Talk:Royal Knights

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Royal Knights is within the scope of WikiProject Digimon, which aims to organize, expand, clean up, and guide Digimon related articles on Wikipedia.
For more information and how you can help click Show →
Notice Attention: Another massive article task is on the horizon, and we will be moving many Digimon lists and articles off of Wikipedia and onto a new wiki. See WT:DIGI#Transwiki for the discussion.
Archive
Archives
  • archive 1 (Everything from before February 2007)

Contents

[edit] Article Split response

I don't think there is a need to fit all info of each Royal Knight member on this page. I think they should get their own pages back like they were before this merge. Rtkat3 5:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm in agreement with this. The members can easily be listed on this page, with a link leading to the appropriate page.

-

Aren't you jumping the gun a bit, I mean so far the Royal Knights are making cameo appearances (appear and get defeated) Gallantmon and Sleipmon are gone so far, Crusadermon in ep 42 and Duftmon in ep 43, they will appear and then predicted to fall.

Can this split decision wait a bit until the season is at least over so we know if it is worth make a page for that knight of not as what happen if that was Gallantmon's only appearance? or Duftmon? or Sleipmon?--WarDragon 23:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

The thing about this is, even a merged article here at Royal Knights is a likely target for deletion for being fancruft.. individual articles have only stood for so long because it's such a pain in the ass to try to get them deleted / merged. -- Ned Scott 01:58, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes. A look at past afds for -mon articles confirm this. Some were deleted, some were merged (although people kept recreating them), and some of the recent ones was kept because plans for this merge was already in place. --`/aksha 09:58, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
This article only contains information about the members of the Royal Knights (i.e. Gallantmon) as they appear IN the Royal Knights (as in, outside of other appearances). However, searching for any Royal Knight takes someone directly here. Due to the normally unstructured path of digivolution (Agumon can become Tyrannomon and Devimon can become MetalGreymon), it would be incorrect to put all of Guilmon's forms in one article. Also, in the case of Omnimon, would it really make a lot of sense to have the same information in both the Agumon and Gabumon articles? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.95.119.120 (talk) 17:26, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] I hate to point this out but...

The chances are much higher that Gallantmon and/or Sleipmon survived instead of died for a few reasons

1: All digimon become Digitama when killed. Unless that Digitama is destroyed, then the Digimon will be reborn, unless Royal Knights have a different way of re-birth

2: The Royal Knights are much more powerful then Normal Digimon, even Digidestined Digimon, as shown by the strength of Gallantmon. It would take a much longer fight to weaken a Royal knight enough to kill them.

3: The Shield Cracked. This most likely means that Gallantmon just barely managed to destroy the sheild in time to avoid death, which de-digivolved Sleipmon, who was then taken by Gallantmon to the Super Computer.

-

isn't not surviving and dying the same thing? unless you didn't mean to but the "neither" in.

1. Can't answer that

2. Considering Sleipmon was also a Royal knight, it seems that they were equal power-wise even though Sleipmon was injured

3. Possible but considering that Gallantmon was sent by Yggdrasil to destroy the human world so the digital world could survive, i doubt he would have just left, he could have carried on. --WarDragon 16:32, 2 February 2007 (UTC)


I fixed the Neither, and a few other errores I can't really remember adding. But it seems to me, even if Gallantmon survived, he would be extremely weak from the fight against Sleipmon. I also thought that Gallantmon was one of the more powerful Royal Knights, up in the ranks with Omnimon and Alphamon, though Sleipmon could be in the same group, I just think Gallantmon would be more powerful then Sleipmon, presumbly because he managed to crack the shield.

I have an idea. How about we just don't mention Sleipmon and Gallantmon's fate in the article? Because...really, we don't *know* whether they survived or not, so saying either is technically speculation. --`/aksha 09:53, 3 February 2007 (UTC)


I like that idea, just stating they disappeared should be enough, and not fall under speculation, as the only thing we really are sure of is that they Dissapeared. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.175.205.251 (talk) 19:48, 5 February 2007 (UTC).

All the articles have been hopefully edited--WarDragon 21:23, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notes please

Can we have something or even a note that tells a person editing the article that the digimon in 01, 02 and tamers were not the royal knights? I mean I made this mistake and changed it when corrected but in the history discussion section there has been a constant adding of 01, 02 or tamers to the appearance list. So can something be done about it?

Also can we do something about the whole gender thing about Crusadermon?

--WarDragon 21:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

1. i think this is a combination of people doing it on purpose, and people not yet used to this digimon-by-character format (so as in, i'm not sure those people adding the information for magnamon 02 realizes we have a section in a different article about him). We can of course add a few of those notes that can be viewed only by people editing into the articles (i'll go do that now). The other thing we could do is to put disambiguation links (so a link on the magnamon section pointing to the veemon article). We used to have them, but i removed it because i figured they were redundant (magnamon redirects to veemon, so we have a disambiguation link to the veemon article. BUt someone couldn't have reached the royal knight article by searching for magnamon).

2. as for crusadermon - as i said in the edit summaries - we really need a source before we can state that crusadermon had its gender changed. I mean, unless it's explicitly stated in the anime itself, we can't say that based on observation alone. So saying it had its gender changed is a pretty big deal, i don't think it's something we should put into the articles without some kind of a source. As for the pronouns - i think i'm going to go rewrite the section so we can avoid third-person pronouns altogether. --`/aksha 01:49, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

On the first point, I think that links shold be made to the other characters who have info in other articles (the Veemon and Agumon articles). Even though you say that Omnimon and Magnamon aren't royal Knights, they are still Magnamon and Omnimon, so people wanting information on all appearances of the character by that name can find it. Bellahdoll 00:46, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll

The article used to have such links. I removed them because i thought they where not needed. This is because Magnamon actually redirects to the Veemon article. So anyone looking for general information on "Magnamon" would be sent directly to the Veemon article. On the Veemon article, there is a link pointing to this Royal Knights article.
Therefore, people reading the royal knights article have either followed a link, or where actually looking for information on the royal knights. Anyone looking for information on magnamon from digimon adventure 02 by typing in magnamon in the search box would have been automatically sent to the veemon article.
The same goes for the others. (Omnimon redirects to Agumon, and Gallantmon redirects to Guilmon)
I'm not against having links, but i think they're unnessasary. Given what i've just explained, do you still think it's a good idea to have them? --`/aksha 13:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Just a thought, but, since Veemon redirects here, shouldn't this page also have a link to the Veemon article. My main reasoning is that when I look up a certain character I want to see all appearances, not just as part of the royal Knights but in other circumstances. I understand that the other information should NOT be in the RK article, I see it as convenient to have a link to said other information. Bellahdoll 19:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll

What redirects here? Veemon certainly doesn't redirect here? Which article are you talking about? --`/aksha 04:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, isn't there a way to have the link go directly to the Magnamon, Omnimon, Gallantmon section of the Veemon, Agumon, and Guilmon articles? If so, readers would still get the information on other characters without having to go through things about lower form of the said characters. Bellahdoll 19:14, 9 February 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll

Yeah, that's what we do. We use piped links (so [[Veemon#Magnamon|Veemon]].) So since the the mangamon in 02 is just another form of the character Veemon, the sentence reads as "for the Magnamon featured in Digimon Adventure 02, see Veemon". However, the link on "veemon" actually takes people straight to the Magnamon section. --`/aksha 04:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mean to say Veemon redirects here. What I meant is there is a link to the this article under the Magnamon section of the Veemon article. Bellahdoll 07:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)Bellahdoll

That would be fine. -- Ned Scott 08:10, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Royal Knights

Could the royal knights true forms be dragons. In tamers gallantmon turned into a dragon. In frontier dynasmon turned into a dragon and the founder imperialdramon turns into a dragon.

Maybe the Royal Knights are all just Knightmon wearing different costumes. I'm confused as to why this section is titled "Megidramon". Since when did Megidramon have anything to do with the Royal Knights? --`/aksha 13:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gallantmon and Magnamon

For Gallantmon, it lists him as a Virus, I thought he was a Vaccine, like most of the other Royal Knights.

For Magnamon: It lists his level as Armor, but it seems he is a bit more armored then the Golden Digi-egg version, meaning he might actully be a Mega, just a Mega form of an Armor version of Magnamon, or something. I am not even completely sure if the armor is different, but it looks like it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.0.10.6 (talk) 00:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC).

Gallantmon is Virus attribute, so are all of his other forms (Gallantmon Crimson Mode, Guilmon, etc.).
Magnamon... his level as a Royal Knight does seem to be kind of disputed, the Magnamon from 02 was an Armor level Digimon, but the Royal Knight Magnamon (who appears in X-Evolution and Savers) is more than likely a Champion level Digimon, hopefully his level will become clear in Digimon Savers. Nightmare SE 01:23, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Yep, Gallantmon is virus. As for Magnamon, i would have (logically) thought it was a mega, as with most of the other Royal Knights. But Magnamon from 02 was defintely an armor leveled digimon. There're very few cases of where a single digimon species have had different levels - so really, we have no reason and information/evidence to suggest Magnamon in the royal knights is not armor, even if it does seen a little illogical. --`/aksha 13:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Magnamon is Armor/Adult everywhere (since Armor and Adult are defined as being the same thing in Japan, except Armor is obtained through Armor Evolution instead of normal evolution), with the exception of a few V-Pets. For example, in the Pendulum X, Magnamon X is listed as an Ultimate/Mega. All versions of Magnamon, whatever the level or X-status, are counted as Royal Knights, though. Shining Celebi 19:08, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
That can't be right. Gallentmon from Tamers isn't a Royal Knight. This Magnamon posseses more power then the normal Magnamon from 02. And if he is more powerful then that one, he must be an incredabliy powerful Digimon. The 02 Magnamon gained power from each digi-egg, of which Davis had three, meaning he had power, presumably of a high-level Ultimate. Besides that, Remember that Serphimon gave his power to him to Armor-digivolve, when Serphimon is shown to be extremely powerful, meaning Magnamon must be stronger then Serphimon, meaning the Royal Knight version is even more powerful.
The amount of Digi-eggs Davis had has absolutely nothing to do with Magnamon's power as Magnamon was clearly weaker than Kimeramon who was an Ultimate in the anime. Magnamon has a high level of power for an Armor digimon because of his gold digizoid armor which makes him as strong as a mega (although that does not make him as well rounded as a mega as gold digizoid armor is only power, not defense or speed.). As for him being stronger than Seraphimon, Seraphimon (and Magnadramon) released the golden digi-eggs before de-digivolving, that in no way makes Magnamon or Rapidmon stronger than them. Also the Magnamon in Savers more than likely digivolved normally from a rookie (Veemon) just like how Allomon and Harpymon were Champions in Tamers. Nightmare SE 16:58, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
I thought Kimeramon was Mega, or atleast as strong as one. I also thought they said that the more digi-eggs that a person had, the stronger each one was. And What I was pointing out in the Seraphimon thing was this, Seraphimon is the end result of the same Digimon Line that has Angemon, a Champion on Par with most Ultimates, and Magna Angemon, Who was able to over power Piedmon, the leader of the Dark masters. Meaning that unless Seraphimon lost power in digivoloution, He should be almost as strong as super Megas, like Imperaldramon Fighter mode, and such. Thus, in order for a digimon like him to summon the eggs, even though he had an Ally in his fight, the Golden Digimon must be more powerful then he was, otherwise he could have simply fought and bested Churubimon by himself. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by X-Antibody (talk • contribs) 19:33, 12 February 2007 (UTC).
Kimeramon is a mega in a couple of video games, I'm not sure if in the anime he's was as strong as a mega but he was definitely above average as far as the Ultimate level goes seeing as he gave the DigiDestined far more trouble than MetalGreymon ever did. Seraphimon's digivolution was never really explained (nor was Magnadramon's), all we know is they digivolved so they could release the digi-eggs and not to fight, perhaps they thought they would de-digivolve if their partners were turned into children. As for "super megas" the only level that exists beyond Mega is "Super Ultimate" which is in V-Tamer, Imperialdramon Fighter Mode is mega level, even Omnimon in V-Tamer was mega level, Seraphimon was also in V-Tamer, and was defeated by Arkadimon Champion. Nightmare SE 20:26, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Chimeramon is counted as an Ultimate/Mega in many places, and the Perfect version is generally pretty close to the strength of an Ultimate. Magnamon is supposed to at least have the attack power of an Ultimate, but his Gold Digizoid provides a decent defense too, and level doesn't have so much to do with speed. Nobody ever said anywhere, though, that having more Digimentals made them more powerful. That's simply not the case at all. Secondly, regarding the Angemon line, they are not that strong. Angemon is stronger against dark Digimon, and neither Angemon nor Holy Angemon overpowered Piemon. Angemon got totally owned, and Holy Angemon just knocked him off a cliff. If you rewatch the episode, you'll notice that even Garudamon can send Piemon flying, and Andromon fought Piemon for a pretty long time. Thirdly, the third movie is out of continuity. It's not supposed to make sense. Magnamon and Rapidmon were not stronger than Seraphimon and Holydramon would have been. Presumably, they summoned the golden Digimentals because they wouldn't be able to hold their forms long enough to fight, or something. Or maybe they did plan on fighting Cherubimon, but they wanted help. And lastly, Super Ultimate is just a kind of Ultimate, not a higher level. Shining Celebi 20:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

You know...the people who made the anime, and the people who made the movies, and the people who made the games....where *not* the same people. And i doubt they really sat down and discussed all of this. Magnamon probably got re-used because he looked cool, and people liked him. But i doubt the folks making savers really cared about the cannon explaination for golden-digi-egg-ing in Digimon 02.

Similarly, the people who wrote the trivia on the card game (which is where all this digizoid information comes from) probably didn't have much to do with the anime people... --`/aksha 03:41, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk

I just went on to digiport, and there was an episode title in Digimon Savers thet was called Episode 48: The Last Enemy Justimon Meeting. Do you think that Justimon could be a Royal Knight, just wanted to let you know.

First of all, that episode title is far from confirmed. All that happened is that it showed up on 2chan, a Japanese image board, which is an extremely unreliable source. It seems to me that these titles have come much too early, and there's no other source backing them up. Regarding the subject at hand, I doubt very much they plan on making Justimon a Royal Knight. Shining Celebi 06:19, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Where'd Duftmon go?

Someone got rid of his picture and data, and I think merged it with Crusdermon, what happened? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by X-Antibody (talk • contribs) 22:46, 16 February 2007 (UTC).

It was just a minor typo, all fixed. Nightmare SE 23:37, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible Royal Knights

Justimon is a possible royal kight as well as Darkdramon and Tigervespamon. Susoonamon is also a candidate but unlikely as well as Mystimon.

The only real candidate is Rapidmon (Armor) (and even that is extremely unlikely), NONE of the Digimon you mentioned have any reason to be Royal Knights. Nightmare SE 16:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Appearance summaries (section 1)

Could we make them a bit bigger and chunkier with information? I mean, I read them, and they feel small. X-Evolution is meant to be the main digimon film with the Royal Knights in it, and Digimon Savers is the second anime series with them in it and it has 7 lines of information when there is going to be in total 3 hours + of information going to be shown. Can we just add a bit more information into these sections? --WarDragon 12:48, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course, if someone can be bothered to write it properly. And when i say "properly", i mean something that doesn't look like someone's trying to write a novelization of the movie (or anime in the case of savers) on wikipedia. Something like "Each Digimon attacks, and slowly Avalon begins to crack, Craniummon in disbelief at seeing his shield crack has no choice but to use it as the attack persists." is too much detail, (describing a fight step by step), wrong tone (very story-telling, not encyclopedic) and in universe. --`/aksha 11:43, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, calm down, now just a point, nowhere on this site do they have a full plot summary about this episode, so they can't find out why Craniumon lost. Isn't it better to give a simple sentence one or two about how that person lost. I mean, I and others don't want to read the page; Somebody appeared, and later he died, with a few side notes on appearance etc that is just not right, a person and summary needs more than that.

"Each Digimon attacks, and slowly Avalon begins to crack, Craniumon in disbelief at seeing his shield crack has no choice but to use it as the attack persists." I think I might have put that up, but with this you have to remember some key things; one its not too detailed for example they or I, didn't add what order the digimon attacked, what attacked was used, the environment around them etc. Two, it shows that Craniumon's ultimate defence is getting beat and his state of mind and situation--WarDragon 12:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Why do we need a full plot summary for the episode? We don't need it. The summaries at List of Digimon Frontier episodes give a good example of what level of detail we really *need* for something like a digimon episode. In fact, we actually do have a List_of_Digimon_Savers_episodes which give a plot summary of all digimon savers episodes (or at least should, if the article is being updated).
As for the example i put up - it is too much detail. Way too much and in the wrong tone. For a start, it's in universe. Secondly, if Craniumon haveing his ultimate defense beaten is a significant plot point, then we should be written about it as commentary. Something like "[whoever craniumon was fighting] managed to defeat what is Craniummon's ultimate defense". Something like "Craniumon in disbelief at seeing his shield crack has no choice but to use it as the attack persists." is in-universe - it's not commentary, it's basically describing what happens in a story-telling novelization tone. --`/aksha 08:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not saying a "full" summary of each characters emotions and everything else ahs to be included but maybe though of. Considering that half the frontier episodes haven't been added in yet, its not a really good example to use. Also there is a big difference between plot summary and the "actual" plot (with inbetween bits). The plot summary doesn't tell people that Avalon cracked? it doesn't say people views or conversations? probably because of the summary word =P

Also yeah i get your point about the in-universe thing, sorry about that.--WarDragon 17:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Crusadermon

I see you removed the gender references to Crusadermon...that's kind of a lame way to skirt the issue. I remember you were talking about not being sure if the Japanese Crusadermon was a male - someone has to have a subtitled copy of a Frontier episode they can check. And I KNOW you guys are watching Savers, was Crusadermon called a male in that? Indiawilliams 05:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

uhh...not sure who you're talking about. But i've removed gender references to it before, so i'll assume it's me =P. What i wasn't sure about was the comment that "Crusadermon was meant to be male in the original japanese, but had his (or her?) gender changed to female in the dub". That's the thing i said we needed a source for. Otherwise, if crusadermon is defintely male in savers, then i don't see anything wrong with just using 'he' for it. But from my understanding, jap pronouns aren't gender-sensitive. So i'm not sure how Crusadermon could possibly be called a male in savers. --`/aksha 13:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Can I just ask, if Wikipedia (or at least its English version) is going with dub things (such as the usage of the term Data Squad) shouldn't Crusadermon be referred to as a "she" in the article? OK, I admit the dub for Savers isn't out yet and anything could happen, but still, it kind of maintains consistency? (and before anyone starts, let's just say some of the stuff above was a bit confusing)

[edit] Attacks

Are all the attacks listed for the digimon actually the ones they have used this season, and does it even matter if they aren't? I just want to know if there is any answer either way, so I don't delete something for a bad reason.128.211.254.142 15:26, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, this article covers all the media where the Royal Knights have appeared - which includes Digimon Frontier, X-Evolution, Digimon Savers, the Digimon Card Game, and possibly some of the digimon games. So any attack that appears in any of those media should be included. --`/aksha 12:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] any more knights?

Has anyone gotten any new Royal Knights? Because it's been like a month now, and there is no new royal knight that anyone didn't hear about.

Nope, all the Digimon on the article page are confirmed Royal Knights, the other 3 have yet to make an appearance, but might in future media sources such as the cards game, games, or manga.

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:08 Digimon X-Evolution.jpg

Image:08 Digimon X-Evolution.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 03:38, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Exalted Knights

Wasn´t this just a different Dub Term , with the actual classifcation being Holy Knights ?

I don't know about the card game, but the dub did use Exalted Knight in place of Holy Knight. Probably that whole PC junk.KrytenKoro 09:01, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Revert?

Currently a lot of people have draw ire to the way the edits are happening and what is being written, with the grammatical and linguistics of sentences, decaying somewhat. So i guess this is more of a discussion section for them to go at.

While i thank him/her for taking interest in the subject, older more experienced people are coherently writing more fluid pieces and need respecting, just because you want to help doesn't mean that you should. Also lose the arrogance bit with "don't revert" as what your writing may not be right. --86.130.139.232 14:04, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

If a full revert is needed, or if you want to work on it, there's a copy of the page in my space.KrytenKoro 19:29, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I am thinking of doing the full revert as the person is constandly changing stuff, and it is less fluid. (Just so you know i am not the person editing stuff currently, just FYI.)--86.130.139.232 00:53, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I know. 156, not 86.KrytenKoro
Ummm...the revert you performed has a lot of the errors that were fixed since it's editing. The link I gave you is probably the least error-filled one.KrytenKoro

Can I just go ahead and revert it to the way I last had it? If you want to compare, please do. But it really doesn't look like the quality of the page is improved at all. I mean, when I look at the changes 156 has made, nearly all of them seem to be abominations of grammar and spelling (and I'm not using hyperbole - they really are that bad).KrytenKoro 08:26, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Well i reverted it back to your last one, as that is before the whole 156 started is that ok? or was there something wrong with the previous information as well? --86.130.139.232 10:06, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The link I gave you is probably the least error-filled one.KrytenKoro

Ok there, I used the link you gave even though i didn't see many problems with Trainra edits just maybe a feew overdramatics and structure--86.130.139.232 10:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Trainra just fixed "seperate" to "separate". The 156 edits, I explained why they were messed up on his/her talk page.KrytenKoro 13:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

All these reverts are getting so tire some, I mean the article was okay exactly as it was! if there was a need for a grammer change then thats cool, but all you simply did was revert the whole process back to the old article, there was not point in doing that at all! And as fot the issue about grani, Grani was specifically designed to assist the Tamers, not to become a steed for gallantmon. Gallantmon made grani his own steed after he contributed his power making it coexist in the real world. All you are doing is changing and altering edits based on your opinion, because you don't think it is acceptable! This is not a dictaorship kind of site, you most learn to repects others contributions and information, you had some pionts about grammer, but completely changing it, was piontless especailly when there was not alot wrong with it!156 14:55, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to ask you now to just leave this article - This childish behavior of yours is not conducive to improving the article at all.
Personally, I have never reverted your edits without a reason to do so - there is several very LONG sections on your talk page explaining EACH CHANGE I MADE. I even kept the few edits you made that were actually useful. No, this is not a "dictatorship" site - but YOU are the one treating it as such. I have explained every change I made, while you continuously demand that your edits not be changed because you said so - THAT is acting in "dictatorship", not what all the other editors are doing.
For Grani - the cards and other appearances of the creature tell that it is Gallantmon's steed ONLY. As this is the page about the Royal Knights, not Digimon Tamers, then we take that information as higher priority.KrytenKoro 23:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
I have submitted this page for protection and it is now semi-protected. Trainra 02:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Magnamon's Rocket Attack

Well considering instead of launching beams of light he launched rockets in one episode shouldn't we include that attack as well, as i see no mention of it--86.130.139.232 12:06, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Was it an episode in which he was a Royal Knight? If not, then no, because this page is for the Royal Knights version. Go to the lists or character pages if you want to add it there.KrytenKoro 12:50, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
It was the Royal Knight Magnamon, I remember this, it was in Digimon Savers, when the Knights first appeared, he attempted to use the attack on Sleipmon I believe. Nightmare SE 13:40, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
Oh. If he didn't name the attack in Savers, then didn't they call the missile thing "Magna Blast" in Adventure? It might be that there's beam and missile versions.KrytenKoro 13:55, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

It was near the end of Savers episode 40 were Sleipmon interveins, and Magnamon attacks him. He didn't name the attack but he opened up his armor like he did with the beams. Also was the beams attack on the cards (royal knight version) or was that taken from the adventure series? --86.130.139.232 21:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Unless it was on a Modify Card, it wasn't on the cards - the only show Magnamon using Melee attacks, or the shiny blue ball of death.KrytenKoro 14:17, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

So are we going to add it, or is it just that there is no name for it, that we can't?--86.130.139.232 00:28, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

It was almost certainly a variation of Magna Blast, but it didn't appear in the anime until Savers. We'll know what it is when Data Squad comes out, anyway.
Maybe it was named in one of the games?KrytenKoro
Well if its in any of the games it would have to be Digimon Digital Card Battle, I know he's in the game, and all Digimon have 3 attacks in it, but I don't remember him using an attack with Rockets but I can check later on just to be sure. Nightmare SE 03:06, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I checked, no missile attacks, his attacks are Aura Barrier (Magna Explosion/Extreme Jihad), Plasma Blast and Plasma Shot (Magna Blast/Plasma Shoot), looks like Plasma Blast isn't even listed anywhere... [1] On a side note, the Magnamon species has an attack called "Light Aura Barrier", my guess is Bandai called Extreme Jihad that in the Japanese version of Digimon Digtal Card Battle, either that or its being used by Bandai America in the card game. Nightmare SE 13:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Why not have a sub bullet point underneath the Magna Blast entry, except highlight the new one as a savers attack? --WarDragon 01:27, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New Pictures?

Well the three pictures that I feel we should change are Alphamon's, Dynasmon's and Magnamon's. Magnamon's is low quality, but he only appears breifly in episode 44 solo in shots, and most of the time he is looking at Dynasmon and not towards the camera, but there are a few maybe we could use. Alphamon's and Dynasmon are officical picture but i would like to change them, like Alphamon's to his CGI form in X-Evolution and possibly get a Frontier or Savers picture up of Dynasmon? What do you think?--WarDragon 01:33, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evolution

Though I still don't see how the anime appearances are so definitely not Royal Knights (I don't remember it being mentioned, ever), most of the Royal Knights are consistent with their anime evolutions in the card games - every Magnamon, even the X version and the ones that actually name it as a Royal Knight, have him digivolving from Vmon with goldness (sometimes its "awakening of a gold knight!" instead of the digimental).

For Omega, there is this from his profile:

A member of the Royal Knights. This Digimon was was born long ago in the ancient Digital World when two Ultimate level Digimon, War Greymon and Metal Garurumon, fused during an extreme Digital Crisis. Afterwards, he became one of the Royal Knights.

and in only one case out of eleven (normal version, even) does it digivolve from something other the Agu/Gabu line - "Dynasmon + Knight's Pride!" (which to me seems to be more like calling for backup type of "evolution")

Dukemon: "A Royal Knight of light who awakened from a Demon Dragon!", from Megidramon, and in all but four cases (out of about 14), it digivolves from MegaloGrowlmon.

UlforceVdramon: the few cards of him all still have AeroVdramon as the primary source, though Dynasmon and Grademon appear as alternates to the Vdramon group.

So, basically, even the plot parts of the Royal Knight versions agree that the digivolution is the same - I see no reason for this to be an issue of dispute between the "normal" and RK versions.KrytenKoro 00:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

The collectable card game is not used as a source for digivolutions here, as you pointed out Digimon have "alternates" in the card game, such as Agumon who has around 20 digivolutions. Descriptions such as the Omnimon description should be used as sources and in my opinion should be inserted into the article. I also need to point out that the Royal Knight Digimon are specific characters (albeit they appear in multiple continuities) meaning their species digivolutions do not apply here as the general species are not Royal Knights.
Digivolutions:
Alphamon - Grademon (D-Cyber), DoruGreymon (X-Evolution)
Craniummon -
Crusadermon -
Duftmon -
Dynasmon -
Gallantmon -
Magnamon -
Omnimon - MetalGarurumon + WarGreymon [The card description you wrote earlier must be inserted, otherwise it seems as if someone just added the species digivolution.]
Sleipmon - Qilinmon (Savers)
UlforceVeedramon -
This basically leaves Craniummon, Crusadermon, Duftmon, Dynasmon, Gallantmon, Magnamon and UlforceVeedramon with no digivolutions, and with the exception of Craniummon all of them have species digivolutions not associated with their Royal Knight counterparts. Nightmare SE 10:53, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
But if these are just the characters, then there's little reason to treat them as seperate from the species itself - if the species naturally evolves from something, so should the Royal Knight. I mean, if there was a contradiction between the normal version and the Royal Knight version, fine, but there's not. Dukemon has the most give out of all the Royal Knight cards, but the others - Omegamon, Ulforce, and Magna - all have clear emphasis on the "natural" line - the Ulforce cards even have it digivolving from AeroV, AeroV Zeromaru, and UlforceVdramon (blue border), with only two instances of another evolution being added - and it's still not the prominent evolution on the card. While the cards cannot be used as a primary source, yes, there's no reason to take their variability as arguments against the earlier anime.
Furthermore, Dynasmon and RhodoKnightmon have never not been Royal Knights, so there's even less reason to mistrust the win ratio card.KrytenKoro 16:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Fine, but we'll add them all based on their species digivolutions and not their primary card digivolutions. Also we are not to add Mode Changes. Nightmare SE 19:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Got it. Except for...this card lists itself as a Royal Knight. What do we do with that?KrytenKoro

Gallantmon are digivolutions of wargrowlmon, magnamon is an armor digivolved veemon, ulforceveedramon is a digivolution of an aeroveedramon, and crusadermons digivolve from knightmon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.92.132.233 (talk) 01:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Gallantmon can digivolve from WarGrowlmon. It can also digivolve from other Digimon, and because this article is discussing the characters as Royal Knights, not the versions that were partners or the species as a whole, we don't know for sure what they digivolved from.Not even Mr. Lister's Koromon survived intact. 02:28, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Royal Knight!

The 11th Royal Knight has appeared! His name is "Examon", he's the black/red dragon one in the scan on WtW! For more info, check here: http://withthewill.net/index.php?topic=5871 --Amigobro2 01:16, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

A bandai acaba de revelar o mais recente dos cavaleiros reais, seu nome é EXAMON,possui a aparencia de um dragão vermelho, ele é uma fusão de SLAYERDRAMON E BREAKDRAMON, sendo as formas kuuykyokutai de DRACOMON sque se fundem em EXAMON, um dos 13 cavaleiros Reais.

Agora só restam mais dois cavaleiros reais.

Revelação oficial lañçada pela propia BANDAI.

Nome :Marcos R. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.8.8.187 (talk) 16:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC)