A HORRIBLE HORRIBLE states ruling

[Rocketman]

I had to rule on this at my states yesterday. This is the way I ruled it: if you announce an attack you don't have the proper energy for, you may use another attack you do have the energy to use. if not, turn over. Why? 1. In announcing an attack, you have an intention to attack, that must be forfilled. 2. Though pokemon does not have " game phases", it does indeed have steps. Attacking is the LAST step you do. If your intent is to attack, you have intended to enter that step. 3. Allowing a player to " rewind" and preform other actions opens a big can of worms for " gaming". For instance, stalling. You could announce an attack you couldn't do, then, go back and preform other actions, do it again, and take a 10 minute turn. I'm sure most judges would put their foot down at some point, but where would that point be if not clearly defined? And thi clearly defines this. 4. This is rewarding a misplay. Crystal beach is out, and I forget to play my staduim and attack with a H. castform on it,,,,,,,and I get a go back? How about if I forget to attach my energy and attack? I also get to go back? How about it I didn't draw my card, can we go back to the beginning of the turn and start all over? And if I " rewind" to the beginning of the turn, can I play another supporter? why not, after all, if we are going back to the start of the turn, I know it sounds crazy, but if you don't draw a line on this, you can open a can of worms that could produce many " gamemanship" issues.
Rick

 

[PokePop]

Rick: I think the gamesmanship can be addressed as needed. Are we seeing that, or are we going to introduce major penalties in anticipation of something we're not seeing?

We had this situation in Juniors at NY States this weekend.
The player tried to attack then realized they couldn't, and then went back into their turn and played a Prof Oak Res. before the opponent could stop them.
Since it involved my son's friend, I asked two of my judges to make the ruling, outlining the two parts involved:
1. Was the attack rewindable back into the turn? Yes or no. We didn't have to worry about using an alternate attack because the Pokemon just had the one attack.
2. If the answer to 1 was no, then the use of the Prof Oak had to be looked at. If it was rewindable, that was a non-issue.

They decided that the rewind brought the player back into the body of their turn. As it happened, that was what I would have ruled, but I would have supported the opposite decision.

I do agree that we need to get POP to set a guideline on this, but I have to say that it reminds me of the Supporter discard error. In both cases we're effectively issuing a penalty of "attack loss" for what the guidelines calls a minor procedural error. People can state that it's not a penalty, just enforcement of the game state, but if it walks like a penalty and quacks like a penalty...

 

[CameraMan]

I posted this on the OP forum this AM.

I go by the laid it down, you played it rule, so no you couldn't rewind all the way to the beginning, unless the person you are playing tells you its OK to back up, and play a different suporter then its not. This is a game and should be fun also. There is a line, and I feel the execution not the intent is the end of the turn.

I feel if it can be rewinded without altering game state, then do it, and address gaming issues seperately.

This is a general play question:

Its my turn, I think I'm able to do my attack, and announce it, then either the other player, a judge, or I realize I don't have what I need to complete my attack, or for some reason, I can't.

I've tried to go by the position if something happend and you can restore game state, then you do. This could be a new player, or an experienced one that just miscalculated.

I would say you just use it as a learning moment explain why they can't do the attack, then since the attack was not successful, they can try another attack, switch, retreat, to do something different, or just pass.

The other side of the discussion is that your turn ends when you announce your attack, not execute the attack, and the fear is that people will start gaming and bluffing if there is not a penality.

If you see the same player over and over, then you start with a caution, and increase as necessary.

Please give us a ruling on this situation.

 

[Rocketman]

Pop, gamesmanship can be addressed as needed. My point was that this is something that can arise from this, but not always. Just an example. But this should be consistant, and we do it one way or the other. I don't really think it wise to use this ruling as a judges call. This led to some heated discussions, and as long as it is up in the air, it always will.
Rick

 

[PokePop]

I agree, and have stated, that we need direction from POP on this. I think that's the one main thing both sides of the discussion agree upon!

 

[NoPoke]

I have on occasion unwound a whole turn when an inbetween turn action was missed. Usually there is a missed KO that also needs to be corrected. There are limits to this as there has to be no awkward shuffle/search to prevent the clean rewind. Given that restriction undoing the whole turn always seemed liked the best way to emphasise to both players that mandatory inbetween turn actions have to take place.

A player forgets to draw a card at the begining of their turn... do they miss that draw once they enter "step 2" or even this "step 3". ? I believe that the correct answer is no and that I have to try and repair the game state by drawing the card. If I can't repair the game state then a different penalty applies.

 

[Professor_Chris]

I had to rule on this at my states yesterday. This is the way I ruled it: if you announce an attack you don't have the proper energy for, you may use another attack you do have the energy to use. if not, turn over. Why? 1. In announcing an attack, you have an intention to attack, that must be forfilled. 2. Though pokemon does not have " game phases", it does indeed have steps. Attacking is the LAST step you do. If your intent is to attack, you have intended to enter that step. 3. Allowing a player to " rewind" and preform other actions opens a big can of worms for " gaming". For instance, stalling. You could announce an attack you couldn't do, then, go back and preform other actions, do it again, and take a 10 minute turn. I'm sure most judges would put their foot down at some point, but where would that point be if not clearly defined? And thi clearly defines this. 4. This is rewarding a misplay. Crystal beach is out, and I forget to play my staduim and attack with a H. castform on it,,,,,,,and I get a go back? How about if I forget to attach my energy and attack? I also get to go back? How about it I didn't draw my card, can we go back to the beginning of the turn and start all over? And if I " rewind" to the beginning of the turn, can I play another supporter? why not, after all, if we are going back to the start of the turn, I know it sounds crazy, but if you don't draw a line on this, you can open a can of worms that could produce many " gamemanship" issues.
Rick

No phases, huh? So what was that yesterday when you were trying to explain your position when you told me I had entered the attack phase? :\

Speaking of intent, my intent was to use Dual Stream. My intent was not to use Claw Swipe OR pass. Forcing a player to either give up an attack or use an alternate, possibly self-damaging is a ridiculously steep price to pay for the most minor and easiest to rewind of gameplay errors (assuming it is caught before the next turn starts). It's hardly even a misplay. A misplay would be attaching the wrong energy and being unable to attack no matter what you tried. I attached the RIGHT energy, I got ahead of myself because it was the game winning move and I knew I had it. Your stalling example is ridiculous. You'd buy no more than 5 seconds by announcing an illegal attack, noticing it and then completing your turn (which you would have done anyway). It's a mistake that deserves no more than a caution for a single offense. Obviously, if the offense is repeated it should escalate.

This should actually be a non-issue. I had the stadium in hand and the energy, all I had to do was drop one and the attack would be valid. No, I take that back, it probably would have been a non-issue if her father wasn't standing over the match when he saw her about to lose with plenty of other matches still going on with ~5-10 minutes left in the round. Now, Jeff's a great guy and I know his heart is in the right place, but this wasn't the only questionable thing he did that day. If the shoe would have been on the other foot, as soon as she flashed the stadium to prove she could make her attack legal, I would have picked up my cards because she obviously has the winning move.

A player should be able to do everything in his or her power to make his or her intended attack legal before having to choose to pass or use another attack. Especially if it's merely dropping a card from their hand.

 

[Ditto]

I have on occasion unwound a whole turn when an inbetween turn action was missed. Usually there is a missed KO that also needs to be corrected. There are limits to this as there has to be no awkward shuffle/search to prevent the clean rewind. Given that restriction undoing the whole turn always seemed liked the best way to emphasise to both players that mandatory inbetween turn actions have to take place.

A player forgets to draw a card at the begining of their turn... do they miss that draw once they enter "step 2" or even this "step 3". ? I believe that the correct answer is no and that I have to try and repair the game state by drawing the card. If I can't repair the game state then a different penalty applies.

The Draw step (Step 1 of the turn) is MANDATORY so there is no choice but to rewind to it. Step 2 and Step 3 (the Attack step) are NOT mandatory, and so if they are skipped it is no big deal.

I do agree that we need to get POP to set a guideline on this, but I have to say that it reminds me of the Supporter discard error. In both cases we're effectively issuing a penalty of "attack loss" for what the guidelines calls a minor procedural error. People can state that it's not a penalty, just enforcement of the game state, but if it walks like a penalty and quacks like a penalty...

The fact is that it's the players CHOICE to not attack (or use a different attack) by how they play. It's equivalent to if the player attached the wrong energy. They made a mistake, and that cost them to not be able to attack. THEY made a MISTAKE. They CHOOSE to try and attack with a move they couldn't make. ("Can I get a too bad, right here?")

No phases, huh? So what was that yesterday when you were trying to explain your position when you told me I had entered the attack phase? :\

If you read his post more closely, you'd see that while he said there weren't "Phases", there ARE "Steps" (which are clearly defined in the rulebook in black and white). You were in your Attack step when you made your mistake, therefore "can't happen, didn't happen" occurs and you rewind back to the first spot that you can before you made a gamestate error (which is where you announce your attack). You announced a valid attack, yet could not perform it, so you rewind back to the part where you announce your attack (which is how you start your Attack Step). So you are at the beginning of your Attack Step, where you can announce an attack or pass, those are your only two options that the game will let you perform at that part of the game.

Speaking of intent, my intent was to use Dual Stream. My intent was not to use Claw Swipe OR pass. Forcing a player to either give up an attack or use an alternate, possibly self-damaging is a ridiculously steep price to pay for the most minor and easiest to rewind of gameplay errors (assuming it is caught before the next turn starts). It's hardly even a misplay. A misplay would be attaching the wrong energy and being unable to attack no matter what you tried. I attached the RIGHT energy, I got ahead of myself because it was the game winning move and I knew I had it.

Your general intent was to attack and for your turn to end. Your general intent was that you were done with all the OPTIONAL actions from Step 2. Why should you get to change your mind and go back and do something that is OPTIONAL? When you announce your attack you forfeit any other optional actions for that turn. You made a MISTAKE, that's part of the game.

A player should be able to do everything in his or her power to make his or her intended attack legal before having to choose to pass or use another attack. Especially if it's merely dropping a card from their hand.

You did. You had the chance to do any of the optional actions from Step 2. Once you left Step 2 and went to Step 3 (the Attack Step), you were saying that you were done "doing everything in your power to make your attack legal". Just because you didn't do it correctly does not mean that you just get to magically go back and perform any extra optional actions that you already declared yourself to be finished with.






On another note, no one seems to actually be discussing the logical steps I have outlined and used to explain how the situation works. Everyone is just saying something like "this is too harsh, this is stupid, I don't like this" and other such rebuttals. If you think that there is something flawed in my logic, then point it out and follow it up with your own logical line of thought. People have said they don't agree with me, but they haven't found anything wrong with my logic yet, which means it's right. If someone can find something wrong with my actual logic, then obviously I can't be right. I might just have to tweak my approach a bit, or I might be completely wrong, but either way, no one has proved it yet.

 

[Professor_Chris]

The rule book doesn't say what to do in the event that the energy requirements are not met, so bringing it up is completely moot as it is silent on the issue.

You're right though, it was a mistake. But the mistake was an illegal move. That's called a gameplay error, not a misplay. Losing an attack/being forced to use an attack you don't want to use is too steep a penalty for a VERY minor and easilly corrected gameplay error. The general rule has always been "rewind if possible" and "if you can't do it, it didn't happen/if you have to do it, make it happen." I can't Dual Stream, so my attack never started and my turn should be returned to me. People don't lose their sleep check if they draw their turn too soon. :\ I shouldn't lose my turn if I call out a currently illegal attack too soon.

The turn loss/forced alternate attack is a ruling with an absurdity that rivals the discarded supporter ends the turn ruling.

 

[Ditto]

The rule book doesn't say what to do in the event that the energy requirements are not met, so bringing it up is completely moot as it is silent on the issue.

You're right though, it was a mistake. But the mistake was an illegal move. That's called a gameplay error, not a misplay. Losing an attack/being forced to use an attack you don't want to use is too steep a penalty for a VERY minor and easilly corrected gameplay error. The general rule has always been "rewind if possible" and "if you can't do it, it didn't happen/if you have to do it, make it happen." I can't Dual Stream, so my attack never started and my turn should be returned to me. People don't lose their sleep check if they draw their turn too soon. :\ I shouldn't lose my turn if I call out a currently illegal attack too soon.

The turn loss/forced alternate attack is a ruling with an absurdity that rivals the discarded supporter ends the turn ruling.

How many times do I have to say this "THERE IS NO PENALTY BEING ASSIGNED!" Yes, you made an illegal move, that's why it's rewound to the beginning of the step you are currently in (the Attack Step). Your mistake, was moving into that Step. The first thing you do in that Step is check to make sure you have the energy required to use that attack. At that point, you are already in the Attack Step, and therefore are done with all OPTIONAL actions from Step 2.

You can't Dual Stream, correct, so it didn't happen, correct, but you DID start your Attack Step. You don't get to just take that back.

Again, the Sleep Check is MANDATORY so it CAN'T be skipped. Everything in Step 2 is OPTIONAL, and therefore is able to be forfeited by the player (which you did by moving to the Attack Step).

Also again, you didn't lose your turn. You CHOSE to end your turn. The judge did nothing to make you lose your turn. You put yourself in a position of having the choice to use an Attack you could afford based on your energy, or passing. YOU put yourself there because that's how the GAME works, not because the judge just felt like it.


My apologies if you feel like I am attacking you personally, as that is not what I am trying to do. I am merely trying to emphasize the specific points of how this all works, and you have given me a fine example to use to reiterate those points. (Though it is a little frustrating that I have to keep reiterating the same points.)

Edit: When I say there is no penalty assigned, I am meaning that the judge is not giving a "penalty" of "you can use another attack or pass". The judge is merely clarifying for the player what they are allowed to do based on the rules of the game. Of course there will probably be a Caution or Warning assigned. That is the actually penalty, the Caution or Warning, not the clarification of the gamestate.

 

[bulbasnore]

Rick: I think the gamesmanship can be addressed as needed. Are we seeing that, or are we going to introduce major penalties in anticipation of something we're not seeing?

How many times are you going to see 2xQuick Search in a match? Think you'll see it in the grinder at worlds 2k6? It happened consistently with a player, but his opponents, while some of them warned each other, never called a judge. If you saw it one time, you'd be freakishly lucky. I think its too easy to apply a major penalty for even one occurrence of this one. so...

...let's take a more analogous case. How many times are you, as a judge, going to see POW while ahead on prizes? This happened in multiple matches at a 2k6 regional. The players did not call the judge. It was corroborated later by unrelated bystanders. And, funny enough, someone later said, yah, also happened 'to me' at a GC with the same guy. You're not going to see the multiples, at a 150 player event with 4 judges, so, caution and rewind? Not going to do that on gamebreakers in MA/SR.

I think game breaking oopsies need a penalty, because you just aren't going to see them often enough to curb the cheats.

Look, it took us over a year to catch a cheater ... we just couldn't prove the fishy things were cheats, or judges let the guy off too lightly for things like having 5 of the same Stage 2 in his deck, until John just happened to be standing behind him when he palmed that card... we were freakishly lucky, but at a bigger tourney still with many more judges circulating.

How many times are you, as a judge, going see when someone witholds an energy needed for Flamethrower, so they can use it for Bannette after the counterattack? Statistically, its a very small chance, all the more so b/c when most opponents catches him, you won't get the report. So when you see it, you rewind it, let him play the energy for the KO, then take his chances on drawing the second NRG for the Bannette ex? I would have to call it differently.

For sure, if a player announces an attack, or the sloppier 'does 80' or 'KO' in the masters/seniors, that's the attack. At a maximum, I'd rule that you can only choose another attack for which you have the energy. If I look at the game state and see your misplay might give you a game turning or game breaking advantage, then I think a more material penalty is warranted.

Sure, this is hard on guys like Prof Chris. Not at all saying he was trying to cheat; his case is the poster argument for rewind. However, for consistency I would have to come down to the same spot as Rick -- use the other attack.

Pokepop, I agree we need direction from POP on this. I can't say which way I think they'll go. Until they announce their direction, I think its a decent application of the rule book to not rewind out of the attack step. Either way, I think its a proper application of the penalty guidelines to assess a penalty in proportion to the potential advantage.

 

[Professor_Chris]

Hypothetically, let's say I want to use an attack, but don't have the energy required. I announce it. I do have another attack though, however, this attack KO's my active/bench for my opponent's last prize (or some other similarly disasterous effect like discarding the rest of my deck when I won't take my last prize). By what you're saying, I no longer have to right to go back and make my intended attack legal and am not FORCED to use this other attack that I can pay for because I am in this imaginary "Attack Phase" (it doesn't matter if you call it a step, what you describe is a 'phase.' The steps outlined in the rule book are merely an order of operations for effects) and I no longer have to option to pass it. I lose because you make me do something I would have never done on my own.

 

[Ditto]

Hypothetically, let's say I want to use an attack, but don't have the energy required. I announce it. I do have another attack though, however, this attack KO's my active/bench for my opponent's last prize (or some other similarly disasterous effect like discarding the rest of my deck when I won't take my last prize). By what you're saying, I no longer have to right to go back and make my intended attack legal and am not FORCED to use this other attack that I can pay for because I am in this imaginary "Attack Phase" (it doesn't matter if you call it a step, what you describe is a 'phase.' The steps outlined in the rule book are merely an order of operations for effects) and I no longer have to option to pass it. I lose because you make me do something I would have never done on my own.

When did I say you couldn't pass? When did anyone say you couldn't just not attack. You can just not attack and then you won't KO your own Pokémon. But you can't go back and do something from Step 2 that you already declared you were done with.

Just because you draw your card and then immediately attack, doesn't mean you didn't do Step 2. You were in it, you just didn't do any of the actions in it. Same thing with the Attack Step, just because you are in that step, doesn't mean you have to actually attack, you can still pass like normal (which is what I would suggest in this situation :wink.

 

[Professor_Chris]

When did I say you couldn't pass? When did anyone say you couldn't just not attack. You can just not attack and then you won't KO your own Pokémon. But you can't go back and do something from Step 2 that you already declared you were done with.

Just because you draw your card and then immediately attack, doesn't mean you didn't do Step 2. You were in it, you just didn't do any of the actions in it. Same thing with the Attack Step, just because you are in that step, doesn't mean you have to actually attack, you can still pass like normal (which is what I would suggest in this situation :wink.

Why should I be allowed to pass? I'm already in this imaginary attack phase. Assuming I have an attack to perform why should I have the option to pass now? No where in those order of operations after Step 2 (announce attack; make sure you have enough energy) does it say you can change your mind and just pass. If I've hit Step 2 in the order of effects of this "Attack Phase" it is too late for a pass if there is a legal attack, right? Unless you're now admitting that the rule book is unclear on this part and there is no point in basing your argument on it. =) If I can rewind back to the normal play phase to choose to pass my attack phase, why can't I do the other things allowed in that phase? If I start it, it's too late to pass it, no?

 

[Ditto]

Why should I be allowed to pass? I'm already in this imaginary attack phase. Assuming I have an attack to perform why should I have the option to pass now? No where in those order of operations after Step 2 (announce attack; make sure you have enough energy) does it say you can change your mind and just pass. If I've hit Step 2 in the order of effects of this "Attack Phase" it is too late for a pass if there is a legal attack, right? Unless you're now admitting that the rule book is unclear on this part and there is no point in basing your argument on it. =) If I can rewind back to the normal play phase to choose to pass my attack phase, why can't I do the other things allowed in that phase? If I start it, it's too late to pass it, no?

The details my friend, the details. Firstly, the Attack Step is clearly written, so it is hardly imaginary. As I said before, just because you don't do anything in a particular Step, doesn't mean you didn't go through it. When you pass you are in the Attack Step. You don't pass from Step 2. Since you are at the beginning of the Attack Step, you still have the option to pass.

For the point of discussion, lets say on this particular point I am incorrect. What is wrong with the situation that you described? It was your mistake to incorrectly attack. If that's what the gamestate demands then that's how it is, even if it is "stupid". That's like arguing that it's "stupid" that you have to draw a card each turn. That's just how it is.

In any case, I believe that I am correct in my first explanation, though I will double check when I get home.

 

[Big Daddy Snorlax]

As I read through some of the impassioned arguments about missed steps and calls for penalizing the player who tries something illegal, I imagine that some of you must have an interesting take on "Spirit of the Game". If someone makes a misplay, which we've all seen, then I will be the first to run out and get a "Too Bad" for them.

However, if someone tries to do something that they can't legally do, then it never happened and they can go on playing the game, period. No big complicated analysis of which phase they have entered, just go on doing things that are legal during your turn. When you attack with an attack that you can do, or you pass your turn, then you're done. Nice and simple to explain, little room for a player to try to get an edge they do not deserve through a technicality. IMHO

BDS

 

[Professor_Chris]

OOPS. Passing/Being able to choose to end your turn without an attack isn't mentioned in the rule book. At all. =( We've been playing this game wrong FOR YEARS. Pass=Skip. A skipped phase obviously doesn't happen and if you're in that phase and can do something I don't see the basis for being able to cop out of it. My point was to illustrate what an awful idea it was for a simple mistake (such as forgetting to set down an energy/stadium/etc) to force you to do something you don't want to do. The example was so intentionally absurd that it couldn't possibly be the way the game was meant to be played.

Anyway, I firmly believe there is no attack phase and that your turn only ends after a successfully completed attack or a passing and that the steps located in the rule book (just like the damage calculation steps) are in there as merely an order of operations for complex attacks.

In What Order Do You Do Your Attack?
The exact steps to go through when attacking are listed here. For most attacks, it won't matter what order you do things in, but if you have to work your way through a really complicated attack, follow these steps in order and you should be fine.

I also believe that a rewind should put you back before your choice to attack. Step b of the order of attack, for all intents and purposes for modified, is the first step of attacking. If this first step is failed then I only seems logical that you should back out of the attack because the first step was invalid.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

Nice and simple to explain, little room for a player to try to get an edge they do not deserve through a technicality. IMHO

BDS

And that's what it's all about. Some people want to have this edge at their disposal and others don't want this technicality to exist to be taken advantage of.

 

[Ditto]

OOPS. Passing/Being able to choose to end your turn without an attack isn't mentioned in the rule book. At all. =( We've been playing this game wrong FOR YEARS. Pass=Skip. A skipped phase obviously doesn't happen and if you're in that phase and can do something I don't see the basis for being able to cop out of it. My point was to illustrate what an awful idea it was for a simple mistake (such as forgetting to set down an energy/stadium/etc) to force you to do something you don't want to do. The example was so intentionally absurd that it couldn't possibly be the way the game was meant to be played.

Anyway, I firmly believe there is no attack phase and that your turn only ends after a successfully completed attack or a passing and that the steps located in the rule book (just like the damage calculation steps) are in there as merely an order of operations for complex attacks.

I also believe that a rewind should put you back before your choice to attack. Step b of the order of attack, for all intents and purposes for modified, is the first step of attacking. If this first step is failed then I only seems logical that you should back out of the attack because the first step was invalid.

As I said, I'll have to check when I get home to see if that logically fits for sure in the order of things. Either way, that's why I added the part about even if I was wrong, that you're still in the attack step and therefore if it has to be that you have to do an attack that you are able to perform, then so be it, what's wrong with that?

Your point that it's an awful idea and shouldn't be played that way is just your opinion, it has no logical basis, and therefore is irrelevant.

You may not like the idea that there are steps in Pokémon, but you don't have to, they're still clearly there. If the order or separation didn't matter, then they would all be listed together as bullets, rather than grouped and numbered. They're like that for a purpose.

Your choice to use an attack is the start of the Attack Step, it's what enters you into that step. You don't even have to say a specific attack to enter into the Attack Step, that's why you flip for the baby flip first, before you announce your attack, because you have started your Attack Step, but that doesn't mean you actually get to use an attack.

You still rewind to the beginning of the Step that you are in, you don't get to go back in time to a previous Step. If you announce an attack and find you can't do that, then you rewind back to the beginning of that part, where you announce an attack (or pass). So you'd still at least be at the beginning of step b from the part you're referring to, still clearly in the Attack Step.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

And that's what it's all about. Some people want to have this edge at their disposal and others don't want this technicality to exist to be taken advantage of.

Some people don't want to draw a card at the beginning of their turn either, too bad, that's the rules. You are assuming that I like this way that I am discussing. You are assuming that I agree that it's good and that I don't think that it's "stupid". I have kept my personal opinions out of the discussion and merely focus on the logic to lead to the right answer. When discussing rules, you can't put your personal bias into it, which I have tried to warn you about.

 

[Professor_Chris]

When discussing rules as facts, it helps if the rule book backs you up. Unfortunately, it doesn't. The rule book is terribly unclear on these matters. In fact, unclear is an understatement. It's 100% silent on the matter.

Your argument is just as much a personal opinion as mine and mine is just as logical as your's. The only difference is that we're approaching the same problem from two different perspectives. Those steps you refer to are just an order of operations for your attack (the rule book even tells you so!). Attacking is only set off from the rest of the things you can do during your turn because it must come at the end.
If you announce an attack you can't pay for, then you couldn't attack and your turn did not end. That's not a terribly hard concept to grasp.

My point about it being an awful idea was that the game couldn't have possibly have been created like that. If something sounds so terribly stupid and broken, then it's only polite to give the creators the benefit of the doubt and say it ain't so before it is confirmed. ;\ Or at the very least take the possibility that its supposed to be that way with a hefty amount of skepticism.

Oh, and passing at step b (because it'd be pointless to rewind to step a if we're staying in this "attack phase" and any time before that would be outside of the attack phase, and a turn end in step a only happens if you fail the baby flip, so your intent to attack and not pass would have already been declared) isn't an option. Do I have to keep saying this?

 

[Ditto]

When discussing rules as facts, it helps if the rule book backs you up. Unfortunately, it doesn't. The rule book is terribly unclear on these matters. In fact, unclear is an understatement. It's 100% silent on the matter.

Your argument is just as much a personal opinion as mine and mine is just as logical as your's. The only difference is that we're approaching the same problem from two different perspectives. Those steps you refer to are just an order of operations for your attack (the rule book even tells you so!). Attacking is only set off from the rest of the things you can do during your turn because it must come at the end.
If you announce an attack you can't pay for, then you couldn't attack and your turn did not end. That's not a terribly hard concept to grasp.

My point about it being an awful idea was that the game couldn't have possibly have been created like that. If something sounds so terribly stupid and broken, then it's only polite to give the creators the benefit of the doubt and say it ain't so before it is confirmed. ;\ Or at the very least take the possibility that its supposed to be that way with a hefty amount of skepticism.

Oh, and passing at step b (because it'd be pointless to rewind to step a if we're staying in this "attack phase" and any time before that would be outside of the attack phase, and a turn end in step a only happens if you fail the baby flip, so your intent to attack and not pass would have already been declared) isn't an option. Do I have to keep saying this?

Maybe we're not talking about the same point, but what exactly is the rulebook "silent" on? As soon as I know what part you're referring to, I'll know how to clarify myself.

How can you possibly go back to something that you have already passed? How can you justify going back to Step 2, when you have clearly made your intent to be done with Step 2? Yes, it is just an order, but that's what makes it a Step, it has an order. Yes, you can't do the illegal attack, but you've already declared that you're done with Step 2, so you don't get to go back to it, so you go back to right after it, which happens to be Step 3, the Attack Step. That is where your logic is flawed. Try to find something actually WRONG with my logic, if that can't be done, then it must be correct.

It's not my job to guess what the creators of the game MIGHT have meant. I can only go by what is actually written out in their words or what they have verbally declared, or written as an errata.

You'll also note that I said you would "at least" rewind back to step b, not necessarily ONLY to step b. I'll have to look at the actual rulebook when I get home, for I believe it is a bit more detailed then the part online, though I could be mistaken. Either way, if it's at the beginning of step b, then you have not announced a specific attack yet (it has only been declared that you are in the Attack Step), and therefore are still allowed to pass. So to answer your question, no, you don't have to keep saying that .