If you could errata one YGO card ... [with rules]

[djp952]

We've had a number of really good debates over the past week in the Rules and Regulations forum. However, the two hottest threads were shut down since the debates were getting a little *too* hot

So, I'm offering up an alternative while things settle down. This might be really lame, or it might be really interesting. I suppose that depends on how much participation there is

I have some ground rules I'd like everyone to follow for this thread:

1) BE CIVIL. Absolutely no ill-will, expressed or implied. If you don't agree with something presented, or think it's incorrect ... too bad. This isn't a debate. Present your own argument for that card's errata instead, without referencing or quoting the statement you disliked.

2) Each CoG member gets ONE post. No more. If you use up your one post by quoting and/or seconding someone else's statement, that's that.

3) Present your statement as if you were addressing an Upper Deck Entertainment game designer (remember Rule #1), with the intent of persuading him/her to bring it up with Konami (remember Rule #1). "da c4rd text 1s teh dumb and make5 n0 s3nse" is NOT an example of a properly presented argument. Give it some meat.

4) [Important] If you think this idea is completely lame, please don't post in this thread at all. There's plenty of other things to do out here Nobody's gonna hurt my feelings by not participating!

I think that if we can get some really well thought out and eloquently written arguments, we can get someone to present a few of them to the real Upper Deck Entertainment. Of course there is zero guarantee that they will listen, and even less that they'd ever find their way to Konami (remember Rule #1 and Rule #4).

Give it a try. I think we have more than a few people that would like to do a write up on Sacred Phoenix of Nephthys and Level Modulation out here!

edit: Oh yeah .. no cheating by using Digital Jedi's list

 

[skey23]

Megamorph

I'd like to propose the following rulings changes for "Megamorph". It's card text is, in my humble opinion, clear enough as to what it is supposed to do, but it's rulings are probably the most conflicting I've ever seen.

I would like to define two terms that I believe are crucial to understanding how to use this card.

Modifier - Is an effect that simply modifies a monster's ATK and/or DEF. This includes cards like "Axe of Despair" or "Cybernetic Magician". If an effect were to look for the original ATK/DEF of a card that has been affected by a modifier, the printed ATK/DEF are still used when determining those values.

Redefiner - Is an effect that redefines or resets a monster's original ATK and/or DEF to a new value. This includes cards like "UFOroid Fighter" and "Megarock Dragon". If an effect were to look for the original ATK/DEF of a card that has been affected by a redefiner, the redefined ATK/DEF are used when determining those values, NOT the printed ATK/DEF. NOTE: A redefiner's effect is normally only active on a monster that is face-up on the field. It does not affect the ATK/DEF of monsters in the Graveyard, Hand, Deck or Removed from Play.

Here is the card text and the rulings I would like to discuss. I have left out the rulings that, in my mind, are correctly written for how this card really should work.

"Megamorph" - "While your Life Points are lower than your opponent's, double the original ATK of a monster equipped with this card. While your Life Points are higher, halve the original ATK."

"Megamorph" changes the original ATK of the monster it is equipped to. Having multiple "Megamorphs" equipped to a monster is the same as having one.

This is true because I believe "Megamorph" is a modifier, not a redefiner. That's why equipping more than one to the same monster has no effect. If it were to redefine the original ATK, then equipping a second "Megamorph" would indeed halve or double the newly redefined value. Let me give a couple of examples.
1. Megamorph does not stack - P1 has "Gemini Elf" face-up on the field. P1 has 2000 Life Points and P2 has 3500 Life Points. P1 equips "Megamorph" to "Gemini Elf" and since their LPs are lower, "Megamorph" modifies the original ATK by doubling it, making "Gemini Elf" a 3800 ATK monster. P1 equips a second "Megamorph" to "Gemini Elf" but since "Megamorph" did not redefine the original 1900 ATK, nothing happens and "Gemini Elf" stays at 3800 ATK.
2. Megamorph stacks - P1 has "Gemini Elf" face-up on the field. P1 has 2000 Life Points and P2 has 3500 Life Points. P1 equips "Megamorph" to "Gemini Elf" and since their LPs are lower, "Megamorph" doubles the original ATK, redefining it and making "Gemini Elf" a monster with an original ATK of 3800. P1 equips a second "Megamorph" to "Gemini Elf" and since it's original ATK is now 3800, and P1 still has lower Life Points, the second "Megamorph" again redefines the original ATK, making "Gemini Elf" a 7600 ATK monster. This is a fundamental aspect of the redefining concept. If you redefine the original ATK, then applying that same redefining effect will once again redefine the newly set values. The printed ATK is completely ignored after a redefining effect has been applied.

[Re: Arsenal Bug] If you equip "Megamorph" to "Arsenal Bug" then its ATK will be 4000 or 1000, depending on "Megamorph"'s effect.

"Arsenal Bug"'s effect does not redefine it's original ATK/DEF, it simply modifies it. This is why "Megamorph" will make the ATK 4000 or 1000 no matter if there is another Insect on the field or not.

[Re: Behemoth the King of All Animals] If you have "Behemoth the King of All Animals" with an original ATK of 2000 because you Summoned or Set him with 1 Tribute, and you equip it with "Megamorph", its original ATK will be 4000 when your Life Points are lower, and 1000 when your Life Points are higher.

"Behemoth the King of All Animals" effect redefines it's original ATK, so when "Megamorph" is equipped after being Summoned with only one Tribute, it does not see the printed 2700 ATK value. It only sees the newly redefined 2000 ATK value, and will modify that value accordingly.

[Re: Elemental Hero Thunder Giant] If a monster is equipped with "Megamorph" and its ATK is lower than that of "Elemental Hero Thunder Giant", and the effect is activated to destroy the equipped monster, but "Mystical Space Typhoon" is chained to destroy "Megamorph", so that the monster's original ATK is now higher than the ATK of "Elemental Hero Thunder Giant", the effect of "Elemental Hero Thunder Giant" Disappears and the monster is not destroyed.

This ruling, in my opinion, is just completely wrong. This ruling says that "Megamorph" is redefining the monster's original ATK, which I believe to be completely untrue base off the fact that "Megamorph" doesn't stack if multiples are equipped to the same monster. In this scenario, it should not matter if "Megamorph" is equipped to the monster because the monster's original ATK was never redefined to a new value, it was simply modified.

[Re: Fusilier Dragon, the Dual-Mode Beast] If you have "Fusilier Dragon, the Dual-Mode Beast" with original ATK of 1400 because you Summoned or Set it without Tribute, and you equip it with "Megamorph", its original ATK will be 2800 when your Life Points are lower, and 700 when your Life Points are higher.

Again, we have a ruling that's trying to say that "Megamorph" redefines the original ATK. If you equip "Megamorph" to "Fusilier Dragon, the Dual-Mode Beast" that was Summoned without Tribute, it's original ATK of 1400 is doubled (modified) and it's ATK is now 2800.

[Re: Inferno Fire Blast] If "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" equipped with "Megamorph" is selected for "Inferno Fire Blast", you inflict 2400 damage to the opponent.

How is this possible if "Megamorph" is supposed to redefine the original ATK of the monster it's equipped to? According to the last two rulings, if my "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" is equipped with "Megamorph" and my Life Points are lower, then I will inflict 4800 points of damage to my opponent. The only way this ruling can be true, which I believe it to be, is if "Megamorph" is a modifier and not a redefiner. "Megamorph" is not reseting the original ATK value of "Red-Eyes B. Dragon" to 4800, it's simply doubling the printed 2400 ATK.

[Re: King of the Skull Servants] The original ATK of "King of the Skull Servants" is determined by its effect. This is further doubled/halved by "Megamorph" and other effects that are based off of original ATK. If the number of "Skull Servant" and "King of the Skull Servants" cards in your Graveyard changes, re-calculate the original ATK of "King of the Skull Servants", then re-apply the effect of "Megamorph". If you have "King of the Skull Servants" with an original ATK of 2000 (2 "Skull Servant" cards in your Graveyard), and you equip it with "Megamorph", its original ATK will be 4000 when your Life Points are lower, and 1000 when your Life Points are higher.

Notice here it says that "Megamorph" is an effect that is based off of the original ATK. It doesn't say that it redefines it. This ruling needs to have the word original removed from the last sentence. "Megamorph" wouldn't make the original ATK 4000, it would make the ATK 4000.

[Re: Megarock Dragon] The original ATK of "Megarock Dragon" is determined by its effect. This is further doubled/halved by "Megamorph" and other effects that are based off of original ATK. So if you Special Summon "Megarock Dragon" with an original ATK of 2100 points, then equip it with "Megamorph", its ATK will be 4200 or 1050 depending on your Life Points.

This ruling just about perfect. The word original was removed from the last statement involving 4200/1050.

[Re: Power Bond] The ATK bonus for "Power Bond" is not a fixed number. It is a bonus equal to the original ATK. So if the original ATK changes, so does the bonus from "Power Bond". For example, if you equip the Fusion Monster with "Megamorph" to change the original ATK, the bonus ATK for "Power Bond" adjusts so that the bonus is equal to the new original ATK. For example, if you Summon "Cyber End Dragon" and then equip it with "Megamorph" while your Life Points are lower, its original ATK will become 8000, so it gains an additional 8000 ATK from "Power Bond" for 16000 ATK total.

This one is the most confusing one of all, and probably the most incorrect, in my opinion. If you stay with "Megamorph" being an ATK modifier, this ruling becomes very simple.
- [Re: Power Bond] If you Summon "Cyber End Dragon" (original ATK of 4000) and then equip it with "Megamorph" while your Life Points are lower, its ATK will become 8000, then it gains an additional 4000 ATK from "Power Bond" for 12000 ATK total.

 

[krazykidpsx]

Here goes my one post

Hello, people at R&D.

There are numerous cards whom rules tend to make more confusion to the game than anything. 1 card that comes to mind is "Triangle Ecstacy Spark" from the Yu-gi-oh! TCG. Its rules state that there must be a Harpy Lady Sisters on the field in order to activate the card. The card states that all harpy lady sisters on your side of the field will change its attack power to XXXX. Now in a player and judge point of view, we have seen the rule that states "Do as much of the card that you possibly can" by this I mean if there isnt something that you cannot fullfill then you do what you can and move on. So to clear up this with people wouldnt an errata like:

"This card can only be activated when there is a face-Up Harpy Lady Sisters on the field. All face-up harpy lady sisters attack power becomes XXXX. Untill the end of the turn Negate the effect of all Trap cards activated."

Something that can actually state that you need a Harpy lady sisters on the field. With out it, the rules placed upon it give it way to much confusion to the game.

 

[Tkwiget]

Well the only card that has been bugging me lately is Fairy Box. So naturally I would re-write the rulings on it.

2) The current ATK is reduced to 0, including all Equip Spell Cards. Trap Cards and Quick-Play Spell Cards can still modify the ATK of that monster after "Fairy Box"'s effect has established on the affected monster. A monster effect such as "Injection Fairy Lily" can increase its own ATK after "Fairy Box" is successful.

3) "Fairy Box" modifies the current ATK of a monster similar to "Cybernetic Magician" in resetting the original ATK to a new value. Since "Fairy Box" gives the original ATK a new value of 0, it can be modified in the Damage Step with cards such as "Limiter Removal", "Rush Recklessly", "Blast with Chain", "Rising Energy", and monster effects that change ATK in the Damage Step such as "Injection Fairy Lily", "Luminous Soldier", "The Hunter with 7 Weapons", "Steamroid", and "Kinetic Soldier".

4) Monsters with similar effects as "Spirit Ryu" will still remain at 0 ATK because their effects cannot activate in the Damage Step. Examples: "Bazoo the Soul-Eater", "Spirit Ryu", "Winged Minion", and "Spirit of Flames".

 

[Tiso]

Well there would be countless card changes I would like to make, but the most important I think would be to have Konami fix terminology problems. The difference between:

Each and Both
Sent and Discard

and other problems in that nature.

 

[SynjoDeonecros]

Here goes my one post

Hello, people at R&D.

There are numerous cards whom rules tend to make more confusion to the game than anything. 1 card that comes to mind is "Triangle Ecstacy Spark" from the Yu-gi-oh! TCG. Its rules state that there must be a Harpy Lady Sisters on the field in order to activate the card. The card states that all harpy lady sisters on your side of the field will change its attack power to XXXX. Now in a player and judge point of view, we have seen the rule that states "Do as much of the card that you possibly can" by this I mean if there isnt something that you cannot fullfill then you do what you can and move on. So to clear up this with people wouldnt an errata like:

"This card can only be activated when there is a face-Up Harpy Lady Sisters on the field. All face-up harpy lady sisters attack power becomes XXXX. Untill the end of the turn Negate the effect of all Trap cards activated."

Something that can actually state that you need a Harpy lady sisters on the field. With out it, the rules placed upon it give it way to much confusion to the game.

You brought up something that's been gnawing away at me for a long while now about the Harpies: the ruling that Harpie Lady #1, #2, #3, and Cyber Harpie Lady are treated as being named Harpie Lady proper for all intents and purposes, including deck construction. That, to me, seems really limiting and stupid, especially considering all of the support for the archetype that have come out. I think solving this problem would be as simple as changing the effects of those cards to thus:

"This card is treated as 'Harpie Lady' for the purpose of card effects."

With this effect in place, they're still treated as "Harpie Lady" anywhere on the field, your hand, your deck, your graveyard, and removed from play, but ONLY when a card effect is activated that requires a "Harpie Lady" to activate, or applies to a "Harpie Lady", thus allowing you to have multiple copies of each card. So, for instance, they're treated as separate cards normally in your deck, but the moment Birdface, for example, is activated, and starts looking for "Harpie Lady" in your deck to bring out, they notice this, and instantly treat themselves as "Harpie Lady" so they can be affected by it.