You are absolutely right, those are my words, and I don't disagree with that. I don't see you disputing what I'm saying.

Just as I said, RoM doesn't redirect attacks until after the attack was declared, which means that RoM doesn't have any bearing on whether or not you can attack. In all of the outlined situations, adding or taking away RoM doesn't change whether or not you can attack.

So if your only monster is Kay'est I can attack, because I'm allowed to declare a direct attack on your lifepoints. RoM doesn't change this ability. So if your Kay'est is equipped with RoM, I can still declare a direct attack. The question now is: What happens?

A) Does the attack get redirected to Kay'est for a similar reason to the fisherman/dreamsprite ruling, that it's being done by an effect and not the attack declaration?

B) Does the attack continue as a direct attack because Kay'est cannot be attacked?

or the new possibility brought up by Magus:

C) Monsters like Kay'est cannot be equipped with RoM for the same reason they cannot be targeted by by Staunch Defender.

and if it is C, then what if you equipped The Legendary Fisherman with RoM when his effect wasn't active (or on Kay'est when skill drain was active). what happens when their effects come into play again? Is RoM destroyed due to the monster no longer being legal (like a type specific equip, like dragon treasure, when dna surgery is used). Or would RoM just be ignored like case B (in which case wouldn't it be more likely that B is correct and not C)?