You can only activate this card when a monster(s) with an ATK of 1000 or less is Normal Summoned, Flip Summoned or Special Summoned. Remove from play those Summoned monster(s), and your opponent removes from play all monsters of the same name in their hand and Deck. Their Deck is then shuffled.

1) Would you check their hand?
I assume yes.

2) If the answer to 1) is yes, then would you still check if your opponent summoned a Sangan or Treeborn Frog and you activated Chain Disappearance?

3) If the answer to 1) is yes, then would you still check if your opponent removed 2 copies of the card from their deck to their RFG and the one copy to the field.

1 is yes

2 is yes, since as far as I know, a card effect is not aware of the banlist.

3 I sadly do not know. But i would venture a guess as to yes.

3 - Refer to rules for Nobleman of Crossout for this scenario. As long as the opponent removes at least one copy from their hand/deck then you may not verify their deck's contents. If they do not remove anything other than the monster removed by Chain Disapperance, you have the right to verify if they have anymore copies or not.

Are you positive of that Magus? Because by "referring to the rules for Nobleman of Crossout" the only ruling that I see that applies to this is:

• If the targeted monster is a Flip Effect Monster, it is not flipped face-up and its Flip Effect is not activated. Both players must reveal their Decks to each other to verify that all cards of the same name as the Flip Effect Monster are removed from play.

Which makes no mention as to whether or not any additional cards were removed, or how many were removed. It simply states that both players MUST reveal their decks for verification.

Not really questioning you, but I find it odd that if when they summon the first copy, that just because they remove a second from their deck you can't verify that they don't have a third.

In my opinion the verification should be allowed no matter what the circumstance. For the same reason that when my sangan dies I have to show you the entire card, rather than just the bottom edge of the card to prove its ATK is 1500 or less.

The only reason why I say that is because there has been this ruling for effects like NoC where as long as you remove one copy of the card the opponent does not verify the contents of the deck. This ruling has been a long-standing one and is what I based my post on.

If, however, it no longer exists then I will retract my statement. Unfortunately I have lost the link to the old judge list and can't find the post where it was stated (anybody wanna help me with that one?).

I could be wrong, but this ruling I gave is how it was played for a good while.

I looked it up for you and found this under the title "Nobleman of crossout and verification". It seems to only corroborate that you CAN in fact verify the deck if no three copies were removed ...

Thnx, good to know they have this now.

I can feel the rules abuse now . . .

I thought that you would leave the rules abuse to us ;) @.@

Well its been around a while and I've not seen much abuse. I don't think its very well known.

It seems more likely to occur with chain dissappearance. You can summon a monster yourself that you know the opponent doesn't play, chain disappear it, and you get a free peek at hand and deck. Lovely for decks running cards like Mind Crush, DD designator, Dark Designator or prohibition ...

Well, in all fairness, that post doesn't really clarify anything about what Magus and I were discussing. It only states that verification is done by the player, not a judge. It doesn't state anything about situations where verification would/wouldn't be allowed.

I know it's been said that if you were to NoC a flip effect monster that was limited to 1 that you can still verify. And honestly, I think I might remember seeing something similar to what Magus said before. I just don't think it makes sense.

I mean if I run Exiled Forces, and I summon 1 and it gets chain disappeared and I remove 1 from my deck, then you're not allowed to check if I have a 3rd?

I personally think that as long as you remove the number of copies, or can verify the location of the max number of copies allowed for that card verification shouldn't be allowed. For example if I run 3 of a monster and 1 is in my graveyard, and I summon a 2nd that gets disappeared, and I remove a the 3rd copy that was in my hand, no verification should be required since the location of all 3 are in public view. And if a card is limited to 1 and it gets disappeared then no verification should be necessary for that player since they can only play 1.

This way verification only occurs when it's possible that a player has another copy in a place that isn't a part of public knowledge (such as the hand or deck).

And as to the comment that card effects are not aware of the ban list, well verification isn't part of the effect, it's part of the policy, on the same level as the ban list.

Even if the flip effect monster is a limited card the verification is still carried out as evidenced by this previous judge list post…..

http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=7467#7467

According to the same thread it’s the player who verifies the contents (or lack of contents) of the deck. The judge should not to be involved.

I know that verification is still done even if the card is limited, I said it was my personal opinion of the way I think it should be. I know that you still verify even if it's a limited card, I just don't see the reason. When you're checking to make sure your opponent doesn't have copies that shouldn't be in his deck you're now checking if their deck is legal, which is something that the judges and/or other tournament staff should be handling via decklists and deckchecks.

We've also already established that the players do the verification and not the judges.

The current question is that from what Magus stated earlier that if a player removes at least 1 copy from their deck, that you cannot verify. Essentially that you can only verify if they don't remove any.

What gives anyone that idea? Was there something in the rulings or judge list post I missed? I've never seen any reference to that anywhere.

Magus said it was a ruling for Nobleman of Crossout, but he can't find it either (may have been in the old judgelist on yahoo). The thing is I think I remember something like that, but don't quite remember exactly where or what it actually said.

We're mainly trying to confirm/deny that the ruling ever existed.

I looked all over the old judge board and all I find is confirmation that there never was such a ruling. Now, can we apply what we have found so far to Xav's original question ?

1.You would only check their hand if they didn't remove 3 copies all together from their deck. Since the effect explicitly says from hand and deck, if they do not remove three copies total, then yes, you get to look at their hand.

2.Yes, you would. As per the rules on NoC about limited flip effect monsters, you do get to look at hand and deck when it is a limited monster.

3.No, if three copies were removed, you would not get to check their hand or their deck.