my profile | search | faq | all boards index
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» Wizards.Com Boards   » Card Rulings and Strategies   » Card interpetation revisited

   
Author Topic: Card interpetation revisited
yoshi1001

Member # 825



posted November 15, 2002 10:31 AM      Profile for yoshi1001   Email yoshi1001    Edit/Delete Post Report This Thread to Moderators
I was rummaging through the Legendary Posts and looking at the topic on the new poison rule. It was kinda amusing in a way, what with everyone complaining about 'Gatr (that would be the Riptide one, remember [Wink] ), people were gearing up for the challenge series, and I was adamant that trainer denial babyporter would become a viable deck strategy. [Wink] Anyway, here was something I wrote addressing the issue of poison and Rocket's Snorlax:

quote:
1. Literal: Doesn't say any special conditions stop it, but that's called into question by 2.

2. Intent: Unclear. Originally powers in which status effects did not apply because either A: You had to be on the bench to use them (i.e., Dodrio) or B: you had to have a certain effect on it that would be removed by the other status effect, thereby turning it off anyway (Rocket's Snorlax), the "This power doesn't work" text was not included in order to save space. As a result, it is impossible to derive what the writers meant when they wrote the card.

3. Original Japanese: Interesting tidbit: Rocket's Snorlax was moved from the second gym set in Japan to the first one in the US. Unfortunately, the actual card text is basically the same as the english version.

4. Broken v. Non-Broken: Not an issue. Neither case is broken.

Yep. Althought offhand I would say that Rocket's Snorlax's power would not be stopped if it was asleep and Poisoned, there is enough doubt in my mind to classify it as a type 5 (chat) ruling.

The eventual ruling was that poison would not stop the power, by the way.

This is my old card interpetation method. Unfortunately the post in which I explained it in detail was deleted some time ago, but here's each of the areas, along with one I would add today:

1. Literal: What does the card say?

2. Intent: What does it seem like the card should do?

3. Original Japanese: What did the Japanese card say?

4. Broken v. Non-Broken: is either interpetion extremely unbalancing to the game?

5. Feasibility (new): Can this rule realisitcally be applied, or does it cause undue problems for players and judges?

Using these critera, you can evalulate a situation and come up with a ruling. For example, let's look at the Expedition Feraligator issue:

1. The card's power does not say may.

2. It appears the power should have been optional, as powers of this format generally are.

3. The Japanese card says may.

4. N/A

5. Playing the card as written will make things very hard for players and judges.

Now, obviously rulings are not made soley on a set list of criteria, but it certainately helps when you're trying to collect your thoughts.

Any thoughts? Additions? Changes?

--------------------
Visit Pokéwatch!

Listen to PIRN, the Pokémon Internet Radio Network. We have interviews with Master Trainer Mike, Kierin Chase, and more, as well as your favorite Pokémon music! PIRN: The number 1 Pokémon Internet Radio Station!

PIRN: The Magazine

PIRN Message Boards

GCAbGEbGF

AIM: yoshi1001

From: Janesville, Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2001  |  IP: Logged
Otaku

Member # 42359



posted November 15, 2002 02:25 PM      Profile for Otaku   Email Otaku    Edit/Delete Post Report This Thread to Moderators
I might replace number four with a more general "Improves/Hurts Game Balance." Why? Because sometimes the best counter for a "broken" card is another "broken" card, because you can't make every card broken by defnition (every card can't be played in every deck). Just a name change to clarify.

--------------------
Imakuni Rules!

You can reach me at Otakutron on AIM and nihon_game_otaku on Yahoo Messenger.

From: Iowa | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
yoshi1001

Member # 825



posted November 15, 2002 02:30 PM      Profile for yoshi1001   Email yoshi1001    Edit/Delete Post Report This Thread to Moderators
True, but rulings aren't really designed to balance gameplay (except in extreme cases). although if a rule does balance gameplay, I guess it could be considered non-broken.

--------------------
Visit Pokéwatch!

Listen to PIRN, the Pokémon Internet Radio Network. We have interviews with Master Trainer Mike, Kierin Chase, and more, as well as your favorite Pokémon music! PIRN: The number 1 Pokémon Internet Radio Station!

PIRN: The Magazine

PIRN Message Boards

GCAbGEbGF

AIM: yoshi1001

From: Janesville, Wisconsin | Registered: Feb 2001  |  IP: Logged


All times are Pacific Time  
   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic    next oldest topic   next newest topic
Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | www.Wizards.com | Privacy Statement



Powered by Infopop Corporation
Ultimate Bulletin BoardTM 6.2.0

ShopGamesBooksMagazinesStoresEventsCompanyWorldwideCommunity