Level Up a LV. X

[pokemonforever]

Rather than just the limit, we COULD take the integral from 0 to infinity of Lv. X dX

Could you even take the integral at 0? We know there is no Lv. 0 in Pokemon, since the levels of all Pokemon consists of the set of all positive natural numbers {1, 2, 3, ... 100}. When considering a Lv. X to a Lv. X, would that also be considered a double integral or the integral from 1 to inf. of Lv X ^ (Lv. X)?

 

[Flareon]

The worst part of this whole thing is that I KNOW Ditto's dead wrong, but he explains it with such logic that I agree with him.

I'm gonna fall over if he's an English major.

Even though I think Ditto did argue well, props have to be given to Poke Pop as well for proving that it was not "blatantly obvious" on the card that this is allowed and that the card is "telling him" he can do this is an overstatement. I would maintain, however, that the card is slightly ambiguous, but I'm pretty sure the arguments against allowing Lv. X to Level Up again are much stronger than the arguments for it.

Not that this dismisses the grounds for having the debate, but I'm pretty sure it would almost always be a misplay to Level Up your Lv. X in the EXTREMELY slight chance that the opportunity would ever present itself.

 

[NoPoke]

Level X's are Pokemon cards with specific game mechanics. There are instructions written on the card to explain the new mechanic. There is also much that is not written on the cards too.

The instructions on the cards should not be read in isolation.

 

[Chairman Kaga]

So for PUI, or PCL or whoever to just come out with a rule that says you can't "just because I said so", is completely ridiculous.

So by that logic, I can disregard the rulebook. After all, they "just say so" about how to play in there. Who knew postmodern relativism would find its way into Pokemon?

Come on. They made a ruling. It is, by all reasonable standards, official. Rational thought made its exit from this thread long ago (despite what you algebra pros claim).

 

[charmander rox]

Okay, X is a scientific constant, just like k. X will always equal infinity. It's that simple. Variables are always expressed in lowercase letters, like x. This one is not. It's not a variable.

 

[Ditto]

Level X's are Pokemon cards with specific game mechanics. There are instructions written on the card to explain the new mechanic. There is also much that is not written on the cards too.

The instructions on the cards should not be read in isolation.

It's not so much that the card is being read in isolation to the rules surrounding LV. X's, since again, AFAIK, there is no rule that says you can't Level Up a Pokémon twice, it's that 'Pop has now pointed out that the intent of the LV. X mechanics themselves does actually have a direct rule that guides it.

If X is a variable then there is no game mechanic that should prevent Leveling Up from happening more than once. However, if X is some unknown constant, then I can agree with the "No Game Effect" taking place, thus preventing the double Leveling Up.

While I don't agree that a Pokémon should just be able to "jump" from LV. 5 to LV. 100, nor do I necessarily think that was PCL's intent, but if it is I can see how Leveling Up twice would not be allowed.

I still don't see how you can be any more sure than I am that it's a constant vs. a variable without talking to PCL though.

 

[NoPoke]

I don't view the X in Lv X as a number a constant or a variable. The "Lv X" ink could have no significance other than to identify the card: to distinquish these cards from other similar cards that aren't subject to the Lv X restrictions..

 

[Ditto]

I don't view the X in Lv X as a number a constant or a variable. The "Lv X" ink could have no significance other than to identify the card: to distinquish these cards from other similar cards that aren't subject to the Lv X restrictions..

It IS the level of the Pokémon though, and levels are numbers. You can't Level Up to LV. GOD, or some other non-number phrase. (Hey, that was funny though.)

 

[NoPoke]

Ditto there has been no statement from anywhere that says that when a pokemon is Leveled Up in the tcg that the number associated with the already in play pokemon increases.

I think you can rightly be accused of reading too much into the Level numbers. It would be equally fair to say that I am probably reading too litltle into the ink marks besides the Lv ciphers. They do look like numbers and that was a perfectly fair working hypothesis until the Lv X came along.

I wish they had been called LV N rather than X *evil grin*. N (or a squigly version of it) being used for the transfinite numbers. Now that really would generate some tortuous arguments. Or perhaps i the imaginary number sqrt(-1) forsome sideways arguments.

 

[ShadowTogetic]

Could you even take the integral at 0? We know there is no Lv. 0 in Pokemon, since the levels of all Pokemon consists of the set of all positive natural numbers {1, 2, 3, ... 100}. When considering a Lv. X to a Lv. X, would that also be considered a double integral or the integral from 1 to inf. of Lv X ^ (Lv. X)?

the integral of zero is any constant

 

[Luxatos]

I'm pretty sure this boils down to what the rules don't explicitly say. While the rules don't say a leveled-up Pokemon has the same name (except for deck construction purposes) the text printed on any of them that have self-referencing text in attacks and powers doesn't include the "Lv.X" as part of the name. Thus is the precedent for considering it as having the same name in play as its previous form.

Then, the text on the card regarding how to use it (since, oddly, I can find nothing on specifically HOW to level up a Pokemon in the rulebook) says "Put this card onto your Active [Pokemon name]. [Pokemon name] Lv.X can use any attack, Poke-Power, or Poke-Body from its previous Level." Now it seems to say its name includes the Lv.X part.

So we have this card (let's say Torterra Lv.X), in play, referencing itself as Torterra in its attacks and Power, but in the Lv.X rule on the card, as Torterra Lv.X. So it's confusing whether or not you consider it Torterra when looking at the text "Put this card onto your Active Torterra." And THAT is what this whole argument boils down to. Not algebra, not "what does X mean," but reconciling that this card says it is called two different things, and it APPEARS to favor the view that "this card is called Torterra when in play" because of all the times that it says "Torterra" instead of "Torterra Lv.X."

Let's look at the Japanese card though. In Japan, all those instances of "Torterra" actually are translated "this Pokemon," aren't they? So that argument gets shot down.

 

[DarthPika]

Ditto, youre mistake is aplying algebra to pkmn cards.

X isn't suposed to be a variable, it's the higest posible leval that you can leveal up into. For all I care it could be 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to the 100,000,000,000,000 power. It dosn't mater what the leval is, all that maters is that it's the HIGEST posible leval, and you can't add to it.

Adding X + X would = 2x. There is no lv. 2x, if there was THEN you could lv. up a lv. x, but there isn't.

 

[stalkerex]

Well you cant have 4 _____ and 4 ____ Lvx BECAUSE!!!!!! Well the lv isnt part of the cards name. All the cards have a level. Its like delta pokemon. They had the delta symbal, but wasn't part of the name. Same goes for lv45, lv23, and lv.X. Also Lv.x cards are so powerful and making them part of the 4 per deck means people who run them will have to have an in depth stratagy and thats why most decks that run them run 1, like infernape decks...

Now another good ruling made by JAPAN, is that you cant level up a level x into another. That would be odd because think of the X as an Infinate (SP?) number. Leveling up is like transending your pokemon to its greatest power. Now if you have already done that, wouldnt it be weird to do that again?


If you wanna keep leveling up and playing then try the DBZ CCG...

 

[DarthPika]

That's exactly my point. Let's say you rate somthing and give it a 10/10, and then shortly after give it another rateing of 11/10. See somthing wrong there? The problem is there is no 11/10, 10 is the higest posible rateing and you can't go above it. It's the same with lv.x.

 

[NoPoke]

I agree 110% with DarthPika

 

[Ditto]

Ditto there has been no statement from anywhere that says that when a pokemon is Leveled Up in the tcg that the number associated with the already in play pokemon increases.

I think you can rightly be accused of reading too much into the Level numbers. It would be equally fair to say that I am probably reading too litltle into the ink marks besides the Lv ciphers. They do look like numbers and that was a perfectly fair working hypothesis until the Lv X came along.

I wish they had been called LV N rather than X *evil grin*. N (or a squigly version of it) being used for the transfinite numbers. Now that really would generate some tortuous arguments. Or perhaps i the imaginary number sqrt(-1) forsome sideways arguments.

Yeah there is. The fact that it's Leveling UP and not Leveling DOWN.

Again, when has your Pokémon ever gained experience points and grown to LV. GOD? It hasn't, cause levels are numbers, they always have been.

I'm pretty sure this boils down to what the rules don't explicitly say. While the rules don't say a leveled-up Pokemon has the same name (except for deck construction purposes) the text printed on any of them that have self-referencing text in attacks and powers doesn't include the "Lv.X" as part of the name. Thus is the precedent for considering it as having the same name in play as its previous form.

Then, the text on the card regarding how to use it (since, oddly, I can find nothing on specifically HOW to level up a Pokemon in the rulebook) says "Put this card onto your Active [Pokemon name]. [Pokemon name] Lv.X can use any attack, Poke-Power, or Poke-Body from its previous Level." Now it seems to say its name includes the Lv.X part.

So we have this card (let's say Torterra Lv.X), in play, referencing itself as Torterra in its attacks and Power, but in the Lv.X rule on the card, as Torterra Lv.X. So it's confusing whether or not you consider it Torterra when looking at the text "Put this card onto your Active Torterra." And THAT is what this whole argument boils down to. Not algebra, not "what does X mean," but reconciling that this card says it is called two different things, and it APPEARS to favor the view that "this card is called Torterra when in play" because of all the times that it says "Torterra" instead of "Torterra Lv.X."

Let's look at the Japanese card though. In Japan, all those instances of "Torterra" actually are translated "this Pokemon," aren't they? So that argument gets shot down.

At first it seems like it would just boil down to that, as I have said before, however, if the mechanic of X is to be some high number constant, then the "No Game Effect" principle can be called upon.

So what we've found, through the discussion about the mechanics of X, is that the semantics really DO matter as far as what X is supposed to be.

Personally, it makes more sense to be a variable, for a number of reasons.

1. Pokémon grow one level at a time, they don't jump to some random level.
2. If they wanted it to be some high level constant, then why not just use the actual number? There's no reason not to.
3. There is no "ultimate" form in Pokémon, so why are they trying to make one up to fit this scenario?

However, if Japan says that it's supposed to be a constant, well then that's how they made it. Not checking though, when the variable argument has more complete logic associated with it, seems irresponsible.

Ditto, you're mistake is applying algebra to pkmn cards.

X isn't supposed to be a variable, it's the highest possible level that you can level up into. For all I care it could be 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 to the 100,000,000,000,000 power. It doesn't mater what the level is, all that matters is that it's the HIGHEST possible level, and you can't add to it.

Adding X + X would = 2x. There is no lv. 2x, if there was THEN you could lv. up a lv. x, but there isn't.

You're messing up the math. It's not algebra, it's recursion. X = (previous level) + 1. I've already talked about that numerous times in my previous posts.

Again, there is no "ultimate" form in Pokémon. Why are we trying to say there is?

Well you cant have 4 _____ and 4 ____ Lvx BECAUSE!!!!!! Well the lv isnt part of the cards name. All the cards have a level. Its like delta pokemon. They had the delta symbal, but wasn't part of the name. Same goes for lv45, lv23, and lv.X. Also Lv.x cards are so powerful and making them part of the 4 per deck means people who run them will have to have an in depth stratagy and thats why most decks that run them run 1, like infernape decks...

Now another good ruling made by JAPAN, is that you cant level up a level x into another. That would be odd because think of the X as an Infinate (SP?) number. Leveling up is like transending your pokemon to its greatest power. Now if you have already done that, wouldnt it be weird to do that again?


If you wanna keep leveling up and playing then try the DBZ CCG...

And again, there is no "ultimate" form of a Pokémon. As you've said, this isn't DBZ.

That's exactly my point. Let's say you rate somthing and give it a 10/10, and then shortly after give it another rateing of 11/10. See somthing wrong there? The problem is there is no 11/10, 10 is the higest posible rateing and you can't go above it. It's the same with lv.x.

But how do you know that X = 10 when what it started at was 3? Pokémon don't just randomly change level at will. They sequentially increase in level by 1 as they gain enough experience to do so. It's not a rating system where they're just assigned random values.

 

[DarthPika]

Look when they made the lv.x they made it the HIGEST POSIBLE LEVAL FOR THE GIVEN POKEMON. How can you go higer than the higest? You can't.

 

[Lawman]

Ditto: You keep going back to the video games to say leveling is a number higher than before. Remember, the TCG has some different mechanics than the video game and vice versa. Do not equate them the same.

Keith

PS I've never run into Imakuni at a tourney hall :biggrin:

 

[Ditto]

Look when they made the lv.x they made it the HIGEST POSIBLE LEVAL FOR THE GIVEN POKEMON. How can you go higer than the higest? You can't.

How do you KNOW that? And what sense does that make? Why would they break the rules they already have in place just because? It doesn't make logical sense for it to be that way, and since no one has actually asked them, we really can't know.

 

[taurik]

Here's a few questions, which may or may not shed light on the subject:

1. In the TCG, there are different versions of the same pokemon, i.e. different versions of Pikachu. Do they all have the same level?
2. When a pokemon evolves to the next stage in the TCG, i.e. Pikachu to Raichu, does Raichu always have the same level?

If not, it would imply to me that evolving (in the TCG) doesn't necessarily go one level at a time, and can be any number of levels difference. By that logic, wouldn't it make sense that "leveling up" in the TCG doesn't mean increasing by just one level, but it could be some unknown quantity of levels?