Digital Jedi's Erratas That Make Sense

[Digital Jedi]

Essentially, a thread that I've moved from the Realms, this thread will be formatted a little differently. The previous one solicited everyone's suggestions and presented it as a challenge, allowing players a long felt need to vent some of their distaste for rulings that make no sense or Game Mechanics that felt vague and were difficult to explain. This time, however, as the opportunity arises, I will present my own personalized erratas for cards in desperate need of one. In addition, I'll present Game Mechanic "labels" similar to ones found in other TCG like Magic: TG and The VS. System.


Here's a collection of erratas I've saved to date:

Current Text: Waboku
"Make all Battle Damage inflicted by monsters on your opponent's side of the field 0 during this turn."

Digital Jedi's Errata: Waboku
"Make all Battle Damage inflicted to you (and monsters you control) by your opponent's monsters 0 for the duration of this turn."

One confusing phrase that has seen numerous threads in this forum and others is the phrase: "This card cannot be Normal Summoned or Set. This card cannot be Special Summoned except by . . . " So I suggested we replace it with one phrase:

NOMI:

Therfore we would have the following:

Mazera DeVille
NOMI: Offer 1 face-up "Warrior of Zera" on your side of the field as a Tribute while "Pandemonium" is on the field.
If "Pandemonium" is on your side of the field when you Special Summon this card successfully, your opponent discards 3 random cards from his/her hand.

Red-Eyes Darkness Dragon
NOMI: Tribute 1 "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" on your side of the field.
Increase the ATK of this card by 300 points for each Dragon-Type monster in your Graveyard.

Dark Paladin
FUSION NOMI: "Dark Magician" + "Buster Blader"
As long as this card remains face-up on the field, you can negate the activation of 1 Spell Card and destroy the Spell Card by discarding 1 card from your hand.
The ATK of this card increases by 500 points for each Dragon-Type monster on the field and in either player's Graveyard.

Ascended Trunks and DMKnight helped me out with another phrase that's a little overused: "If this card attacks with an ATK that is higher than the DEF of your opponent's Defense Position monster, inflict the difference as Battle Damage to your opponent's Life Points." So Ascended Trunks suggested:

Overkill. EDIT: This term has been since been changed to Impale courtesy a suggestion by DaGuyWitBluGlasses.

Spear Dragon
Overkill. When this card attacks, it is changed to Defense Position at the end of the Damage Step.

Gaia Soul the Combustible Collective
Overkill. You can tribute up to 2 Pyro-Type Monsters on your side of the field. If you do this, increase the ATK of this monster by the number of Tributed monsters x 1000 points.
Destroy this card during the End Phase.

Fairy Meteor Crush
Equipped monster has Overkill.

When ever a counter was definitively not a Spell Counter I felt it should say so. Also to help clarify this particular card's rulings:

Current Text: Magic Reflector
Select 1 Spell Card that remains face-up on the field and put 1 counter on it. If the selected card is destroyed, the counter is removed instead of the card being destroyed.

Digital Jedi's Errata: Magic Reflector
Select 1 Spell Card that remains face-up on the field and put 1 "Reflector Counter' on it. If the selected card is destroyed by an effect (other than its own), the "Reflector Counter" is removed instead of the card being destroyed.

This one was personal. I still dont understand why it works the way it does. It just does. So:

Current Text: Ultimate Offering
At the cost of 500 Life Points per monster, a player is allowed an extra Normal Summon or Set.

Digital Jedi's Errata: Ultimate Offering
At the cost of 500 Life Points per monster, the controller of this card is allowed an extra Normal Summon or Set during his/her Main Phase and your opponent's Battle Phase. (This does not include your Battle Phase)

Heres something JDOS suggested that I thought was a great idea:

You know what would really be nice, too, is having the monster card text actually spell out what type of effect the monster has. It would really help out with cards like Divine Wrath and figuring out what it can and can't be activated against (King Tiger Wanghu comes to mind).

Something like this:

Jowgen the Spiritualist
Effect Monster (Spellcaster / LIGHT / 3 Stars / ATK 200 / DEF 1300)

Ignition: Randomly discard 1 card from your hand to the Graveyard to destroy all Special Summoned monsters on the field.

Continuous: As long as this card remains face-up on the field, no monsters can be Special Summoned.

or

Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Beginning
Effect Monster (Warrior / LIGHT / 8 Stars / ATK 3000 / DEF 2500)

Summoning Requirement: This card can only be Special Summoned by removing 1 LIGHT and 1 DARK monster in your Graveyard from play.

Once during each of your turns, you can select and activate 1 of the following effects:

Ignition: Remove 1 monster on the field from play. If you activate this effect, this card cannot attack during this turn.

Optional Trigger: If this card destroyed your opponent's monster as a result of battle, it can attack once again in a row.

And here are the most recent additions to the list:

Current Text: The Legendary Fisherman
As long as "Umi" is face-up on the field, this card is unaffected by any Spell Cards. Monsters on your opponent's side of the field cannot select this card as an attack target.

Digital Jedi's Errata: The Legendary Fisherman
As long as "Umi" is face-up on the field, this card is unaffected by any Spell Cards. Monsters on your opponent's side of the field cannot select this card as an attack target. If this is the only monster on your side of the field your opponent may attack you directly.

Current Text: Guardian Kay'est
This card can only be Normal Summoned, Flip Summoned, or Special Summoned when there is a "Rod of Silence - Kay'est" on your side of the field. This card is unaffected by any Spell Cards. Also, this card cannot be an attack target of your opponent's monsters.

Digital Jedi's Errata: Guardian Kay'est
This card can only be Normal Summoned, Flip Summoned, or Special Summoned when there is a "Rod of Silence - Kay'est" on your side of the field. This card is unaffected by any Spell Cards. Also, this card cannot be an attack target of your opponent's monsters. If this is the only monster on your side of the field your opponent may attack you directly.

 

[Spike Kaiba]

erm...about the whole effect thign (as you say, quoted by JDOS), Konami and UDE don't take us for total idiots, and believe we are smart enough to actually figure out the effect type (I'll admit some are confusing)...but yeah

 

[Digital Jedi]

erm...about the whole effect thign (as you say, quoted by JDOS), Konami and UDE don't take us for total idiots, and believe we are smart enough to actually figure out the effect type (I'll admit some are confusing)...but yeah

Of course, much of the game can be interepted by simple deductive Reasoning. That said, much of the game prompts analization that requires Sherlock Holmes-like powers of deduction just to come to a logical conclusion. We just want to simplify things for the greater good.

 

[Xeno]

Current Text: Waboku
"Make all Battle Damage inflicted by monsters on your opponent's side of the field 0 during this turn."

Digital Jedi's Errata: Waboku
"Make all Battle Damage inflicted to you (and monsters you control) by your opponent's monsters 0 for the duration of this turn."

If you control a monster, doesn't that mean it's not on your opponent's side of the field?


On whole, there were some good points in your thread, but for the most part I agree with Spike. Most people aren't complete morons and can figure it out as it is. Also there is a standard way UDE/Konami explain how a card works, and once you get used to it, it's pretty obvious most the time.

 

[Digital Jedi]

If you control a monster, doesn't that mean it's not on your opponent's side of the field?


On whole, there were some good points in your thread, but for the most part I agree with Spike. Most people aren't complete morons and can figure it out as it is. Also there is a standard way UDE/Konami explain how a card works, and once you get used to it, it's pretty obvious most the time.

Xeno, I agree that a lot of things can be deduced if you just think about it. However as long as Waboku has been around (and explained) I consistantly see people saying that the monster still dies from the attack. That paticular errata was formated to clarify that niether you nor your monsters take Battle Damage (or rather, take Battle Damage of 0 points)

Ultimate Offering cannot be deduced by the card text. Niether can The Legendary Fisherman nor Guardian Kay'est. Nomi monsters have not the clearest card text in the world, especially to new players (but even some of the old.) We're at a distinct advantage here on IGCF because we are constantly discussing how the game is played and recieving updates and explanations, no matter how quesstionable, on various rulings. But where do the new and young players without internet access go to "deduce" these rulings or card effects. It would be nice if the card effects just said what they meant.

If there wasn't any confusion on matters like these the Rules and Regulations Forum wouldn't be lit up like a Christmas Tree with the same questions over and over again.

EDIT: I guess what I'm saying is that the card texts should say what they mean and mean what they say. And not say one thing and mean what Konami says.

 

[jdos]

I agree with Spike and Xeno, that MOST cards and effects can be figured out without expending too much brainpower. My question to you then would be, why do we need to expend even that much? Why shouldn't the effect type be spelled out for everyone? That's just good tidy documentation.

This would cause all arguments related to effect types to cease without having to rely on judges and Netrepâ„¢s to clear up every little piece of minutiae. Then they can actually focus on the difficult answers instead of repeating over and over again with every new generation of duelists that, yes, Jowgen has 2 different effects, and no, one does not depend upon the other....and on and on and on.

I write a lot of end user documentation in my professional life, and I can tell you that the more sussinctly you spell something out to people, the better off you will be in the long run. The more you leave open to interpretation, the more interpretations will arise. Even ones you would never have thought up yourself.

Clarity is a phenominal tool.

 

[jpnuar1]

Fair enough. But if we teach new duelists that the effects of all cards are exactly as written, then what will we do when they start taking the effects of older cards seriously?

Especially cards that have errata due to total misprints (as opposed to erratas that simply clarify cards, like Dust Tornado). Like Amazoness Fighter, Ultimate Offering, (working in the opponents battle phase,) cards like Tornado Wall, and Attack and Receive, (only working with battle damage,) the errata'd name of After Genocide (now After the Struggle), and I think that now even the name of one of the sets has been changed from Magic Rulers to Spell Rulers? (I never was aware of that, until I suddenly noticed that people were referring to cards from "spell rulers". It took me awhile to realize why.)

I admit that effects written more clearly would have helped immensely, had it started earlier, but I would imagine that it would be pretty difficult now to make the transition smoothly. If it ever happens, maybe I'll go to a low level tournament, and bring my 1st edition Lord of D., just to see the look on everyone's faces when they encounter its "original" effect.

 

[Digital Jedi]

Admitedly, it would not be smooth process. But it may go to show that effects should be clear when they are first printed.

The goal, however, is to make certain that they don't continue to print erroneous card texts. If thet continue on this trend the hodgepodge of a mess would get even worse then if they tried to correct themselves.

 

[jpnuar1]

Yeah, that's true, I was just presenting the flip side of the coin (and also wanted to mention the fun of showing newbies one of the earliest cards...)

What bugs me most are cards that require a cost of discarding cards (or RFP cards), and on way too many cards of that nature, the card says any type of card can be used, but the errata says that it has to be a specific type (monster, or spell, for most cards I think). It bugs me, because its too difficult to memorize each of those cards and their errata...

 

[Maruno]

...hence the very handy inventions known as the computer and the printer.

 

[jpnuar1]

My point being that if it only happened on a few cards, it would be understandable. But when it gets to be of a volume so large that all erratas must be printed, so as to have hard copies of all rulings, its gotten way out of hand.

 

[Duelist 316]

Ascended Trunks and DMKnight helped me out with another phrase that's a little overused: "If this card attacks with an ATK that is higher than the DEF of your opponent's Defense Position monster, inflict the difference as Battle Damage to your opponent's Life Points." So Ascended Trunks suggested:

Overkill.

Most people refer to it as "Trample," from the Magic ability that essentially does the same thing.

 

[somewan]

Most people refer to it as "Trample," from the Magic ability that essentially does the same thing.

Never thought I would ever quote a tip card, but...

Tip Card #44 of 50 (Dark Revelation)

Piercing Battle Damage

"Mefist the Infernal General" has an effect that inflicts Battle Damage to the opponent when he battles with a Defense Position monster and his ATK is higher than the defending monster's DEF.

"Big Bang Shot" is an Equip Spell Card that gives the same effect of "Piercing Battle Damage" to any monster equipped with it. But remember that putting a "Big Bang Shot" on "Mefist the Infernal General" will not make the opponent take double the damage, since Battle Damage is only inflicted one time per battle.

****

It's called "Piercing Battle Damage". Wow, practical application of a tip card...of course, there was not Mefist or Big Bang in the pack the tip card came in...go figure.

 

[Digital Jedi]

Most people refer to it as "Trample," from the Magic ability that essentially does the same thing.

And originally that's the phrase I used, not realizing it was already in use by another card game. Here are the original posts on the subject. I thought it was quite funny:

Well, you really can't call it trample, as that's taking terminology from Magic: the Gathering, and we've already lost the world Magic to them. I think a more fit term would be Overkill.

As for your idea, this was what I've been wanting for the longest time. Other games I've played (Especially Dragonball Z) used terminology constantly. Endurance. Tokui-Waza. Well, I kinda forget the rest, but you see what I'm going with this.

I had no idea thats where the term trample came from. (You can tell I've never played Magic.) Actually, the frist time I heard that term was online. In my area we always refered to that effect as "Breakthrough" even long before VS. came on the scene. I'm sure that term came from another game, as well.

I like the idea for Overkill, but since we are dealing with UDE we might run the risk of it being changed to OverDes or someting stupid like that. (After all, they did change "After Genocide" to "After the Struggle.") Maybe, we can risk it. If Overkill is not family friendly enough maybe they would let us use the Japanese word (or equivelent) for Overkill. I never understood how YGO could have some of the most demonic looking imagery they could they could think of but be worried about an old, chubby lady's cleavage (Im speaking of the Americanized version of Dian Keto) or how UDE doesn't sweat half naked or seductivley dressed chicks on there VS. cards (Girl 13, Encantadora, Black Cat) but will completley redo the card art on Otohime's thigh.

I was thinking that if overkill would have been to bad, we could have sarcastically suggested Penetrate >_>

That would just be too wrong. Imagine when Spear Dragon attacks Amozones Blowpiper!

YGO would surely be sued.

 

[jpnuar1]

Wait, who's penetrating the Amazoness Blowpiper? I'm jealous... (or is it envious? I always get those two words mixed up...)

 

[exiledforcefreak]

Both of Black Luster Soldier's effects are ignition, people just don't know how to use Black Luster Soldier.

Also, you should use trample instead of overkill.

use the term "loyalty" for Blindly Loyal Goblin and Mataza the Zapper.

you should use the term "exaust" for monsters that switch into defense after an attack. cards like GAF and Giant Orc would say "you may not change the battle position of this monster the turn after it has attacked"

 

[jdos]

Both of Black Luster Soldier's effects are ignition, people just don't know how to use Black Luster Soldier.

And that, right there, is exactly why it would be helpful if Konami spelled out the type of effect right on the card. Even the effects on the (arguably) most used card in the game are in question. Some say Optional Trigger, some say Ignition. I'd say "point proven". lol.

 

[Digital Jedi]

Both of Black Luster Soldier's effects are ignition, people just don't know how to use Black Luster Soldier.

Also, you should use trample instead of overkill.

use the term "loyalty" for Blindly Loyal Goblin and Mataza the Zapper.

you should use the term "exaust" for monsters that switch into defense after an attack. cards like GAF and Giant Orc would say "you may not change the battle position of this monster the turn after it has attacked"

Well, as was pointed out to me, we can't use terms already in use by another game. The already made YGO stop using the word "Magic", how much more trouble we would they be in if they started using Wizards of the Coast's Vs and Magic: TG game terminology. What I'm hoping we can do here is create Game Terminology that could be practically used

 

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

I like "Impale" (Spear Dragon, Gravekeeper's Spear Soldier, Mad Sword Beast's Horn)

 

[OKShadow]

Well, as was pointed out to me, we can't use terms already in use by another game. The already made YGO stop using the word "Magic", how much more trouble we would they be in if they started using Wizards of the Coast's Vs and Magic: TG game terminology. What I'm hoping we can do here is create Game Terminology that could be practically used

Actually the VS system games (Marvel/DC) are by Upper Deck so I don't think UDE would sue itself over terminology.

Here's one: Hibernate. Term for creatures that can flip themselves face down lol.