Jump to content

Dark Magician Girl of Chaos


Kid Gambino

Recommended Posts

QlfWq8b.png

 

[spoiler=Lore]Dark Magician Girl of Chaos

DARK - ✪✪✪✪✪✪✪

Spellcaster/Effect

Gains 200 ATK for every "Magician" Spellcaster monster in the GY. If this card would be destroyed by battle and sent to the GY: You can discard 1 Spell Card; this card and the opponent's monster are banished instead. During the next Standby Phase after this card was banished by it's own card effect: Special Summon it.

[2300/2200]

 

 

[spoiler=Notes]Firstly, there is a high chance some of you have already seen this card's image and name (or a version of it) before, so I want to point out that I'm aware that this card isn't exactly an original idea as I'm certain it's been done dozens of times before. However, I was really motivated to make a female version of DMoC after browsing through Magician Girl cards and so I went ahead and came up with this gal. This card is meant to be capable of meshing with either Dark Magicians or Magician Girl decks, her first effect allowing her to get an ATK boost much easier than her DMG counterpart, but at a slower pace. Her second effect is a callback to DMoC's effect, but also works with the attack-punishing aspect of Magician Girls, in where she's capable of banishing anything she battles, so long as her intended location was the GY and you discard a Spell Card, with her revival the next turn making her just as consistent of a monster-banishing engine as her male counterpart. Any and all constructive criticism is welcomed and appreciated. Thanks!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned in other thread, an effect that starts a chain and has a "would be destroyed by battle" condition is awkward to have because of the rulings on what you can activate in the different steps of a battle, plus there is no card with such condition as of now. The only ones are continuous effects (e.g. Zenmaines). Your alternatives are making it a continuous effect, or activating it during battle, or well, after the monster is destroyed by battle, turning it into a grave effect.

 

That aside, the card feels underwhelming IMO. It's a beater that needs GY setup to get scary, and the battle effect has a cost when IMO isn't needed. I would take out the discard cost and add a built-in summoning condition to encourage Link2 or Rank7 plays along Dark Magician.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's a big problem with using ["Magician" Spellcaster monster] since "Magician" is not an Archetype, you can read about this Here but the important point is:

 

Due to their Japanese names, a number of older cards, such as "Time Wizard" and "Night Wing Sorceress", also fall into this archetype. Also, several older cards, such as the "Dark Magician" archetype and "Magician of Faith", include "Magician" in their English names but are not part of this archetype. However, because TCG and OCG support for this archetype only works on Pendulum Monsters and Continuous Spell Cards, neither have been an issue.

 

The effect is good, certainly works with the other Magician Girls and not too difficult to summon in that deck. Fits in thematically so no complaints there and non-targeting Banishment is welcome in any deck no matter how awkward it is to use (Just look at Infernoid Seitsemas).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I mentioned in other thread, an effect that starts a chain and has a "would be destroyed by battle" condition is awkward to have because of the rulings on what you can activate in the different steps of a battle, plus there is no card with such condition as of now. The only ones are continuous effects (e.g. Zenmaines). Your alternatives are making it a continuous effect, or activating it during battle, or well, after the monster is destroyed by battle, turning it into a grave effect.

That aside, the card feels underwhelming IMO. It's a beater that needs GY setup to get scary, and the battle effect has a cost when IMO isn't needed. I would take out the discard cost and add a built-in summoning condition to encourage Link2 or Rank7 plays along Dark Magician.

Not sure what you mean, I thought the clear point this effect would activate is right when it's about to be destroyed and sent to the GY, which is at the end of the Damage Step. I also don't see what makes this more of an awkward activation requirement than Zenmaines.

 

I can understand the ATK boost maybe being weak because it's slow, so I could consider bumping it to 200 ATK, but since this is gonna be ran in Magician decks which afaik don't really avoid the GY, this card can potentially become really strong which I don't think is necessarily a bad thing.

 

The discard cost was to balance the fact that her banishing effect can be used offensively (ram her into problematic monsters) or defensively (sit back and wait for opponent to sacrifice a strong monster, remove her with card effect or do nothing), not to mention it's non-targeting as TheTrueSaiyan said which is pretty good. If I were to remove any type of cost for this, I'm certain this card would vastly outclass her male counterpart.

 

Lastly, neither Dark Magicians or Magician Girls are known to have any problem Special Summoning their monsters, nor should they have any trouble Special Summoning this, so I don't believe she really needs another built-in Special Summon effect.

 

There's a big problem with using ["Magician" Spellcaster monster] since "Magician" is not an Archetype, you can read about this Here but the important point is:

 

The effect is good, certainly works with the other Magician Girls and not too difficult to summon in that deck. Fits in thematically so no complaints there and non-targeting Banishment is welcome in any deck no matter how awkward it is to use (Just look at Infernoid Seitsemas).

This confused me, and I clicked the link and it says Dark Magician isn't a Magician but doesn't state why. Do the Japanese names for Dark Magicians not include "Magician"? If so, I don't know how else to make it do what I want, which is to have a much better effect version of DMG that works with both DM and MG decks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This confused me, and I clicked the link and it says Dark Magician isn't a Magician but doesn't state why. Do the Japanese names for Dark Magicians not include "Magician"? If so, I don't know how else to make it do what I want, which is to have a much better effect version of DMG that works with both DM and MG decks.

It because the TCG takes some liberties when localizing some card names, basically the monsters that would fall under "Magician" here in the TCG would be a set of monsters in the OCG that have nothing in common in their names so they would have to list out every single target that isn't included instead. To see this at it's worst, just look at Crystal_Vanguard, see what it has to do because we didn't translate the names of some monster correctly.

 

I'm not 100% sure what monster you want to include to trigger the ATK increase but "Dark Magician" and "Magician Girl" are both established Archetypes so you could just use both of them and frankly it wouldn't be too broken IMHO if it just got 100ATK for every Spellcaster in the GY. Up to you how you want to resolve it though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long story short about the Magician thing:

 

Dark Magician uses a direct transliteration of "Magician" from Japanese, as do DMG, Gagaga Magician, Astrograph/Chronograph Sorcerers, and Silent Magician.

Pendulum Magicians (and Time Wizard) use the Japanese word for Magician, "Majutsushi".

 

There are also a few examples of monsters whose English name contains Magician, but that don't have either Magician or Majutsushi in their original Japanese card text.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not sure what you mean, I thought the clear point this effect would activate is right when it's about to be destroyed and sent to the GY, which is at the end of the Damage Step. I also don't see what makes this more of an awkward activation requirement than Zenmaines.

 

AFAIK the issue is the timing. "Would be destroyed by battle" is kinda awkward because of the step it happens, and the cards that can be activated in that step. Not sure how to explain it better but think about this: at which point it is confirmed the monster will be indeed destroyed by battle for this effect to be activated? what if some ATK-modifying effect is used in that battle and changes the outcome? If it didn't start a chain like Zenmaines,Maestroke, etc. do, then the timing wouldn't be an issue.

Anyway, another alternative is using Psyhemuth's condition, which has a similar effect: "After damage calculation, when this card battles an opponent's monster:" Notice how this makes the effect resolve after damage calculation and the battle is concluded, whereas your effect tries to do so at the middle of the battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And now an old as dirt card to the rescue.

DDAssailant-BP02-EN-R-1E.png

Try using the same phrasing as this card for that battle banish.
 

After damage calculation, when this card is destroyed by battle with an opponent's monsterBanish that monster, also banish this card.

As for the "Magician" issue. All potential damage can be avoided, as stated repeatedly before, by being more specific and specifying the range as  "Dark Magician" or "Magician Girl" monsters. or by simply making it all Spellcaster-type monsters, since Spellcaster Decks don't usually have the monsters to spare for Grave powerups. 100x is actually going to come out a bit underwhelming regardless, I honestly wouldn't be afraid to amp it up to match DMG's 300x in the modern era.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It because the TCG takes some liberties when localizing some card names, basically the monsters that would fall under "Magician" here in the TCG would be a set of monsters in the OCG that have nothing in common in their names so they would have to list out every single target that isn't included instead. To see this at it's worst, just look at Crystal_Vanguard, see what it has to do because we didn't translate the names of some monster correctly.

 

I'm not 100% sure what monster you want to include to trigger the ATK increase but "Dark Magician" and "Magician Girl" are both established Archetypes so you could just use both of them and frankly it wouldn't be too broken IMHO if it just got 100ATK for every Spellcaster in the GY. Up to you how you want to resolve it though.

 

Long story short about the Magician thing:

 

Dark Magician uses a direct transliteration of "Magician" from Japanese, as do DMG, Gagaga Magician, Astrograph/Chronograph Sorcerers, and Silent Magician.

Pendulum Magicians (and Time Wizard) use the Japanese word for Magician, "Majutsushi".

 

There are also a few examples of monsters whose English name contains Magician, but that don't have either Magician or Majutsushi in their original Japanese card text.

 

Duly noted. So from my understanding, "Magician" is divided into "Majishan" and "Majutsushi" in the Japanese language, despite meaning the same thing, to identify two different archetypes of monsters (Dark Magician/Pendulum Magicians), so that each archetype's card effects don't end up affecting the other. However, for this instance, I want this to be able to gain ATK from Dark Magicians or Pendulum Magicians, or any Magician for that matter. For the fact that it causes issues for the description of this card's hypothetical Japanese version, we can just pretend this card would say "Majishan/Majutsushi" so that it is still affected by the cards I want it to without causing any translation errors.

 

AFAIK the issue is the timing. "Would be destroyed by battle" is kinda awkward because of the step it happens, and the cards that can be activated in that step. Not sure how to explain it better but think about this: at which point it is confirmed the monster will be indeed destroyed by battle for this effect to be activated? what if some ATK-modifying effect is used in that battle and changes the outcome? If it didn't start a chain like Zenmaines,Maestroke, etc. do, then the timing wouldn't be an issue.

Anyway, another alternative is using Psyhemuth's condition, which has a similar effect: "After damage calculation, when this card battles an opponent's monster:" Notice how this makes the effect resolve after damage calculation and the battle is concluded, whereas your effect tries to do so at the middle of the battle.

 

You're gonna have to provide me with something else that makes me think this card causes some type of paradox situation because I'm still not understanding, sorry. For the situation you provided, ATK-modifications wouldn't make a difference at the end of the Damage Step since you've already accomplished damage calculation, so no type of stat modification is gonna do anything, and you can't go back and re-do the Battle Step, so in that case the stat-modification is the one missing the timing. If you do activate a stat modifier before the damage calculation step then it changes what is destroyed and whether my card would trigger, depending on which monster is now losing that fight. You can find more information about exactly what can and cannot be done here: http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Damage_Step

 

And now an old as dirt card to the rescue.

DDAssailant-BP02-EN-R-1E.png

 

Try using the same phrasing as this card for that battle banish.

 

As for the "Magician" issue. All potential damage can be avoided, as stated repeatedly before, by being more specific and specifying the range as  "Dark Magician" or "Magician Girl" monsters. or by simply making it all Spellcaster-type monsters, since Spellcaster Decks don't usually have the monsters to spare for Grave powerups. 100x is actually going to come out a bit underwhelming regardless, I honestly wouldn't be afraid to amp it up to match DMG's 300x in the modern era.

 

I appreciate the find but D.D. Assailant's effect works slightly different than what is intended with my card. DMGoC prevents the destruction entirely, while this card is destroyed then banishes both monsters. So while it may not seem that huge of a difference, cards that would trigger from DMGoC being destroyed, with her original effect, would not, because she wasn't destroyed, that's why the card says "are banished instead". Also, her effect would not be able to activate if her intended location after destruction cannot be the GY, so if cards like Macro Cosmos are in play, her effect cannot activate. Small things, but they make a difference, and until someone shows me an instance where her effect causes an unsolvable ruling problem, I don't think it'll be necessary to change her effect.

 

EDIT: Changed her ATK gain to 200. I'm trying my best to still give the original DMG some shine in comparison to this card so I think the measly 100 ATK difference is enough, granted she's still much more powerful, especially since what can boost her is more vague, but DMG having a slightly larger ATK gain will certainly give her the edge in that regard, especially in highly-focused DM/DMG decks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Would be destroyed by battle is really weird. Literally no other card activates in said scenario. It's technically after damage calculation, but still during the damage, but before the monsters go the GY. Yeah, you've complicated matters even further by specifying sent to the GY. No other card does that with an effect like this either. I'm having a headache thinking about the ruling shenanigans alone, but anyway, suggested phrasing (even though the effect is 2stronk now):

If this card would be destroyed by battle, you can discard 1 Spell Card, then banish that opponent's monster, also banish this card until your next Standby Phase.

 

This is all I can think of. It's not what you had in mind, but otherwise I'm reporting this for experimental.

 

Considering you gotta Tribute Summon it, Magicians have much better things to Normal Summon, especially without requiring a Tribute. Like honestly, such a measly ATK boost? It's only use is as a potential remover, considering how IT SHOULDNT ACTIVATE MEANING IT CAN GET AROUND UTL, but if it does activate...that makes it even worse. Potential side if it doesn't activate, maybe even at 1, but considering the discard and the fact that this card bricks so easily...yeah.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that case, you'll need exception text for "Time Wizard", because its Japanese name is "Taimu Majutsushi".

 

"This card gains 200 ATK for each Spellcaster-Type "Magician" monster, or "Time Wizard", in your Graveyard."

 

If you wanna put that in MR4 text, be my guest.

 

Right, forgot about that one. I can't believe I've had to think this hard about this part of the effect. I'll probably be changing it to all Spellcaster monsters shortly since I've come to realize there really is no good point in defending this being "Magicians" other than me wanting it to be more open than DMG but not too lenient such as all Spellcaster monsters, but whatever is necessary to avoid having to keep talking about this.

 

Would be destroyed by battle is really weird. Literally no other card activates in said scenario. It's technically after damage calculation, but still during the damage, but before the monsters go the GY. Yeah, you've complicated matters even further by specifying sent to the GY. No other card does that with an effect like this either. I'm having a headache thinking about the ruling shenanigans alone, but anyway, suggested phrasing (even though the effect is 2stronk now):

 

If this card would be destroyed by battle, you can discard 1 Spell Card, then banish that opponent's monster, also banish this card until your next Standby Phase.

 

This is all I can think of. It's not what you had in mind, but otherwise I'm reporting this for experimental.

 

Considering you gotta Tribute Summon it, Magicians have much better things to Normal Summon, especially without requiring a Tribute. Like honestly, such a measly ATK boost? It's only use is as a potential remover, considering how IT SHOULDNT ACTIVATE MEANING IT CAN GET AROUND UTL, but if it does activate...that makes it even worse. Potential side if it doesn't activate, maybe even at 1, but considering the discard and the fact that this card bricks so easily...yeah.

 

0303cee9f774cf91e6c7055cca681442c9b9dd33

 

Pretty much the same exact wording, except this says "your Graveyard" and includes card effect destruction too. Card Rulings for Tiki Soul states it activates during the Damage Step, just like my card, not afterwards. Please feel free to post any instances you can find where Tiki's effect has caused ruling shenanigans that cannot be solved with common sense or referring to rules already established, this is all I'm asking for at this point in regards to changing my card's effect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much the same exact wording, except this says "your Graveyard" and includes card effect destruction too. Card Rulings for Tiki Soul states it activates during the Damage Step, just like my card, not afterwards. Please feel free to post any instances you can find where Tiki's effect has caused ruling shenanigans that cannot be solved with common sense or referring to rules already established, this is all I'm asking for at this point in regards to changing my card's effect.

 

Notice the lack of a colon; it doesn't activate, so my point still stands. My mistake in regards to the the GY thing, didn't realize another card did it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, as Dova pointed out, Tiki is a Continuous effect instead of starting a chain, so there is no conflict there. You can make your effect continuous as well, which was one of the alternative I suggested since my first post here.

 

I did check the breakdown of the battle phase, and it seems an alternative with precedence is an "after damage calculation" clause, as I also suggested when I mentioned Psyhemuth, since at this stage of the BP the monsters destroyed by battle are not sent to the GY yet, so the intent is the same, but you got precedences and rulings to back it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...