According to the rulings on such cards as Rare Candy and Wally's Training, babies evolve into their respective next form while non-baby basics are evolved from.
Why the big difference? Try to explain to a little kid that Pikachu doesn't evolve from Pichu, but Pichu does evolve into Pikachu.
Sure, as an adult, I can see a SLIGHT difference on how babies evolve. Plus, I suppose a Rare Candy that lets Cleffa evolve directly into Clefable would be "broken" in unlimited (but unlimited is broken anyway).
So, are any of my fellow "older" players having a problem explaining this difference in evolution semantics to the younger players? Personally, I wish there WAS NO difference, and cards like Rare Candy and Wally's Training could work on babies. It would SURE make my job easier as a judge. JMO.
Why the big difference? Try to explain to a little kid that Pikachu doesn't evolve from Pichu, but Pichu does evolve into Pikachu.
Sure, as an adult, I can see a SLIGHT difference on how babies evolve. Plus, I suppose a Rare Candy that lets Cleffa evolve directly into Clefable would be "broken" in unlimited (but unlimited is broken anyway).
So, are any of my fellow "older" players having a problem explaining this difference in evolution semantics to the younger players? Personally, I wish there WAS NO difference, and cards like Rare Candy and Wally's Training could work on babies. It would SURE make my job easier as a judge. JMO.