I though you were saying that if would stay removed from play =P

Might as just say on the text "When this face-up card is removed from play"

Meh, too easy lol... Konami rises to the ocation every time a cards text needs to be a bit clearer :p

That's true..."Hey!! Even though this card can say this and be simpler to understand, let's have it say this and give people huge headaches trying to figure it out!!" XD

I got 1 more: If My DD survivor gets targeted while face down with nobleman of crossout, will he comeback later???

No it doesn't "face-up on the field".

Mechanic's wise, D.D. Survivor never flips face-up before removal. The only reason either player knows what the target was is because it must be checked in order to identify whether it is a "FLIP:" type effect. Other than that, because it must be placed in the RFG face-up, it is natural to start the process from the field, but it is not mechanically recognized as "face-up" when it is removed.

what are you talking about? have your read dd survivor? dd survivor returns to the owners side of the field. permanent control or not the owner is the owner. as long as dd survivor is face up when it gets removed it will always return to the owners side of the field (unless a full field or some other effect prevents him from coming back at all)

phiefer3 is correct because when a card is removed from play it is sent to the owners remove from play pile and then its effect activates at the end phase. I am still not sure why it was ruled as "yourside" means the controller while the special summon goes to the owner. It didnt make to much sense to me to add all that face up on yourside of the field crap when face up was just as good.

I believe I know what I'm talking about.

Anyway...

Not sure what this is meant to signify, but it shows that the last person to have "Permanent Control" retains the services of D.D. Survivor.

In the Message, Player B established Temporary Control of D.D. Survivor by using Snatch Steal.

When he attacked D.D. Assailant and was removed from play, Snatch Steal was destroyed by Game Mechanics, and D.D. Survivor no longer has a "active" effect allowing him to be controlled by Player B.

The "Your side of the field" argument simply left that way, would imply that he returns to "Your side of the field". By placing "...Summoned to the owner's side of the field...", signifies that it will again return to the last person who had Permanent Control.

Ownership is not just established by "who takes the card home" at the end of the day. Ownership is as simple as who's side of the field the card returns to as the Permanent Controller.

When you summon a Monster using Monster Reborn, from your opponents Graveyard, you are the "owner" even if you are not the Original Owner. If the Original Owner takes control of the Reborn monster using Snatch Steal, and Snatch Steal is later destroyed, does the monster stay on the Original Owner's side of the field, or does it return to the Reborn Owner's side of the field?

The Hand, Graveyard, and Deck are the only places that can remove a monsters control from a non original owner (also Remove Brainwashing). If the monster is removed from play, and there is no effect establishing control that can be reset, i.e, "Brain Control or Snatch Steal", they retain control.


Remove Brainwashing
Continuous Trap
As long as this card remains face-up on the field, the control of all monsters on the field returns to the original owners.


If there was no such thing as "owner" vs "original owner" there would be no need to place that in the effect of Remove Brainwashing.

Now, I can fully accept being "wrong", but it needs to be a better argument than because the card says "return to owner". We know how the Sacred Phoenix argument worked out concerning his text....

Actually it signifies that it returns to Player A (the Original Owner), I understand where you are coming from, but there are several other examples that support this particular case, for instance: Strike Ninja and Return from the Different Dimension.

You might have to refresh my memory on Srike Ninja scenario, as it pertains to a Reborn Opponents Strke Ninja, or a Strike Ninja that the controller has Permanent Control over.



Strike Ninja Effect Vs Creature Swap And Snatch Steal 2005-04-10 10:51:00 <Morgan Adams>


1.
Adama has Strike Ninja

Baltar has Goblin Attack Force. He actives Creature Swap.

Adama gives Baltar Strike Ninja and receives Goblin Attack Force.

In a later turn, Baltar activates Strike Ninja's effect to remove it from play.

Would Strike Ninja return to Adama or Baltar?


2.
Snatch Steal: Baltar uses Snatch Steal and then, after receiving Strike Ninja, uses its effect. Who does it return to?


Morgan Adams



Answer:

1. "Strike Ninja" would return to Baltar's side of the field and remain there.

2. "Strike Ninja" would return to Baltar's side of the field, but then control reverts back to Adama because it is no longer equipped with "Snatch Steal."

----------------------------------
Curtis Schultz
Official UDE Netrep
[email protected]



Balter has Permanent Control of Strike Ninja, thanks to Creature Swap. Balter uses the effect of Strike Ninja to remove him from play. Strike Ninja returns to Balter's side of the field, and guess what?? He stays there. How is this any different than using Return from the Different Dimension?

http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=4649#4649

Refer to Strike Ninja when equipped with Snatch Steal.

Well you got to it first, but isn't the scenario involved with cards like Snatch Steal, Brain Control etc.??

Creature Swap exchanges monsters.