Level Up a LV. X

Discussion in 'Cards: Strategy and Rulings Discussion' started by Ditto, Sep 27, 2007.

8 league13 468 60
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ditto

    Ditto Member

    This post says that you can't do that, however, I don't see why you would not be able to. Take Torterra for example:

    Since "LV. X" is not part of the name but just the Level, Torterra LV. X's real name is just Torterra. That's why we can only have 4 Torterra and Torterra LV. X combined in a deck.

    So since the Level Up text says to put the LV. X card onto Torterra, Torterra LV. X == Torterra and therefore should fulfill the requirement. Is there somewhere in the rulebook that says you can't Level Up a Pokémon more than once? That would seem stupid since this is trying to mimic the video game where Pokémon Level Up, and obviously a Pokémon in the video game Levels Up more than once. Since X is a variable, meaning the next Level, why can't the new X equal X + 1?

    Does anyone know if this has actually been confirmed by Japan (since, no offense to them, they don't always have to rule with the logic of things, but on how things are "supposed" to be) or if it has just been ruled this way cause it would be "weird" to have the same card on top of itself?

    Unless there is a part in the rulebook that says you can't, or Japan has said we can't, then all the requirements on the cards are met, and therefore should be able to happen. If neither the rulebook nor Japan has overridden what the card text says, and yet we are still not supposed to do what the card lets us do, then how are we supposed to be able to read the cards and make a correct ruling, when the cards aren't always right?
     
  2. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    You do it because of the principle (Metarule) that you can't do something for no game effect.
    Leveling up a Pokemon that is already Level X would have no "Game Effect" and so can't be done.
     
  3. fieryseraph

    fieryseraph New Member

    It would get rid of status effects, wouldn't it? That's the only reason I could think of to do it...
     
  4. Ditto

    Ditto Member

    Yes, it would get rid of status effects and any other effects on the Pokémon. Plus, is Leveling Up not an effect on it's own? I know it's not the same as evolving, but I would consider evolving an effect. I would consider the first Leveling Up as an effect too, so why wouldn't Leveling Up again (think, evolving again) not also be a game effect?
     
  5. Chromecatz

    Chromecatz New Member

    nice argument.
     
  6. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    How are you Leveling up?
    You would be going from X to X.
    That is the same level.
    It cannot be done.
     
  7. kevstoy

    kevstoy New Member

    However, what about Lucario Lv.X that it's poke-power Stance allows you to prevent all effects of an attack during the next turn. Thus if I evolved my Lucario to Lv.X one turn, used stance, then were able to Lv.X the next turn to a second LV.X I would thus have the effect of using stance 2x which may save me in a game? Thoughts?
     
  8. mtjimmer

    mtjimmer Master Trainer, Emeritus

    Lv.X is the ultimate form of that Pokemon. It can't go up any higher.

    You can't put a Lucario LV.X on top of a Lucario LV.X.

    For honest and for true!
     
  9. Ditto

    Ditto Member

    Yes and what is X? X is a variable, and the definition of that variable seems to be "some level higher than the level under it", since it is leveling "up". More specifically to make sense with the game, "1 level higher than the level under it". Obviously if you had a Torterra LV. 45 and "Leveled Up" to a Torterra LV. X you would expect that X > 45, otherwise it would be leveling "down". Variables are just that, variable, therefore X does not always have to equal the same thing. That's the whole concept of recursion, that X = X + 1 is valid. So Torterra LV. X right now is Torterra LV. 46. But what happens when a Torterra LV. 64 is printed in the future. You would still be able to play Torterra LV. X onto it, therefore making Torterra LV. X == Torterra LV. 65. But you could have both in play making one Torterra LV. X == Torterra LV. 46 and one Torterra LV. X == Torterra LV. 65, but yet they have the same card text. So why couldn't you have a Torterra LV. X on top of a Torterra LV. 45 making it a Torterra LV. 46 and then another Torterra LV. X on top of that making it a Torterra LV. 47? A Pokémon can Level Up twice during a battle on the video game, which is what this is trying to represent, so why not in the card game, especially since the text on the cards actually would allow this to happen?


    So why don't we just have LV. 100 Pokémon instead of LV. X if it's supposed to be the last level? Again, why can't Lucario gain more than one level, when it can gain 100 levels in the video game?

    I respect the rulings from PUI, however, we've seen too often that if that's not the way Japan plays it then it gets overruled. Has anyone checked with PCL about this or is this in a rulebook? I'd have to look over the rulebooks more carefully but I can't think of anything right now that has been in a current rulebook and then ruled that it should not be that way, so for now, it seems like the only answers we can trust are either the rulebook or PCL when those answers directly contradict what a card text says.

    Again, no offense to you Jimmer or anyone at PUI (nor the rules team), but you guys are telling me I can't do something that the card says I can do, and so far, only PCL and the rulebook have been able to accurately do that. While I understand that rulings are made and then reversed later if they need to be, I would like to try and find out from PCL sooner than later if we need to reverse this ruling or not.
     
  10. Bobby

    Bobby New Member

    Ok, we aren't talking about Lucario LV.X^2 here. That's like saying X + 1 = 2 could have more than one answer. Lucario LV.X is exactly the same as every other Lucario LV.X, therefore X is the same.

    In other words, no.

    NOTE: playing two of the same LV.X in a deck generally isn't a good idea.
     
  11. Ditto

    Ditto Member

    That's the whole thing though, we don't have that "2", so we don't know X + 1 = 2. All we have is X + 1 = Y, which has a lot of different answers. Again, X can equal one thing at a certain moment and another thing at another moment. For instance, if you have X + 1 = 2 and X + 5 = 3, X would be very different in each case. Variables can change, they are only a set number in a given circumstance. What happens when they make another Lucario LV. X (did they in Japan already or was that just different artwork?)? You wouldn't say those two Lucario are the same would you?

    Playing two of the same LV. X in a deck is only not a good idea if the deck isn't built for it. As someone has already said, what if you could Stance the same Active twice in a row? I would think that would be pretty good. Whether something is good in a deck is all about what the deck is designed to do.
     
  12. Mew

    Mew New Member

    When variables are used in systems of equations or when refering to something, and the same variable appears more than once it has the same value.
    Torterra Lv. X = Torterra Lv. X

    X is < or = 100. We must assume that it = 100, and 100 is the highest achievable level so far.

    But then again, the card's requirements are met....
     
  13. charmander rox

    charmander rox New Member

    You could say that X > 100. In other words, if a Pokemon is LV X, it is already beyond extreme.
     
  14. Ditto

    Ditto Member

    So to use my example before:

    X + 1 = 2

    and

    X + 5 = 3

    Those X's have the same value? Each Pokémon or each Leveling Up would be it's own equation, so they can have different meanings.

    Again, what if a Torterra LV. 64 is made and you have it, Torterra LV. 45 and 2 Torterra LV. X in your deck, and you play both Torterra LV. X on each of the other Torterra. One Torterra LV. X would equal Torterra LV. 46 and one Torterra LV. X would equal Torterra LV. 65, so Torterra LV. X =/= Torterra LV. X.
     
  15. Ikari

    Ikari New Member

    I understand your position, and i really think you have the right. What if another Torterra Lv X is printed? (Differents attacks, Power... etc...) you can Level Up it twice. But hey... like someone says: Your Terra Line will be 4-3-2/1/1 and that's odd... i think the Lvl Up twice can be done (the card's requirements are met) but in playability terms, its inneficient.

    Maybe with the Basics that can be leveled up: Dialga, Palkia, Darkrai, Crescelia...
     
  16. DITTO!!!!

    JIMMER, POKEPOP AND OTHER NORMAL PEOPLE HERE IS TELLING YOU THE SAME THING, YOU CANT! JIMMER WORKS FOR PUI/POP AND POKEPOP IS A MEMBER OF TEAM CONPENDIUM, THEIR RULING SHOULD BE ENOUGH FOR YOU I DONT KNOW WHY YOU CONTINUE TO ARGUE THIS. OBEDINCE TO THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE RULEINGS IS. :thumb:


    Sorry for the CAPS, I had to get that off my chest. Awaits for this to get locked:smile:
     
  17. PokePop

    PokePop Administrator

    You do know that I can't read a word of the above.
     
  18. Flaming_Spinach

    Flaming_Spinach Feature Editor

    He knows that.

    He's just sad he can't write in ALLCAPS anymore.
     
  19. ninetales1234

    ninetales1234 <a href="http://pokegym.net/gallery/browseimages.p

    Hopefully this will find its way into the TCG rulebook, (along with the new confusion rule! :smile:) as it certainly is not obvious.

    Perhaps now would be a good time to mention Digimon, in which the monsters had an "Ultimate" form, and then after, it was discovered the monsters could transform beyond that. And let's not forget DragonBall Z, with it's "Super Saiyan", then "Super Saiyan 2" and "Super Saiyan 3". I guess what I'm saying is that there is a precedent for some video game or TV show claiming there is an ultimate form of something, and then tell the audience that there's something even higher.
     
  20. ShadowTogetic

    ShadowTogetic New Member

    There is no new x. x=x for all x in F

    If you're saying x=x+1, then you're saying 0=1
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page