YOU'VE BEEN PLAYING YU-GI-OH! WRONG!! - Complete Guide to PSCT and Missing Timing

[@hardymk12]

The fact that this series isn't called Duel Academy is a crime. Thank you for your service Coder, making yugioh players smarter one school day at a time

[@Ragnarok540]

I can see how some cards are balanced by using "when" instead of "if", but for a good number of them it makes them unplayable or just borderline incomprehensible for new players. The good thing is that in modern design very few cards have this "feature", in the past it really feels like the designers used the terms randomly.

[@embDBA]

Society if Lady Labrynth and Paleos were ifs:

[@Ragnarok540]

@@embDBA Also Thunder Dragon Titan, and Baronne being able to negate anything at resolution would be crazy too.

[@FrostReave]

@@embDBAPaleo’s make perfect sense though. That’s to stop you from summoning every Paleo in the gy on 1 trap card. Lady I guess could be an if effect but they didn’t because they *want* it to be chainblocked

[@Carwinley]

From what I recall, doesn't the OCG not differentiate between When/If, making missing the timing a TCG-only rule?

[@Ragnarok540]

​@@Carwinleyit definitely is an OCG thing, MD is based on OCG rulings and you get plenty of messages about missing the timing like the one in this video, for example when playing Yubel and link summoning using the level 11 Yubel.

[@an_jb]

Coder I need to thank you. Life is hard as fuck and sometimes I just want to relax and hear some useful Yugioh information without it being about Konami drama or Meta dooming. This is just facts and information and I deeply appreciate it.

[@ithrowstuffinavideogame]

W comment, 100% agree

[@kevinvargas8355]

Professor Coder, make a lesson about types of effect. For example quick, trigger, activated, lingering, unclassified, condition, effects that say "this name is X while on deck", effects that apply on specific phase likke Kozmo Tincan, etc. Would really appreciate it!

[@darksaintwins1432]

Yeah this one seems great. I always struggle to explain why negating my Destiny hero dread master doesn’t stop the anti destruction and 0 battle damage that is applied for the rest of the turn.

[@kevinvargas8355]

@darksaintwins1432 exactly, also the why Imperm on Ritual Beast Elder does nothing, and stuff like that. We know why, but it would be awesome if Coder explains it in a video/lesson like this one

[@Locklear2552]

Professor Coder, I think a small 3-5 mini test at the end of each chapter would help some of your students retain the knowledge you are teaching us. The results should be hidden until voting is complete to prevent popular vote Keep up the great content, I learned lots from this video!

[@Varudras]

0:00 Intro 1:05 Who am I? Chapter 1 2:04 What is PSCT? 7:58 How to read 8:12 Activation Condition 9:52 Cost vs Target Chapter 2 11:21 Conjunctions 13:08 and if you do 17:26 then 19:09 also 20:46 also, after that 22:13 and 24:48 Multiple Conjunctions 27:04 Conjunctions != legal activation Chapter 3 31:53 Targeting 33:47 it, them, that, those 35:25 both, all 36:35 that, those (again) 38:09 all Chapter 4 40:57 Missing Timing 42:15 What is „missing timing“? 46:14 Examples 55:02 Further clarification 1:00:20 Questions/Recap

[@Jimpipecigarbear]

Can this one get a pin?

[@StainlessKay]

Thank you Varudras, the final bringer of the end times

[@PreechaPatumcharoenpol]

One hour of ruling lecture. This is peak Yu-Gi-Oh content.

[@NamikazeRed]

Very complete and comprehensive course. I just think that there's a missing clarification that'd explain more the difference between optionnal "if" and "when" effects. It's the fact that "when" effects can activate in the SAME chain where they meet their activation requirement. "If" effects have to activate in a new chain after the chain where the requirement is met resolves. For exemple, to keep the dupe frog on the field case, if you activate an effect that'd send dupe frog to GY as COST (for exemple enemy controler) and your opponent DOES NOT have a response, you can activate dupe frog in the next chain link (If dupe was an "if" effects, you'd have to wait until the e-con chain fully resolves before you can activate dupe in a new chain). Another example of this would be thunder dragon titan + thunder dragon dark. However, if your opponent DOES have a reponse after the requirement is met as cost, you miss the timing (or rather being chain blocked)

[@hi-i-am-atan]

if effects can activate in the same chain as their conditions being met, same as when effects similarly, when effects can have to activate in the next chain after their condition is met, same as if effects what you're thinking of has nothing to do with if vs. when, it's whether or not the effect says "(quick effect)" / is a trap effect

[@lavalord96]

I actually love having this as a guide for when I'm making custom cards for my yugioh card format. Thank you, for the knowledge, I mean that.

[@rustyanubis1650]

As someone who knew a lot but was still confused on many things, this video was of great help in understanding the fine points of how the interactions work and I thank you for explaining it in a very comprehensive way.

[@caloriferobello]

I finally understand why Sharvara doesn't make Yubel miss timing but linking away Terror Incarnate does. Thank you, peak content

[@sapphypegasus7890]

These type of videos are what the community needed. Thank you DC! Excellent work! You explain everything very well!

[@Deadly-Shunpo]

I played Penguin Knight in Mermail during full power Tearlament format while Halq was legal because you could search it with Abysspike and the Halq would summon Plaguespreader to stack it so they could never mill you or you get all your stuff back, and just generally a good tech for that specific match up in water. Was a ruling nightmare until the head judges of certain bigger events decided the card would just work as intended, instead of 'technically' giving me game losses for 'having an entirely different deck' because of the text "form a new deck" as the card should have recieved PSCT treatment like a decade ago.

[@alexgarrett4673]

As a new (to Yu-Gi-Oh) player with a love of rules technicalities, this is both fascinating and informative. I 100% did not understand any of this before watching the video, and feeling all the pieces slot into place as you explained it makes my brain feel good. Thank you for laying everything out in such an easy-to-understand format!

[@GKuriboh]

Glad this came out before I Judge Remote Duel YCS this weekend. Thank you Coder!

[@M1A2C.]

I never understood missing timing before, but this video was actually really helpful and quite easy to understand. Thank you for explaining it so well

[@D4PPZ456]

I really needed this series. Like other MD players, i couldnt read before now.

[@khenumine]

God I love this. This is the stuff no one talks about enough on the Yugispace but is what we TRULY need as players, to play the game properly and sequentially, to enjoy our game better. THANK YOU Coder.

[@AnRuixuan]

Coder I absolutely love this series, it's been so helpful. One topic I think would be good to cover is lingering/continuous effects and the difference in various restrictions/locks "this turn", "for the rest of the turn", etc (like effects that apply retroactively vs those that only start on summon/activation, in terms of things like being able to summon or attack)

[@Ragnarok540]

I always knew Torrential Tribute is not a card that "misses timing", but is common to see people using it as an example (even if it doesn't even contain the word "can"), thanks for including it in the video for future reference.

[@kindklan8020]

chain 1 imperm chain 2 I:P makes it miss timing no?

[@chewdoom8415]

​@@kindklan8020 officially, missing the timing is only used when referring to optional when effects

[@jdeltwoone]

@@kindklan8020 you can't even activate it there... so it doesn't miss timing... miss timing is for effect not activation

[@monkfishy6348]

@@chewdoom8415 "Officially" there is no such thing as missing timing. It's a made up term by players. Konami has never once used it.

[@chewdoom8415]

@@monkfishy6348 Honestly, i was going to type that until I saw for myself how they have the "missed activation timing" on MD. May not be word for word, but it is close enough. They have an official explanation of optional when vs if effects, so it seems like that's why they acknowledge activation timing.

[@heivd8639]

i really love your series with ruling, looking foward to them very much!! :) at 54:00 you asked a question to the viewer, i paused, and instantly had it right. looking foward to those questions, maybe after one topic, some quick questions, maybe 2 or 3 questions with only 2 answers, that really helped me now learning and really understand the topic :) big thank you!!

[@mrxRby]

I hate that the lectures don't get as many views as this is one of my favorite pieces of content. Coder if you see this, I know it's not great for you monetarily but this is so helpful for me.

[@chrisshorten4406]

I truly appreciate the effort and work you put into teaching us about missing the timing, even though I still don't understand it (for some reason, my author brain finds it makes no sense).

[@darksaintwins1432]

03:46 without seeing the answer. “When this card is sent from the deck to the GY by your opponent’s card effect: shuffle all cards in your GY into the deck.”

[@brandongouveia8198]

It has to be a card controlled. Agido and Kelkek wouldnt trigger it but your version makes them do

[@darksaintwins1432]

@@brandongouveia8198I made this under the assumption that control was not an established term pre psct and elected to view it as being owned by your opponent. The MRL reading of the card doesn’t mention control at all while the db1 does which makes it kind of a toss up. You’re correct, though. If the intended effect is that it only triggers when sent by a card on your opponent’s side of the field and not by cards in the hand or graveyard/banished then this would be better. “when this card is sent from the deck to the GY by the effect of a card your opponent controls: shuffle all cards in your GY into the deck.” I now know that coder chose if instead of when, but I’ve seen way too many old cards retain that “when” even after multiple reprints so I don’t think it would be changed.

[@hi-i-am-atan]

@@darksaintwins1432 you're correct in that assumption, "controlled by your opponent" is in reference to the _effect_ and not the card the effect comes from, so it's the ancient egyptian version of "your opponent's card effect" since modern yugioh doesn't bother with the concept of "controlling" an effect

[@BlueHawkPictures17]

I would love to know more about "having x", "having exactly x", having at least x", "having x+" in card text and what they mean, but namely why Rainbow Dragon summoning ruling differs so much from the OCG/Masterduel mechanics vs. TCG judging. I have had every judge tell me I can summon even if I have more than seven differently named Crystal Beasts on my field/GY and I agree considering that -both- the -TCG and- OCG card text was errata'd to drop "having a total of x" to just "having x" which on the principle of subsets if you have 8 you also have 7. I believe the OCG/Masterduel ruling is actually wrong/outdated and TCG judges who "fallback" on the OCG ruling especially since they're not supposed to are also wrong to restrict Rainbow Dragon summoning if you have more than 7. This sucks because TCG simulators use those rulings and it gimps my ability to practice online with all these fake rulings.

[@monkfishy6348]

You must have excactly 7 different names for Rainbow Dragon. If you have more than 7 names, then the Summoning Condition is not met. This is not different in the TCG and OCG. Rainbow Dragon was never erratad to change this text. It always said "by having 7" or "while you have 7".

[@BlueHawkPictures17]

@@monkfishy6348 my bad I must be conflating the JP errata history and the EN errata history. That doesnt change the fact that the english text does not specify exact numbers, and every judge I spoke to in TCG allow for more than 7 because thats how its worded in english. That also doesnt change the fact that the JP errata changed from "having a total of 7" to "having 7", which aligns with thr english text.

[@ScootaGray]

4:34 “when this card is sent from the deck to the GY by an opponents card effect: shuffle all cards in your GY into the deck”

[@Vinicius-Bigode]

Over an hour of card board law school, hell yeah! (I don't even play Yugioh anymore) Keep 'em coming 🙏

[@liampouncy7808]

This content is actually ridiculously high-quality. I've kept away from yugioh for ages because the ruling stuff hasn't felt worth the hassle, but I'm getting an itch to get back involved. Something that I'm not sure exists/ where I would find it is concise explanations of what different decks are trying to accomplish (both in terms of their deck 'theme' and how they're used competitively/ how their engine works). I've started to get an inkling just by watching videos of people using them, but it's not easy when so many cards have so much text. A video which breaks down different deck archetypes with their main plans would be amazing - especially if you simplified/ removed the extraneous text off the cards (effects which are cool but not core to their function). I feel like the way you present things would make you perfect for this type of thing. Regardless, keep up the great vids.

[@yubelcu5721]

Ok today I learned that targetting is cost and MST negates. 😂 Nice video, very clear and effective.

[@thedemonofrazgriz3602]

I learned that Shaddoll fusion can be negated by MST since it needs to stay on the field to resolve. Very cool! Wish I knew this in TOSS format lol

[@michaelmahoney6782]

@@thedemonofrazgriz3602 I'm unsure if you are joking but to be clear that is not true.

[@thedemonofrazgriz3602]

@@michaelmahoney6782 Lmao yeah I was joking, not for Shaddoll fusion specifically but it does work on cards that pays cost first like rage with eyes of blue

[@hi-i-am-atan]

@@thedemonofrazgriz3602 it has nothing to do with "paying cost first," but the fact that rage with eyes of blue says both "and" and "and if you do" instead of "also" right after its effect to banish itself if rage gets mst'd, then you can't banish this card ( implicitly, this card _on the field_ ) and as many many cards as possible from your hand, field, and gy, face-down, because you cannot banish the rage with eyes of blue that you activated that is on the field face-down, therefore you cannot banish the rest of those cards or special summon up to 3 blue-eyes _and_ banish the activated rage that is no longer on the field from the field, therefore the whole thing resolves with a single effect in other words, review the section of this video covering conjunctions. this is literally the kind of stuff that that part's all about

[@RashFaustinho]

Waaah, that's so cool! Best class ever! Feels like we're GX students!

[@Soahdd]

Really good aesthetic and visuals, keep up the good work

[@Lewt_2B]

a very relevant example of missing timing was lightpulsar dragon in the chaos dragon deck of 2012. people purposefully played soul taker because the "then" conjunction in order to gain 1000 life points made it miss timing

[@Анимебг-н2ы]

Distant coder is a true man of culture.He is understand what the best pokémon is

[@brendankaufman3430]

these lecture videos are fantastic.

[@smeargle3951]

A good example for the 'and' conjunction would be mimighoul maker. Recently we had a judge call about what happens if mimighoul maker gets activated and the opponent chains something to fill up all their monster zones. Looking back we ruled it wrong because we thought it works like 'also'.

[@5ar.s955]

In conclusion: "It/them/That Card/Those Cards" is the superior targeting effect beacause it applies, regarldes if anything happens to the targets "Also" and "Also, after that" are the superior conjuctions beacause A is not required for B and vise versa. Which one is better depends on if simultaneous or sequential acctions are better. "If" is the superior timing effect beacause it can not miss timing Is there a deck that utilizes only the superior lines in its cards and how good is it? If there isnt any, how broken would the deck be?

[@O-01-45]

Actually super useful for trying to make a custom archetype and have it still be readable.

[@MissingNo_]

Thank you for being able to clearly explain this.

[@brendankaufman3430]

If you're planning on doing more lessons, I think that going over what does and doesnt start a chain as well as inherent special summons vs effects that special summon, and why/when cards like Black Horn of Heaven do and don't work.

[@humanoid251]

Excellent lecture as always Professor Coder but I encountered a situation a few months ago that I’m still not 100% sure on. You said that only optional “when” effects can miss timing. Well in this situation my opponent activated The Zombie Vampire to make each of us send 4 cards to the GY. In doing so I sent a Neko Mane King who’s effect reads “During your opponent's turn, when this card in your possession is sent to your GY by an opponent's card effect: It becomes the End Phase of this turn.” After which my opponent resolved part B of The Zombie Vampires effect, “then if any monsters were sent to either GY by this effect, you can Special Summon 1 of those monsters to your field.” summoning my Neko Mane King. I wasn’t sure if Neko Mane King’s effect could be activate so we called a judge over and he ruled that because the last action to occur was the summon and not the send to GY, it missed the timing. So my question here is did Neko Mane King miss the timing in this situation? Because the way it reads makes it seem like it’s a mandatory effect and it sounds like you’re implying that mandatory “when” effects can’t miss timing.

[@emersongrtcg]

Neko Mane King has a mandatory effect. It never misses the timing. However, will not activate in this situation because it was moved from it trigger location. It was no long in the GY at the moment it would activate.

[@tolgsi4199]

Monsters have to remain at their original location, they met their trigger condition in order to activate. In this case, the neko mane king was removed from the gy, where the original trigger location is, so it can no longer activate there. Another example js mirrorjade. If you can destroy it AND banish it in the same chain, it can no longer activate its board wipe effect.

[@kevinvargas8355]

I would like a clarification on effects that would "miss timing" of application like Branded lost. Most the players I know get it wrong. I am talking about when the fusion summon is not Chain Link 1, the "your opponent cannot respind" effect is not applied since the last thing to happen before the next chain was not the fusion summon. Example, CL1 Lightning Storm, CL2 Branded in Red, after resolving, las thing is Lightning destroying, not the fusion summon, so Branded Lost does not "protect" from opponent responding on the next chain even if Branded in Red summoned succesfully

[@lorenztor1990]

All of this is perfectly explained and makes sense to me. What doesn't make sense is WHY it was designed this way lol

[@praekeafraxinus6926]

Thanks Professor Coder, I feel a step closer to getting my PhD in Dueling.

[@dramajoe]

Long time card game player who started playing Master Duel last season, quickly fell in love with a Cydra brew, and grinded to Master rank shitting on Tenpai scrubs with it. Very occasionally I would miss timing on Chimeratech Rampage Dragon's destroy spells and traps effect and I kept forgetting to look up why after because of how rarely it occurred. Thanks to this video I now understand that it happens only when I use Super Poly as a quick play to counter to my opponent's removal.

[@RoseZ7323]

Sincerely thank you for your time Coder this must've been a lot of work Its appreciated c: God bless you ❤

[@jonathonquarisa2626]

I don't know if this will be its own video, but I think it would have been good for this video, that is psct that distinguishes between summons that start a chain and summons that do not. I have an idea on the difference but I am not 100% sure on it.

[@bryankreinhart]

Was watching and realized I learned something. I had no choice after that so I had to give a thumbs-up (this is not optional).

[@BlueHawkPictures17]

I think the best rule of thumb with optional when effects are to check whether their activation requirements were met in the start or middle of a chain resolution that does not include them.

[@monkfishy6348]

The best thing to do is check if the activation condition was met as the last sequential action in the prior Chain or by a non-Chain action. If the answer is no, it can't activate. It's very simple.

[@walkerred8220]

The fact that we have an actual hour long lecture on only an aspect of Yugioh makes all those jokes just a little funnier

[@Arudos7]

Great video! I understood everything in this video but I still have a Question on things you said at 56:13 and 58:00 : I recently built a "Super Quant" deck out of fun with some friends and I tested it on master duel. It's the powerranger deck. A keycard in this deck is "Super Quantal Fairy Alphan" which lets me tribute it to special one random super quant monster "and" puts two other SQ Monsters from deck to my GY. So, A and B happens simultaneously. All "Super Quantum" Cards have a "When this card is Summoned: You can..."-Trigger, so they can miss timing and they have an if-effect that triggers on sent to GY. Let's say I activate my "Super Quantal Fairy Alphan" and "SQ Blue Layer" gets summoned (It let's me search the field spell). The other two Monsters send to the GY are red and white layer. Now on MD the window, which lets me choose which effects I want to activate, pops up. I am now able to activate any of those three cards as chainlink 1. (So Blue Layer can be activated). However, if I do not choose to activate blue layer first (the one that got summoned with the "when.. you can.."-effect to search for Field Spell) I can't activate it later or higher than chainlink 1. To make things more clear. If the MD activation window pops up and I choose to activate let's say red layer first to special one SQ Monster from my GY, I am now not able to activate blue layer with his "When.. you can.." Effect as chain 2. It doesnt let me choose him?! But, if I understood correctly at 56:13 you explained that you can activate the when-effect as any chainlink you want to, as long as the last action that occurred is still the activation requirement for the "When-Card". This is true here. "Alphan" special "and" sent cards (simultaneously). The SQ blue Layer will be summoned (that's the requirement), so on summon the chain that gets started on MD refers to that summon. So, why am I not allowed to activate any SQ card possible and then activate blue layers effect (let's say as last chainlink) after?? The chain is still refering to blue layer getting special summoned. Anyways, really great video which inspired me to create a big spreadsheet with all rulings you just explained. I am really looking forward to all your upcoming ruling explanation videos! Thanks!🔥

[@TwistedBOLT]

Overall, great video although there is a bit I disagree with. Conjunctions sometimes DO affect activation legality and you DON'T always need to be able to do all mandatory parts of an effect in order to activate it. Examples: Nekroz of Clausolas can be activated if it would just negate the effects of a monster or just set its attack to 0. Titanocider can be used on a monster who's attack is not zero even if it's a normal/already negated monster. Yet cannot be used on an effect monster with 0 attack. Droplet can be used to negate a monster under skilldrain. (And does apply the negation) Blue-Eyes Chaos Dragon can activate its effects when attacking in to just a single monster with 0 attack. Aluber the jester of despia CANNOT summon itself to try to negate an already negated monster. Then there's inconsistent rules about cards being able to not being able to activate battlephase-related effects in main phase 2. Overall, activation legality is the messiest part of the game and almost any broad conclusion you derive can be disproven by niche corner cases. I myself explain the above rules by saying: * If a single effect has multiple mandatory segments and multiple of those segments in succession modify a monster's property (set stats/negate effect), for as long as the conjunctions between those segments allows it, only one property needs to be legally modifiable for those segments as a collective to be deemed legal when determining the whole effects legality. Also another thing, you mentioned optional segment, but the same thing about them not being checked for activation legality also applies for conditional segments as well.

[@Dragonsanddogs1]

I’m signing up for a class with Professor Coder!

[@yunggod3076]

Imma like the video and then watch it, because I know it will be a banger.

[@dawwnzo5613]

Another banger! Keep them coming Sensei

[@christopherl.1072]

I think there needed to be a place to explain effects with optional parts. For example, galatea, the orcust automaton, it returns one of your banished machines, but then, you can set an orcust spell or trap. That can be confusing for some player, because the second part doesn´t need to be able to resolve to activate it. Similarly Ice barrier.

[@frankyquilavafireblast895]

Holy crap, excuse me Oh my goodness, I feel like I can actually understand missing the timing now. Thank you professor coder, thank you.

[@PlaguevonKarma]

Can you make a playlist of these if you're making a series? This is legit so cool as a teacher lol

[@archon42]

Recent viewer here. I love your work, sir.

[@jadenknott]

I've actually used the analogy of punch to explain the difference between if and when effects and it went something like this "If the punch bowl is out: Guests can go to the bowl and fill their cups When a glass is over a ledge: the cup can fall down and if it does the punch in the cup will spill" And i explained that it could be caught or be moved Would y'all say that i cooked with this analogy?

[@davidgaer1354]

at the end of the video u should ask a question about the subject and that would be the homework and at the start of the next one should be that answer to see if we got it right. this is also a little review so we can retain that information.

[@anthonycannet1305]

31:45 so you need to be able to resolve all parts of the effect in order to activate, but then once it’s been activated it doesn’t matter if parts of the effect become illegal so long as the conjunctions aren’t conditional. So in the case of “do A also do B” I need to be able to do A and B but then if A becomes illegal I still get B, but if A is illegal from the start I can’t activate it

[@monkfishy6348]

Pretty much, except activation legality is (usually) determined by if you can do all MANDATORY parts of the effect. Not just all parts of the effect.

[@anthonycannet1305]

@@monkfishy6348 If part of an effect is not mandatory then it is always able to resolve, which counts towards all parts of the effect being able to resolve. There's never a scenario where it would be illegal and so can't be illegal when determining if it can be activated

[@monkfishy6348]

@@anthonycannet1305 Saying "all part of the effect must be able to resolve in order to activate" is simply misleading and not even true. There's dozens of individual rulings which contradict it, and even a whole subcategory of effects, but it's a fine rule of thumb.

[@anthonycannet1305]

@ like what, give an example

[@hi-i-am-atan]

@@anthonycannet1305 interrupted kaiju slumber

[@Ulquiorra_Cifer]

when i was watching gx when i was a kid, seeing a duel academy sounded really dumb, but it makes a lot of sense right now

[@FURNACE_YGO]

My favorite example is Goblindbergh summoning a red, green, or yellow gadget. The gadgets miss the timing to add

[@anthonycannet1305]

I feel like the conjunctions are a waste of “space”. What I mean by that is there are 5 different conjunctions for 5 different effects when you could use 4 conjunctions to create 6 effects while keeping the same (if not more) functionality. The space of effects is using more conjunctions than it could be, which I think adds to the confusion surrounding it. There are 3 things that need to be relayed to the player 1)is it sequential or simultaneous 2)is it conditional on the previous effect 3)is it conditional on the next effect If we assume that the effects are simultaneous unless otherwise stated to be sequential, we can use one conjunction “then” to denote if it is sequential. If it doesn’t use the word “then” that means it is simultaneous. By similar logic we could use the absence of a conditional conjunction to mean it’s unconditional, but in cases of unconditional simultaneous effects we’d have nothing to link the two effects together. So we’ll use “also” to mean unconditional. Lastly we need conditional and required conjunctions so we can use “additionally” and “and” respectively. So now using these 4 conjunctions “then”, “also”, “additionally”, and “and”, we can make all 5 of the existing cases plus a 6th unused one without needing to make a 6th conjunction unique to it. 1)simultaneous unconditional. A and B happen at the same time, and B will happen regardless of A “also” 2)sequential unconditional. A and B happen in order, and B will happen regardless of A “also, then” 3)simultaneous conditional. A and B happen at the same time, and B only happens if A does “additionally” 4)sequential conditional. A and B happen in order, and B only happens if A does “additionally, then” 5)simultaneous required. A and B happen at the same time, and each of them only happens if both do “and” 6)sequential required. A and B happen in order, and each of them only happens if both do “and, then” Then denotes if it should become sequential from the assumed default of simultaneous, and then we denote the conditional relationship between the two effects, we even have a sequential conjunction for the situations where a AND b *both* need to happen or neither of them does, which currently isn’t used on any cards. 4 conjunction words to create 6 different effects instead of 5 for 5. And it’s a little bit simpler for someone to understand being only 4 words instead of 5 phrases.

[@anthonycannet1305]

One corner case that I didn’t implement in the system which is also not implemented in the current rules text is A is conditional on B but B is not conditional on A. Meaning that A only happens if B happens, but B happens regardless. You can get the simultaneous timing by simply reversing A and B and using the additionally conjunction, but we don’t get a sequential version. If the conjunctions is that A will only happen if B can happen, but A happens before B, then simply switching the A and B to get the condition right will also reverse the order they happen which changes the effect. So we could replace the and conjunction with a conjunction meaning A is conditional on B, then just use both that and the additionally keyword for cases where they’re conditional on each other. But I couldn’t think of a single word for that and would probably have to use a phrase for that to make it sound like proper English…

[@TaleraxDeAvon]

categorizing the conjunctions like this would be better, I agree. but I also wouldn't mind unique conjunctions if they weren't counterintuitive in some case, like the "and if you do".

[@khenumine]

Unironically I want to have quizzes that sub from these videos.

[@rexblanco2204]

Coder: *teaches stuff so people can be a better player Me: I can now Ruleshark my opponent better.

[@ApaulloYGO]

Coder really did this for his people, good think he spoke the while time. There were too many words to read

[@VanillaMidgetSSBM]

Early Yu-Gi-Oh! Cards were kind of hampered that the game had **key terms** in the rule book, but they didn't really tell you what those terms meant beyond a vague definition. And a lot of rules had to be explicitly stated on cards For example - Whenever you search your deck for a card you're supposed to shuffle immediately afterwards, this is a core part of the rules, as a result early search cards had to TELL YOU to shuffle the card afterwards. As a result a lot of pre PSCT cards are basically telling you VERBATIM what the effect is from an age where people didn't really know how to resolve effects off of key terms

[@thekittenfreakify]

really enjoying this series

[@aiRCoft]

*To the question about **_Dark Ruler No More_** at **28:35**:* At 28:52, you said "the 'also' conjunction says that you don't need to successfully do 'A' in order to apply 'B'" (which is correct), but then at 29:26, you say "you can't activate _Dark Ruler No More_ because 'A' would do nothing". I thought 'B' happening wasn't reliant on 'A', though? Since when does 'B' care about whatever happened with 'A' when it comes to 'also' conjunctions? On a similar note, if _Dark Ruler No More_ can't negate ALL of your opponents monsters' effects, as the effect clearly states "all face-up monsters your opponent currently controls", then 'A' (in that conjunction) hasn't been met. That is to say, your opponent controlling a normal monster (or otherwise any monster without an effect) would be enough to prevent 'A' from occurring, however, 'B' (the "your opponent takes no damage" part of the effect) isn't reliant on 'A', so it'd still resolve.

[@YojiroX]

I think you missed the point, that whole section is about activation legality and how the conjunction is irrelevant, Dark Ruler can't be legally activated because the enemy board is already negated. B doesn't need A but A and B both need to be legal for the card to be activated. Like he pointed out in the video if the card is legal to activate but A becomes unable to resolve in the chain after it has already been activated then B will resolve just fine. Activation and Resolving are different things, B doesn't need A to *_Resolve_* to apply/resolve its own effect since the effects happen simultaneously but both effects need to be able to be applied when you try to *_Activate_* the card.

[@Citrusracoon]

I ❤ Professor DistantCoder!!! Teach us Coder!

[@alexjolly5787]

i think the main 1 for people back in the day that would confuse people would be charge of the light bridge were its like mill 3 then search for a lightsworn kinda like dark ruler no more and the dragonmaid

[@enorm_ygo]

MORE VIDEOS LIKE THIS PLEASE!!

[@jkromes20]

I think it would be super helpful to write the conjuctions the way you have them explained in a cheat sheet format the size of a card i can keep in my binder or deck box. Other info too like one for the dmage step stuff.

[@PredicateCapeThe21St]

I wanna say penguin knight could be worded something like this: “When this card is sent from the deck to the graveyard: return all cards in your graveyard to the deck.” This is before watching most of the video and could be completely wrong ofc.

[@EmeraldVEN-Vtuber]

I've always thought "Missing the Timing" was such a dumb mechanic that really limits decks to their full potential and a lot more players would get confused by causing more arguments than it should Also Coder's fave pokemon Aipom? Mine too! Nice!

[@Jolfgard]

Today I will learn why Firestarter's effect was intended to continously apply while Dark Cure's effect was "obviously" not intended to continously apply.

[@damiancartagena2774]

this is extremely helpful, 10/10

[@shaxplosion]

Thanks Coder I watched this instead of uni

[@foxblackbirds777]

I just want to say thank you coder

[@jkromes20]

I have a ruling question: If i activate Mirror Gate, if only one monster survives the battle, will it return to the owner? Does it go through a real battle even? "When an opponent's monster declares an attack targeting a face-up "Elemental HERO" monster you control: Switch control of the opponent's attacking monster with the targeted monster you control, then calculate damage. Control of both monsters switches back during the End Phase."

[@analoghabits9217]

CL1 Deneb, CL2 TT, CL3 Tachyon Transmigration. Deneb's activation is negated retroactively, Dupe doesn't miss timing.

[@23jewfan]

“Every card that you see coming out will be written in a standardized way” Fur Hires beg to differ.

[@xCorvus7x]

13:47 Maybe to people who are completely unfamiliar with tabletop games. It's pretty common for players to have an outside-the-game discussion of what is happening at a given moment and how exactly it is taking place. The distinction between a game's internal time and real time really isn't that obscure. Edit: Use your imagination. It's not the real-life turn of events that is supposed to inform how you feel about what's happening but how that action is treated _in-game._

[@kirbyale7948]

You are a very experienced player and judge and these videos are really helpful, but some links to official sources in the description would also be appreciated. I’m not doubting you, but telling new or less experienced players that a mechanic works in a certain way because “this random video on youtube said so” would be weird

[@siph0r154]

Like with everything worthwhile, cite your sources 😊

[@DistantCoder]

See the main reason i’m making this is because of lot of this isn’t readily available out there. The primary sources my research comes from is official konami blogpost articles, but a lot of this info has been catalogued in documents written by active judges in the community, the OCG database, konami ruling e-mails and some of those are difficult to cite.

[@fabianbeteta5795]

​@DistantCoder you look good with your glasses. Also you would definitely make a good professor of yugioh.

[@shawnmalia9765]

Ok, so here is a genuine question that i thought may have been addressed due to psct being a subject of this video: Why in the age after konami understanding they were going to put psct on their cards, modern day "ryko, the lightsworn hunter", is worded in a way it does not follow one of the more recent conjunctions specific wording?(most likely also in his case) In addition to that, would ryko's "Simultaniously" in parenthesis, make other potential cards miss the timing due to it being a new conjuction not officially printed on any other card(from what im aware of) otherwise? or would a card destroyed by ryko follow other "implied simultanious" timing rulings like "if you do"?

[@TeeteringTod]

Yes

[@emersongrtcg]

Ryko was writted that way because it's a mandatory effect with a optional first part. The "you can" in the first part could make you think all the effect is optional. Look: FLIP: You can destroy 1 card on the field, also, send the top 3 cards of your Deck to the GY. Move the destruction to the end would not be possible, because Konami wants you to destroy before you see what you will send to the GY. To avoid confusion, they just wirited it with dots.

[@ghostspyx5]

Thank you for making this but my lord im glad mtg is my main game as rules are far simpler. I think the weirdest we get is layers or tokens arent cards. I find it interesting the two games have opposite ideas for playing cards. To activate a yugioh effect all parts must be possible to be applied. For magic, all that matters is you have paid all costs.

[@d.r.6177]

The Penguin example: I assume you are correct, but with the new text it would also apply, if it is sent by an opponents card effect from the gy or hand. The original card could imply that they need to control the card.

[@justinalicea1590]

No it doesn't. Both versions are explicit that the card must be in the deck as its starting position, then be sent to the GY by an opponent's card effect.

[@d.r.6177]

@ No, Cards in the GY are not cards that your opponent controls. Cards your opponent controls are those on the field Unless I misunderstand something here

[@justinalicea1590]

@d.r.6177 "the effect of a card controlled by your opponent" is just a really complicated way of saying "an opponent's card effect."

[@rotex03]

This content is super useful.

[@aka_Ingmar]

This is an amazing video but with this video also shows is how complicated this game truly is for no reason other than being complicated sometimes like I can't stand the fact that you have to have an extensive knowledge on a semicolon versus a colon

[@tisajokt7676]

can you explain what is meant by "costs must be paid exactly"? Also, chain blocking? (I think I understand chain blocking, but I also thought I understood missing timing yet still learned a few things from this video)

[@PinkFrappe]

“And if you do” even in common English still implies simultaneous action, just that it has a conditional trigger. For example, your spouse asks you to go out and get milk, and if you do, deposit a check while you’re out. The actions are, logically, simultaneous. You’re going to get milk and you’re going to deposit a check. But if you don’t go out to get milk, you don’t go and deposit the check either. You can go and get the milk, but if something else comes up and prevents you from depositing the check, it doesn’t stop you from getting the milk. Also, the only thing about missing timing I still don’t understand is why *on a fully-automatic digital client* it’s still possible. I get that you need to have your toggle on to hit every possible activation timing, but the fact that it’s even possible for timing to be missed is asinine.

[@justinalicea1590]

Except that you kind of proved yourself wrong in your own example? Because if you hear "and if you do, do b," no one is going to say "I'm going to do action b first." Because it is sequential. And that isn't what missing timing means, as he clearly explained.

[@PinkFrappe]

@ You’re right, that wasn’t the best example. But the point I’m trying to make is that by using “and” in the first place it is implying simultaneity. If you do Action A, and Action B is able to be taken, both actions are taken together. Compared to Action A happening, then if it can, Action B happening after. Grammatically, you wouldn’t use “then” to describe two or more simultaneous events. “Then” implies sequence, and would therefore be incorrect. Let’s go back to my previous example and see if I can correct myself there. “Go to the store and get milk, then go to the bank and deposit this check.” In this case, we have two conjunctions each implying a different timing. If you go to the store, you must get milk. That is simultaneous in resolution. You went to the store and got milk. If you do not or cannot get milk, you do not go to the store which also prevents you from depositing the check. Obviously, in real life, there is nuance to actions. We are not programs made to act as strictly defined. If you went to the store, got milk, and deposited a check, you could say that was all the simultaneous action of “Going Out”. But, if you went to the store, got milk, then deposited the check, you could say it was your sequence of “Running Errands”. The words we use affect how we perceive the action(s) described, especially when multiple can be true at once. As for my confusion on missing timing, let me use a specific example from playing Master Duel with a friend. I’m playing my Scrap deck, with Scrap Factory active in the Field Zone. When the game is set to Toggle Auto, when I use a Scrap monster to destroy another Scrap monster, Scrap Factory misses the timing to Special Summon a “Scrap” monster from the deck. But when my game is set to Toggle On, I get an activation window. That specific example is what I was thinking of when I made my previous comment. Now this could be a bug on the simulator’s side of things, and if it is, then there’s nothing to be done but report it and hope it gets fixed. But, if it isn’t a bug and it’s intentional game design, then I do not understand *why* it is intentionally implemented.

[@dangodoom6156]

I'd like a lesson on effects, activated effects, being negated etc.

[@frosticle6409]

Simple ruling clarification question: Despian Quaritis doesn’t trigger if it returns to the extra deck from the field because it’s the card that’s trying to activate right? But Raye will if a Sky Striker link is spun back to the extra deck because its condition of “If a Sky Striker Ace Link monster leaves the field by opponent’s card effect” was met correct?

[@1danny1032]

Quaritis doesn't trigger because its returned to the deck face down, and it was ruled cards that are face down cannot ACTIVATE (not to be confused with cards already activated then spun or flipped face down) unless otherwise stated in the cards text. Raye is face up in the graveyard and met it's condition so it can activate.

[@stardust9470]

Raye resolves differently because the effect is on a separate card instead of being in the card being returned to the extra deck. Aluber would interact similarly to how Raye interacts with the links in this case. Quaeritis would return and you would be given the option to activate Aluber's trigger effect

[@frosticle6409]

Thanks for the replies. A guy at locals was arguing Raye wouldn’t trigger but I was sure it did. Just wanted to make sure and understand why.

[@xhantTheFirst]

Wait professor I have a question! 27:00 Is it "(Do A, and if you do, do B), also do C" (in which case if you don't do A, you still do C), or "Do A, and if you do, (do B, also do C)" (in which case if you don't do A, you don't do C either

[@monkfishy6348]

With an "also" conjunction, you always do it, regardless of what you managed to do with any prior conjunction.

[@SkullxFreak]

The lightning storm example is good but not even for the reason you bring it up. To activate lightning storm requires the card to be face up. It does not say "other face up card" just face up cards in general. If activation conditions needed to remain true for a card to activate lightning storm would never be useable as playing it would result in it being a face up card on the field and therefore not allowing the activation

[@Gaiall]

It would be perfect if you could add chapters to your ruling videos, it would really help people needing to come back to a specific explanation

[@DistantCoder]

I’ll let my editor know to mark specific chapters for future videos, good suggestion!

[@Kaichi223]

I think I need a brand new Duel Academy right now

[@bryanmckean]

More of this type of content!

[@flex91995]

Someone hire this man. Hebhas that teacher energy down. If we need to build duel academy just to hure him, I'll invest in that project