Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Aipom Vs. The Zero Card Deck

TheDarkTwins said:
Ok this is a really bad discussion...

I will tell you why...

If aipom read that you must draw a card this whole thing would be valid... but it says you "may" draw one... there for no matter whether you choose to draw a card or not (even if you have no card , since if you have none you can choose not to draw) you can still put aipom on the bottom of your deck...
This is the silliest discussion ever...
IMO...
Drew
Click to expand...

This is the silliest interpretation of the attack I've ever seen. :tongue: IMO.

Let me direct you to my first post in this thread:

It says "Once during your turn...you may draw a card." The "may" is in there because you are not required to use the Power every turn. That wording is there for every Poke-Power with this kind of effect. Once during your turn, you MAY attatch a Grass Energy to your Active Pokemon...or you MAY remove two damage counters from one of your Pokemon...etc.
Click to expand...

The "may" is there because it is a Poke-Power, and must be "invoked," if you will. If the attack read:

"Once during your turn, before you attack, draw a card. Then put Aipom on the bottom of your deck."

That would mean you would have to do this every turn, regardless. Then it would be a Poke-Body, and a really bad one, at that. It says "may" because you can choose to do the Power, or you can choose not to do the Power. If you do not draw a card, you can't continue with the second part of the power.

You may draw a card. If you do not, you can put Aipom on the bottom of your deck. Pretty simple, and if anything, I'd think they would change the Mary ruling.
 
You draw the 4th card, can't draw the 5th, and stop using the Trainer.
Click to expand...
Following your logic, Pop, if you played a Professor Elm as the only card in your hand with less than 7 cards left in your deck, the card's effects would end after you couldn't draw 7 cards and you'd thus be able to play trainers for the rest of your turn.

Another example would be playing a TVR with a zero-card hand and a 2-card deck. You draw two, can't draw the third, the card's effects end, and you do not have to discard a card. This is following your ruling, which I don't think is correct. The way Pokemon has always been is that you draw as many cards as you can, then you finish up the effect(s) of the card.

I don't think Aipom will, or should, be eratta'd at all. Its simply a card that, if not prized, prevents you from decking. You can play it or not.
 
Moss Factor said:
Following your logic, Pop, if you played a Professor Elm as the only card in your hand with less than 7 cards left in your deck, the card's effects would end after you couldn't draw 7 cards and you'd thus be able to play trainers for the rest of your turn.

Another example would be playing a TVR with a zero-card hand and a 2-card deck. You draw two, can't draw the third, the card's effects end, and you do not have to discard a card. This is following your ruling, which I don't think is correct. The way Pokemon has always been is that you draw as many cards as you can, then you finish up the effect(s) of the card.

I don't think Aipom will, or should, be eratta'd at all. Its simply a card that, if not prized, prevents you from decking. You can play it or not.
Click to expand...
Nope, I don't see that Elm applies.
It's placing a cost for playing the Trainer. Sure, it's at the end, but it's not a "step" that you follow.
It's more of a precursor to the Supporter text that came along shortly after.

The TVR is a valid argument that I'll bring up in the rules team discussion.
 
You're not drawing those to keep, just to look at, before selecting one or rearranging them.
Different situation.

So far we have TVR and Mary as good counter examples.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top