soslowpoke
New Member
I also believe the general rule on errata was that it was only to be issued if the card was printed to be unplayable (like Blaine's Charizards Fighting energy or the no damage indication on Rockets Minefield)
How long does it take the MTs to answer a rulings question?
- Thread starter ukpokemonpro
- Start date
- Status
If you think back to the early days of WotC rulings, you will remember that MTM and DMTM used to say that there would be NO errata for Pokemon. That statement was based on the fact that having to track and explain errata, which change something printed (or not printed) on a card, adds a level of complexity to the game.
That was a good goal, but we all know what happened as the printing errors contiunued. We finally had an error that made a card essentially unplayable as it was printed. It was corrected by issuing an errata and the door was opened. Even so, the original intent to keep the game rulings as simple as possible, where errata were concerned, was always a focus. Many errata were suggested by players, but the response was always the same, "unless the error makes the card unplayable or changes the intent significantly, an errata will not be issued."
I think that should still be the case. We all know that there will be many rules needed to clarify the way cards work. Why add more confusion by having errata that change something clearly printed on the card. I say PUI should still apply the same test - unless the error makes the card unplayable or changes the intent significantly, errata will not be issued. In the case of Marill, that has no retreat vs a retreat of 1, I just don't think it is significant enough to issue an errata.
BDS
That was a good goal, but we all know what happened as the printing errors contiunued. We finally had an error that made a card essentially unplayable as it was printed. It was corrected by issuing an errata and the door was opened. Even so, the original intent to keep the game rulings as simple as possible, where errata were concerned, was always a focus. Many errata were suggested by players, but the response was always the same, "unless the error makes the card unplayable or changes the intent significantly, an errata will not be issued."
I think that should still be the case. We all know that there will be many rules needed to clarify the way cards work. Why add more confusion by having errata that change something clearly printed on the card. I say PUI should still apply the same test - unless the error makes the card unplayable or changes the intent significantly, errata will not be issued. In the case of Marill, that has no retreat vs a retreat of 1, I just don't think it is significant enough to issue an errata.
BDS
ukpokemonpro
New Member
I can only think we have all lost it what we are talking about is a card that is only available in limited numbers and I think you will find where that was the case with for example promos 1-20 they were banned from tourney play.. laughable really as 1-20 were the only promos we had no problem finding .. but here you have a card that only one country has access to and you are not calling for it to be banned in OP?
I refer you back to the original proposal that it is either issued with errata or banned ..
Easy really!
Play as written has always been the rule of thumb and is easiest for the game in that it will keep it simpler for any new people coming in.Keeping errata to a minimum is key.
With that said,`Pro,just in case you didn`t know you get 3 free retreat marills in the Oasis Sandstorm Theme deck if you can get your hands on them.
`Sensei
With that said,`Pro,just in case you didn`t know you get 3 free retreat marills in the Oasis Sandstorm Theme deck if you can get your hands on them.
`Sensei
ukpokemonpro
New Member
Just in case you didn't know sensei we do kinda know what we are talking about here ... as NoPoke says not in our sets....
Of course, I don't play the game or anything, but is this one tiny difference between the cards enough to make this big of a fuss over? Again, I don't play the game, so I don't know much about the retreat cost or what not, but is this particular Marill card sooooo much better than other Marill cards that you just *want* to play it... except that it's not good with the retreat cost? Basically, what I'm wondering, is if the error was never made if the Marill card would just be a regular common card that no one would have ever really noticed...
soslowpoke
New Member
I didn't know Marill was such a ground-breaking good card that would cause this much concern!
UncleBob said:
Bob: You're exactly right. It's not a big enough difference to make a fuss over.
One reason it is being made a fuss over, I would guess, is that it is one more example of "Europe didn't get something the US got... again".
There is such a thing as deciding when to pick one's battles.
ukpokemonpro
New Member
It could potentially lead to an advantage in a game and certainly WotC set a precedent with some of the promo's that were not widely available (1-20) by banning them from tournament play.
This card is in fact almost impossible to get in Europe without grey importing from the US something we would like to get away from given that we want to work with our distributors on OP.
It could affect the outcome of a game and certainly if we ever get worlds having a card available in only one country and not any others is not good.
It saddens me that constantly we are referred to as moan about Europe doesn't get this and the US does
What we have here is a possible unfair advantage to one player over another caused by a misprint that is not widely available and yet those who would style themselves as guardians and rule makers are arguing over what to me is a no brainer!
It is not available world wide and therefore should be banned from tourney play! But then again if your American and you want an unfair advantage to help you win I guess you will see no need for the ban ....
I am not saying Marill is a groundbreaking card but if you were to play it and you had access to them would not everyone play no-retreat over the one with retreat cost?
Now again given that it is only available in the US anyone who wants fairplay must agree that a ban is needed?
Last edited:
)v(ajin_ipg21
New Member
This is a TCG: T for... althought MANY of us end up B... anyway.
4 Simplicity's sake it is about US 1 and The rest of the World 0.
And PUI has only begun... damn if they do *not enough*, damn if they don't *do enough*.
4 Simplicity's sake it is about US 1 and The rest of the World 0.
And PUI has only begun... damn if they do *not enough*, damn if they don't *do enough*.
NoPoke
Active Member
The majority of my players do not have access to american product to trade with. If there was no competative advantage to the misprint then I would not be bothered by Marill. But there is and no amount of complaing about avoiding errata and trading will change the fact that one card is very obviously superior and equally obviously unavailable to the wider market.
It seem like many are demanding that they retain a competative advantage and are unwilling to see that this is unsporting conduct.
It seem like many are demanding that they retain a competative advantage and are unwilling to see that this is unsporting conduct.
Tego
New Member
But the only reason to play this Marill would be because you're playing an Azumarill deck. And who would want to play Azumarill? Well, I guess the Sandstorm Azumarill is okay in Tag Team battles.
But anyway, it's silly of me to go into gameplay specifics. What I think should be done is that all Marills should count as either the free retreat or one-retreat version, depending on which one they decide to be the correct version.
I think that rulings like Dark Vileplume's weakness (play either one as written) or Best Hitmonchan's HP (play either one as written!) are stupid. They should make an official statement on which card is the correct version on all cards that have two different near-identical versions.
But anyway, it's silly of me to go into gameplay specifics. What I think should be done is that all Marills should count as either the free retreat or one-retreat version, depending on which one they decide to be the correct version.
I think that rulings like Dark Vileplume's weakness (play either one as written) or Best Hitmonchan's HP (play either one as written!) are stupid. They should make an official statement on which card is the correct version on all cards that have two different near-identical versions.
NoPoke
Active Member
only reason???? This free retreat Maril is right up there as a first pick in draft.
And free retreat is VERY significant... just remember all the baby supported decks under Wotc. I'm not claiming that the free retreat Maril unballances the game to such an extent that it has an overwhelming tournament advantage. But that tournament advantage exists nonetheless.
And free retreat is VERY significant... just remember all the baby supported decks under Wotc. I'm not claiming that the free retreat Maril unballances the game to such an extent that it has an overwhelming tournament advantage. But that tournament advantage exists nonetheless.
Otaku
Active Member
Gee, why would anyone want to have the only natural free-retreating basic available?NoPoke said:
Aquapolis only has a 40 HP Hoppip that's free retreat is dependent upon its Poke-Body and a Grass Energy.
In Skyridge, there is an Abra that has a Poke-Body allowing it free retreat if it has a Psychic Energy attached.
Otherwise, there are a few evos. Now, add in the fact that the Marril in question has a 75% chance of Paralysis, and you see why it's an issue. Or maybe you don't: I am out of time, but here's the most obvious answers:
a)there is alway an advantage to ahving a free retreater to bring up after you active is KO'd: it gives you time to counter properly
and b)it makes it much easier to maintain a Primal Veil Lock against an opponent but get around it yourself.
soslowpoke
New Member
ukpokemonpro said:
But why weren't the black star promos banned? 1-20 were simply rotated out because they had their two year release- a bunch of those promos were rereleased in league- but how about the Year 3 promos that just never came? Did you ban those? And latter Battlezone promos- did you ban those? How about Pokemon center, Lucky Stadium, Ho-oh, and Rapidash: there's no Pokemon Center in the UK (yet), I never heard any fuss over those.
Kyogre/Groudon ex? Is that banned worldwide?
I don't like to sound mean but the more you press against this subject the more it looks like a US-1, rest of the world-0 type thing. You do it all the time and as much as I want to feel sorry for you all, you're still getting more than what you would get by keeping silent, and I think those that do make it happen for you would feel like all their efforts towards you are unappreciated and that they simply wasted their time trying to make things somewhat worthwhile for you.
Either way, all these complaints about the US getting and everywhere else not getting is probably the only thing in life thats makes me feel guilty living in the USA
- Status