The Simple Texts Project

[Maruno]

The concept is simple; the execution may be a little more tricky. Below is the concept, and I hope that you're the execution.

Nearly every card game around has a properly defined set of game mechanics, and templates for how to work card effects. Yu-Gi-Oh!, however, doesn't (you may have noticed). It certainly doesn't have a rigorous templating system, at least - the texts are much too chatty, and often multiple effects have to be forced into the same paragraph. There's no way to distinguish between cost and effect unless you're really really clever and are told which is which anyway. Polymerization doesn't say it Fusion Summons anything, even though it's the quintessential Fusion card. And there's many more problems like that.

So. You may already suspect what this is about.

I propose that the City of Gamers creates and develops a rigorous and defined way of writing card effects. Included in this is a rewriting of the game's rules and mechanisms (only where appropriate - the best example is to start referring to damage substeps for various effects, and properly defining what they are) and trying to turn this game into one that can be understood by many more people.

Let's do away with the "block o' text" paragraph style we see on cards at the moment, and invent proper and rigid ways of writing effects. Let's use an arrow (->) to separate cost and effect. Let's categorise effects by how they work (continuous, multi-trigger, etc.). Let's make it obvious how many effects each card has, and what they do. And so forth.

The reason for this is to provide an easily-readable card text that says exactly what it does, so that people having some difficulties with a card can use it as a reference to better understand how it works. The main goal of this project is to make things as simple as possible without changing what the effect actually does.

So how about it? Who's with me?

Before you say yes, please bear in mind that this is likely to be a difficult task, possibly requiring extensive brainstorming sessions and discussions. It certainly requires at least a good working knowledge of how the game works. The first part (getting the templates together) will be the hardest, since those templates can be used to quickly and easily rewrite all the card effects (of which there are about 2500 different cards). You don't have to dedicate yourself to the entirety of the project, but any comments you can make would certainly help.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The first point of business, as I see it, is to decide on all the possible categories of effects. There are continuous effects, trigger, multi-trigger, ignition, lingering, summoning condition, activation condition, Flip, optional/compulsory, Normal Spell/Trap effects (the ones linked to the activation and resolution of the card, as opposed to a Continuous card or a Monster Card effect), and so forth. There's also the oddball effects that don't really fall into an existing category, and some that probably don't need a category in the first place (as odd as it sounds).

We may even need to create some new categories. For example, there's a difference between a lingering effect that is continuous (Soul Exchange), and a lingering effect that triggers some time later (Last Will). Perhaps we can come up with names to suit these differences?

Getting this sorted would probably require a good knowledge of many of the cards around, so that if you think of a card's effect that doesn't fit into something previously mentioned, it will help to generalise the templates even further.

I suppose the best way of going about a project like this is to lead by example. So here's a couple I've thought about. They're not representative of every kind of card effect around, and I'm sure the wording, the terminology and the style can be improved upon, but for now this is what I've got:


Elemental Hero Air Neos

• Fusion Material Monsters: "Elemental Hero Neos" + "Neo-Spacian Air Hummingbird"
• Summoning Condition: This card can only be Special Summoned from the Fusion Deck by returning the listed Fusion Material Monsters you control to the Deck.
• Continuous: While your Life Points are lower than your opponent's, this card gains ATK equal to the difference.
• Trigger: During the End Phase -> Return this card to the Fusion Deck.

Ultimate Offering

• Multi-Trigger: Activate during your Main Phase or your opponent's Battle Phase (except the Damage Step). Pay 500 Life Points -> Normal Summon or Set 1 monster from your hand. (This Normal Summon or Set does not count towards your Normal Summon/Set limit.)

Soul Exchange

• Activate during your Main Phase 1. Target 1 monster your opponent controls -> Skip your Battle Phase this turn, and create Condition for this turn only:
  • You can Tribute the targeted monster as if it was a monster you control.

Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster

• Trigger/Compulsory: Upon this card's Summon by "Clock Tower Prison" -> Destroy all monsters you control (except "Destiny Hero" monsters). You can Special Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero" monsters from your Graveyard.
• Continuous: During the turn this card is Special Summoned, "Destiny Hero" monsters you control are not destroyed by battle, and you take 0 Battle Damage from battles involving your "Destiny Hero" monsters.
• Continuous: The ATK and DEF of this card equal the total original ATK of all "Destiny Hero" monsters you control.

 

[Entropy]

Ooh, I like.

Elemental Hero Air Neos

• Fusion Material Monsters: "Elemental Hero Neos" + "Neo-Spacian Air Hummingbird"
• Summoning Condition: This card can only be Special Summoned from the Fusion Deck by returning the listed Fusion Material Monsters you control to the Deck.
• Continuous: While your Life Points are lower than your opponent's, this card gains ATK equal to the difference.
• Trigger: During the End Phase -> Return this card to the Fusion Deck.

One thing is with the "Summoning Conditions": there are really two kinds, Summoning Restrictions ("Raremetal Dragon") and Summon Effects ("Cyber Dragon"). I'm not really sure if it's important to differentiate, since it's kinda obvious. There's also how it's a cost, although I believe that's another non-issue - is there any Summon Effect where it's an effect to do anything?

• Summoning Restriction:
  • Semi-Nomi (summoned through own Summon Effect).
  • Is not Special Summoned by a Fusion Summon.
  Summon Effect: By returning the Fusion-Material Monsters to the Main Deck:
  • Special Sumon this card from the Fusion Deck

Although, I may be confusing thoroughness for simplicity. Which would be more important?

Oh, and there's also Rule Effects (like "Harpie Lady 1"), and Continuous/Ignition Effects that are applied when the monster isn't on the field (Fusion Substitute Monsters which apply in the hand/field/face-down field/Graveyard/Removed Zone; "Phantom Beast Cross-Wing", "Destiny Hero - Malicious").

Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster

• Trigger/Compulsory: Upon this card's Summon by "Clock Tower Prison" -> Destroy all monsters you control (except "Destiny Hero" monsters). You can Special Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero" monsters from your Graveyard.
• Continuous: During the turn this card is Special Summoned, "Destiny Hero" monsters you control are not destroyed by battle, and you take 0 Battle Damage from battles involving your "Destiny Hero" monsters.
• Continuous: The ATK and DEF of this card equal the total original ATK of all "Destiny Hero" monsters you control.

One minor thing about this card (and ones like "Gaia Soul the Combustible Collective") is that people sometimes think that the effects are connected. A simple idea is to list the effects in the opposite order, so that they seem less connected.

There's also still confusion about how "Destiny Hero" monsters mean monsters with "Destiny Hero" in their name. Perhaps something between the two, like "Destiny Hero"-named monsters (or Archfiend-category monsters)?

Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster

• Continuous:
  • The ATK and DEF of this card equal the total original ATK of all "Destiny Hero"-named monsters you control.
• Continuous: During the turn this card is Special Summoned:
  • "Destiny Hero"-named monsters you control are not destroyed by battle, and you take 0 Battle Damage from battles involving your "Destiny Hero"-named monsters.
• Trigger/Compulsory: Upon this card's Summon by "Clock Tower Prison":
  • Destroy all monsters you control (except "Destiny Hero"-named monsters).
  • You can Special Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero"-named monsters from your Graveyard.

I put the activation conditions/targets on the opening line, and "at resolution" parts on separate lines, to help differentiate. I also putting the last effect on two separate bullets, to show that the two don't occur simultaneously (which is important for Missing the Timing).

 

[Maruno]

One thing is with the "Summoning Conditions": there are really two kinds, Summoning Restrictions ("Raremetal Dragon") and Summon Effects ("Cyber Dragon"). I'm not really sure if it's important to differentiate, since it's kinda obvious. There's also how it's a cost, although I believe that's another non-issue - is there any Summon Effect where it's an effect to do anything?

• Summoning Restriction:
  • Semi-Nomi (summoned through own Summon Effect).
  • Is not Special Summoned by a Fusion Summon.
  Summon Effect: By returning the Fusion-Material Monsters to the Main Deck:
  • Special Sumon this card from the Fusion Deck

Although, I may be confusing thoroughness for simplicity. Which would be more important?

Good point. In my musings of the project I just lumped both of those together, because they're both about how the card can be Summoned. I didn't think separating them into two types was that important. If it is, somehow, then it probably would make more sense just to separate them, then.

There are some cards that tell the player to "Special Summon x monster, ignoring the Summoning conditions". Also, Nomi monsters would have both Restrictions and Effects, and it'd be easier to just say:


Destiny Hero - Dogma

• Summoning Condition: Nomi -> Tribute 3 monsters, including at least 1 "Destiny Hero" monster.
• Trigger/Compulsory: During your opponent's first Standby Phase after this card is Summoned -> Decrease your opponent's Life Points by half.

Besides, I thought the self-Summon monsters (like Cyber Dragon and Nomi monsters) were just like other Summons (i.e. not using the Chain). I don't know what you mean by the "there's also how it's a cost" thing.

Oh, and there's also Rule Effects (like "Harpie Lady 1"), and Continuous/Ignition Effects that are applied when the monster isn't on the field (Fusion Substitute Monsters which apply in the hand/field/face-down field/Graveyard/Removed Zone; "Phantom Beast Cross-Wing", "Destiny Hero - Malicious").

I think Harpie Lady 1 and Fusion Substitutes could qualify as being effects that have no category. They just "are"; they're always applicable. Harpie Lady 1 can be specifically worded so that it means "including the Deck list".

I think Destiny Hero - Malicious would just be an Ignition effect, but usable only while it's in the Graveyard. That's how it's supposed to be, right? That is, you activate it, remove it from play, possible chaining, resolve and Special Summon. Similarly, Phantom Beast Cross-Wing would be Continuous, but applicable only while it's in the Graveyard. Similarly for D.D. Crow, etc.. The effects can be worded to mean this, rather than create new categories.

One minor thing about this card (and ones like "Gaia Soul the Combustible Collective") is that people sometimes think that the effects are connected. A simple idea is to list the effects in the opposite order, so that they seem less connected.

Yes, I remember that. I thought making them separate effects (as indeed they are) in the way displayed would be fine enough (we should also specifically said in the rules somewhere that separate effects are separate). If people still have trouble with this, then things can be modified/moved around accordingly.

There's also still confusion about how "Destiny Hero" monsters mean monsters with "Destiny Hero" in their name. Perhaps something between the two, like "Destiny Hero"-named monsters (or Archfiend-category monsters)?

Personally, I think it's smegging obvious what "Destiny Hero" monsters are. It's the exact same terminology as the game uses, so players should be expected to know what it means. I don't think we should be trying to reword the cards that much; we should just base ourselves on what already exists and move the different effects round a bit. I think ideally we'd introduce no new terms or phrases at all, and go entirely on what the real game has (such that if the rewrites appeared on a real card, players would have no problems understanding it) - in reality, though, I think we'd have to "invent" new terms like Nomi, Trample and the like (but we wouldn't go so far as to invent "Searcher" (Sangan-like effects), for instance).

If there are no quotes (as far as I'm aware, this only applies to Archfiends), then go look it up on a list. We could also make mention somewhere on Archfiend cards that they are an Archfiend card, if we really wanted to. Personally, since these rewordings are primarily for reference, I think having a list of "What is an Archfiend?" would be good enough.

Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster

• Continuous:
  • The ATK and DEF of this card equal the total original ATK of all "Destiny Hero"-named monsters you control.
• Continuous: During the turn this card is Special Summoned:
  • "Destiny Hero"-named monsters you control are not destroyed by battle, and you take 0 Battle Damage from battles involving your "Destiny Hero"-named monsters.
• Trigger/Compulsory: Upon this card's Summon by "Clock Tower Prison":
  • Destroy all monsters you control (except "Destiny Hero"-named monsters).
  • You can Special Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero"-named monsters from your Graveyard.

I put the activation conditions/targets on the opening line, and "at resolution" parts on separate lines, to help differentiate. I also putting the last effect on two separate bullets, to show that the two don't occur simultaneously (which is important for Missing the Timing).

I initially considered something similar, until I got into rewriting a couple of cards that required a mass of sub-bullets (I think it was Ojama Trio - it has to define what an Ojama Token is and what it does; it has its own Trigger/Compulsory effect). The way I write it may not be as open and easily readable, but I think it would be a bit neater.

For one, I don't think Continuous effects should have any parts to them. They should just be "this is what it is" in a sentence or two. For Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster's second effect, I think what I've written is just as good as what you have. But if the majority of the people in this project (once we get more people to have a majority) decide otherwise, then fair enough. We need a lot of players to work on this and give their opinions, so that we can best tailor the rewrites for the masses.

As for non-simultaneous effects (the "Clock Tower Prison"-related effect), I thought a full stop would be sufficient, perhaps also coupled with the word "then". Besides, I think we should keep bullet points only for die-rolling effects ("do this depending on the number rolled", "do this depending on the number of heads") and other lists (Ancient City - Rainbow Ruins). Given this, a list of bullet points would signify that you have a choice to make (most likely using chance) and you only do one of the bullet points. What do you think?

For costs and effects, effects come after the arrow (->). As for effect activation conditions, I thought of making that the first sentence before the arrow, with the second sentence being the cost. Ultimate Offering is an example of this. If there's only one sentence, it should be obvious whether it's the activation condition or the cost. I'm sure it could get simpler (as you've exampled), but at the cost of becoming a bit "messy".

As a side note, for Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster, if you choose to Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero" monsters, would you have to target them at activation? Because if so, that effect would need to be rewritten a bit. At the moment it's written to be more like Fissure (e.g. D.D. Crow couldn't be chained to stop a Summon, because a monster hadn't been targeted yet).

(This project will most likely be quite enlightening for most of us, since we'll have to know exactly how a card works in order to rewrite its effect properly with no ambiguities.)



I've also thought of the difference between effects where it's "everything or nothing", and effects where it's "as much as possible, please". I can't remember any examples, but I know such a case (of the latter, assuming the former is the standard) exists.

 

[Entropy]

Besides, I thought the self-Summon monsters (like Cyber Dragon and Nomi monsters) were just like other Summons (i.e. not using the Chain). I don't know what you mean by the "there's also how it's a cost" thing.

I mean how for "Dogma", it's a cost to Tribute the monsters. If the Summon is negated ("Solemn Judgment", etc), then you don't get the monsters back.

I don't believe there are any cards where it's an effect of the Summon (and not a separate effect), no?

I think Harpie Lady 1 and Fusion Substitutes could qualify as being effects that have no category. They just "are"; they're always applicable. Harpie Lady 1 can be specifically worded so that it means "including the Deck list".

They're actually different - "Harpie Lady 1" can't be negated by "Skill Drain", but Fusion Substitute Monsters don't work if they're face-up on the field with "Skill Drain". They work while the monsters are face-down, though.

I think Destiny Hero - Malicious would just be an Ignition effect, but usable only while it's in the Graveyard. That's how it's supposed to be, right? That is, you activate it, remove it from play, possible chaining, resolve and Special Summon. Similarly, Phantom Beast Cross-Wing would be Continuous, but applicable only while it's in the Graveyard. Similarly for D.D. Crow, etc.. The effects can be worded to mean this, rather than create new categories.

I suppose. Maybe add it on the opening conditions/costs line, like this?

Destiny Hero - Malicious

• Ignition: Only while this card is in the Graveyard, remove it from play -> Special Summon 1 "Destiny Hero - Malicious" from your Deck

Phantom Beast Cross-Wing

• Continuous: Only while this card is in the Graveyard -> all "Phantom Beast"-named monsters and "Gazelle the King of Mythical Beasts" gain +300 ATK

Personally, I think it's smegging obvious what "Destiny Hero" monsters are. It's the exact same terminology as the game uses, so players should be expected to know what it means. I don't think we should be trying to reword the cards that much; we should just base ourselves on what already exists and move the different effects round a bit. I think ideally we'd introduce no new terms or phrases at all, and go entirely on what the real game has (such that if the rewrites appeared on a real card, players would have no problems understanding it) - in reality, though, I think we'd have to "invent" new terms like Nomi, Trample and the like (but we wouldn't go so far as to invent "Searcher" (Sangan-like effects), for instance).

If there are no quotes (as far as I'm aware, this only applies to Archfiends), then go look it up on a list. We could also make mention somewhere on Archfiend cards that they are an Archfiend card, if we really wanted to. Personally, since these rewordings are primarily for reference, I think having a list of "What is an Archfiend?" would be good enough.

I think it's pretty obvious too, but I still get asked at least once a week "Is 'Great Shogun Shien' a 'Six Samurai' monster?" or "Is 'Substitoad' a 'Frog' monster?". I never liked that wording, since I always saw it as more UDE-ese. (Complain complain, whine whine.)

I initially considered something similar, until I got into rewriting a couple of cards that required a mass of sub-bullets (I think it was Ojama Trio - it has to define what an Ojama Token is and what it does; it has its own Trigger/Compulsory effect). The way I write it may not be as open and easily readable, but I think it would be a bit neater.

For one, I don't think Continuous effects should have any parts to them. They should just be "this is what it is" in a sentence or two. For Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster's second effect, I think what I've written is just as good as what you have. But if the majority of the people in this project (once we get more people to have a majority) decide otherwise, then fair enough. We need a lot of players to work on this and give their opinions, so that we can best tailor the rewrites for the masses.

As for non-simultaneous effects (the "Clock Tower Prison"-related effect), I thought a full stop would be sufficient, perhaps also coupled with the word "then". Besides, I think we should keep bullet points only for die-rolling effects ("do this depending on the number rolled", "do this depending on the number of heads") and other lists (Ancient City - Rainbow Ruins). Given this, a list of bullet points would signify that you have a choice to make (most likely using chance) and you only do one of the bullet points. What do you think?

For costs and effects, effects come after the arrow (->). As for effect activation conditions, I thought of making that the first sentence before the arrow, with the second sentence being the cost. Ultimate Offering is an example of this. If there's only one sentence, it should be obvious whether it's the activation condition or the cost. I'm sure it could get simpler (as you've exampled), but at the cost of becoming a bit "messy".

Fair enough. How would this look?

Sky Scourge - Norleras

• Summoning Condition: Nomi -> Removing from play 1 LIGHT Fairy monster and 3 DARK Fiend monsters from your Graveyard.
• Ignition: Pay 1000 Life Points -> Send all cards on the field and in both players' hands to the Graveyard, and draw 1 card.

Graceful Charity: Draw 3 cards. Discard 2 cards.

Would we even need a [list] for Normal Spell/Trap Card?

As a side note, for Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster, if you choose to Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero" monsters, would you have to target them at activation? Because if so, that effect would need to be rewritten a bit. At the moment it's written to be more like Fissure (e.g. D.D. Crow couldn't be chained to stop a Summon, because a monster hadn't been targeted yet).

Right, it doesn't Target.

Hm, would there be a way to specifically say it doesn't target, other than by not including the word "target" before the "->" ? Maybe saying that you "choose" the monster at resolution?

•Trigger/Compulsory: Upon this card's Summon by "Clock Tower Prison" -> Destroy all monsters you control (except "Destiny Hero" monsters). You can then choose and Special Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero" monsters from your Graveyard.
•Trigger/Compulsory: Upon this card's Summon by "Clock Tower Prison" -> Destroy all monsters you control (except "Destiny Hero" monsters). You can Special Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero" monsters from your Graveyard (this does not Target).

I've also thought of the difference between effects where it's "everything or nothing", and effects where it's "as much as possible, please". I can't remember any examples, but I know such a case (of the latter, assuming the former is the standard) exists.

I'm pretty sure the latter is the standard. Still, maybe we should specifically differentiate the two? Maybe:

Penguin Soldier

• Flip: Target up to 2 cards -> Return as many as possible targets to their owners' hands.

Pot of Avarice: Target 5 monsters in your Graveyard -> Shuffle exactly all 5 targets into your Deck. If successful, draw 2 cards.

The "exactly" would mean that you have to return 5, not "5 or as many as possible".

De-Fusion: Target 1 Fusion Monster on the field -> Return the targeted monster to the Extra Deck. If successful, if the returned monster was Fusion Summoned, and if all of the returned monsters are in your Graveyard and can be Special Summoned to your field, then Special Summon exactly all of those monsters from your Graveyard.

...Ow.

 

[Maruno]

I mean how for "Dogma", it's a cost to Tribute the monsters. If the Summon is negated ("Solemn Judgment", etc), then you don't get the monsters back.

I don't believe there are any cards where it's an effect of the Summon (and not a separate effect), no?

Are you sure? I always thought Summons like that worked practically the same as Tribute Summons, in that they don't use the Chain at all. You do the Special Summon (perhaps you could use a Summon-negator card in the middle of it, but that's all), the Summon is done and then you respond to the Summon. I never thought it was an actual effect. Negating a Tribute Summon doesn't give you back the Tributes either.

They're actually different - "Harpie Lady 1" can't be negated by "Skill Drain", but Fusion Substitute Monsters don't work if they're face-up on the field with "Skill Drain". They work while the monsters are face-down, though.

Fair enough. A "Global Continuous" effect, then, maybe, for the Fusion Substitutes.

Besides, I was under the impression you could negate the name change effect. Harpie Lady 1 would be Harpie Lady 1 if Skill Drain was around. I don't see why it wouldn't be negated. In which case, Harpie Lady 1 also gets classified "Global Continuous" (for the name - regular "Continuous" for the ATK boost, of course).

A good result of making all these categories is that we can define exactly what Skill Drain will and won't negate. For one, Skill Drain can negate Global Continuous effects, but only if they're face-up on the field.

I suppose. Maybe add it on the opening conditions/costs line, like this?

Destiny Hero - Malicious

• Ignition: Only while this card is in the Graveyard, remove it from play -> Special Summon 1 "Destiny Hero - Malicious" from your Deck

Phantom Beast Cross-Wing

• Continuous: Only while this card is in the Graveyard -> all "Phantom Beast"-named monsters and "Gazelle the King of Mythical Beasts" gain +300 ATK

I'm beginning to come around to the idea of an activation/active condition line like you suggest (rather than incorporating it into the rest of the effect, like I've done with Dreadmaster above).

I think it's pretty obvious too, but I still get asked at least once a week "Is 'Great Shogun Shien' a 'Six Samurai' monster?" or "Is 'Substitoad' a 'Frog' monster?". I never liked that wording, since I always saw it as more UDE-ese. (Complain complain, whine whine.)

I suppose the best way (because I think your ""Destiny Hero"-named" idea would still be a bit confusing) would be to go back to the original terminology, which is "a monster with "Destiny Hero" in its name". It makes things a bit more long-winded, but it says exactly what it means.

Fair enough. How would this look?

Sky Scourge - Norleras

• Summoning Condition: Nomi -> Removing from play 1 LIGHT Fairy monster and 3 DARK Fiend monsters from your Graveyard.
• Ignition: Pay 1000 Life Points -> Send all cards on the field and in both players' hands to the Graveyard, and draw 1 card.

Graceful Charity: Draw 3 cards. Discard 2 cards.

Would we even need a [list] for Normal Spell/Trap Card?

Well, I think for convention's sake the card's name would always be on a separate line (it's a kind of heading, after all). The effect goes below it (apparently as bullet points, although this may also be changed if someone thinks up a better way to put it).

Looking good. They're almost exactly how I'd word them (just some cosmetic changes). But admittedly, these are some of the simpler effects, so they're not that difficult to get right.

Right, it doesn't Target.

Hm, would there be a way to specifically say it doesn't target, other than by not including the word "target" before the "->" ? Maybe saying that you "choose" the monster at resolution?

•Trigger/Compulsory: Upon this card's Summon by "Clock Tower Prison" -> Destroy all monsters you control (except "Destiny Hero" monsters). You can then choose and Special Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero" monsters from your Graveyard.
•Trigger/Compulsory: Upon this card's Summon by "Clock Tower Prison" -> Destroy all monsters you control (except "Destiny Hero" monsters). You can Special Summon up to 2 "Destiny Hero" monsters from your Graveyard (this does not Target).

I think we can use the word "Target" (with a capital T) to mean a targeting effect. If it doesn't say "Target", then it doesn't target anything. It's a "say what you see" case.

Naturally, we'll get the people who ask whether it targets anyway, but we're going to get complainers in any case. I think excluding the word "Target" would be better than saying "(This effect does not Target.)" every time.

No, I think the current wording of that effect works fine. Special Summon 2 monsters, which monsters? Well, you pick them, but remember this is NOT Targeting them (Targeting only happens at activation, and the effect doesn't say Target either).

If we wanted to be thorough about this, we could also write a few rulings to go along with the rewrites, but I think this is entirely unnecessary. Just make sure everyone knows the texts are very literal indeed, and remember to point the viewer towards the official rulings as well. These rewrites should be able to work as stand-alone things, but they're just for reference so they should be used in conjunction with the real texts and the rulings.

I'm pretty sure the latter is the standard. Still, maybe we should specifically differentiate the two? Maybe:

Penguin Soldier

• Flip: Target up to 2 cards -> Return as many as possible targets to their owners' hands.

Pot of Avarice: Target 5 monsters in your Graveyard -> Shuffle exactly all 5 targets into your Deck. If successful, draw 2 cards.

The "exactly" would mean that you have to return 5, not "5 or as many as possible".

De-Fusion: Target 1 Fusion Monster on the field -> Return the targeted monster to the Extra Deck. If successful, if the returned monster was Fusion Summoned, and if all of the returned monsters are in your Graveyard and can be Special Summoned to your field, then Special Summon exactly all of those monsters from your Graveyard.

Having thought about this for a while, perhaps we shouldn't try to differentiate between the two after all. That is, we should treat each card separately and word it to say what it means, rather than trying to come up with phrases for one case and assuming the other is the standard.

Below are my suggestions. They're meant to be taken very literally.


Penguin Soldier

• Flip: Target 0, 1 or 2 Monster Cards on the field -> Add as many of the Targeted cards as possible to their owners’ hands.

Pot of Avarice

• Target 5 Monster Cards in your Graveyard -> Add all 5 of the Targeted cards to your Deck and shuffle it. Then draw 2 cards.

De-Fusion

• Target 1 Fusion Monster on the field -> Add the Targeted card to its owner's Extra Deck. Then, if that monster was Fusion Summoned and all the Monster Cards used to Fusion Summon it are in your Graveyard, you can Special Summon all of them.

That seems like it would work (if taken literally, like I said).

Here's how "literally" works: In the case of De-Fusion, since the Summons happen afterwards, if you can't return the monster then the effect stops and you never get to the Summon part (it's very clear you need to return the monster). The same goes for Pot of Avarice - as long as you say to return all 5 of the cards, then if you can't you cannot carry on with the effect and wouldn't get to the drawing.

This could result in a lot of "(if possible)" and "as many of ... as possible" in the "as much as possible" effects. But that's probably something we'll just have to live with. I don't think it'd be that bad, and it would say exactly how the effect works.

The main point to remember, then is that if you can't achieve an earlier part of an effect, then the effect immediately stops and you don't even try to do any later steps.



I also think using the word "add" instead of "return" (w.r.t. hand and Deck) would help, since "return" sometimes doesn't make sense (say, if a monster is "returned" to your hand even though it had never been in there before). Also, I'm sure there are some cards that look for cards that are added to the hand or the Deck, and people could try arguing that "return" isn't the same as "add". Does this particularly even matter?

 

[Entropy]

Are you sure? I always thought Summons like that worked practically the same as Tribute Summons, in that they don't use the Chain at all. You do the Special Summon (perhaps you could use a Summon-negator card in the middle of it, but that's all), the Summon is done and then you respond to the Summon. I never thought it was an actual effect. Negating a Tribute Summon doesn't give you back the Tributes either.

It doesn't, but it's very helpful to think of it like it does, to help explain things.

You "activate" the effect by paying the costs. Players can then respond, but with only specific cards, like in the Damage Step. Afterwards, the Summon is successful.

With missing the timing, the costs are paid and then you Summon, so you miss it. With effects like "Sangan", his effect is pushed back until the current "chain" resolves (like Tributing "Sangan" for "Mystik Wok" - you resolve "Mystik Wok", and then "Sangan"'s effect begins a new chain).

Although, it doesn't actually use a chain block (which would be important for "Combo Fighter"), and it doesn't activate or resolve. It's only useful in explaining the mechanics behind it. It's like calling "Exodia"'s effect a Continuous Effect like "Jinzo", even though it is a Game Condition: you cannot chain to either, neither effect can interrupt a single chain link ("Jinzo" vs "Ceasefire", or "Exodia" vs "Graceful Charity"), and both can activate in between chain links (like chaining "CotH" on "Jinzo" to the activation of a Trap).

Fair enough. A "Global Continuous" effect, then, maybe, for the Fusion Substitutes.

Besides, I was under the impression you could negate the name change effect. Harpie Lady 1 would be Harpie Lady 1 if Skill Drain was around. I don't see why it wouldn't be negated. In which case, Harpie Lady 1 also gets classified "Global Continuous" (for the name - regular "Continuous" for the ATK boost, of course).

A good result of making all these categories is that we can define exactly what Skill Drain will and won't negate. For one, Skill Drain can negate Global Continuous effects, but only if they're face-up on the field.

[info]The name of "A Legendary Ocean" is treated as "Umi" always and for all purposes. If "Imperial Order" is active, the card name is still treated as "Umi". If the opponent activates "Cursed Seal of the Forbidden Spell" targeting "Umi", you cannot activate "Umi" or "A Legendary Ocean" for the rest of the Duel.
[/info]"Harpie Lady 1"'s effect is like "A Legendary Ocean" - neither can be negated. Also, both effects are applied outside the duel, for deck construction purposes. Lastly, "Harpie Lady 1"'s effect applies while in the deck, while Fusion Substitute Monsters do not (for "Future Fusion").

I'm beginning to come around to the idea of an activation/active condition line like you suggest (rather than incorporating it into the rest of the effect, like I've done with Dreadmaster above).

Well, we could always do it the over-the-top way, and do it the way the Japanese Expert Rulings Page does it. They include a separate section for activation conditions, things at activation (targeting, costs), and things at resolution. Then they explain everything in gross detail.

I suppose the best way (because I think your ""Destiny Hero"-named" idea would still be a bit confusing) would be to go back to the original terminology, which is "a monster with "Destiny Hero" in its name". It makes things a bit more long-winded, but it says exactly what it means.

Sounds good.

Well, I think for convention's sake the card's name would always be on a separate line (it's a kind of heading, after all). The effect goes below it (apparently as bullet points, although this may also be changed if someone thinks up a better way to put it).

Ow, I just noticed that you used Soul Exchange in the first post...I really need to read things better.

I think we can use the word "Target" (with a capital T) to mean a targeting effect. If it doesn't say "Target", then it doesn't target anything. It's a "say what you see" case.

Naturally, we'll get the people who ask whether it targets anyway, but we're going to get complainers in any case. I think excluding the word "Target" would be better than saying "(This effect does not Target.)" every time.

I like this. We can then get rid of all those terms that mean the same thing, like "designate" or "select".

Having thought about this for a while, perhaps we shouldn't try to differentiate between the two after all. That is, we should treat each card separately and word it to say what it means, rather than trying to come up with phrases for one case and assuming the other is the standard.
*snip*

Here's how "literally" works: In the case of De-Fusion, since the Summons happen afterwards, if you can't return the monster then the effect stops and you never get to the Summon part (it's very clear you need to return the monster). The same goes for Pot of Avarice - as long as you say to return all 5 of the cards, then if you can't you cannot carry on with the effect and wouldn't get to the drawing.

This could result in a lot of "(if possible)" and "as many of ... as possible" in the "as much as possible" effects. But that's probably something we'll just have to live with. I don't think it'd be that bad, and it would say exactly how the effect works.

The main point to remember, then is that if you can't achieve an earlier part of an effect, then the effect immediately stops and you don't even try to do any later steps.

Looking good. The only thing I can think of is resolve-as-much-as-possible effects, like "Book of Life". The only thing I can think of is using "if possible" repeatedly:

Book of Life

• Target 1 Monster Card in your Opponent's Graveyard, and Target 1 Undead-Type Monster Card in your Graveyard -> Remove From Play the first Target from your opponent's Graveyard (if possible) and Special Summon the second Target from your Graveyard (if possible).

 

[Maruno]

It doesn't, but it's very helpful to think of it like it does, to help explain things.

You "activate" the effect by paying the costs. Players can then respond, but with only specific cards, like in the Damage Step. Afterwards, the Summon is successful.

With missing the timing, the costs are paid and then you Summon, so you miss it. With effects like "Sangan", his effect is pushed back until the current "chain" resolves (like Tributing "Sangan" for "Mystik Wok" - you resolve "Mystik Wok", and then "Sangan"'s effect begins a new chain).

Although, it doesn't actually use a chain block (which would be important for "Combo Fighter"), and it doesn't activate or resolve. It's only useful in explaining the mechanics behind it. It's like calling "Exodia"'s effect a Continuous Effect like "Jinzo", even though it is a Game Condition: you cannot chain to either, neither effect can interrupt a single chain link ("Jinzo" vs "Ceasefire", or "Exodia" vs "Graceful Charity"), and both can activate in between chain links (like chaining "CotH" on "Jinzo" to the activation of a Trap).

The thing is, though, in the end that way of thinking about it is essentially wrong. And actually, we don't really need to cover how self-Special Summons work anyway - all we need to do is list how it can happen and let the game mechanics worry about the actual process. The arrow in the "Summoning Conditions:" line doesn't mean cost -> effect. But perhaps the arrow can be removed and replaced with a colon or something.

"Harpie Lady 1"'s effect is like "A Legendary Ocean" - neither can be negated. Also, both effects are applied outside the duel, for deck construction purposes. Lastly, "Harpie Lady 1"'s effect applies while in the deck, while Fusion Substitute Monsters do not (for "Future Fusion").

Okay then, make Harpie Lady 1 a category-less effect, and say category-less effects are always and forever applicable (i.e. even in the Deck, and it can't be negated by anything). And make sure to specify Harpie Lady 1 works even during deck construction too - we don't need a whole effect category for something like that.

Well, we could always do it the over-the-top way, and do it the way the Japanese Expert Rulings Page does it. They include a separate section for activation conditions, things at activation (targeting, costs), and things at resolution. Then they explain everything in gross detail.

Something like this:


Destiny Hero - Malicious

• Ignition: Activate only when this card is in your Graveyard
  • Remove this card from play -> Special Summon 1 "Destiny Hero - Malicious" from your Deck.

It introduces another (indented) bullet point, but it separates out what needs to be separated. I'm still not convinced that extra bullet point won't make some things very messy, but we're always open to new layouts.

Ow, I just noticed that you used Soul Exchange in the first post...I really need to read things better.

'S no problem.

I like this. We can then get rid of all those terms that mean the same thing, like "designate" or "select".

Exactly. This project is all about proper terminology, and "Target" is a prime example of that.

Looking good. The only thing I can think of is resolve-as-much-as-possible effects, like "Book of Life". The only thing I can think of is using "if possible" repeatedly:

Book of Life

• Target 1 Monster Card in your Opponent's Graveyard, and Target 1 Undead-Type Monster Card in your Graveyard -> Remove From Play the first Target from your opponent's Graveyard (if possible) and Special Summon the second Target from your Graveyard (if possible).

Either that or use "resolve as much as possible" at the beginning of the effect. In the case of Book of Moon, though, I'd go with "(if possible)".

And remember, Zombie-Type




Going back to the "Destiny Hero" monster problem, I've had second thoughts. It really is neater to say ""Destiny Hero" monster" rather than "a monster with "Destiny Hero" in its name" (particularly for cards like Phantom Beast Cross-Wing that include specific cards too). It may not be quite as intuitive, but...

I'm having third thoughts, now that I think about it. I don't know which I'd prefer (for the general public - obviously I'd have the shorter version for myself because I'm clever enough to know what it means). We'll need a poll at some point about it, see what people other than the two of us think about it.

How about "then shuffle your Deck" at the end of every effect that searches the Deck. Is it needed, or should we leave it as just being implied? I think it couldn't hurt to include it.

 

[Entropy]

The thing is, though, in the end that way of thinking about it is essentially wrong. And actually, we don't really need to cover how self-Special Summons work anyway - all we need to do is list how it can happen and let the game mechanics worry about the actual process. The arrow in the "Summoning Conditions:" line doesn't mean cost -> effect. But perhaps the arrow can be removed and replaced with a colon or something.

Sure, it would probably make it more complicated anyway.

Also, how would we handle cards like "Cyber Laser Dragon", that can only be Summoned by "Card X"?

Cyber Laser Dragon

• Summoning Condition: Nomi -> with "Photon Generator Unit"
• ~Etc.~

Or is that too brief?

And "Cyber Dragon"?

Cyber Laser Dragon

• Summoning Condition: While you control no monsters and your opponent controls at least 1.

Or even worse, "Gilasaurus"? What would we even write from him?

Gilasaurus

• Summoning Condition: From your hand
• ~Etc.~

Okay then, make Harpie Lady 1 a category-less effect, and say category-less effects are always and forever applicable (i.e. even in the Deck, and it can't be negated by anything). And make sure to specify Harpie Lady 1 works even during deck construction too - we don't need a whole effect category for something like that.

It's technically a condition. Although, the OCG semi-officially calls it a Rule Effect, but we'd want to reduce the amount of new terminology, no?

Something like this:


Destiny Hero - Malicious

• Ignition: Activate only when this card is in your Graveyard
  • Remove this card from play -> Special Summon 1 "Destiny Hero - Malicious" from your Deck.

It introduces another (indented) bullet point, but it separates out what needs to be separated. I'm still not convinced that extra bullet point won't make some things very messy, but we're always open to new layouts.

Would we be separating consecutive effects on separate bullets, like I originally did with "Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster"?

Also, for what you suggested originally (bullets for die rolls/listed effects), we could always just use the bullet character • instead of a [*]. Or would we use a sub-sub list?

Going back to the "Destiny Hero" monster problem, I've had second thoughts. It really is neater to say ""Destiny Hero" monster" rather than "a monster with "Destiny Hero" in its name" (particularly for cards like Phantom Beast Cross-Wing that include specific cards too). It may not be quite as intuitive, but...

I'm having third thoughts, now that I think about it. I don't know which I'd prefer (for the general public - obviously I'd have the shorter version for myself because I'm clever enough to know what it means). We'll need a poll at some point about it, see what people other than the two of us think about it.

Hm, I like the poll idea.

How about "then shuffle your Deck" at the end of every effect that searches the Deck. Is it needed, or should we leave it as just being implied? I think it couldn't hurt to include it.

We probably should, I see that asked every once-in-a-while.

 

[Digital Jedi]

Dagnamit! You guys got way ahead of me. Now I have to actually READ what you posted. =/

Well, if you feel the need to suggest additional icons besides the ->, I can at least help in that respect. Don't forget that [noparse]1* 5* 3*[/noparse] etc. translates to 1* 5* 3* respectively. Not to mention all the icons for the existing game are already part of our Smiley set. Folks just don't remember to use them too much.

 

[Maruno]

Also, how would we handle cards like "Cyber Laser Dragon", that can only be Summoned by "Card X"?

Cyber Laser Dragon

• Summoning Condition: Nomi -> with "Photon Generator Unit"
• ~Etc.~

Or is that too brief?

And "Cyber Dragon"?

Cyber Dragon

• Summoning Condition: While you control no monsters and your opponent controls at least 1.

Or even worse, "Gilasaurus"? What would we even write from him?

Gilasaurus

• Summoning Condition: From your hand
• ~Etc.~

As I understand it, "Nomi" means "can only ever possibly be Summoned this way:". I've already considered Neo-Spacian Twinkle Moss, and I've worded it exactly as you have for Cyber Laser Dragon (except saying "By the effect of" instead of "with"). Great minds, perhaps.

A Cyber Dragon situation would be a bit tough. It's not a "Summoning Condition", it's a "Summoning Option" (although I'm hesitant to invent that new category). "Summoning Condition" seems to me like it's the only possible method to Summon it (or initially Summon it, at least) - it closes off all the regular methods (like Tribute Summon for a high-Level monster). Perhaps we should indeed invent a "Summoning Option" category, then. Opinion?

I don't think, however, that there needs to be three "Summoning" categories:

• Summoning Condition - like Guardian Summons, it's a regular one but you just need a particular card around or some other condition
• Summoning Method - this is how you Summon it, and no other way at all. Works for Nomi and initial Summon
• Summoning Option - as well as existing methods, you could also Summon it this special way (Cyber Dragon)

The first two can be grouped together, I think. It makes those "ignore the Summoning Condition" cards a bit simpler to word, and I think having it would be a bit too picky.

It's technically a condition. Although, the OCG semi-officially calls it a Rule Effect, but we'd want to reduce the amount of new terminology, no?

Condition. So it's not an effect of the card, but a kind of tag placed on all cards called Harpie Lady 1 by the game mechanics?

I don't think we want to be inventing any new rules. The effect should still be written on the card, as as I said before make it either a category-less effect (applicable everywhere) or a "Global Continuous" effect, and make sure to have it say "even in Deck construction". I have no idea which would be better to use - we'd need all the examples of this kind of effect to be able to decide on that, I think (or at least I would).

Would we be separating consecutive effects on separate bullets, like I originally did with "Destiny Hero - Dreadmaster"?

Also, for what you suggested originally (bullets for die rolls/listed effects), we could always just use the bullet character • instead of a [*]. Or would we use a sub-sub list?

First question: Exactly, yes.

Second question: I figure bullets and lists are the same thing. In that case, a sub-sub list would be appropriate. As you can see, it'd get a bit messy.

However, it'd be a lot less messy if each effect itself wasn't already listed (i.e. if they didn't have a bullet point. That is, all the bullet points lose a "sub". However, having each effect itself be bulleted makes it easier to distinguish between different effects (some won't have big red categories on them, you know).

It all depends on how it's presented in the end, and I don't know how that'll be.

Hm, I like the poll idea.

I'd hope we have a whole load of polls about this in the future. Which wording of this card do you like best, how should we refer to names, could this effect category be merged into this one, etc. etc..

Not only is this project a team effort (or rather it will be once it gets moving properly), but it's also for the masses. If they don't like it, then whatever we've come up with is meaningless. Ideally the masses would all be part of the team, so we'd have as big an input as possible (and can rewrite all the cards as quick as possible, without one person having to do loads of them).




Do you think we should create a new section for this project (like the Deck Masters section) yet? It makes it easier to have a bunch of threads related to it (one for contributions, one for arguing over wording, one to make suggestions of what should be found out from the official channels, one to find examples of new effects we've not already rewritten, something like that). I only put this thread in the General Discussion (YGO) because I thought it'd get a bit more attention, and because the STP section doesn't exist yet. If you reckon a section would be better, I'll poke Digital Jedi and get him to make one.

 

[Maruno]

Dagnamit! You guys got way ahead of me. Now I have to actually READ what you posted. =/

Well, if you feel the need to suggest additional icons besides the ->, I can at least help in that respect. Don't forget that [noparse]1* 5* 3*[/noparse] etc. translates to 1* 5* 3* respectively. Not to mention all the icons for the existing game are already part of our Smiley set. Folks just don't remember to use them too much.

Ah, you posted while I was replying to Entropy. I hope you'll forgive the double post, but I think my other post is long enough as it is.

Yeah, go on, get reading And you could also make us a new section for this project so that we can have several threads with short posts instead one one thread with very long posts indeed.

I actually think "9 Stars" is easier to read than 9*, because I don't have to count them to decide how many there are. Actually, it might be a bit better to have something like 4* 2* 3*, because that would break it up into the obvious groups of 0, 1 and 2 Tributes, which is a bit more intuitive (to players of the game, anyway).

 

[Digital Jedi]

Originally, when you first suggested this, I had setup Language 101 in the University as the area for this. But I never added the subforums, just the category. I'm rethinking some of the layouts here, so let me get back to you.

Oh, just mouseover the stars, it will say the level. I just think it's cool. 8*

 

[Maruno]

Originally, when you first suggested this, I had setup Language 101 in the University as the area for this. But I never added the subforums, just the category. I'm rethinking some of the layouts here, so let me get back to you.

Oh, just mouseover the stars, it will say the level. I just think it's cool. 8*

Ah, okay, fair enough.

 

[Maruno]

It's just occurred to me that the Simple Texts Project may be worth a fair bit more than just reworded effects.

Actually, I've thought about one aspect of this almost since I thought up the STP: rewriting the rulebook, which would include new terms that are currently undefined or difficult to find (perhaps including terms the STP basic uses, like "Nomi"). It would also make a note of all of the game mechanics, such as describing how lingering effects work and stating that they can't be negated (as far as I'm aware).

The other aspect sparked in my mind just now, inspired by Peten the Dark Clown (a ruling about it was recently asked). I know it's been done all over the place, including here already, but the other aspect is: articles. Yes, it's been done before, everyone's already read them all, and I believe Curtis writes a lot somewhere. However, the articles I'm thinking of would include the terminology and the redefined everything from the STP. They would essentially be extended examples for certain cards or mechanics or so forth.

But thinking about it as I type, I suspect that's rather an unnecessary thing to do. But still, how about the STP rulebook?



As for displaying all the information once we've come up with it, how about some kind of Wiki for the STP? Nah, probably not, actually. I was just thinking about it as a place to collaborate and do a kind of jigsaw thing with all the bits of information everyone has (one person dumps the rulings for a card, another points out some more combos for it, someone else lists similar cards to help with consistency, etc.). It wouldn't be an ideal way to display the finished information, really, because as far as I'm aware any Wikia can be edited by anyone (Wikipedia can lock some of their pages, I know, but that's 'pedia and it's special).

Nah, so how about something like Netrep or ccgdb.com instead? A simple little online tool that'll list everything, perhaps with some search options (although since it'd be purely for reference I'm not sure whether anything more than listing the card would be needed).

 

[Digital Jedi]

Don't tempt me to do things I was already thinking about doing but didn't have a good enough excuse to do.

www.cogonline.net/wiki

Yes, it does everything Wikepedia does. It's needs some tweaking. I need to get the colors and the forum navbar in there. I need to set up some Wiki admins. But other then that, have at it. Mess around and see if it will suit your needs.

 

[Maruno]

That looks distinctly cool. At the moment I'm currently the most active contributor to this Duke Nukem wikia, and I've learnt quite a lot about Wiki formatting from it (such as creating templates, tables and so forth - basically, anything you see on that wikia I'm likely to have designed). If this picks up it'll be decidedly interesting. I'd be happy to mess around with presentation, once you've got everything you wanted in there. Gosh, I don't know where to start. And I don't often say "gosh", not often at all.

It's just for the STP, then? Or is it (or can it be) for the CoG in general? Since page formats can be edited a bit more easily in a Wiki, I suppose it may be more suited for nice big presentations and fancy articles (although that would probably detract from this forum - I don't suppose that's desirable). Besides, I don't anticipate it would ever turn into a big thing for this forum.

 

[Digital Jedi]

Whatever you think works best. The only things I'll be tweaking is the CSS and images. The Wikia itself is free to be edited at any time. I'm currently reading how to control permissions so I can set you up as an Admin. But as it stands, I've integrated the Wiki with the forums so you only ever need one login for the forums and the Wiki, and it will be limited to CoG members to edit.

As far as it being for CoG in general, I'm not entirely sure yet. I've always wanted to install MediaWiki, but never really had a valid reason to until now. But, whatever happens with it happens. With the amount of space/bandwidth I have, if need be we can have more then one Wiki if it seems like a good idea. Or even if it doesn't. Never stopped me before.

 

[Maruno]

Might as well just have one Wiki for everything we want. Each Wiki can have an infinite number of pages, of course.

I'm sure people will think up more things to put on the Wiki. Good work with integrating it into the forum - very impressive.

I just had a good look, and discovered there's absolutely nothing in this Wiki. Not even any templates or help pages or anything. I think the templates may be the first order of business. I've very briefly experimented with some things, and I suspect the lack of templates (such as the ! template, which inserts a vertical pipe in places where, if you just stick the pipe itself in it messes things up) is what is causing me a few problems. It may also be the case that some language in the templates I've used on the Duke Nukem wikia is different in this Wiki (for whatever reason). I'll have a go at it tomorrow, and will try not to mess things up too much.

 

[Digital Jedi]

You know, I've only done a small amount of Wiki editing. Some spelling corrections here and there and one or two comments on Talk Pages. I have yet to really dig into the meat and potatoes of it all.

Like, I've never really seen how you create a new page, other then trying to navigate to the page that doesn't exist, and click the create link there. I also don't know what Templates, related to Wiki, are exactly. I presumed they're just little variables you put into the edit window and it comes out preformatted to something else.

 

[Digital Jedi]

Looks like the templates have to be created for each Wiki.