Welcome to Yugioh! Singapore forum. Please login.

Have a nice day.


A place for YuGiOh fans or players to gather and chat
 
HomeHome  FAQFAQ  SearchSearch  RegisterRegister  Log inLog in  
Share | 
 

 Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
AuthorMessage
DIYDeath
Duelist
Duelist


Number of posts: 84
Age: 27
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Registration date: 2010-12-16

PostSubject: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Thu Dec 16, 2010 4:57 am

I've been thinking of making a specific deck and I need Ojama Knight for it. Now I've heard from multiple people that Ojama Knight's effect is permanent and from others that it's a continous effect (mainly from this site on the later).

What I'm looking for is essentially proof that Ojama Knight's effect is indeed a continous and not permanent because the case can easily be made using Ojama King, Jinzo and others that specify "while this card is face-up on the field" and using cards like Gale to advocate its permanency.

I've looked for rulings on Wikia against Ojama Knight, which doesn't exist and every thread here that does answer this question links me to pages that have no rulings regarding the permanency of his effect.

So my question is if Ojama Knight's effect is actually permanent given that there are no rulings on him and the fact that his text specifically does not say "while this card is face up on the field" where are these rulings coming from?

Links to Ojama Knight:

Ojama Knight Home Page

cerap washroom now. Have to cut short.

*Edit*

Alright now I can finish my thoughts.

It might seem kind of harsh for me to question people's word so harshly but after Moon/Sun dragons said that Necrovalley doesn't effect them and finding out it does plus people saying Spy creates a replay (if spy is Destroyed) when it doesn't has turned me off of trust in Yu-Gi-Oh.

I know that Ojama Knight has been reprinted to not inclue "If this card is face up on the field" but as I've said before, that text isn't optional text. It's a instruction on how a specific effect works and that blurb is key for knowing the permanency of the effect.
Back to top Go down
Axehead
Judai Yuki
Judai Yuki


Number of posts: 2490
Age: 19
Location: Singapore
Registration date: 2008-07-18

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Thu Dec 16, 2010 5:16 am

Continuous = Permanent.

Monsters in Yugioh only have 1 out of 5 types of effects.

* Continuous
* Ignition
* Trigger
* Flip
* Quick

No such thing as permanent.
Back to top Go down
RedEyesFan
Senior Duelist
Senior Duelist


Number of posts: 644
Age: 21
Location: Singapore
Registration date: 2010-01-17

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Thu Dec 16, 2010 10:43 am

i think what he meant was OjaKnight is like final countdown.

but he should just bash those people up who decide to screw the rules because they dont know it.
Back to top Go down
bishzor101
Senior Duelist
Senior Duelist


Number of posts: 680
Age: 21
Location: Singapore
Registration date: 2008-11-29

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Thu Dec 16, 2010 11:08 am

Quote :
If you select up to 3 Monster Card Zones and your "Ojama King" is flipped face-down, the Monster Card Zones are usable again. When "Ojama King" is flipped face-up again, you can select up to 3 Monster Card Zones again.

Does this seem convincing to you?
Back to top Go down
DIYDeath
Duelist
Duelist


Number of posts: 84
Age: 27
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Registration date: 2010-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Fri Dec 17, 2010 5:39 am

King isn't Knight and while you can bridge how selecting monster zones works you can't bridge the mechanics of cards from the same Archtype that have different text. I'm not arguing rulings. I'm just trying to find one that actually exists, otherwise Instant Fusion+Ojama Knight is a viable (although cheap) tactic to use. With how selecting Monster zones works though you can't select ones in use already, making it less cheap and at least counterable if you maintain a field presence at all times and try to negate those fusions. Hell, wouldn't chivalry even kill Ojama Knight? His effect would be negated and he would be destroyed AND its a spell card, making R.Decree useless to counter.

Like I said before, I'm just looking for rulings that actually exist. If no one can provide then sucks for the guys in my City, cause I'm gonna bring my new beat stick.
Back to top Go down
Akira
Junior Duelist
Junior Duelist


Number of posts: 163
Age: 27
Location: Singapore
Registration date: 2008-04-01

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Fri Dec 17, 2010 7:18 am

Since November 2006, starting with Cyberdark Impact, Konami/UDE implemented a new standardization for all card text by dropping the phrase "As long as this card remains face-up on the field" from all continuous effect.

If you have a look at the newer (errata'ed) reprinted version of Ojama King, you would have noticed that it contains the similar text structure as Ojama Knight:
Quote :
Ojama King (DR3-EN034)

Select up to 3 of your opponent's Monster Card Zones. The selected zones cannot be used.

The same as for Jinzo:
Quote :
Jinzo (GLD1-EN003)

Trap Cards cannot be activated. The effects of all face-up Trap Cards are negated.

Do note that this move is only implemented on the TCG side. The Japanese text for continuous effect still contains the phrase "このカードがフィールド上に表側表示で存在する限り".

Following are Japanese text for Ojama Knight and Ojama King for reference purposes.

Quote :
おジャマ・ナイト

このカードがフィールド上に表側表示で存在する限り、
相手のモンスターカードゾーンを2ヵ所まで使用不可能にする。

Quote :
おジャマ・キング

このカードがフィールド上に表側表示で存在する限り、
相手のモンスターカードゾーンを3ヵ所まで使用不可能にする。

All card texts quoted are correct at the point of writing.
Back to top Go down
http://duelistcodex.wordpress.com/
bishzor101
Senior Duelist
Senior Duelist


Number of posts: 680
Age: 21
Location: Singapore
Registration date: 2008-11-29

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Fri Dec 17, 2010 1:33 pm

But the knight must follow the king. They have same effect. Its common sense. The zones are not usable when they are on the field. Its like you need fire to boil water.
Back to top Go down
DIYDeath
Duelist
Duelist


Number of posts: 84
Age: 27
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Registration date: 2010-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Sat Dec 18, 2010 7:55 am

And again, there's no rulings on the card. Konami is stupid for the standardization, while this card is face-up on the field matters as text as it's a condition that must be met vs something like Gale where the effect doesn't specify face-up and is, indeed, permanent when applied.

This is why I'm being a pain, because there are no rulings on Ojama Knight and because Konami screwed up and someone needs to show them why wording is so bloody important for a game like this.

As for King and Knight being the same. Their effects do the same thing but their instructions were very, very different on how the card is used...up until the reprint but the rulings were made when King had the old text while Knight has never had a reprint and has no rulings based on this.

It's not even like it's that cheap anyhow. You have 3 chances to stop the Knight before the effect takes hold.
Instant Fusion
Summon
Effect activation

Even at it's best it's not a OHKO strat. I'd hate to see a GK abuse this though...
Back to top Go down
bishzor101
Senior Duelist
Senior Duelist


Number of posts: 680
Age: 21
Location: Singapore
Registration date: 2008-11-29

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Sat Dec 18, 2010 8:11 pm

Just follow the Japanese text. The line:"このカードがフィールド上に表側表示で存在する限り" is the key; it means as long as this card is face up on the field. Its called human presence. Gale is a different case.
Back to top Go down
DIYDeath
Duelist
Duelist


Number of posts: 84
Age: 27
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Registration date: 2010-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Tue Dec 21, 2010 6:52 am

I get that was what was intended and I understand why, because permanent monster zone lockdown breaks the game. What I'm pissed about is the fact that Konami decided to remove conditions from specific cards and essentially just expect us to be psychic. Not cool Konami, not cool. The ruling issue has been resolved but someone might want to sticky a thread in here about standardized texting, because I guarantee there will be many, many issues regarding it.
Back to top Go down
Altuz
Duelist
Duelist


Number of posts: 53
Age: 19
Location: Under Your Bed Nom-ing
Registration date: 2010-02-17

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Tue Dec 21, 2010 11:52 pm

DIYDeath wrote:
King isn't Knight and while you can bridge how selecting monster zones works you can't bridge the mechanics of cards from the same Archtype that have different text. I'm not arguing rulings. I'm just trying to find one that actually exists, otherwise Instant Fusion+Ojama Knight is a viable (although cheap) tactic to use. With how selecting Monster zones works though you can't select ones in use already, making it less cheap and at least counterable if you maintain a field presence at all times and try to negate those fusions. Hell, wouldn't chivalry even kill Ojama Knight? His effect would be negated and he would be destroyed AND its a spell card, making R.Decree useless to counter.

Like I said before, I'm just looking for rulings that actually exist. If no one can provide then sucks for the guys in my City, cause I'm gonna bring my new beat stick.
Compare the wording. If it is similar except for the amount of monster card zones, you follow the King.
Back to top Go down
DIYDeath
Duelist
Duelist


Number of posts: 84
Age: 27
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Registration date: 2010-12-16

PostSubject: Re: Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed   Wed Dec 22, 2010 4:34 am

The issue was that the wording wasn't the same at all until the standardized text and there are no rulings on Ojama Knight's page. It's very easy to be mistaken about this since Konami didn't make it very well known they were reprinting cards that say "while this card is face up on the field."
Back to top Go down
 

Ojama Knight Rulings: Proof Needed

View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 1 of 1

 Similar topics

-
» About on gpt payout proof section?
» CERASTUS KNIGHT-LANCER or other?
» Caballero del Santo Sepulcro/Knight from the Holy Sepulchre
» Roll Call When You Are Needed
» Member Ideas Needed

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
 :: YUGIOH :: YuGiOh! General :: Ruling Questions and Card Translations-