Targeting in Yu-Gi-Oh! is Convoluted

[@zironVT]

Being dyslexic and trying to fully understand the differences in specific card effect types is wild, "that target", "those targets", "it" , "they/them" is such a wild thing to have to learn the mechanical difference in. And then you have "and", "and if you do", "also", "also, after that" and "then". This game is harder than some english tests sometimes

[@m4t829]

I would love to see a video about "missing timing" cards (when/if/if you do/after that)

[@KhanhNguyen-mh5ec]

Man yugioh is like English.

[@golderzoa]

i'd like to see more of this type of stuff. it can help a lotta new players and even me a somewhat decent player

[@billyjean8176]

The only cases where something would miss timing is in the case of a card saying, "When ... you can:" will not activate if their activation window is met mid resolving chain. Another way for a card to "miss timing" now is if a monster is no longer where it needs to be when its effect would trigger. So if you quick synchro to someone TTing your board, good bye effect as it's not where it's trigger would be met. (If it's on summon, if it's a floating effect it'll trigger.)

[@GattaiHeroes]

That is complete BS and we all know it

[@GattaiHeroes]

​@@billyjean8176then you have Elemental HERO the Shining being tributed to the graveyard for a monster and "miss timing" happens

[@Trigger99X]

Difference between targeting and non targeting is the difference between walking into a room and saying “I’m going to shot ” and “I’m going to shot” and you having a reaction before they do

[@Ragnarok540]

Targeting is not a hard concept to grasp. Targeting means you make your choice when you activate the card, for example infinite impermanence. Non targeting means you make the choice at resolution, that is, when you are resolving the effect (maybe even during a chain resolving), like forbidden droplet or DPE, or in your example dingirsu. Basically, if a card targets you know before resolution the choice so you can remove the target, for example using book of moon.

[@anotokinatsukashii]

This is the most clear explanation of targeting I have ever read… I have just been rolling with whether the card says “target” or not but this makes so much more sense??!! Thank you for sharing your wisdom!

[@DoggoDoesStuff1]

That's how I thought of it, then I read the Genex card that was used as an example and it fucking says "Select AND destroy", how the fuck are newbies/people who aren't mentally ill like us inherently supposed to know that when a card says select the selecting happens as a cost even though there's no semicolon lmao

[@Ragnarok540]

@@DoggoDoesStuff1 that card is irrelevant in the current game and if it got a reprint, it would get new problem solving card text.

[@solobugg5087]

I was confused at first about this, but in reality, it's almost always as simple as "if it says it targets, it targets." The only instance when this will be confusing is with older printings of cards that say "select" or they don't say "target", but do indeed target because of their lack of clear wording as opposed to their modern PSCT writing (i.e. Book of Moon, Ryko). Edit: I just realized there's another instance of targeting that may also confuse players, and it's not something that you can get from just reading the card text. It's Equip Spells. Equip Spells always target the monster they're being equipped to, even though they don't say it. It's just their mechanic.

[@ShiaSpirit]

Target is just a yugioh keyword like piercing. It just means to choose a card before resolving an effect. If it doesnt say target, it means to choose a card at resolution of the effect. Pretty simple. Just turn off your brain. It similar to PSCT. Semi colons, colons, and commas arent used properly for English, but they make sense for yugioh. We give passes for punctuation, but not for the word target.

[@bloodster14]

Making them unaffected would worsen the situation here because now they wouldn't even be affected by Dingirsu and Droplet (Cards you mentioned), so now the only out for them would be to Tribute them with a Kaiju or Lava Golem or to destroy them by battle, it would buff them even more. Kinda like how RaidRaptor - Ultimate Falcon works atm.

[@FearedKamil]

This

[@billyjean8176]

But that card is bad. It's only funny with waking the dragon and pure raid raptors. (I forget you guys only play master duel) Which is also shit tier rogue. Dies to one hand trap yay rogue decks...

[@bloodster14]

@@billyjean8176 "Ugh, Master Duel players. How dare you not play in the sacred and holy irl game like me, a god among you" Ulti Falcon is a backup plan in Kali Yuga turbo strategies like Utopia, Blackwing and yes, Raid Raptors. Doesn't mean the card is bad, it can put you in a pinch if your deck relies on effect removal and not battle destruction. Solid stats and it's one of the most notorious towers in the game.

[@bloodster14]

I'm not saying those decks are meta threats or anything, I know they are rogue. It's just that you haven't played against one of these decks which can play through 1 to 3 handtraps and still can go into Ulti Falcon if their main plan is something they can't get to anymore. And now what? You know have 5 to 3 cards in hand to get rid of a Towers, which to most meta decks wouldn't be a problem I'll admit. But then again "Meta can beat Ulti Falcon" is not an argument to say a card's bad, period. I'm pretty sure Tearlaments out to Ulti Falcon is Kaleido crashing into it with Perlereino boost, Branded's out is Titaniklad with more attack, and Spright's out is Cat Shark shenanigans. Goes to show that even them need to go out of their way to have a chance to destroy the dude.

[@KiteKenny11]

There are other outs, tho admittedly not a lot, but there are some cards that specifically tell your opponent to remove a card from their field, and since that doesn’t affect the cards directly, it will work on towers monsters.(example ferret flames)

[@ratulroychoudhury6008]

"targeting" happens as part of the cost. which means texts before semi colon. that means oppnent knows the selected card at the activation. For "non- targeting" card effects opponent only knows the selected card at the resolution, when the opponent cannot respond.

[@134f1n47r33]

Amen 10/10 just the explanation I'd use. It's a weird concept to grasp at first, but once you experience/understand chaining a few times, it makes sense. Master duel is excellent at showing this, and ygopro did a decent job, too.

[@Marika_ER]

Targeting isn't that complicated. If it says target, that's a target. Meanwhile other cards have a destruction as a secondary effect. For example, mirror jade's effect is that it sends a card from the extra deck to the grave, the banish is secondary and therefore not a target

[@kurosakitora5498]

hohohooo,you just brought up memories of me first time trying darkworld in a deck that discards for cost....thinking it will trigger their effects XD

[@Shrouded_in_Mystery]

I had an issue with "select" being used in older card texts instead of "target" and that wording has always given me trouble. This breakdown is really helpful even if it shows how confusing this game can be.

[@khornebread4802]

As an Archfiend player (yes we exist), my entire archetype's removal is based on targeting... I would give ALMOST ANYTHING for an Archfiend that had non-targeting removal.... Or at least some decent dedicated support.

[@subaerofreeman1957]

Rikka n kaiju : allow us to solved your problems If I can't target then I'll just go to wallmart

[@Videogamer80]

Non-targeting removal which can be interpreted as targeting removal doesn't exist anymore with PSCT. It's just that older printings of cards weren't written with PSCT rules in mind, as it was a relatively recent concept, so they seem kinda confusing there. Unless the card is banned, the yugioh database should have a PSCT description on it, I'm pretty sure

[@renaldyhaen]

Non a fan of "non-target" removal. Target effect is more interesting and sometimes you or your opponent can outplay the target by using other quick effect. Dodge the target effect always looks satisfying. . Non-target removal is a respond for monster with target immunity. Then, for countering non-target, we now have new Icejade Synchro that somehow can "power creep" non-target mechanic. And then, what next?

[@animeknight99]

I think one of the few cards that doesn't target is Smashing Ground

[@emissaryofcharybdis105]

Hehehe the joys of being a Fortune Lady player. "Cannot be targeted" ain't gonna save you from Every ❤

[@steeveedragoon]

From what I understand about the word "select" on older cards is that it doesn't necessarily mean that the card targets. And that's where the issue came from, the fact that there was no word that definitively meant that something does in fact target. I believe that Ryko was one such card. I've heard about issues in the past where it was unclear if it targeted or not, or if the pop and mill would happen simultaneously or one after the other. Also, in terms of your opinion on non-targeting effects, I somewhat disagree. I think that they're fine when used in moderation. For example, Spright has a smashers, which is a form of non-targeting removal that makes you go -1 or -2 in card advantage. Looking at Tear and Kash, neither deck has any in archetype form of non-targeting removal, and they're both still very powerful decks. It's really shown that Konami has at least had a change in philosophy when talking about whether or not things target. They very well could've made Fenrir or Arise-heart a powerful non-targeting banish. Tearlaments Sulliek could've been a non-targeting monster negate, but they had enough sense not to do that. I think non-targeting removal becomes a problem when a deck has too much of it, can access it way too easily, gives them additional advantage, and/or is on something that is a pain to remove for one reason or another. Some kind of downside can certainly counterweight these issues though. Going back to smashers as an example, spright can access it very easily, but it does require them to banish a spright card from hand or grave, then a level/rank/link 2 monster they control. Also, about the pain to remove part. Dragoon and Mirrorjade. Both a pain to Deal with, and for 2 completely separate reasons. I also want to express that I keep on forgetting that Dragoon's pop is non-targeting. It's not really that much of an issue to deal with anymore, but it's still a pain in the ass. I'm glad that I can't do shit to Scareclaw Tri-heart. At least facing it down will be easier.

[@thaariqbinaziz2821]

If the card doesnt say it targets (raigeki/darkhole/smashing grounds/droplet/etc) that means it doesnt target

[@XmortoxX1990]

Things like this make this a lot harder to play than it should

[@absoul112]

Having seen a few videos and a short on targeting, it's not simple and I don't get how people say otherwise. The fact that a piece of punctuation helps determine whether or not a card targets doesn't help.

[@jimmyjon411]

I feel so heard

[@TheFallenStarlight]

Distant: IT DOESN'T TARGET

[@djeldj]

Followed by autistic reeing lmao 😊

[@donnelleraeburn9207]

Bro want an unaffected dragoon... Na

[@niinbo9620]

You think unaffected by other Cardeffects matter? Evenly Matched? Traptrix Sera and XYZ Monsters are Unaffected by other Trapeffects, but Evenly Match - which is a trap - doesnt care - why?

[@dechaphet]

Weird little interaction where the trap is not applying the effect to the cards because the player chooses what to banish, essentially applying the effect onto the player

[@niinbo9620]

@@dechaphet yea ._.

[@edmundoandrade5113]

I play traptrix and i did expected to get washed by evenly, i was confused

[@Marika_ER]

Because you're not affecting them with a trap card. You're forcing your opponent to perform a mechanic. Same thing with Towers. It doesn't send an opponents monster to the grave, it just forces your opponent to perform an action

[@JorgeLuiz487]

Miss timing and targeting when you play yugioh a lot you get used to it (eventually...EVENTU--) but its still a very goofy mechanic that only exists to make the game more annoying to play imo, specially when you need to explain to a new/returning player

[@briannitzschke2767]

This has always been kinda silly. Its quite literally does the card say "target" l? Yes/no. That simple. Dont overthink it.

[@Quintingent]

This video baffles me. The first half appears to be trying to argue against keywords, on the grounds that... you have a personal idea of what the word should mean? You talk about confusion, but the idea of a clearly defined term confuses you? The second half, where you bring up the example of Genex Ally Crusher not having the word 'target' is more understandable... but is also arguing against the wrong thing. See, the reason Crusher doesn't say 'target' is because it was printed before Konami standardised how card text was written - now known as Problem Solving Card Text, or PSCT for short. Before Konami did this, it was often unclear how specific cards worked - and ironically, targeting was one of the biggest offenders. So Konami finally got their act together and standardised the card text. As a result however, we now have this divide between cards last printed before then (since reprints of pre-PSCT cards update the text to reflect the new standards) and cards printed afterwards. It's unfortunate to be sure, but thankfully it only applies to weak and non-iconic cards that haven't been reprinted. Let's be real, how many people were actually aware of Genex Ally Crusher's existence? And finally, your 'solution' for this issue... well ignoring the fact that it unnecessarily power creeps protection, it also fails to account for other ways things interact with targeting. There are several cards that interact when targeted - for example the recent Nouvelles archetype reacts to targeting effects. So uh... yeah. Tldr targeting is fine, with the exception of 13+ year old cards that people wouldn't use anyway

[@whiter827]

Honestly, eventually all boss monsters will be unaffected because of stupid ass power creep. And there will be cards that function like evenly matched that WILL affect the monsters EVEN THOUGH they're unaffected.

[@plootybooty]

catboi has gone insane

[@nestor3634]

nah dude imagine if dragoon was uneffected

[@the199dirtrider]

God I love your voice

[@TheDarkSunGwyndolin]

I've been playing yugioh since I was a child, and this is 100% accurate

[@FabledSorcerer]

Yugioh is a fair and balanced game said no one ever.

[@Merlin69_hahahaha]

"Yugioh is so fun and easy" - Exactly zero people EVER.

[@edmundoandrade5113]

Wait who plays yugioh for fun?

[@Merlin69_hahahaha]

@@edmundoandrade5113 Exactly

[@FabledSorcerer]

@Edmundo Andrade There are a rare few that still try to play the game for the fun of it without trying to ruin the fun of the game for their opponents. They are often told that they are horrible at deck building just because they want everyone to enjoy the game instead of locking their opponents out of doing anything.

[@edmundoandrade5113]

@@FabledSorcerer i play TOONs 🥵

[@KhanhNguyen-mh5ec]

Fact

[@amandhairfan1283]

I think this is one of the worst thing in Yu-Gi-Oh. It's already confusing enough with multiple of exact same action with same result treated differently because it's worded differently, such as discard and send from hand to graveyard/by card effect and for cost, and this targeting things. But the change in card with wording like in your example just make it worse. Though i understand most of these weirdly super specific rule now (somehow), i think it's necessarily complicated. But there's nothing can be done about it now. We might as well have a "place this monster from your hand to your main monster zone" which is neither normal or special summon (if it isn't there already).

[@Quintingent]

It's worth noting that their example of a card that targets without the word 'target' is from before Konami standardised how effects were written (this standardisation being called 'Problem Solving Card Text', or PSCT for short). Cards printed before this standardisation are the ONLY exceptions, and even then, if they've been reprinted since they're errata'd to comply with the new standards. In short, provided it isn't a card last printed over 13 YEARS AGO you can be sure that if it says 'target' it targets, and if it doesn't say 'target', it doesn't.

[@amandhairfan1283]

@@Quintingent true, all new cards are consistent now, but still it's just as the video calls it, convoluted. You can still use old card, and if you do you just have to know it actually target. But my point is this whole thing is unnecessary complicated. Even now there's still some cards for effect timing that i don't understand, Like why Primula the Rika fairy get to summon if added by Rika glamour? (not that I'm complaining, i mainly play Rika lol). Also things like skipped battle phase, logically thinking, without knowing the rule I would thought that it would go to main phase two, but no, skipped battle phase means there is no battle phase, so the rule apply like it is a first turn which there is no battle phase, therefore no main phase two as well and it goes straight to the end phase, and it's not the same as cannot enter the battle phase, you still need to manually declare that you go to battle phase for it to apply. This make sense but only after you know about the actual rule regarding this specific things, at least it is for me.

[@Quintingent]

@@amandhairfan1283 I'm not saying that there aren't confusing/convoluted rules in the game. There are. But targeting isn't one of them. Incidentally regarding your question about Primula, it's actually fairly simple: Trigger effects activate at the start of a chain, and check if their trigger happened during the last chain (well, for 'if' triggers anyway. 'When' triggers can miss the timing - now that's a convoluted ruling). So here's what happens: Rikka Glamour activates, tributing a monster. Glamour resolves, adding Primula. The chain has ended, so any trigger effects check if their activation conditions were met A monster was tributed during the last chain, so Primula's condition was indeed met. Note that a lot of similar trigger effects that activate in the field or GY say 'whilst you control this face-up card' or 'whilst this card is in your GY', which do require them to be in the proper place ahead of time. Hand effects like Primula don't have that clause because the hand is not public knowledge

[@amandhairfan1283]

@@Quintingent i see. I kinda get going on, but since Primula isn't in the hand yet when the tributing happened, my brain still think it shouldn't work that way haha. I just don't know any other examples where something similar can happen.

[@bluemike3452]

typical complaining yugiboomer