List of Archfiends?
- Thread starter Ojimaru
- Start date
ygocollectorx
New Member
you can find all of the latest yugioh cards by sets,attributes,types, atk and def. at netrep.net
In addition to using Netrepâ„¢, the UDE FAQ lists all the other cards that are Archfiend that don't include the word Archfiend in their name. Look under "What's an Archfiend?":
http://www.upperdeckentertainment.com/yugioh/en/gameplay/faqs/default.aspx
http://www.upperdeckentertainment.com/yugioh/en/gameplay/faqs/default.aspx
Kenjiblade
New Member
I should add that all future cards that are supposed to be Archfiends will be called Archfiends when they are released in English. That said, the list of Archfiends will never need updating again, because they have since all been properly named (and will continue to be).
DaGuyWitBluGlasses
New Member
Kenjiblade said:
What about "A Deal With Dark Ruler"?
Kenjiblade
New Member
So, there are some exceptions. =P
Besides, "A Deal with Dark Ruler" is from the same set as the one in which the Archfiends originally appeared (not counting older cards that were retroactively named Archfiends). Also, since it doesn't stay on the field after it resolves, the fact that it should be an Archfiend is mostly irrelevent.
If it ever does become important for "A Deal with Dark Ruler" to be an Archfiend, I'm sure UDE/Konami will add it to the list. Eventually.
Besides, "A Deal with Dark Ruler" is from the same set as the one in which the Archfiends originally appeared (not counting older cards that were retroactively named Archfiends). Also, since it doesn't stay on the field after it resolves, the fact that it should be an Archfiend is mostly irrelevent.
If it ever does become important for "A Deal with Dark Ruler" to be an Archfiend, I'm sure UDE/Konami will add it to the list. Eventually.
Just curious, but in light of errated titles like After the Struggle and Big Shield Gardna and the like, why do you think "they" (meaning, whoever is charge of such things) have never retroactively errated those Archfiends that need it? I would have though Dark Beginnings and Revelations would have been a prime time to rename the cards for future gamers and reference.
Digital Jedi said:
My guess (and it's abolutely a GUESS) is that in general they just don't errata card names.
Guardna v. Gardna was just a mistake, some of us (yes, I was one) sent e-mails to UDE to request they choose one over the other. (I believe Curtis got propz in the RONIN database change thread for clearing it up too!!) After Genocide v. After the Struggle and Trial of Hell v. Trial of Nightmare were likely changed due to pressure by parents or some other party offended by the original names. Again, speculation on my part.
There is still an outstanding name issue with Cemetary Bomb v. Cemetery Bomb, but unless people complain I seriously doubt they would feel a need to issue any kind of statement or errata. We all know it's the same card, and that's the important part.
I would have liked to see card name erratum for the Archfiends as well, but I totally understand why they didn't do it. "Archfiend's Axe" would sound really cool, though .... Dillie would turn cartwheels if they did that, he's such a fiend
edit: It's really nice to see you again Kenji!
LOL Yeah, I remember your letter to the judges list. I believe they said to you they errated the card for those of you with difficult players.djp952 said:My guess (and it's abolutely a GUESS) is that in general they just don't errata card names.
Guardna v. Gardna was just a mistake, some of us (yes, I was one) sent e-mails to UDE to request they choose one over the other. (I believe Curtis got propz in the RONIN database change thread for clearing it up too!!) After Genocide v. After the Struggle and Trial of Hell v. Trial of Nightmare were likely changed due to pressure by parents or some other party offended by the original names. Again, speculation on my part.
There is still an outstanding name issue with Cemetary Bomb v. Cemetery Bomb, but unless people complain I seriously doubt they would feel a need to issue any kind of statement or errata. We all know it's the same card, and that's the important part.
I would have liked to see card name erratum for the Archfiends as well, but I totally understand why they didn't do it. "Archfiend's Axe" would sound really cool, though .... Dillie would turn cartwheels if they did that, he's such a fiend
edit: It's really nice to see you again Kenji!
djp952 said:
*scoffs*
I knew there always has been problems with censorship in the West (~and unfortunately Malaysia, too....) but I just recently noticed that this extended beyond the card texts to the card artwork! Prime example: Go take a peek at Dark Magician Girl (MFC-000) and then switch over to the Japanese version of the same picture. Play a small game of "spot the difference" and you'll notice two lines missing in the English version... *sigh*
There's a website that lists a whole slew of card art edits along with pictures of the changes. You'll find the link somewhere around here if you do a search of the General Discussion (YGO) forum. Pretty much most of the edits came from Konami and not from UDE. Konami seems to think some things will offend western cultures and other things won't. Looking through the the changes all at once like that, reveals that either Konami selected random people with no clear guidelines to make the edits, edits were made simply made randomly over different points in time or the edits are completely arbitrary and serve no real purpose other then to give us alternate card art.
Dillie-O
Council of Heroes
I find it kind of sad that the same parents with 10 year olds that will gawk and scream over a trading card game to get it censored are often the same parents you'll find taking to a rated R movie loaded with over the top amounts of drugs, sex, and violence in it and think that's perfectly normal.
No, I'm not trying to set this up as a troll, just pointing something out that dawned on me a while back with the game and the original artwork cards 8^D
No, I'm not trying to set this up as a troll, just pointing something out that dawned on me a while back with the game and the original artwork cards 8^D
Stupid comments in 3...2....
Light of Intervention is active. Player [A] controls Terrorking Archfiend, Falling Down equipped to his opponent's Blue-Eyes White Dragon, Slate Warrior, and a face-down card. Player has another Blue-Eyes White Dragon. attacks Terrorking with Blue-Eyes. [A] chains Magical Hats changing Slate Warrior to DEF and summoning two A Deal with Dark Ruler's. Replay. Blue-Eyes destroys Terrorking. Does Falling Down stay on the field?
Or, maybe....
Player [A] has Slate Warrior and two set cards. Player has Blue-Eyes White Dragon. Blue-Eyes attacks Slate Warrior, [A] chains Magical Hats summoning two A Deal With Dark Ruler's. Replay. Blue-Eyes attacks and destroys one A Deal With Dark Ruler. Before the end of the Battle Phase, [A] uses Interdimensional Matter Transporter to remove A Deal With Dark Ruler from play. During the End Phase, ADwDR returns, but is not destroyed since the Battle Phase is over. [A]'s turn. He Flip-Summons ADwDR. Can [A] use Falling Down on Blue-Eyes, or summon Terrorking Archfiend?
Note: Magical Hats
Normal Trap
Select 2 non-Monster Cards from your Deck and 1 of your Monster Cards on the field, then shuffle your Deck. Shuffle the 3 selected cards and Set them on the field in face-down Defense Position. The 2 cards selected from your Deck are treated as monsters (ATK 0/DEF 0) and are destroyed at the end of the Battle Phase. You can only use this effect during your opponent's Battle Phase.
Light of Intervention is active. Player [A] controls Terrorking Archfiend, Falling Down equipped to his opponent's Blue-Eyes White Dragon, Slate Warrior, and a face-down card. Player has another Blue-Eyes White Dragon. attacks Terrorking with Blue-Eyes. [A] chains Magical Hats changing Slate Warrior to DEF and summoning two A Deal with Dark Ruler's. Replay. Blue-Eyes destroys Terrorking. Does Falling Down stay on the field?
Or, maybe....
Player [A] has Slate Warrior and two set cards. Player has Blue-Eyes White Dragon. Blue-Eyes attacks Slate Warrior, [A] chains Magical Hats summoning two A Deal With Dark Ruler's. Replay. Blue-Eyes attacks and destroys one A Deal With Dark Ruler. Before the end of the Battle Phase, [A] uses Interdimensional Matter Transporter to remove A Deal With Dark Ruler from play. During the End Phase, ADwDR returns, but is not destroyed since the Battle Phase is over. [A]'s turn. He Flip-Summons ADwDR. Can [A] use Falling Down on Blue-Eyes, or summon Terrorking Archfiend?
Note: Magical Hats
Normal Trap
Select 2 non-Monster Cards from your Deck and 1 of your Monster Cards on the field, then shuffle your Deck. Shuffle the 3 selected cards and Set them on the field in face-down Defense Position. The 2 cards selected from your Deck are treated as monsters (ATK 0/DEF 0) and are destroyed at the end of the Battle Phase. You can only use this effect during your opponent's Battle Phase.
Since "A Deal with Dark Ruler" is not on the list of Archfiend cards (even if it should) then the answer would be "NO" to all of the above.
And well, who uses "A Deal with Dark Ruler" / "Magical Hats" anyway? (tm)
And well, who uses "A Deal with Dark Ruler" / "Magical Hats" anyway? (tm)
Entropy said:
I have to disagree with DX on this one. As Kenji points out, it's "mostly" irrelavent that it isn't on the list. But it is supposed to be. I think it would stay, but only until they are destroyed at the End Phase.
A Deal with Dark Ruler would not be a monster card once removed from play, so it either wouldn't return or be destroyed when it tries. I'm presuming the latter. (See Embodiment of Apophis)
Deathjester
New Member
"A Deal with Dark Ruler" probably isn't a true "Demon" card for the same reason that "Nin-Ken Dog" isn't a true "Ninja" card (there was some discussion a while back about whether it was since it has "Ninja" in its Japanese name).
DJ, try to convince any judge that "A Deak with Dark Ruler" is an Archfiend card. I never heard of that until this thread brought it up. Realistically, unless the Head Judge is aware of that very obscure fact, no it's not going to work (even if it should). That's why I said it's not going to work in REALISTIC circumstances. Technically we're still playing Black Luster Soldier - Envoy of the Beginning wrong (in Traditional Formats anyway).
That said, we're also talking about a VERY obscure kind of situation. Ok I'm all for debate for the sake of debate, but even this is a bit far-fetched that it would ever see the light of day. And unless it shows up at an SJC where someone gets lucksacked over it in the finals, it's not going to change the UDE list.
That said, we're also talking about a VERY obscure kind of situation. Ok I'm all for debate for the sake of debate, but even this is a bit far-fetched that it would ever see the light of day. And unless it shows up at an SJC where someone gets lucksacked over it in the finals, it's not going to change the UDE list.
Your talking to the administator and founder of The CookieSlayer Collective. We eat obscure for breakfast. LOL :nod_yes
DaGuyWitBluGlasses
New Member
Deathjester said:
No, nin-ken dog is not a ninja monster, it doesn't have ninja in its japanese name.
http://yugioh-haus.com/images/304-002.jpg
The last 2 symbols of the names below make a ninja:
http://yugioh-haus.com/images/306-007.jpg
http://yugioh-haus.com/images/tlm-jp025.jpg
A deal with the Dark ruler does have Demon written in japanese phonics. See the 4 first symbols:
http://yugioh-haus.com/images/304-030.jpg
Compared to
Archfiend's Oath:
http://yugioh-haus.com/images/305-039.jpg
Although they were the same set here,
In Japan a deal with Dark Ruler was set 304 The card's name archfiend here were set 305, so that can be a possible explanation why it didn't get translated properly.