As much of a jest this is, I really wish YGO text was that simplified. Imagine picking up this card and it just said: No GY effects No GY Banish "Gravekeeper's" Monsters: +500 Atk/Def There's a ton of cards that could do with that kind of simplicity.
@@BlueSparxLPs Indeed, that could be nice. But then we lose the functionality where a card like Master with Eyes of Blue partially works under Necrovalley; you can shuffle it back into the Deck for cost but the rest of the effect is negated. If it was simply "No GY effects", it means you couldn't activate it in the first place. :-)
Effect will read: "Give gravekeepes 500 extra attack. Look guys we really want a card that turns off the entire graveyard, but we cant seem to word it, just be cool plz"
@@HotPikachuSex69 If it were to be printed again today, it would technically get errata'd again, cause they would need to change "Graveyard" to "GY" and "ATK and DEF" to "ATK/DEF"
2:06 I remember them explaining this in the episode of Yu-Gi-Oh! GX where this card was featured. Judai was able to activate Elemental HERO Necroshade's effect to summon Bladedge for game because Necrovalley doesn't stop effects happening inside the Graveyard.
Gravekeeper's Chief: Oh, that effect doesn't work anymore, we just revised Necrovalley recently. Jaden: Oh No! Jaden loses and he and his friends are buried alive in the alternate dimension and Darkness takes over the Earth soon after. ^_^
I liked the version of Necrovalley in the anime where it prevents cards from being moved out of the graveyard, except it allows them to leave by _their own effect._ It made it more splashable.
I had the very first version when I played in middle school, and since I didn't know about rulings I took the "involves the graveyard" very literally. Oh your monster gains attack based on cards in the graveyard? Negated!
@@TraaaaaasshBooooaaaatttt Doesn't matter, people use them interchangeably. There's no rule that says tier zero can only mean 70% representation or whatever.
I remember a friend used it on me earlier in the 2010s and I was like "so like what I can't do anything involving the GY?" and was really confused. I'm sure I misplayed due to the confusing way the card effect could be depending on the time period.
Necrovalley 2055: "don't look at the graveyard. Any player who says the word "graveyard" pays a fine of up to $450. Also gravekeepers still gain 500 atk and def I guess, if that still matters to you."
Polymerization is another card that has had its text changed a bunch of times, although without really changing what it does. The first printing is very vague and really doesn't tell you how to use the card. Its first erratum in Dark Beginning 1 gives all the necessary information finally, though interestingly it tells you to Special Summon the monster instead of Fusion Summon (which at first doesn't seem too bad since Fusion Summon is a type of Special Summon, but some Fusion monsters specifically require they be Fusion Summoned). The card wouldn't finally say "Fusion Summon" until its seventh erratum in 2013 when the card was released in Legendary Collection 4.
I think the current effect keeps the “spirit” of what the card was meant to do. Namely, it was meant to let the dead have their rest and not be disturbed. That said, I literally had no idea that the current effect is the way it is. Last I heard, the dead could rise themselves up so this is a neat piece of news for me lol.
This current version basically says: Y'all are already dead old mans. Stay in the Graveyard where you belong, and stop crawling out of those coffins, damn it!
I feel kinda dumb for never having picked up on that lol. I always just got annoyed by it since most of the time my deck would get completely shut down by it
I'm kinda surprised the effect doesn't exclude any Gravekeeper cards. Their spells and monsters that can revive/banish say they're unaffected by Necrovalley, but still.
@@TheGuyWhoIsSitting I'm guessing it's to prevent the Gravekeeper player from being able to use generic cards like Monster Reborn to gain an advantage. They might've thought it'd be unfair for them to be able to use cards that the opponent is currently locked out of, even if they mostly have their own equivalent
Even after 19 years necrovalley is still among the top 5 field spells of all time if not #1. People always get pissy when I use necrovalley. I always hear "and now I...wait I can't. Stupid necrovalley"
6:36 you say there are cards that affect cards in the graveyard without moving them. Could you give some examples? I think in general whenever you say something like "this is important because there are cards that do this" you should have some examples to back that up. Enjoyed the video!
A good example would be Elementsabers. Their effects don‘t move the cards anywhere, they stay in the GY, but the Attributes of the monsters change, which means that they would technically be affecting cards in the GY. Edit: after rereading the older version of Necrovalley, the effects of Elementsaber monsters wouldn’t actually be negated since they would be affecting themselves. However, something like Rebirth Judgement would.
If Metaverse was at 3 (probably only with a limit or ban of Mine) this card, despite being so old would be extremely useful for today's game. What I like about this game is that there are no set rotations and you can pull out a 15+ year old card from the attic and be played today and even make a big impact.
@@christianmennitt2399 that always kills me when GK does that to me lol there nothing I can do! Royal tribute used to be banned apparently so that tells you something
Metaverse is probably never coming off the limited list because it's a normal trap. As soon as it goes to 2 or more copies Trap Trick's existence makes it essentially the same as having another 3 on top of that. It's arguably less likely to come off the limited list than even Terraforming is.
In the context of a hypothetical casual game where you played the cards as they're written instead of ruling them on their most current errata, this is one of those you'd break conventional wisdom of "don't mix different printings of the same card; If something get's bounced and you play another they can tell if it's a second copy if it's from a different set" and play 3 copies each from a different set, since they're all very similar yet meaningfully different effects.
My favourite errata is the one preventing modification of Types/Attributes in the GY. I feel like that was specifically targeted at Elementsabers, though I guess Zombies were becoming big again around that time so they wanted to add an out to Zombie World, but that was around for ages before the aforementioned Necrovalley errata.
@@brandol75 right, the current card specifies "effects" that move a card out of the gy are negated. Banishing as cost is not an effect, so the additional bit is needed. There are cards that return to deck as cost for example, those are allowed
@@JustJules250 That's why i said "cannot leave", meaning any way (cost or effect) to place any card from gy to anywhere (banish/field/hand/deck) is not applied.
Thanks for the shout out at 4:41/4:42. :) This card does get easier for me to understand, but sometimes I still get tripped up when playing duel links. :P
It should be noted that the LCYW was the first one that actually worked like the OCG necrovalley - save for the attributes thing- , and the newest text responds to an actual change in the OCG text.
I now feel like I understand necrovalley less and have absolutely no clue which version of the card I have in my casual GK deck and I have just no idea just... what? o.O
If the text starts with the ATK/DEF boost, its the last three If it mentions: *involve the Graveyards* it is the 1st, OG, confusing, "depends on the rullings if it negates" version *affect a card(s)* and is wordy, it is 2st(2:54), otherwise 3st(4:15) *target a card(s)* It is 4st (4:50) *cannot be affected by* It is the 5st (5:32) *move a card card in the Graveyard, other than itself* it is the 6st(6:17)(it had a reprint of higher rarity [6:56]) *Types and Attributes,* it is the newest. (7:09)
@@foisopracurtir6389 Aww! Thanks, am sure I'll figure it out. I just didn't even know there had been multiple updates to the actual effects! ^.^ I know I never had the old ones, but dunno which set I currently have. Its not a deck I spend a huge amount of time with ^.^;
I stopped playing Yugioh for almost 10 years and when I came back I found out that certain cards don't do the same things they used to. Konami had "Errata'd" them even though completely changing the effect of a card isn't what Errata Lists are for. It really upsets me that Konami treats the TCG like a digital game, but last time I checked, Necrovalley in Duel Links doesn't have the correct text on the card which confused me and my girlfriend when someone played around it in a way that didn't seem possible.
I think, ideally, the effect would be: Cards in the GY cannot be banished. Cards and effects which activate in the GY, or that would make a card leave the GY, are negated. Cards in the GY do not change their name, Type, or Attribute. "Gravekeeper's" monsters gain 500 ATK/DEF.
Other People : I don't know what Pot of Greed does... Me : I don't know what Necrovalley actually does ... cos there are so many versions of this card! 🤣
It should just say "Neither player has access to cards or effects in their graveyards in any way. Gravekeepers gain 500 atk and def." That would honestly make the card so much easier to just play and be fully understood. Since banishing cards is accessing them, then I would think that it would just be fully understood at that point without having to mention it.
The Necrovalley from structure deck Marrick was the first copy of Necrovalley that I ever owned. So it’s nice to see it’s history and makes me love my first copy of it even more.
necrovalley errata #27: any card that is sent to the graveyard/removed from play are sent to the shadow realm instead, also all "gravekeeper's" monsters gain 25 ATK/DEF
More versions of the card buried in the Errata-Valley than Pharaohs in the Necrovalley. I agree with some comments, new effect: "GK's gains 500atk and def. GY off limits. Just please, stop making us need to update this card. PLEASE." If konami has a sense of humour, in 2023 they should release a GK special set where they have one copy of each version of this card in the set, just as a nod to this feat. Also...maybe just have a note saying "we give up, it does whatever you want it to..."
Necrovalley Any card which removes a card from the graveyard is negated. Cards with gravekeepers in their name get 500 atk and 9000 defense buff. Ruling. The effect is negated when a card is removed from the graveyard not before. So if a card says draw two and then remove a spell card in the graveyard from play. The player may draw two but the graveyard effect will not activate.
The reason Monsters could revive themselves before was probably for the "synergy" with Revival Jam, which was also a Marik card. Now its been long enough that the card and the user are divorced from each other.
They say the reason that Magic Cards were change to Spell cards was not to avoid a Copyright issue but it was actually because some dude added a bunch of De-Spell Yugoh Cards to his Magic Deck which as we all know, allows you to destroy any Magic card on play, so his deck quickly became OP
This iteration 6:00, Assault Stardust Player : Hell Yeah! Next iteration 6:25, Assault Stardust Player : WHAT? What do you mean I can't..... 9:00, this is outright bashing Zombie World. Let the dead REST with dignity. Do not disturb or tamper!
There was so much more than just Grapha and Fortress you could do under the previous-to-the-current Necrovalley. Those two were just a part of decks that could side-deck Necrovalley.
I knew that they changed the text on it several times, but I thought that was mostly just due to confusion over how it worked, I had know idea the literal effect of it had been changed so many times. Also, I'm curious at how it holds up in modern Yugioh? Cause back in the day, with the exception of like 1 or 2 decks this would pretty much completely shut all my decks down unless I destroyed it, which ironically would sometimes be harder because of the GY restrictions
The effect I know is that anything that would move a card from the GY or activate in doesn't, which is annoying when you play a lot of grave effects(revival specifically)
I mean what was really wrong with the original ruling? They are called Gravekeeper's so why not just flat negate any affect with GY text in it. Ruling isn't that weird when you know Ash Blossom can work on any card with the right text in it's affect, even if that specific affect isn't being used right then.
When I played ancient gears it basically went like this Me: I active ancient gear fusion Ash: No Me: But I don't have ancient gear golem on the field so I can't use monsters in my deck Ash: Yes Me:So you can't negate it Ash: Did I stutter
7:55 you can always use machina fortress under necrovalley, because machina fortress isn't an effect, it's a summoning condition. It has "(from the hand or gy)". Necrovalley only negates effects.
Summoning condition is like infernoids. Machina fortress is a unclassified effect to summon itself. Necrovalley is one of a few cards where the difference between a summoning condition and unclassified effect actually matters. The others being dark ruler jha des and its zombie counterpart and vampire grace.
Summoning condition is like infernoids. Machina fortress is a unclassified effect to summon itself. Necrovalley is one of a few cards where the difference between a summoning condition and unclassified effect actually matters. The others being dark ruler jha des and its zombie counterpart and vampire grace.
Fun fact: Phaoronic Guardian actually changed to spell cards mid printing so I have a “magic” and “spell” card dark room of nightmare from the same set
Wait why does grapha not work under necrovalley. Necrovalley as written negates effects. Grapha’s return from the grave is a summoning condition. That’s why it has always worked under shadow imprisoning mirror.
it should be simple, like: Negate the cards that would activate in the graveyard. also negate card effects that require access to the graveyard or affect the graveyard in some way.
Ikr, people say it lets you draw 2, but from where? the field, the graveyard, your extra deck, or your opponents hand? I don't think they'll ever clarify it
I still have 1 of every single version. Ans from what I heard they way modern necrovalley is written was the way all copies of necrovalley were always intended to work. The text was just really confusing
has anyone ever used 3 different prints of a card? or is that strictly banned cause i can vividly imagine three different necrovalleys on the field all negating different things
Was structure deck Marik ever released in europe? ive heard about it loads of times but not know anyone who had it, nor did i ever see it on sale, and would definitely have got it when i was a kid if i had. Edit, just looked and it turns out the Marik deck was a 2010 release, thats dumb, im pretty sure this is about the time they decided that the only two cards in the game were Dark Magician and Blue Eyes White Dragon though so spamming DM Stuff makes sense.
They should have changed the art too. each time the text changes, an hour passes, and eventually the sun sets. later, in the later versions, the sun rises and so on. because at least then we can better identify which version it is with the passage of time. and its symbolic of how much time has passed since the last errata.
i really don't get why the banish part is still on necrovallesy. it's impossible to banish a card from the graveyard without moving it so there is no point of separating that part. it also doesn't say card in the graveyard cannot be shuffled in the deck because its equally pointless.
The only thing I can imagine is that Necrovalley only negates effects that move cards from the graveyard, it doesn't negate costs, however the other effect that prevents cards from being banished also prevent costs.
@@diogoreis1322 it's exactly this. you can still activate, and thus pay the costs, of effects that are or will be negated. hence, famously, how stardust works under skill drain: skill drain does nothing to stop stardust from _activating_ its effect and thus tributing itself ... which means that when its effect resolves, it is no longer on the field and _skill drain no longer applies to it,_ allowing the effect to resolve without being negated also, nearly all chaos and chaos-like monsters would still be summonable under necrovalley if the banishing restriction wasn't there. summoning conditions are, well, conditions, not effects, so the other effect wouldn't catch 'em. which also means that if a summoning condition requires you to move a card in the gy in any way that isn't banishing, you can perform it under necrovalley just fine ( if you're curious as to why machina fortress and grapha get screwed over by the newest errata, it's because of a dumb rule where summoning conditions, or summoning _procedures_ would be the more proper term i guess, are only conditions _if the monster is a special summon monster._ if you can normal summon the monster, even if you would never do so in a billion years, the summoning procedure is suddenly an unclassified effect despite looking _completely identical to a condition._ the best part is that this rule basically exists _solely_ for necrovalley and, uh, ha des, so ... yeah, can't blame you if you've never heard of it before )
If it didn't say cards in the gy can't be banished, I can activate and successfully resolve effects that has a cost to banish a card in the gy. The line "negate any effect..." only negates effects. It doesn't prevent you from paying costs.
@@gregoryford2532 there is really no reason to make that distinction. in fact, it would be _more intuitive_ if either all summon procedures were effects or if they were all conditions, because nobody is gonna look at bls and go "hmm it says its special summoning condition and its special summoning procedure in the same sentence, i guess that mean it doesn't special summon itself via an effect." like, conditions and effects are already entirely implied, people are just going to think that sentence structure is to save on card text and even in the ocg where they _do_ bother explicitly delineating between conditions and effects ... it kinda just makes it all the more obvious how dumb it is. like, if you look at a ua monster and bls with the japanese text, one tells you that the card can be special summoned from your hand by returning another ua monster to the hand, while the other ... tell you the card can be special summoned by banishing a light and a dark. the sentence structure ain't identical, but genuinely the only real difference between them is that one has ① in front of it and the other doesn't. like ... sure, i guess i _can't_ argue that one is summoned by an effect if you mark the procedure as an effect, but, like, why like, okay, you want grapha to stay dead if someone actually puts ha des on their field and beats the shit out of grapha with him. but like, machine ruinforce can just keep crawling its way out? exodius can return every monster in your gy into the deck under necrovalley, but if a new monster comes along that can special summon itself by just shuffling two or three of 'em? well, fuck if it dares to be normal summonable, i guess! oh yeah and kaiju can be normal summoned, so their special summon procedures are effects, but, like. you can still kaiju an ultimate falcon. ultimate falcon is unaffected by _all effects,_ but you can still apply a kaiju's effect to tribute a monster and special summon it. which may actually mean a normal summonable exodius _could_ still be special summoned under necrovalley, even though it moves cards out of the gy and grapha's effect gets smacked with a negate for exactly that reason. because one is doing it as a "cost" and the other isn't ... even though these effects _are not activated and thus don't have costs_ yet _somehow,_ even though you can't use an ultimate falcon on the field for a fusion or ritual summon because using it as fusion material / tributing it for a ritual involves applying an effect to it, you can still do whatever you want to it through summoning procedures that are effects??? why is this game like this
2024 text: "All "Gravekeeper's" monsters gain 500 ATK/DEF. Cards in the GYs cannot be banished. Negate card effects that would move card(s) in the GYs, also negate card effects that change Types/Attributes in the GYs".
Let me rewrite this in vague, weird magic the gathering card text: *clears throat* The Graveyard's are protected. They are sacred grounds while this card is the field. Those who desecrate them shall be Called by the Grave.
With the most recent errata I’ve built out my Gravekeeper’s deck (which, yes, is fairly anti-meta lol). It’s just nice to be able to use it - it’s not perfect but most people these days don’t see it very often so they get mad when they activate an effect from a monster in the GY and they can’t move it lol
One of the printings said that cards in the grave are not affected by other cards, so does that imply effects that activate in the graveyard couldn't be negated before with Necrovalley on the field? The newest printing gives me the idea I can negate effects in the graveyard with Skull Meister for example. Anyone could clarify the ruling please?
More for my opponents lol I have 3 different versions in my deck, so I make sure to have the most recent one on hand if their not familiar and see my original printing
