The difference here is, Command Knight cannot be voluntarily selected as a target by the PLAYER. You aren't selecting Command Knight, Ring of Magnetism is forcing you to attack Command Knight.

Guardian Kay'est cannot be attacked by your opponents monsters, which means that even with Ring of Magnetism equipped, a monster cannot attack her, and since the only target on the field according to Ring of Magnetism happens to be Guardian Kay'est, you cannot select the opponent, nor can you select her, so you cannot attack.

If Ka'yest can't be attacked then you cannot voluntarily attack her either, I still don't agree with this, I understand the point of view, but countless rules apply that Ring of Magnetism overrides any internal effect a monster/trap/spell would have.

Ex: Raregold Armor, Marauding Captain, Command Knight, Patrician of Darkness, etc.

Why would Ka'yest be the exception, the fact that the monster cannot be selected "by herself" doesn't imply that it doesn't follow a similar if not the exact same pattern as the rest.

That doesn't make any sense. Ring of Magnetism has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not you can attack. It doesn't do anything until an attack has been declared. RoM can't prevent attacks because it doesn't do anything until after the attack has been declared. Kay'est doesn't prevent attacks because it's considered "invisible" to the attacking monster.

So if your only monster was Kay'est, then the attacking monster would think you had an open field. Adding RoM doesn't change anything, because the attacking monster doesn't become aware of RoM until after he starts attacking, he still sees an open field. Therefore the monster attempts to attack directly, at this point RoM jumps up and tries to draw the attack toward the equipped Kay'est.

There are 2 possibilities, either RoM succeeds and Kay'est is attacked, or RoM fails and the the opponent is attacked directly.

First you declare an attack with a monster, and make any payments for the attack.
Then you declare your target.

Ring of Magnetism steps in and replaces the part where you choose your target.

Ring of Magnetism cannot create a block.

I'm looking, but I don't seem to be able to find that part where it says, ignore Ring of Magnetism's effect until you declare an attack.....

Text
You can only equip this card to a monster on your side of the field. Decrease the ATK and DEF of a monster equipped with this card by 500 points. In addition, all the monsters on your opponent's side of the field can only attack the monster equipped with this card, if they attack.

"If they attack" means that you already know what your target is, regardless of the ability to attack a certain monster or not, Command Knight or Kay'est notwithstanding. You HAVE a target by Ring of Magnetism's effect before you even choose to attack.

Its decided for you, so knowing that Guardian Kay'est cannot be attacked by a monster, doesnt mean that you cannot declare an attack, but you cannot attack "her", and Ring of Magnetism has already placed a condition that only you can only attack a designated monster if you attack, so how can the opponent be selected instead?

Also, Kay'est isnt "invisible". She just can't be attacked by a monster, and if Ring of Magnetism overrides Command Knights effect, why is it that you cannot attack if there are two of them face-up on the field, and one equipped with Ring of Magnetism?

Because their effect still applies.

If you control 2 face-up "Command Knights", and no other monsters, and 1 of them is equipped with "Ring of Magnetism", your opponent cannot attack because the 2 "Command Knights" are preventing an attack from being declared. "Ring of Magnetism"'s effect forcefully leads the attack to the equipped monster only when the opponent declares an attack, which is impossible for your opponent to do.


But if Kay'est is the only monster on the field you can still attack (even if it is directly).

But the problem is that Kay'est isn't protecting herself from an attack, she is being IGNORED as an attack target.

Command Knight and Marauding Captain do not ignore, they have a built-in RoM (in a sense) because they redirect attack targets as well.

Another possibility is that RoM can't be placed on Kay'est.

This is somethign I believe has been over-looked, perhaps it's something worth considering?

I'll take that one for 200 Jack... :D

Ok, if we want to "consider" things:

The effect of "Patrician of Darkness" does not override the effects of "Marauding Captain", "The Legendary Fisherman", "Solar Flare Dragon", etc. You cannot choose an attack target prevented by the effects of these cards. Examples: You cannot choose "The Legendary Fisherman" as an attack target if "Umi" is on the field. You cannot choose another Warrior-Type monster as an attack target when you control "Marauding Captain".

You can target a "Command Knight", "Guardian Kay'est" or "The Legendary Fisherman" with "Umi" on the field with "Ancient Lamp's" effect. You can target the opponent's "Soul-Absorbing Bone Tower" even if they control another face-up Zombie-Type monster.


Would you take that one for 1000?


PS: haven't since you in MSN Mag...

Try this link:
http://lists.upperdeck.com/read/messages?id=9370#9370

Notice the part that says this:

Also, lets look specifically at the scenarios where you either have only Kay'est, or you have only 2 command knights:

2 Command Knights:
You cannot attack because there are no legal attack targets. And because there are "visable" monsters on the field you can't attack directly.

Kay'est:
Not only is Kay'est not a legal attack target, but she is also "invisable" to the attacking monster, so it's like there is an open field and a direct attack is allowed.

As a bonus, lets look at command knight and Kay'est together:
Again, Kay'est is not a legal target, and she is "invisable" to the attacking monster. The only monster the attacking monster sees is the command knight. Because there is at least one "visable" monster a direct attack is not allowed. But Command Knight still sees Kay'est and is therefore not a legal target. So there are no legal targets and you can't attack directly.

In the 2 command knight scenario and the command knight/Kay'est scenario adding RoM doesn't change anything because you can't declare an attack because there are no legal targets.

You asked if RoM overrides command knight's ability then why can't you attack when you have 2, well if it doesn't override command knight, then why can you attack when you only control a command knight and another warrior? By your logic, If I had Command knight equipped with RoM and another warrior monster, that before I even choose to attack, the command knight is already has to be my target. But I can't attack him and It'd be a lock. Which if FALSE.

The reason is because of when RoM comes into play. It changes the attack target AFTER the attack has been declared. Which is why with 1 command knight and another monster you can attack, because you (attempt to) declare the other monster as the target, and RoM redirects it to com.knight. But with 2 com.knights, you cannot attack at all and RoM doesn't make a difference.

deck, I was going to bring those cards up, but they really don't help the conversation. I'm not sure what use patrician is in this, as he can't even get around things like MC he doesn't have any bearing on Fisherman/Kay'est.

And as for Ancient Lamp, I believe the reason it works is at least partially because Fisherman/Kay'est would be attacked by a monster on their own side of the field. Their effects only state that they can't be attacked by your opponent's monsters, they aren't protected from your own.

With 2 Command Knights, the "unequipped" one can never be the target, so obviously, you would have to keep bouncing back to the equipped one because it has Ring of Magnetism. Since it "can't" be attacked because of its effect, it sends you back to the unequipped one, but again, you can't attack that one, so it keeps bouncing back and forth.

I brought them up for 2 reasons, the effect of Patrician that doesn't override the monsters effect, RoM does, and for similar conditions, which prove that RoM has a preceding effect first.

And second for Ancient Lamp, which is similar to a Dreamsprite:

[Re: Dreamsprite] If you control "Dreamsprite", "The Legendary Fisherman", and "Umi" is on the field, "Dreamsprite"'s effect can still change an attack target to "The Legendary Fisherman" because he is not being targeted with an attack, but is being targeted with a monster effect.

Which by my standards RoM is forcing it as part of an effect.

The unequipped Command Knight is forcing the soft-lock.

Let's look at these scenarios at the same time. You have 2 monsters, one is a C.Knight equipped with RoM. For this example we'll look at the 2nd monster either being another C.Knight or being a normal monster.

You state that RoM designates the target before you even decide to attack. In this case it's designating the C.Knight. You also state that in the case of 2 C.Knights that you can't attack because the designated target cannot be attacked.

In other words, your reason for why the 2 C.Knight scenario is a lock is based entirely on the RoM and the equipped C.Knight. The effect and identity of the other monster makes no difference based on that logic.

Yet, if the 2nd monster is not a C.Knight you can and will attack the equipped C.Knight. Clearly what the other monster is does make a difference.

It's because RoM DOES override C.Knight's effect, but RoM doesn't do anything until the attack is declared. In the case of 2 C.Knights, no attack can be declared and therefore RoM's effect never even needs to be looked at. But if the other monster is not a C.Knight, then you can declare an attack on it, and then RoM redirects the attack at the equipped C.Knight and overrides it's effect.

The only thing Ring of Magnetism does, is override "choice", not effects. This is the same argument used for Swords of Revealing Light and Threatening Roar.

Swords prevents "monster" from attacking. I don't know about you, but I dont have a single monster card in my vast collection, that has an effect that allows it to declare an attack on its own. So, semantics aside, the whole "Player versus Monster" argument is weak, but that's the way its supposed to go.

Going by the logic "Player versus Monster", if a monster can still attack through Swords because its unaffected by Spell or Traps, then why shouldnt there be a situation where a Spell Card dictates that a player "must attack" a card that they themselves cannot declare as a "attack target"?

As you stated, if Command Knight is on the field with one other monster, Ring of Magnetism isnt affecting the player until they "declare" they are attacking the other monster, so they DIDNT declare an attack on Command Knight, did they? Ring of Magnetism forced them to attack Command Knight. Remember, these are your words that the redirection doesnt occur until an attack is declared....

So, since (by Command Knights text) a player cannot declare an attack on Command Knight while another monster is on the field, they are not violating his effect by attacking him through Ring of Magnetism.