ITT: Everything is hard OPT

[Mysty]

You can read the title. In this format, every card/effect activation (that starts a chain), self-summoning method listed on card (whether effect or summon condition), or specially named Special Summon per monster (except Pendulum Summon) is only once per turn.

To provide an example of each:
• Pot of Greed would have "You can only use 1 'Pot of Greed' per turn."

• Mass Driver would have "You can only use the effect of 'Mass Driver' once per turn."

• Cyber Dragon would have "You can only special summon 'Cyber Dragon' with this procedure once per turn."
• You can only Ritual Summon "Hungry Burger" once per turn.
• You can only Fusion Summon "Elemental HERO Flame Wingman" once per turn.

• You can only special summon "XYZ-Dragon Cannon" with this procedure once per turn.
• You can only Synchro Summon "Stardust Dragon" once per turn.
• You can only Xyz Summon "Number 39: Utopia" once per turn.
• You can only Link Summon "Firewall Dragon" once per turn.

• You can only use each of the summoning procedures on "Beast-Eyes Pendulum Dragon" once per turn.

No longer could Konami "forget" to make burn effects hard OPT. Do note that additional restrictions such as "Can only use 1 effect of [card name] per turn and only once each turn" still apply.

There are a couple of exceptions, though: Anything that reads "up to twice per turn:" or "can only use the effect of [name] up to twice per turn" would read as the latter. Analogously for thrice per turn as well.

 

What are some repercussions of this?

• PRO: Most of the banlist could probably come off.
• PRO: It would be very difficult to FTK, OTK, or just loop in general.
• CON: The game would take a lot more bookkeeping.

These are just very general points without referring to the meta at all, so I'd like to know what you guys think. Did I miss any other large effects? Is anything unclear?  What kinds of meta repercussions would this have, or are decks these days so reliant on repetition that literally the entire meta would be dead and nobody could predict what the rising meta would be? Please leave comments sharing your thoughts.

[Dova]

Would this apply to ED monsters as well?

[Mysty]

Would this apply to ED monsters as well?

Thank you for pointing that out. Yes, Link Summons, Xyz Summons, Synchro Summons, or whatever other inherent summon methods they come up with this would apply to.

EDIT: On second thought, make that all Extra Deck summons.

EDIT EDIT: Clarified to that Special Summoning from the extra deck using the same method and used an example to show where it would be okay to summon two Stardust Dragons in the same turn (Synchro and Starlight Road).

EDIT EDIT EDIT: These rules are getting much more complicated than I thought due to overlooking so obvious.

EDIT EDIT EDIT EDIT: Streamlined the rule and I'm pretty sure I listed all the possibilities. Now to wait until someone else pokes a hole in it again.

[Dova]

So, how about Ritual Spells? I mean, Nekroz wouldn't get hit too badly, as they have such a large toolbox, but mah Gishki. Does that mean Polymerization would also get HOPT? I honestly can't even imagine that.

 

EDIT: Nevermind you updated the post lol

[Mysty]

So, how about Ritual Spells? I mean, Nekroz wouldn't get hit too badly, as they have such a large toolbox, but mah Gishki. Does that mean Polymerization would also get HOPT? I honestly can't even imagine that.

 

EDIT: Nevermind you updated the post lol

Yeah, I quickly realized that I had a deep rabbit hole considering that some Xyz Summons are inherent and others are created by Rank-Up-Magics, so i decided "screw it, let's just make it tied to the summons per monster."

And yes, Polymerization and Ritual Spells do still get a once per turn clause (that's just part of the first example). You can, however, use Shaddoll Fusion and El Shaddoll Fusion in the same turn to summon two different Fusion monsters - add in Super poly for a third different Fusion Monster. How you managed to get that much EMZ/Linked space is beyond me, but whatever.

 

EDIT: I've removed the drawback from pendulum Summon. It's already hard OPT and it's been hurt enough with the recent changes.

[Sleepy]

This change would probably encourage a slight tilt towards less copies of cards due to the now inability of cards to sustain the extension of certain plays through re-using the same engine.

The interesting bit would be, how much would that be altered? I don't think decks would go highlander as a result, but it'd depend on if a card is still absolutely needed enough to be maxed out or if you want to go for other routes.

 

For one, a ton of things would come off with their brand new built-in HOPT clause, and even things like Level Eater, Firewall, Grinder Golem, Topologic Bomber, DAD, JD, etc. would cease being questionable to list attention-worthy. On the other hand, cards like Krebons, Black Garden, Maestroke, Zenmaines, and even Stardust, would be severely nerfed (although they are off the grid in competitive anyways, but still).

 

It'd be amusing to see unfold.

[Mysty]

(1) This change would probably encourage a slight tilt towards less copies of cards due to the now inability of cards to sustain the extension of certain plays through re-using the same engine.

The interesting bit would be, how much would that be altered? I don't think decks would go highlander as a result, but it'd depend on if a card is still absolutely needed enough to be maxed out or if you want to go for other routes.

 

For one, a ton of things would come off with their brand new built-in HOPT clause, and even things like Level Eater, Firewall, Grinder Golem, Topologic Bomber, DAD, JD, etc. would cease being questionable to list attention-worthy. On the other hand, cards like Krebons, (2) Black Garden, (3) Maestroke, Zenmaines, and even (4) Stardust, would be severely nerfed (although they are off the grid in competitive anyways, but still).

 

It'd be amusing to see unfold.

 

1. I didn't think of that people would just build less consistent decks. Perhaps this is a good thing, but I can imagine this being unpopular with the 'competitive' crowd.

2. Argh, I didn't think about mandatory effects. Might have to change the rule to not affect mandatory effects.

3. Are you referring to their "If this would be destroyed, you can detach 1 Xyz Material instead" line? I'm pretty sure replacement effcts and continuous effects would still be unaffected. From what I understand, "use" essentially means "activate" with a caveat that it still counts even if the activation is negated. If I'm wrong on that, let me know and I may or may add/change a ruling.

4. How does Stardust Dragon get worse? Each effect would still be able to be used hard once per turn, so it would still be able to tribute itself and revive itself. The only issue is that having multiples out would be redundant except for their size.

 

I'm just happy to see more than one other person post in one of my theory threads.

[Darj]

I made a similar thread about 4 years ago, and looking at it again it had good reception. Needless to say, I support the idea, although I'm not fully convinced about a hard OPT on the proper Summon of monsters, if only because some decks/archetypes may rely on the repeated Summon of the same monster, and this ruling would screw up their playstyle entirely. I cannot think of any specific deck at the moment, but wouldn't be surprised if there was something around somewhere, perhaps at a casual level.

[Sleepy]

1. I didn't think of that people would just build less consistent decks. Perhaps this is a good thing, but I can imagine this being unpopular with the 'competitive' crowd.

2. Argh, I didn't think about mandatory effects. Might have to change the rule to not affect mandatory effects.

3. Are you referring to their "If this would be destroyed, you can detach 1 Xyz Material instead" line? I'm pretty sure replacement effcts and continuous effects would still be unaffected. From what I understand, "use" essentially means "activate" with a caveat that it still counts even if the activation is negated. If I'm wrong on that, let me know and I may or may add/change a ruling.

4. How does Stardust Dragon get worse? Each effect would still be able to be used hard once per turn, so it would still be able to tribute itself and revive itself. The only issue is that having multiples out would be redundant except for their size.

 

I'm just happy to see more than one other person post in one of my theory threads.

 

1. I'm sad to see that, but gotta say it is true. I personally like those sorts of handycaps where everybody is equally screwed in consistency and are forced to main deck a different engine that works well with their theme as a way to minimize the consistency damage. I'm part of the children of the Synchro era though, when the super popular Plant engine was an example of 4 to 5 "one of" cards that were still awesome to have. It is I think a very unpopular opinion though, since judging from threads I've made in the past or seen people make in the past, someone always calls out on how they cannot search their cards as quickly and treat it as a deal breaker =(

 

3. I am not entirely sure myself. Being continuous means it doesn't start a chain and doesn't have to worry about mistiming it in a chain resolving. It might just be just what you say... It kind of sounds like "use" covers "activate" there, but "activate" doesn't cover "use" at all times. Then again, I don't recall the last time I saw "activate" in a card in that clause, so ultimately am not sure.

 

4. The Stardust change is a somewhat small one, but it is a significant one, you see: When Stardust comes back during the End Phase, if a player does a destruction effect (like trying to Bottomless the Stardust), Stardust can Tribute itself to negate it even though it is just coming back, and since it is still the End Phase, it can immediately self-Special Summon, and should more destruction effects kick in, it can rinse and repeat within the same turn any number of times necessary, as long as the End Phase doesn't end.

With your change, that Stardust coming back from its own protection effect will now be unable to re-use its effect, and will get destroyed by a second card trying to destroy it.

[Mysty]

1. I'm sad to see that, but gotta say it is true. 1. I personally like those sorts of handycaps where everybody is equally screwed in consistency and are forced to main deck a different engine that works well with their theme as a way to minimize the consistency damage. I'm part of the children of the Synchro era though, when the super popular Plant engine was an example of 4 to 5 "one of" cards that were still awesome to have. It is I think a very unpopular opinion though, since judging from threads I've made in the past or seen people make in the past, someone always calls out on how they cannot search their cards as quickly and treat it as a deal breaker =(

 

3. I am not entirely sure myself. 2. Being continuous means it doesn't start a chain and doesn't have to worry about mistiming it in a chain resolving. It might just be just what you say... It kind of sounds like "use" covers "activate" there, but "activate" doesn't cover "use" at all times. Then again, I don't recall the last time I saw "activate" in a card in that clause, so ultimately am not sure.

 

4. The Stardust change is a somewhat small one, but it is a significant one, you see: When Stardust comes back during the End Phase, if a player does a destruction effect (like trying to Bottomless the Stardust), Stardust can Tribute itself to negate it even though it is just coming back, and since it is still the End Phase, it can immediately self-Special Summon, and should more destruction effects kick in, it can rinse and repeat within the same turn any number of times necessary, as long as the End Phase doesn't end.

3. With your change, that Stardust coming back from its own protection effect will now be unable to re-use its effect, and will get destroyed by a second card trying to destroy it.

 

1. So do I. I'm of a firm believer in a quote by Mark Rosewater - "It's not my job to make a game easy for the players; it's actually my job to make a game hard." By this he means that, while rules should be easy to grasp (otherwise nobody would play the game for different reasons), cards shouldn't just give players everything they need without needing to improvise a bit or use them wisely. (In fact, part of my complaint about modern-day Yugioh is that it does make the game really easy, what with Link/Synchro/Xyz spamming that result in nearly-unbreakable boards on the first turn.)

 

2. I did some research and, while I've never seen a continuous effect with a hard OPT clause, unclassified effects (which really should have a different name by now) can have hard OPT clauses despite seemingly not activating (see Beginning Knight). With this in mind, I'll probably have to write "that start a chain" in the rules above just to be sure.

 

3. Oh yeah, I forgot that particular ruling existed in this game, so I'm rather fine to see it gone.

[Azuriena]

So, how about Ritual Spells? I mean, Nekroz wouldn't get hit too badly, as they have such a large toolbox

 

Or at all considering they are Hard OPT: The Archetype.

 

All their Ritual Spell Cards already have hard OPTs on their first effects.