OCG/PSCT Tutorial: Learn How To Write Your Cards Properly!

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

Looking at the current examples (right now, we only have confirmation of the Cyberse stuff from the Deck; nothing on the reprinted cards), you shouldn't have to fix things. Your cards are only triggerable on your turn, so no need for the new (Quick Effect) thing.

 

Until the Deck is officially released (we get non-proxy pics), you can just use the current wording we have at present.

[Atypical-Abbie]

Looking at the current examples (right now, we only have confirmation of the Cyberse stuff from the Deck; nothing on the reprinted cards), you shouldn't have to fix things. Your cards are only triggerable on your turn, so no need for the new (Quick Effect) thing.

 

Until the Deck is officially released (we get non-proxy pics), you can just use the current wording we have at present.

Well, the first one he posted is a Trigger Effect, so it can activate in both player's turn, however, you still don't need to change anything, since being a Quick Effect and a Trigger Effect are different things.

[Guest 777c]

 

They're functionally different, but you should use "until the end of this turn" in this case. Certain types of effects, like those that temporarily switch control of a monster or some of those that temporarily banish a monster, tend to use "until the End Phase." Otherwise, card effects use "until the end of this turn" (or variations like "for the rest of this turn" in other certain cases). Most cards with effects that used to say "until the End Phase," but were later reprinted, have received errata to say "until the end of this turn" instead.

 

See cards like Dante, Traveler of the Burning Abyss on how to write number-choosing. Note though that all instances of "choose a number" seem to be related to effects that deal with cards on the top of a Deck, so it might be fine to use "declare a number" as well in this case; there isn't much precedent so neither should be incorrect (and neither is unclear). Depending on your choice, you might use "the declared number" to refer back to the chosen number when writing the effect resolution.

 

Also, notice that Dante's Ignition Effect is written with a semicolon (";"), whereas you have a full stop. See this article for what a semicolon in an activated effect means and determine whether or not you should be using one in this case (your design choice). If you decide not to use a semicolon, the full stop you currently have won't be clear enough as to how your effect functions as it resolves, so you'll have to use something like "and" instead. See a list of PSCT conjunctions and their meanings here.

 

 

"Until the End Phase" means that the effect has to stop applying some time during the End Phase, not necessarily right when the End Phase begins. You choose to stop applying the effect similarly to how you choose to activate a Trigger Effect that activates "during the End Phase."

I have trouble with another effect, this time, it deals with Setting a Spell/Trap Card.  The effect is as follows:

Once per turn, if your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap Card(s): Destroy it.

 

I am having trouble wording this effect properly.  Is this correct?

[Atypical-Abbie]

I have trouble with another effect, this time, it deals with Setting a Spell/Trap Card.  The effect is as follows:

Once per turn, if your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap Card(s): Destroy it.

 

I am having trouble wording this effect properly.  Is this correct?

I would say that's perfectly correct :)

[Azuriena]

On the topic of Link Strike, "zone" by itself also seems to be no longer capitalised, comparing Zany Zebra to Link Spider.

 

I'm not sure we've seen enough of new Quick Effects to determine whether or not "during either player's turn" and similar will be fully or almost fully deprecated, but we'll see soon enough.
 

I have trouble with another effect, this time, it deals with Setting a Spell/Trap Card.  The effect is as follows:
Once per turn, if your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap Card(s): Destroy it.
 
I am having trouble wording this effect properly.  Is this correct?

 
I'd say you should use "Destroy that card(s)" following Supreme King Z-ARC's example (among other cards... including your card from before), but on functionality alone it's fine as it currently is.
 
Also, I forgot to mention something about your last card: Use "from 1 to 10" instead of "between 1 and 10" so that there isn't any room to misinterpret it as an exclusive range.

[Guest 777c]

I have trouble with the wording of this effect:

Once per turn, if your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap card(s): Destroy that card(s). Your opponent loses LP equal to 500 x the number of destroyed cards.

Is there anything wrong with this effect?

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

"Once per turn, if your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap Card(s): Destroy them, then your opponent loses 500 LP x the number of cards destroyed by this effect."

 

Other than minor cleaning for PSCT and all, you're fine. So basically, the first instance that your opponent sets any backrow, this effect destroys them, correct?

[Azuriena]

I have trouble with the wording of this effect:

Once per turn, if your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap card(s): Destroy that card(s). Your opponent loses LP equal to 500 x the number of destroyed cards.

Is there anything wrong with this effect?

 

Use "x" for calculations involving numerical values like Levels that are increased/reduced rather than gained/lost, but use "for each" when counting cards for those that can be gained/lost like LP, ATK, and DEF. In this case, do something like "Your opponent loses 500 LP for each." It's also fine to add more detail like "... for each card destroyed" or "... for each card destroyed by this effect." (Also note that even if you use "x", you should be doing something like "Your opponent loses LP equal to the number of cards destroyed x 500", where the number comes after "x".)

 

Again, a full stop between A ("Destroy that card(s)") and B ("Your opponent loses 500 LP for each") isn't sufficiently clear as to how your effect resolves. You should connect them with a PSCT conjunction that tells you 1. whether A and B happen at the same time or at different times; and 2. whether A is required to happen for you to do B and/or whether you must be able to do B to do A. See a list of PSCT conjunctions and their meanings here.

 

Example solution — Once per turn, if your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap Card(s): Destroy that card(s), and if you do, your opponent loses 500 LP for each.

[Guest 777c]

"Once per turn, if your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap Card(s): Destroy them, then your opponent loses 500 LP x the number of cards destroyed by this effect."

 

Other than minor cleaning for PSCT and all, you're fine. So basically, the first instance that your opponent sets any backrow, this effect destroys them, correct?

Yes.

[Guest 777c]

I have trouble with the wording of this effect:

• When your opponent Sets a monster(s): Destroy it, flip it face up, and if you do, your opponent loses LP equal to its original ATK.

Is there anything wrong with the wording? If so, tell me how to reword it.

[Azuriena]

I have trouble with the wording of this effect:

• When your opponent Sets a monster(s): Destroy it, flip it face up, and if you do, your opponent loses LP equal to its original ATK.

Is there anything wrong with the wording? If so, tell me how to reword it.

 

You're using "when" instead of "if", but there's no reason to use "when" in this case because the effect is mandatory to activate if its activation timing is met. Read about the difference between "when ... you can" and "if ... you can" here. This effect, however, doesn't say "you can"; it's mandatory to activate, thus regardless of whether you use "when" or "if" in this case, the effect's activation conditions don't change. Therefore, use "if"—triggered effects that say "if" never "miss timing", and this will make it clear to the reader that your effect won't either, whereas "when" is less clear because they'll also have to check whether the effect is optional to activate. Mandatory effects that trigger and used to say "when", but were later reprinted, have received errata to say "if" instead.

 

Your effect's written in the structure "A, B, and if you do, C." This is fine; the first comma substitutes "and if you do" because the list of instructions ends with "and if you do" as the separator. If the structure had been "A, B, then C," the first comma would substitute "then" instead. But it may be good to know that "A, and if you do, B, and if you do that, C" is fine to do in this case as well.

 

You edited this out from earlier, but yes, use "destroy that monster(s)" in this case.

 

Always hyphenate "face-up".

 

Although A ("destroy that monster(s)") and B ("flip it face-up") are considered to happen at the same time, you should still order your effect's resolution in a more logical sequence. So "flip it face-up" should come before "destroy that monster(s)". Or rather, "flip that monster(s) face-up" should come before "destroy it".

 

As a note, it's not required for the effect to flip the destroyed monster face-up to check its original ATK. Its original ATK can be checked wherever it is sent once destroyed (usually the Graveyard). If you don't intend for the effect to interact with effects like those that trigger from monsters being flipped face-up, you can omit "flip that monster(s) face-up" entirely, and it'll still make your opponent lose the correct amount of LP.

[Guest 777c]

You're using "when" instead of "if", but there's no reason to use "when" in this case because the effect is mandatory to activate if its activation timing is met. Read about the difference between "when ... you can" and "if ... you can" here. This effect, however, doesn't say "you can"; it's mandatory to activate, thus regardless of whether you use "when" or "if" in this case, the effect's activation conditions don't change. Therefore, use "if"—triggered effects that say "if" never "miss timing", and this will make it clear to the reader that your effect won't either, whereas "when" is less clear because they'll also have to check whether the effect is optional to activate. Mandatory effects that trigger and used to say "when", but were later reprinted, have received errata to say "if" instead.

 

Your effect's written in the structure "A, B, and if you do, C." This is fine; the first comma substitutes "and if you do" because the list of instructions ends with "and if you do" as the separator. If the structure had been "A, B, then C," the first comma would substitute "then" instead. But it may be good to know that "A, and if you do, B, and if you do that, C" is fine to do in this case as well.

 

You edited this out from earlier, but yes, use "destroy that monster(s)" in this case.

 

Always hyphenate "face-up".

 

Although A ("destroy that monster(s)") and B ("flip it face-up") are considered to happen at the same time, you should still order your effect's resolution in a more logical sequence. So "flip it face-up" should come before "destroy that monster(s)". Or rather, "flip that monster(s) face-up" should come before "destroy it".

 

As a note, it's not required for the effect to flip the destroyed monster face-up to check its original ATK. Its original ATK can be checked wherever it is sent once destroyed (usually the Graveyard). If you don't intend for the effect to interact with effects like those that trigger from monsters being flipped face-up, you can omit "flip that monster(s) face-up" entirely, and it'll still make your opponent lose the correct amount of LP.

Is it true for A, B, also C? How many monsters can be set in one turn? The rules say that only one monster can be Set per turn.

[Azuriena]

Is it true for A, B, also C?

Yup.

 

Edit:

 

How many monsters can be set in one turn? The rules say that only one monster can be Set per turn.

Normally, you can Normal Summon or Normal Set (Normal Summon/Set) no more than 1 monster per turn.

 

You can Set any number of monsters with card effects per turn. Setting a monster also includes changing a face-up monster on the field to face-down Defense Position and Special Summoning a monster in face-down Defense Position.

 

I don't recommend "when/if a monster is Set" as an activation timing because it won't be commonly understood.

[Guest 777c]

Is the following effect correct in terms of OCG/PSCT:

• If your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap card(s): Destroy them, and if you do, your opponent loses 500 LP for each.

If not, tell me how I should reword it.  I am concerned about the grammar because Spell Cards and Trap Cards are different in terms of how many can be Set in one turn, and also the event-related condition.

[Azuriena]

Is the following effect correct in terms of OCG/PSCT:

• If your opponent Sets a Spell/Trap card(s): Destroy them, and if you do, your opponent loses 500 LP for each.

If not, tell me how I should reword it.  I am concerned about the grammar because Spell Cards and Trap Cards are different in terms of how many can be Set in one turn, and also the event-related condition.

 

 

"Card" is capitalised in "Spell/Trap Card" (but not when it's alone).

 

I'd use "Destroy that card(s)" in this case.

 

You can Set any number of Spell/Trap Cards per turn. It doesn't matter whether they're Spell Cards or Trap Cards. There's nothing wrong with your text. Note though that you can only Set 1 Spell/Trap Card at a time (without using a card effect), so if your opponent can activate the above effect in question, it'll activate once each time you Set a Spell/Trap Card normally.

[Guest 777c]

I have trouble with the wording of this Spell Card:

• Increase your LP by 1000 points.

Is there anything wrong with the wording? If so, how should I correct it?

[Flash Flyer - Sakura]

I have trouble with the wording of this Spell Card:

• Increase your LP by 1000 points.

Is there anything wrong with the wording? If so, how should I correct it?

 

Wording is technically fine (but it's the older style). New style is simply "gain 1000 LP."

[Guest 777c]

What is the difference between the following two effects in terms of timing and the number of times the effect can activate?

• Once per turn, if your opponent Summons a monster(s): That monster(s) has its effects negated, also they lose ATK and DEF equal to their own Level/Rank x 300.
• If your opponent Summons a monster(s): That monster(s) has its effects negated, also they lose ATK and DEF equal to their own Level/Rank x 300.

[Dova]

 

What is the difference between the following two effects in terms of timing and the number of times the effect can activate?

• Once per turn, if your opponent Summons a monster(s): That monster(s) has its effects negated, also they lose ATK and DEF equal to their own Level/Rank x 300.
• If your opponent Summons a monster(s): That monster(s) has its effects negated, also they lose ATK and DEF equal to their own Level/Rank x 300.

 

 

Both are the same in terms of timing, as A) both are IF and B) both are an effect. The "Once per turn" on the first effect means it can only activate once per turn for that monster while it is face-up on the field, but the latter effect has no restriction.

[Guest 777c]

I have trouble understanding this effect.

• Target 1 face-down monster your opponent controls; destroy it.

Let's say that my opponent Summons a face-down monster, my opponent flips it face-up, and I target the monster my opponent flipped face-up.  I can say that my opponent's monster can't be destroyed.

Is my reasoning correct?

[Azuriena]

I have trouble understanding this effect.

• Target 1 face-down monster your opponent controls; destroy it.

Let's say that my opponent Summons a face-down monster, my opponent flips it face-up, and I target the monster my opponent flipped face-up.  I can say that my opponent's monster can't be destroyed.

Is my reasoning correct?

 

You can't target a face-up monster with this effect as you do in this scenario. You must target a Set monster. The targeted monster might be flipped face-up by the time the effect resolves, in which case the targeted monster may or may not be destroyed depending on the wording of the effect.

 

A scenario involving this effect might play out like this:

 

Chain Link 1 - You activate the effect, targeting a Set monster your opponent controls. (You can't target a face-up monster!)

Chain Link 2 - Your opponent activates the effect of Prediction Princess Tarotrei, targeting the same Set monster you targeted above.

 

Neither player wishes to activate any more effects, so the Chain resolves.

 

Chain Link 2 resolves - Tarotrei's effect changes the Set monster it targeted to face-up Attack Position.

Chain Link 1 resolves - Your effect destroys the monster it targeted (even though it's no longer Set). Note that not all targeting effects behave in this way.

 

In this case, the effect says "destroy it" and not "destroy that Set monster" or "destroy that target," so the targeted monster is destroyed regardless. The differences between these wordings are:

• "Destroy it" means that when the effect resolves, it doesn't care if the targeted monster is now face-up or if you are now the one who controls it instead of your opponent.

• "Destroy that Set monster" means that when the effect resolves, it doesn't care if you are now the one who controls the targeted monster instead of your opponent, but it does care that it is still Set and not face-up.

• "Destroy that target" means that when the effect resolves, everything that was required to be true when you targeted the monster must still be true, so the targeted monster must still be Set, not face-up, and must still be controlled by your opponent, not you.

[Guest 777c]

You can't target a face-up monster with this effect as you do in this scenario. You must target a Set monster. The targeted monster might be flipped face-up by the time the effect resolves, in which case the targeted monster may or may not be destroyed depending on the wording of the effect.

 

A scenario involving this effect might play out like this:

 

Chain Link 1 - You activate the effect, targeting a Set monster your opponent controls. (You can't target a face-up monster!)

Chain Link 2 - Your opponent activates the effect of Prediction Princess Tarotrei, targeting the same Set monster you targeted above.

 

Neither player wishes to activate any more effects, so the Chain resolves.

 

Chain Link 2 resolves - Tarotrei's effect changes the Set monster it targeted to face-up Attack Position.

Chain Link 1 resolves - Your effect destroys the monster it targeted (even though it's no longer Set). Note that not all targeting effects behave in this way.

 

In this case, the effect says "destroy it" and not "destroy that Set monster" or "destroy that target," so the targeted monster is destroyed regardless. The differences between these wordings are:

• "Destroy it" means that when the effect resolves, it doesn't care if the targeted monster is now face-up or if you are now the one who controls it instead of your opponent.

• "Destroy that Set monster" means that when the effect resolves, it doesn't care if you are now the one who controls the targeted monster instead of your opponent, but it does care that it is still Set and not face-up.

• "Destroy that target" means that when the effect resolves, everything that was required to be true when you targeted the monster must still be true, so the targeted monster must still be Set, not face-up, and must still be controlled by your opponent, not you.

What if the effect were instead written like this:

• Target 1 monster your opponent controls; destroy it.

In this case, do I need to know whether the monster is face-up or face-down?

[Azuriena]

What if the effect were instead written like this:

• Target 1 monster your opponent controls; destroy it.

In this case, do I need to know whether the monster is face-up or face-down?

 

No. Why would you?

[Guest 777c]

Let's say I have a monster with this effect:

• If your opponent Summons a monster(s): That monster(s) has its effects negated, also they lose ATK and DEF equal to their own Level/Rank x 600.

I choose to activate the effect.

What if I activate the effect, and as a result, the ATK and DEF of one of my opponent's monsters becomes negative?  Is it treated as zero, or a negative number?  I need clarification.

[Atypical-Abbie]

Let's say I have a monster with this effect:

• If your opponent Summons a monster(s): That monster(s) has its effects negated, also they lose ATK and DEF equal to their own Level/Rank x 600.

I choose to activate the effect.

What if I activate the effect, and as a result, the ATK and DEF of one of my opponent's monsters becomes negative?  Is it treated as zero, or a negative number?  I need clarification.

ATK and DEF cannot become lower than 0, if they would become a negative number they just become 0 instead.