User talk:1DustinParrish

RE: (1DustinParrish)

Hi there! It looks like you're new to editing wikis, is that right? Some comments on your edits:

• Multiple consecutive edits to a page in 24 hours or less: This is frowned upon. Did you know you can use the "Show preview" button to see what your edits will look like, before saving the page? It should not take 25 edits to a page to finally achieve what you want; rather, it should reasonably take 1-4 edits. If you really want to make multiple changes to a page over a period of time (that you can't achieve in a short timespan), then you should copy/paste the contents of that page into a personal sandbox (User:1DustinParrish/Sandbox), where you can make as many tiny little edits as you want (since it's your user page, and not a main page). When you're finished, then you can copy/paste the contents of that page into the actual main page, citing your sandbox in your edit summary when you do so.
• TCG coverage of rulings: If you were to follow TCG Konami's coverage of rulings to the letter, and then went to a high-tier TCG tournament expecting TCG Konami to have covered everything, you'd be very disappointed. The TCG rulebook does not cover everything, and if something is not 'covered', it is not ignored - rather, the TCG judges default to the Japanese side of things. Why does TCG Konami not cover everything? There's no public answer, but there is a lot of red tape involved when it comes to 'converting' JP content to the TCG side.
  • And when I say "rulebook", I'm not excluding their online Damage Step page or their Fast effect timing page. If you compare their page vs. this wiki's Damage Step page, our article covers a lot more angles than TCG Konami's. It should be noted that TCG Konami considers their ruling .pdfs "non-applicable" nowadays, since they've removed them from the English site (foreign versions have yet to do so). We still cite them for convenience's sake though, when they are correct. With so little TCG coverage of rulings, we are forced to rely on JP coverage as well. --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 00:45, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

If a judge followed the TCG rulebook literally, they'd be correct in saying that card/effect activations that "negate activations" aren't allowed in the Damage Step. But this is not how the game works.
Unfortunately, you won't ever find an "officially published resource" confirming differences between the OCG/TCG, only by word-of-mouth. TCG rulings for a given scenario can change between YCSes (as indicated by the recent YCS London), but over time, everything boils down to reflect the OCG rulings.
If you want an alternative explanation, you might want to ask about the issue of "negating activations during Damage Step" here instead: https://www.facebook.com/groups/judgeslounge/ . It's not an official resource, but the admins there are judges that have judged high-tier events, and can possibly give a better explanation. Those judges may try to point to a UDE-era ruling, or a Konami .pdf ruling, because it'd make an easier explanation. In that case, tell them that you thought those resources were out-of-date (which they are) even if they can be sometimes correct, and see how they respond.
In the future, when leaving messages on a Talk Page, please sign your posts with 4 tildes (~). --UltimateKuriboh (talk • contribs) 01:58, 31 October 2018 (UTC)