All rise!

Hello duelists, and welcome back to Court of Appeals! Every two weeks I'll answer your questions about card interactions, game mechanics and tournament policy submitted to I get quite a few submissions, and I most likely can't get to them all. To improve your chances of your e-mail making it to the column, please follow these ground rules...

-I will not answer new questions in the article Comments. If you have a related follow-up question to a question I answer here, you can ask it in the Comments and I will answer it in a reply.

-Please ask only one question per e-mail. Grammar and clarity helps, too.

-I will credit you with how you sign off on your e-mail. If you don't include a name in your signature, I will use your name as it appears in the e-mail's name field with your last initial.

-All answers I give are unofficial unless backed up by an official source.

-I'll be using official game terms whenever possible. If I use jargon (even jargon that is perceived to be universally accepted), I'll note that it's jargon.

-I'll note sources whenever possible.

-I'll always use the official card database as my card text reference. You can find the official card database here:

-I will not answer any questions about cards not released in the TCG.

Please be seated.

Andrew V. writes…

Afternoon Judge Joe! I have another question for you. I recently picked up Heraldics after having watched part of the Zexal anime, and while I was messing with it I started to wonder about the interaction between Number 8: Heraldic King Genom-Heritage and Toadally Awesome. My gut is telling me that Toadally Awesome would end up snatching my Number 8, but I'm not sure. Kind of an easy question, I assume, but it's worth checking on. Thanks for any light you can shed on the subject! ~ Andrew V.

Hello Andrew!

I'm assuming the situation is that you're attempting to use Number 8: Heraldic King Genom-Heritage's effect to copy Todally Awesome's name and effect, but Todally Awesome's effect is chained to negate and destroy number 8? If that's the case, then yes, Number 8 will be negated and destroyed, then possibly set to the opponent's side of the field if they want.

Gustavo D. writes…

Hi, Joe!

Yang Zing True King hybrids are getting pretty popular. But, since the shared effect of the Yang Zing monsters is a "when... you can..." effect, wouldn't Suanni, Fire of the Yang Zing miss its chance to activate when it's destroyed by True King Agnimazud, the Vanisher?

I mean, if Agnimazud destroys, say, Suanni and Bixi, Water of the Yang Zing, the last thing to happen is the successful Special Summon. If it destroys Suanni and another copy of Agnimazud – that is, two Fire monsters, so that it has access to its non-targeting banishing effect – the last thing to happen is the banishment. In both scenarios the destruction of Suanni was not the last thing to happen, so I guess it misses its timing. Am I right or is there a conjunction-related wording issue I'm overlooking? Thanks!

Hello Gustavo!

The answer is in the conjunctions! Let's take a look at Agnimazud's effect. After the colon, there's three separate things happening: two monsters being destroyed, Agnimazud getting Special Summoned, and the optional effect at the end if you satisfied the requirement. All of these abilities are separated with the words "and if you do/did".

Looking at the PSCT article about conjunctions, "and if you do" means you have to complete the part before it in order to proceed to the rest of the effect, and both parts take place at the same time gameplay-wise. That means all three of Agnimazud's effects take place at the same time, which means as long as Agnimazud was chain link 1, nothing will miss the timing here. Your Yang Zing effects can activate in the next chain.

Alex C. writes…

Hello Judge Joe!

I had an interesting question regarding the legality of OCG cards being used in the Extra Deck. Can you please explain why this is not allowed? I understand that OCG cards are not allowed to be played at all, and I can understand with the differing cardboard thicknesses how OCG cards could cause problems in the Main & Side Decks, but the Extra Deck is its own separate entity where shuffling, cutting, and drawing are not factors.

Is it simply a matter of "no means no," or is there something more to this?

Thanks for your time!

Hello Alex!

When dealing with the "whys" of policy direction, you'll never get an official answer from Konami. It's just how it goes. As members of the player and judge community, the best we can do is take well-educated and properly formulated guesses and go from there.

And from this, I can say that carving out an exception for Extra Deck cards would be more trouble than it's worth. Just considering tournament logistics and nothing else, Tournament Organizers and judges at the local level aren't 100% on tournament policy to begin with. If "We can use OCG cards in the Extra Deck" got tossed into tournament policy, we'd start going down the slippery slope where players will think all OCG cards are ok and that would be a huge mess to take care of from an education standpoint alone.

Dusty P. writes…

My question is this: while I have a Paleozoic Opabinia on the field with a Paleozoic Dinomischus as an Xyz Material, my opponent activates Torrential Tribute. The problem is that I control Imperial Iron Wall face-up. Since that stops cards from being banished, and a Paleozoic card Summoned from the graveyard must be banished once removed from the field, where does it go?

Thanks much! ~ Dusty P.

Hello Dusty!

Paleozoic Opabinia is an Xyz Monster, so it would go to the graveyard. The Dinomischus under Opabinia would also normally go to the graveyard since an Xyz Material going to the graveyard doesn't count as a card leaving the field.

However, to address the more pertinent issue, let's say that Paleozoic Dinomischus was a monster on the field instead of being an Xyz Material. In that case, since Imperial Iron Wall prevents cards from being banished, you would send the Dinomischus to wherever it would normally go – the graveyard in this case.


Adam R. writes…

Hello Judge Joe,

I was using Madolches against a friend earlier this week and we had a fairly simple question but we couldn't find an answer anywhere. On my turn, I Normal Summoned Madolche Anjelly and tributed it to Special Summon Madolche Hootcake from deck. I don't remember exactly what happened, but on my next turn, I still had the Hootcake face-up and when I attacked with it, my friend set my Hootcake with Book of Moon.

During that End Phase, the effect of Madolche Anjelly would have shuffled the Hootcake back into my deck if it were still face-up on my field but my friend and I weren't sure if Hootcake being set made Hootcake "forget" it's link with Anjelly or if Anjelly' lingering effect will apply.

Hello Adam!

Cards going face-down will remove any previously resolved effects. Your Madolche Hootcake gets to stay on the field past the time it would be shuffled into the deck, but it's no longer protected from being destroyed by battle from Anjelly's effect.

Justin writes…

Hi Judge Joe,

First time writer, long time reader. My question today is about the interaction between Mask Change and Fullmetalfoes Alkahest. So the resolution would start out with Mask Change targeting an Elemental HERO on my field, let's say it's Elemental HERO Shadow Mist. My opponent has an Alkahest and targets the Shadow Mist and equips it, but would the Mask Change still resolve? I ask because even if Shadow Mist were to leave control or go face-down it would still resolve because the activation condition was met with the target. The Head Judge at my Regional said it wouldn't and I would like your opinion on the matter as well.

Thanks in advance for the help, Justin

Hello Justin!

I can't give you a definitive, rules-backed answer of "can't send the Shadow Mist" since I don't have a source, but I'm in agreement with your Head Judge. Once the Shadow Mist stops being a monster, you can't send it for Mask Change's effect. This is simply my intuition speaking on this one.


Last question!

Hello Joe

You probably think I'm pretty darn clever for figuring out that your name rhymes with "hello." If you went by Joseph, I would have said "Helloseph Joseph!" I'll pause to let you laugh. (Joe: great. thanks.)

I have a policy question more than a ruling question - marked cards are obviously a big no-no, but signed and damaged cards can present problems since they may also affect how easily they are to detect. If I barfed all over my opponent's cards, they'd get hella soaked and easily detectable and thus illegal. I'm not saying I would do that on purpose, but if I happen to eat three pounds of rotten fish the night before a Regional, it sounds like I could get an easy X-0 record after all my opponents would be rendered null with marked cards. Legal, right?



No, no no.

This is awful and you're awful.

I regret having this be the last question.

Wait. I run this place. I make the rules.

Actual last question!

Google writes…

Hi Judge Joe,

You have just signed in on a new computer!

Make the most out of Windows 10 with the Chrome browser. Chrome is a fast, simple and secure browser, built for the modern web.

Download Chrome

Didn't just sign in from a new Windows 10 computer? Someone may have your password. Click here to review the devices that access your Google account.

… you know what? Good enough. Ship it.

And that's it for this week's Court of Appeals! If you have a question about card interactions, game mechanics or tournament policy, send me an e-mail (one question per e-mail please!) to and your question could be answered in a future Court of Appeals!

Court is adjourned

-Joe Frankino

Joe is a Yu-Gi-Oh! judge and player from Long Island, New York. He sometimes writes nonsense unrelated to TCGs in his blog, which is located at, and he occasionally streams video game nonsense at It's all very nonsensical, I assure you.