Talk:Duelist Pack: Kaiba

"Blue-Eyes White Dragon" Effect Monster

When the official site said A brand-new “Blue-Eyes White Dragon” Effect Monster, available for the first time! I'm not sure that immediatly implies that there'll be an Effect Monster with "Blue-Eyes White Dragon" printed as its name. It could just be a new card that's part of the "Blue-Eyes" series. If it had said an "Elemental Hero" Effect Monster, we wouldn't think they meant an Effect Monster called "Elemental Hero". Two Legal cards with the same printed name is something that hasn't been done before. I'm not sure they'd introduce this in the TCG before the OCG. I'm not saying it's impossible, but I think at this point we're jumping the gun by saying that there will be an Effect Monster called "Blue-Eyes White Dragon" at this point. -- Deltaneos (talk) 21:30, January 27, 2010 (UTC)

That's why I put the link back to the original, but we know it will be the all the same as BEWD except for being a effect monster with some new effect. The name would be the only thing getting changed. This isn't something that hasn't been done on this Wikia before. Why is an unofficial Infernity "Doom" Dragon page name allowed knowing it will be changed when the real name is revealed but not having a placemarker to simply mark it as it will be the same as the original in every other way? Just saying. I merely put what the page gave and left it to be changed and added to later as needed as it as it has been done around here that way before and I doubt that will end. ShinobiPhoenix 21:40, January 27, 2010 (UTC)

"Infernity Doom Dragon" was moved to "Infernity Death Dragon", since that's its official name in the Japanese version.

How do we know it will be the same as "Blue-Eyes White Dragon" apart from name and effect? "Dark Magician of Chaos" could be called a "Dark Magician" Effect Monster, but it isn't the same as "Dark Magician" apart from name and effect.

While we do use placeholder names, they should be logical changes. e.g. calling "Antique Gear Ultimate Golem", "Ancient Gear Ultimate Golem" or in rare cases, a description of what it is e.g. fifth Dragon. We wouldn't give something the same name as another card, unless we knew it had the same name. -- Deltaneos (talk) 02:39, January 28, 2010 (UTC)

I would just like to point out a few things. First, we do have monsters that have been recreated with the same name. Harpie Lady was recreated with many multiple cards such as Harpie Lady 1. Due to the effect/condition these cards have, their names are considered the same just for deck construction. The name just makes it easier for us to descuss them without explaining which one I mean. Second, There IS a card that was a normal monster that was since also made into an effect monster. Its name? Obelisk the Tormentor. Origionally, this card could not be used. Now, this card has an effect card with the exact same name as well as being legal for play. While the first wasn't legal for play, it still was the first to be noted. — This unsigned comment was made by LordGeovanni (talk • contribs) 09:29, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

In my first post, I said that they haven't made 2 legal cards with the same printed name.

Cards like the first "Obelisk the Tormentor" and the Normal Monster "Black Luster Soldier" are Illegal. They can't be used in accordance to the official rules. It is possible that they could create an Illegal "Blue-Eyes White Dragon" or even make two Legal cards with the same printed name for the first time. Point is, we don't know that at this stage, so we shouldn't go ahead saying they have the same printed name until we know.

If this "Blue-Eyes White Dragon" card is like "A Legendary Ocean" and "Cyber Harpie Lady" it would have its own uniqye printed name, calling the article Blue-Eyes White Dragon (Effect Monster), would imply that the printed name of the card is "Blue-Eyes White Dragon".

-- Deltaneos (talk) 12:56, January 28, 2010 (UTC)