full clear text of rules

[I Hate Snatch Steal]

I think that each section should have its rules explained clearly, fully, and without being open to interpretation if they are not already.

 

Examples/complaints:

 

the realistic cards subform rules thread doesn't have the fake type rule and its infamous child the DIVINE/Divine-Beast type rule, although they are referenced in any other cards's rules

 

http://forum.yugiohcardmaker.net/topic/121647-realistic-card-rules-and-a-guide-to-card-design-everyone-in-rc-should-read-this/

 

^ it wasn't there

 

while we're in on the subject:

 

what is too divine to be realistic? is it the usage of the DIVINE attribute and/or Divine-Beast type? Or is it using words like "Divine" "God" ect in your card names? (If its the latter, then that's beyond stupid: rainbow dragon's japanese name says hi)

 

also, archtypes and sets should have its own rule stickey now that it has a new purpose

[Catterjune]

Support. I've been trying to get the CC team to get their shit together forever on this subject.

[Zazubat]

I agree, when I first came, I saw a bunch of random topics, and didn't really know where to begin. Many were confusing and were changed all the time. I think putting something up for each section as 1 single big post is a better idea.

About Divine and such, no the type is not supported in the real game enough to warrant it being "realistic". When was the last time you saw any of these around in the meta? Exactly.

[Just Crouton]

About Divine and such, no the type is not supported in the real game enough to warrant it being "realistic". When was the last time you saw any of these around in the meta? Exactly.

_____

 

We have 4 DIVINEs and 3 Divine-Beasts, that are LEGAL. Not allowing DIVINEs/Divine-Beast is stupid, especially since it's never been a bad thing for someone to make support for existing, undersupported cards.

[I Hate Snatch Steal]

_____

 

We have 4 DIVINEs and 3 Divine-Beasts, that are LEGAL. Not allowing DIVINEs/Divine-Beast is stupid, especially since it's never been a bad thing for someone to make support for existing, undersupported cards.

tell that to stellar black, he'd more hard headed about it then a giant soldier of stone

 

I tried and here's what happened:

 

http://forum.yugiohcardmaker.net/topic/293318-realistic-cards-comments-suggestions-how-can-we-make-our-section-better/page-6

 

I agree with you 110% btw

[Legend Zero]

We have 4 DIVINEs and 3 Divine-Beasts, that are LEGAL. Not allowing DIVINEs/Divine-Beast is stupid, especially since it's never been a bad thing for someone to make support for existing, undersupported cards.

I'm not CC so I'm just throwing this out there, but why does support for DIVINE/Divine-Beast have to have the same type?

Also, DIVINE/Divine-Beast was an attribute konami originally made for cards not legal to the game. Besides the Gods, every other DIVINE monster is changed to another attribute upon release. So while you can support the DIVINEs, it is unrealistic to make the support DIVINE too.

Again, just an outsider looking in.

Edit: Found something interesting.

"In Reshef of Destruction, the Divine type was given to monsters so that they would not be affected by the game's standard type system, which caused monsters of certain types to automatically destroy monsters of certain types. Any cards that target "light type" monsters may also target Divine-Beasts. For example, "Kaiser Sea Horse's" effect applies to the summoning of Divine-Beast-Type monsters. Also, contrary to popular belief, the Divine type is just as Susceptible to card effects as any othe monster, not including monsters with the ability in their effect not to be effected by said effects."

So DIVINE's creation was not for the actual game, but a game design choice.

[I Hate Snatch Steal]

so by that logic, any card type, attribute, monster type, or whatever that was illegal at first will never be legal here even if it later becomes legal in the real game?

 

edit:

 

the bottom line is (or should be) at least 1 legal card has it, so we should be able to do it too, NO EXCEPTIONS FOR GODS OR ANTHING ELSE (except game balance of course)!

[Legend Zero]

The problem isn't are you allowed to make DIVINE/Divine-Beast, but are they realistic? I could honestly see it both ways. There are legal and real cards of the type/attribute, but at the same time those are special cases that will never receive another member (unless they decide to throw us Zorc).

The real way to answer this would be to email konami and ask if they ever plan on making another DIVINE/Divine-Beast. If they say no, then they would not qualify as realistic.

[Catterjune]

Re: DIVINE/Divine-Beast

There were a lot of things that didn't exist back when the card game originally came out. Xyz monsters, Tuners, Synchros, Psychic Types. Instead of talking about the past, let's talk about the present and the future.

We all know the history behind the cards. What I want is a reason why they should not be allowed that doesn't preface itself with "I think" or doesn't come with a history lesson from the Yu-Gi-Oh wiki followed with "that's why they're unrealistic!" Especially since the card maker actively does have room for DIVINE as an attribute.


Re: Reshef of Destruction

The game is completely not canon in every sense of the word. From the story to the cards to the way the game works. Why you'd even bring it up is a mystery. Do you want to tell me I can't put [Thunder Kid] on top of Thunder Kid and get Twin Headed Thunder Dragon as well?

[Zazubat]

Hatcher is right, like I said, stop dwelling in the past. And if you wish to, just post them in AoC ffs.

[I Hate Snatch Steal]

Re: DIVINE/Divine-Beast

There were a lot of things that didn't exist back when the card game originally came out. Xyz monsters, Tuners, Synchros, Psychic Types. Instead of talking about the past, let's talk about the present and the future.

We all know the history behind the cards. What I want is a reason why they should not be allowed that doesn't preface itself with "I think" or doesn't come with a history lesson from the Yu-Gi-Oh wiki followed with "that's why they're unrealistic!" Especially since the card maker actively does have room for DIVINE as an attribute.


Re: Reshef of Destruction

The game is completely not canon in every sense of the word. From the story to the cards to the way the game works. Why you'd even bring it up is a mystery. Do you want to tell me I can't put [Thunder Kid] on top of Thunder Kid and get Twin Headed Thunder Dragon as well?

what happens if the CC moderators don't have a good reason? (I had to say it)

[Legend Zero]

what happens if the CC moderators don't have a good reason? (I had to say it)

Well, it is their section. There are 3 mods there (iirc) and it is their job to set and enforce the rules. If they are all in agreement about something it would not be any other mods place to overturn that.

*Note: We can put this on a list of things to ask YCMaker.

[I Hate Snatch Steal]

Well, it is their section. There are 3 mods there (iirc) and it is their job to set and enforce the rules. If they are all in agreement about something it would not be any other mods place to overturn that.

*Note: We can put this on a list of things to ask YCMaker.

please do

[Synchronized]

Support ( the rules thing).

Truthfully though, the Mod team in CC is way too over the top with that stuff & I can't see them changing their minds on that. (The Divine thing).

[Northern Sage]

Full support. In fact, we might as well make that AC topic into it.

[Nathanael D. Striker]

TBH, I've felt that the rules for all of CC needed a revamp for a while now. So, I support.

[vanishedmem]

Rules are important

[Zazubat]

Rules are important

They sure are... I would advice you to maybe comment something more relevent in this discussing perhaps. Just a friendly suggestion.