Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Little Card Help Please

Status
Not open for further replies.
L

Lugias_Realm

New Member
[BQuestion is also over on the Masters Site but if there's a couple of Profesors who want to aid in getting a quicker response that would be GREAT
Problem 1; Player A has Expedition Ninetails and wants to use Etheraal Flame against a Dustox
It Reads, Discard all Fire attached to Ninetais and this attack does 30+ 20 more damage for each energy card discarded in this way-Dustox prevents all effects only takes actual damage which in this case would be the 30 damage listed, the + should not be allowed to happen it is an effect of the original attack[
The Dispute is simple, Ninetails will do the 30 but since discarding the Fire Energy is and effect( remember is says + not times) so I contend that Ninetails cannoy discard the energy for added bonus

Problem 2, same player Using his Blazikento do fire Stream, player 2 is going to copy the attack but player 1 says he can't unless use the attack unless he discards a Fire Energy. Card states
Discard a fire Energy card attached to Blaziken but then right after theat text comes 3 key wordes" IF YOU DO"this attack does 10 more damage to your opponents bench
I made the ruling that the opponent did not have to discard the Fire Energy as it strickly states, IF you do so in other words giving you a choice as to whether or not you want to do the extra damage by discarding or by not disgarding the Fire Energy just setteling for the straight 50 damage
 
1. Dustox only stops effects done to itself other than damage, so you can still discard for added damage.
2. You must discard the fire energy if you have it. If you do, do the extra damage.
 
Last edited:
Well lets say I'm using Alakazam and I want to miirror the attack for 50 but do not have a Fir Energy to discard , can I still do the original 50 and just by pass dicarding the Fire for the extra damage
 
Last edited:
Except that Alakazam's Psymimic Pokepower says Once during your turn instead of Alakazam'a normal attack you may choose 1 of your opponents's Pokemon's attacks. Alakazam copies that attack including the energy costs(in this case being 1 FIRE and 2 Colorless)and anything else required in order to use that attack,such as DISCARDING energy cards.(No Matter what type that pokemon is Alakazam's type is still Psychic) This Power can't be used if Alakazam is affected by a Special condition

And Clefable's Metronome states Choose 1 of the defending Pokemon's attacks. Metronome copies that attack EXCEPT for it's energy costs and anything else required in order to use that attack SUCH AS DISCARDING ENERGY(No matter what type the Defending Pokemon is Clefable type is still colorless)

So the case could be made that (JUNGLE) Clefable could use Fire Stream but (EXPEDITION) Alakazam could not
 
Last edited:
Yeah, but the discard is not prefaced with "in order to use this attack" so Clefable would have to discard any fire or Rainbow energy attached to it. Of course, if it didn't have any, it could still do the attack for 50.
 
so are you saying that the Zam could use the attack without the fire and without discarding the energy
 
Reply

Correct. As long as he meets the energy cost he has completed that requirement and as far as the Fire discard Ken thats what I was trying to explain to you. Those 3 or 4 little words written after discard a Fire Energy is where I think you were having the problem withe the ruling I made, remember it does say If you do, which is giving the player a option, it doesn't have to be done in order to complete the attack, sorry.
 
BLiZzArD said:
so are you saying that the Zam could use the attack without the fire and without discarding the energy
Click to expand...

No, I was only discussing Metronome because you were correct about Psymimic.

Let's look at 'Zam's Psymimic:


Once during your turn, instead of Alakazam's normal attack, you may choose 1 of your Opponent's Pokemon's attacks. Alakazam copies that attack including its energy costs and anything else required in order to use that attack, such as discarding energy cards...

Bolding mine.

So, the bottom line is that Alakazam needs to have a Fire energy (or Rainbow, Multi, etc) attached to do the attack and must discard a fire energy.

Note that Blaziken's attack does not say 'may'. Unless it says 'may', there is no choice to be made. If you are doing the attack and have a fire energy attached, you must discard it. Period.
So why mention what to do if there is no fire discarded?
Because of things like Metronome, that's why.

If it doesn't say 'may', you have to do everything that the attack tells you to do that you can.

If it says 'or this attack does nothing', you'd better be able to do it or don't waste your attack on it.
 
Last edited:
Lugias_Realm said:
remember it does say If you do, which is giving the player a option, it doesn't have to be done in order to complete the attack, sorry.
Click to expand...

Sorry. Not correct.
If it says 'may', you get a choice.

The 'if you do' only applies to situations like Metronome where you did the attack without all the requirements being met.
 
Alakazam requires you to pay the attack cost, so you will have to have fire energy attached, and therefore discard one in order to use the attack.
 
Alakazam can do the attack if he has a Fire energy attached and discards it.
Does that make you right? I'm not sure from your post.
 
Easier Way

I think that in the future, it would be a lot easier if the answer's pertained to the card in question and not to every card and there mother who fits in to somewhat of the same scenario. Would really help if we could have the answers to the cards in question. I know that with previous rulings already in place it makes it easy to refer to other cards but the problem here is that in almost every case here with NEW cards we are also dealing with card different wording or text or depending on how you interpet it mis-leading text.
 
I don't understand. Are you talking about the Blaziken attack by itself?
Yoshi answered that question correctly back in the first response. The :fire: has to be discarded. No choice. The question then evolved into what scenarios could exist when a :fire: would not be discarded. It seems a logical digression.
 
Re[;y

Your missing the point. All Blizzard & myself wanted to know was about Alakazam trying to use the attack, plain and simple. All the other comments and comparisons didn't help they only made things more confusing. If the question was answered correctly within the 1st post I'd of never known it after reading everything else that was then typed after.
"Lugias_Realm"
Well lets say I'm using Alakazam and I want to miirror the attack for 50 but do not have a Fire Energy to discard , can I still do the original 50 and just by pass dicarding the Fire for the extra damage?

"yoshi1001"
Yep. That's how it works. If you were to metronome it, it would be the same case.

Look at his answer to what I typed! Yep, That's how it works. That gives me the impression that Alakazam could have used this attack without the Fire Energy because I specifically stated 50 damage without discarding Fire and he types "Yep. That's how it works."

If you'll notice even Blizzard in 2 separate comments keeps asking if it does or doesn't work. I guess what I'm saying is can we try as much as possible to just keep the comments in general to the card be asked about.
 
Last edited:
OK, then the answer's simple. Alakazam can't use the attack unless it has a :fire: Energy attached, because Alakazam has to pay attack costs and the attack costs :fire: :colorless :colorless. If you have a :fire: Energy attached, you must discard it.
 
Last edited:
Reply

dkates- We know the ruling now and I think you have missed the point. Leave all the added comparisons and and what if's out of the answers. In order to give the proper rulings or just answer a players question at league it would be much easier to come here and be able to get answers or rulings for JUST THE CARD IN QUESTION
 
Lugias_Realm said:
dkates- We know the ruling now and I think you have missed the point. Leave all the added comparisons and and what if's out of the answers. In order to give the proper rulings or just answer a players question at league it would be much easier to come here and be able to get answers or rulings for JUST THE CARD IN QUESTION
Click to expand...

Lugia: Sure. Absolutely right. It would be best to just answer your question about Alakazam and leave it at that.
.
.
.
.
...if that were what you asked about in the first place!
Look, I don't want to seem peevish here, but look at your first post.
There is nothing in that first post or question about Alakazam using the attack.
How are we to answer that question in the first response if it wasn't asked until the 3rd post in the thread?
Yoshi's answer at that point was wrong. I was referring to his answer to your original question as being correct.

I can't be specific if you're not clear on what you are asking.

Are we clear on the answers now or should we start over?
I don't want to get into a long argument about answering many questions in one thread when you yourself asked for at least three different ruling questions in this thread yourself!

I'm going to lock this now as it can only get more confused.

If you need any question revisited for clarity, or if you want to argue whether a ruling is right or wrong, please post that specific situation in a new topic and we can take it up there.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top