126.180.53 said, "The Seal of Orichalcos" needed to destroying all Special Summoned Monsters to resolving it "land" process (flying from your hand to the field spell slot) and "Stardust Dragon" just sensed it come then kicked it off before it landed perfectly. Therefore "Stardust Dragon" countered "The Seal of Orichalcos" before it could successful on the field and before it could be able to protecting itself from the destruction. Am I clearly now? --iFredCat 01:05, October 8, 2012 (UTC)

Or rather, I agree on Missign0's answer, that the Seal is destroyed.

But the reason behind Missign0's answer was not the correct reason. Missign0's reason was that Stardust negates the Continuous Effects as well.

The correct reason is: Stardust will negate the activation of the card, so the Continuous Effects did not have the chance to apply.

-Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 02:15, October 8, 2012 (UTC)