Forum:Confusion over X-Saber Axel

Okay, I'm confused with something, According to the wording of X-Saber Axel's effect, it says this:

X-Saber Axel HA01-EN010 While you control this face-up card, when a face-up "Saber" monster on the field is destroyed by battle and sent to the Graveyard, draw 1 card.

That implies that the monster can be on either side of the field. But on Konami's ruling page for Hidden Arsenal 1, it says this:

X-Saber Axel HA01-EN010 While you control this face-up card, when a face-up "Saber" monster you control is destroyed by battle and sent to the Graveyard, draw 1 card.

So, which one is right? Could the original print of Axel be in error? Is the one on Konami's ruling page an errata? What's going on, here? SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 18:24, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Where's the ruling that you are talking about? I think they may have made a mistake in the second one.BobaFett2 (talk)

[Right here.] SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 18:39, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

That's such to be typo, as it such to be your monster to be destroy, not general. So it's why it's instant reprint with correct text. Like with Ocean Dragon Lord - Neo-Daedalus text; it was incorrect first time. --FredCat 19:20, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

So, you're saying that it IS only Saber monsters you control that will activate Axel's effect? Damn. If that's true, then there goes any plans I had for it...SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 21:57, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

From Konami's official list, it's such to be only your X-Saber monsters... Just like "Dark Strike Fighter's" tribute power to shoot damages, Polymerization's select (original take owner's hand/side of the field), etc. I am sorry that you have to suffering some adapt to better strategies. --FredCat 22:03, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Are you sure? I even translated the text on the Japanese version of the card using Babelfish, and as inaccurate as it is, it only says that Axel itself needs to be under your control, not the "Saber" monster being destroyed, and I haven't seen any other place online that has this errata, or even knows about it. I'm going to test out which one it is, over the weekend, on Duel Transer, just to be sure. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 22:22, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Honestly, you need an expert to translate the japan text itself. Konami decided that Axel required other X-Saber, included himself, to be in your own side of the field, not general. --FredCat 22:34, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

I've seen the expert translations of the Japanese text, and they all concur that Konami's "errata" is false. And again, virtually no site I've been on even hints that the original text is wrong. Besides, didn't Hidden Arsenal 1 come out before Konami's cut-off threshold for when rulings are supposed to be considered canon? And why haven't they made an official declaration of errata for the card, like they did with Neo-Daedalus and the other cards they've cleaned up the text for? No offense, but unless the games and/or one of Konami's representatives states otherwise, I'm going to assume the original card text is correct. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 22:43, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Then call Konami and objection at them for incorrect the translation. It's their fault for cause this screw up. If they made it that way, then we accept that way. But hey, I am not here to fighting against you, I am just here to prove that Konami is doing what they want. --FredCat 22:48, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

I've already emailed them asking for clarification, and as I said, I'm going to test it out on Duel Transer this weekend to find out for sure. I'll let you know what I find. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 22:50, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Good, let's hope you get the better result, Yu-Gi-Oh Scientist. --FredCat 22:56, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Please don't insult me like that, or should we start a discussion over all of the cards with contradictory rulings in the OCG vs. TCG? SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 23:02, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Nah, I just wish you a good luck. --FredCat 23:04, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Testing it on a game only shows how it works in the OCG. The english games are just text translations, the gameplay program is still OCG. Considering how often the card names and lores in those ruling pages have mistakes in other sets, I agree that the 'errata' is most likely to be fake and was a mistake. So if you have a face-up X-Saber Axel, if you destroy your opponent's X-Saber by battle, you will draw 1 card; if you control another X-Saber and that X-Saber is destroyed by battle, you will draw 1 card. -Falzar FZ- (talk page|useful stuff) 23:42, May 20, 2011 (UTC)

Well, I just tested it out on Duel Transer, and Flazar's correct, you do get to draw a card if you have Axel out and destroy an opponent's Saber monster. I even got a chain with it and At One with the Sword, believe it or not. Si I'm going to assume that Konami's Hidden Arsenal ruling page is a bit on error, and go with what I saw in the game. SynjoDeonecros (talk • contribs) 22:00, May 21, 2011 (UTC)