Field Spell is also a spell card yeah?

[76561199680209969]

When an effect says "spell/trap cards" be it be destroy or protect,, etc,, the effects also apply to the Field Spell right?

Nother random question:

If you have a protection effect live on the field like uuuhh.. "cannot be destroy by this and that" then you activated a card with said protection, got hit by negate and destroy, i wonder what would happen on that interaction... Will the activated card survive? Talking about cards that stays on the field like monsters continuous spell/traps

Come on m8s help me out here cooking something up.

[Papa Shekels]

Field spells are spell cards, but activating the effect of one that has already resolved is a spell effect. The reason that's relevant is because many cards that negate the activation only say a spell/trap card OR monster effect, meaning they will not allow you to negate a field spell that was already activated earlier and is activating its effect. To cover that, it would have to specifically say negate a spell/trap card or effect. This is in contrast to a field spell that does something when activated, like the search effect on the visas planets, which CAN be negated in that way because negating the activation also negates the on-activation effects.

For example: Solemn judgment only negates and destroys a spell/trap card, NOT the effect of a spell/trap that has already been activated.
Gate guardian of wind and water negates the effect of a spell/trap card OR effect, but it does not destroy it, so negating the effect of a continuous/field/equip spell doesn't actually stop its activation.
F.A. dawn dragster negates and destroys the activation OR effect of a s/t, so that would cover any scenario.

If a card has protection, but you negate its activation and destroy it, it is still destroyed. A card's protection effects do not apply until it is successfully activated/summoned on to the field

[HeraldOfOpera]

There's also the fact that the field zone is not a "spell/trap card zone" and a bunch of cards care about that distinction.