Gardevoir Lv. X and Bring Down

Discussion in 'Ask the Rules Team' started by DreamChaser AJ, Dec 10, 2007.

  1. DreamChaser AJ

    DreamChaser AJ New Member

    As a judge, how would the following situations be resolved:

    1)
    Player A has a Gardevoir Lv. X active and points to his opponent's wurmple, and says "knock it out". He has a feebas on his own bench with fewer remaining HP than his opponent's wurmple.

    By pointing to the wurmple and saying "knock it out", is it assumed that he used the attack Bring Down and as a result should KO his own feebas? Or would the attacking player be able to choose another attack since he didn't specifically say "bring down"?


    2)
    Player A has a Gardevoir LV. X active and says "I'll Bring Down the Ralts". He has his own ralts with 3 damage on it but didn't notice. When he uses the attack, he points to his opponent's undamaged ralts, who clearly has the least amount of HP on him opponent's field.

    Since he said "Bring Down the ralts", should the assumption be made that he meant any ralts? Or since the selected target for bring down wasn't a valid target, would the player be able to use another attack instead of Bring Down?
     
  2. mtjimmer

    mtjimmer Master Trainer, Emeritus

    It feels like there is some lingo trickery going on here. A couple suggestions:
    1. Both cases, it is clearly a point at which the player is in the attack step. As a judge, keep close to the facts of the situation.
    2. Illegal or bad statements should not be allowed affect the game. Just because in a match, I said Super-cali-fragil-istic-expi-ali-docious, doesn't mean that I have nothing to say, and then forfeit my turn.

    Case 1 - Bad Statement. "What do you mean by 'Knock it out'?" It never hurts to ask (as a player) what the opponent is communicating. Sometimes there will be language barriers, willful or not. The best answer is to ask the opponent what they mean...players should be interested in winning the game on the merits of their own abilities and deck, not rely on the whim of oddly constructed sentence.
    Case 2 - Illegal statement. Saying "I knock out your ralts with Bring down" is an illegal statement. You can't. Just like you can't attack with Bring Down, only having 2 Fire Energy attached. No legal attack was declared.

    In both of these cases, a judge should not be necessary. A player can always ask his or her opponent what action they are taking. Simple statements like "What's going on?" "Can you clarify?" can be used politely, not giving away any kind of strategy. If you're called over as a judge for either case, you should first address this core issue. "Why didn't you ask your opponent what they were doing?" Also in both cases, I would adjudicate leaving the active player in the attack step, with an undeclared attack.

    Obviously, there can be some gray areas in language. The goal of the judge should be to make sure the game is played in a fair and equitable fashion. Some judges could reach different conclusions, based on other supporting evidence.

    As a caution for future questions - I don't generally answer gray areas. There's always going to be a need for judgment skills, and you don't learn them without thinking things through. (This response occurred because it's a good topic to cover in general.)
     
  3. mtjimmer

    mtjimmer Master Trainer, Emeritus

    Update:

    I received a clarification from Japan on how PCL handles such things.

    Basically, if someone announces Bring Down, no matter what the target, it resolves on the Pokemon that meets the criteria. If your opponent lets you rewind, that's okay, but not expected. (Yes, you would be forced to use Bring Down on your own Pokemon if you're not paying attention.)
     

Share This Page