Forum:More erratas?
| Forums: | Index → Yu-Gi-Oh! Lists Discussion → More erratas? Please sign your comments with ~~~~. See Help:Signatures and Help:Talk pages for further information. |
 | This forum thread has been unedited for 3321 days and is considered archived. Please don't add to the discussion, unless absolutely necessary. |
On January 1, 2015, the following cards that were once Forbidden, some for a long peroid of time, have become Limited with new erratas:
- Chaos Emperor Dragon - Envoy of the End
- Sinister Serpent
- Temple of the Kings
- Crush Card Virus
- Exchange of the Spirit
- Ring of Destruction
This makes me partially wonder: Will there soon be more Forbidden cards that will soon become Limited (or less), with new erratas? The following isn't concerned, but here's what I think might happen to one:
- Imperial Order: When your opponent activates a Spell Card or a Spell Card's effect, you can pay 700 Life Points to negate that Spell Card's effect. During each of your Standby Phases, pay 700 Life Points or destroy this card. You can only control 1 face-up "Imperial Order" at a time.
What are your thoughts on this matter? --Yes, it's PSYCHID! He talks! He does stuff! 14:28, March 12, 2015 (UTC)
- "Imperial Order" cannot have this effect because it'll be just like "Royal Oppression". The LP cost could be higher and have a "can only use the effect of this card once per turn" condition.
- There's a rumor that Konami want to clear the Forbidden List by changing the effect of every banned card so they can all be playable. This is good with things like "Dark Strike Fighter", but I don't like the idea of changing something like "Pot of Greed". --Missign0 (talk • contribs) 05:05, March 13, 2015 (UTC)
Here's a reasonable idea for "Imperial Order": You cannot activte Spell Cards. Negate the effects of all face-up Spell Cards you control. Once per turn, when your opponent activates a Spell Card: You can negate the activation and if you do, destroy it. Battlemaniac (talk • contribs) 12:08, March 14, 2015 (UTC)
Imperial Order doesn't need a errata since it will effect both players. The real problem with Imperial Order is the fact that you can turn it off if you want. If they make the cost continuous for example you must pay 700 LP during each of your Standby Faces that would be good enough, and even so with card like Denko Sekka and Vanity's in the game I think this card is not as good as most people might actually think. Also the card is easier to counter with cards like Galaxy Cyclone or any other trap/monster effect.
The time that this card was OP is over. Cards that really should get a erreta are Graceful Charity and Painful Choice Thunder Eagle (talk • contribs) 21:54, March 14, 2015 (UTC)
Emptiness can't be compared because it doesn't have the same effect and counterability isn't a reason to not errata a card or unban it. The ability to turn it off and lock your opponent out of using Spell Cards is why it was banned. Heck, even the payment was low enough that most players could pay it for multiple turns and it could be crippling first turn. Dark Hole affects both players too but that doesn't make it fair because it can be used to your advantage as can Heavy Storm. With Konami on a bit of an errata'ing spree, they may come and errata Imperial Order, perhaps to have it reset each turn so you activate it turn 1 and then on your next turn it's reset and has an activation fee of 700 LP. --MasterMarik (talk • contribs) 12:00, March 15, 2015 (UTC)
No that's not true. That you locked out your opponent from using spells is powerfull and it shut down a lot of decks. However why is 1 Imperial order with the burn effect more powerfull than 3 Royal Decree ? The Real OP thing is that you can activate Royal Oppression during your opponents turn where they where unable to do anything regarding spells and when it was you turn you could just simply turn it off or pay the cost, same with vanity's. Sending a card to your grave to to disable Vanity's. Believe me I play a lot against Imperial Order cuz I play a lot of Traditional TCG (all cast limited) and it's more of a side deck cards rather than a standard staple like Vanity's. It's strong but not broken anymore. Thunder Eagle (talk • contribs) 13:36, March 15, 2015 (UTC)
- why is 1 Imperial order with the burn effect more powerfull than 3 Royal Decree ? "Nekroz" and "Burning Abyss" Decks are good examples of how Spells are more important than Traps. With Pendulum Monsters, a card that negates effects of Spells so easily isn't going to be allowed. Also, you talk like paying/losing Life Points is a bad thing.
- On a side note, "Dark Magician of Chaos" is finally going to have an Errata. --Missign0 (talk • contribs) 03:53, March 20, 2015 (UTC)
