[POTE] Gunkan Suship Aka-Shari

[~British Soul~]

https://ygorganization.com/pote-gunkan-suship-aka-shari/

Aka Shari no Gunkan / Gunkan Suship Aka-Shari
Level 4/FIRE/Aqua/Effect
You can only use the 2nd effect of this card’s name once per turn.
(1) This card’s name becomes “Gunkan Suship Shari” while in the hand, Deck, field, or GY.
(2) You can reveal 1 other “Gunkan Suship Shari” in your hand; Special Summon this card from your hand, then you can Special Summon 1 “Gunkan” monster from your Deck, except “Gunkan Suship Shari” (but its effects are negated), and if you do, Special Summon 1 Xyz Monster that mentions that monster from your Extra Deck, using it and this card as material. (This is treated as an Xyz Summon.)
0/2000

[The Warden]

Oh hell yeah! This is exactly what Suships have been waiting for! Doubles as Rice while also being able to make any Xyz with obscene ease, no level modulation required.

[Kokoroshi]

3 hours ago, ~British Soul~ said:

https://ygorganization.com/pote-gunkan-suship-aka-shari/

Aka Shari no Gunkan / Gunkan Suship Aka-Shari
Level 4/FIRE/Aqua/Effect
You can only use the 2nd effect of this card’s name once per turn.
(1) This card’s name becomes “Gunkan Suship Shari” while in the hand, Deck, field, or GY.
(2) You can reveal 1 other “Gunkan Suship Shari” in your hand; Special Summon this card from your hand, then you can Special Summon 1 “Gunkan” monster from your Deck, except “Gunkan Suship Shari” (but its effects are negated), and if you do, Special Summon 1 Xyz Monster that mentions that monster from your Extra Deck, using it and this card as material. (This is treated as an Xyz Summon.)
0/2000

I’ll be honest, I’ve never touched the “Gunkan” archetype but the card looks good. Don’t know the gimmick of the archetype so really this card could just be decent or terrible but being able to summon any rank xyz monster as long as it mentions a specific card is really good.

[Tinkerer]

Now the big question is whether you're allowed to run 3 this + X copies of OG Rice. The wording is a bit different from other cards with name changes in the Deck...

 

[Kokoroshi]

3 minutes ago, Redro said:

Now the big question is whether you're allowed to run 3 this + X copies of OG Rice. The wording is a bit different from other cards with name changes in the Deck...

 

Wait, is name changes the gimmick of the archetype?

[Loleo]

10 minutes ago, Redro said:

Now the big question is whether you're allowed to run 3 this + X copies of OG Rice. The wording is a bit different from other cards with name changes in the Deck...

 

you the only reason to question is because it is treated as having the same name in deck, but it isn't always because it doesn't while banished. I'm going to say you can probably play 3 of each because of the NEXT Neos ruling. That only limits to 3 monsters that are always treated as the same.

[Thomas★Zero]

44 minutes ago, Redro said:

Now the big question is whether you're allowed to run 3 this + X copies of OG Rice. The wording is a bit different from other cards with name changes in the Deck...

 

Its a good question since its not (This card is always treated as "Gunkan Suship Shari") and instead "This card’s name becomes “Gunkan Suship Shari” while in the hand, Deck, field, or GY." which would lean to saying yes you can play 3 of this and OG since the latter's effect doesn't apply if banished.

Still it does open up possibilities for new cards to play multiples of monsters whose effects share a name with another card in a deck without being limited to the 3 card per deck rule.

[Kokoroshi]

18 minutes ago, Thomas★Zero said:

Its a good question since its not (This card is always treated as "Gunkan Suship Shari") and instead "This card’s name becomes “Gunkan Suship Shari” while in the hand, Deck, field, or GY." which would lean to saying yes you can play 3 of this and OG since the latter's effect doesn't apply if banished.

Still it does open up possibilities for new cards to play multiples of monsters whose effects share a name with another card in a deck without being limited to the 3 card per deck rule.

Oh no, more possible blue eyes support but whose name is “Blue-Eyes White Dragon” while in the deck. And we all know how fond Konami is of Blue-Eyes

[~British Soul~]

4 hours ago, Kokoroshi_Games said:

I’ll be honest, I’ve never touched the “Gunkan” archetype but the card looks good. Don’t know the gimmick of the archetype so really this card could just be decent or terrible but being able to summon any rank xyz monster as long as it mentions a specific card is really good.

Well it adds another dimension to the deck that's for sure, and allows for more consistent extending, and with regards to the gimmick you asked about, the Xyz monsters have effects depending on the monsters used as Xyz material, all of them mention Shari and another main deck monster associated with them in their effects.

[~British Soul~]

3 hours ago, Thomas★Zero said:

It's a good question since it's not (This card is always treated as "Gunkan Suship Shari") and instead "This card’s name becomes “Gunkan Suship Shari” while in the hand, Deck, field, or GY." which would lean to saying yes you can play 3 of this and OG since the latter's effect doesn't apply if banished.

If we can have more than 3 Harpie Ladies in the GY via the Harpie cards whose name becomes Harpie Lady whilst on the board or GY, I'd say that the answer to whether we can ruun 3 of this and the OG Shari would be yes.

[Tinkerer]

3 hours ago, ~British Soul~ said:

If we can have more than 3 Harpie Ladies in the GY via the Harpie cards whose name becomes Harpie Lady whilst on the board or GY, I'd say that the answer to whether we can ruun 3 of this and the OG Shari would be yes.

But the critical thing is the fact that it becomes Rice in the deck.

All other cards with names that are something else in the deck restrict the amount you can use (i.e. You can't run 3 of the Normal Harpie Lady & 3 Harpie Lady 1). However, that rule is exclusively for deck building, and there is no such restriction on cards with the same name in the hand/field/GY/banished.

However, the way this card is worded almost sounds as if the name-change effect doesn't begin to apply until after the duel starts, so it sounds like it might bypass that restriction..

 

If it does, it could open up some funny support design for stuff like "Gather your Mind" & "Reborn Tengu". Or BEWD as Kokoro mentioned.

[~British Soul~]

1 hour ago, Redro said:

But the critical thing is the fact that it becomes Rice in the deck.

All other cards with names that are something else in the deck restrict the amount you can use (i.e. You can't run 3 of the Normal Harpie Lady & 3 Harpie Lady 1). However, that rule is exclusively for deck building, and there is no such restriction on cards with the same name in the hand/field/GY/banished.

However, the way this card is worded almost sounds as if the name-change effect doesn't begin to apply until after the duel starts, so it sounds like it might bypass that restriction..

Yeah, based on the wording, I'd imagine that it'd bypass the restriction, though we would have to wait on rulings as the wording saying that it comes Shari in deck would cause headaches.

[The Warden]

11 hours ago, Redro said:

But the critical thing is the fact that it becomes Rice in the deck.

All other cards with names that are something else in the deck restrict the amount you can use (i.e. You can't run 3 of the Normal Harpie Lady & 3 Harpie Lady 1). However, that rule is exclusively for deck building, and there is no such restriction on cards with the same name in the hand/field/GY/banished.

However, the way this card is worded almost sounds as if the name-change effect doesn't begin to apply until after the duel starts, so it sounds like it might bypass that restriction..

 

If it does, it could open up some funny support design for stuff like "Gather your Mind" & "Reborn Tengu". Or BEWD as Kokoro mentioned.

It should bypass the restriction because, yes, Cyber Harpie Lady is ALWAYS treated as Harpie Lady, which means it applies even outside of duels for deck-building purposes. The always part I believe is the key-factor here, meaning that the card's original name means nothing because the effect declares it's always something else. Plus the effect isn't in parenthesis, meaning that should you negate the effect, it stops being Shari. This doesn't apply to Cyber Harpie Lady (pretty sure. Never negated its effect before in a video game to confirm.)

Plus this card would become extremely crap if it did replace Shari, considering the deck really really needs both to achieve good results. Being forced to use one or the other would cripple the deck again.

[The Warden]

So this is a double, but, whatever, but I realised because this card becomes Shari, Painful Decision becomes extremely more playable in this deck than before, since while you gotta send a Normal, you search by name. Meaning you can send Shari to grab yourself Aka-Shari. Painful Decision is basically RotA for Aka-Shari now.

 

Although, I really do hope that they make a 4th topping and a matching Xyz that works with the GY, or by taking materials and SSing them, cause in my testing one of my biggest issues is the fact that you can make the present 3 warships in one turn... but can't do a damn thing to get rid of their materials so you can use them further.