Oak´s Visit and 0 cards in deck

[Rainbowgym]

It is correct anyway: "then" means "in that case", "as a consequence", "in those circumstances". It implies something that can happen only after another given thing.

By the way, I agree with you that "if you do" would clear any possible doubts.

No it should say, "after you did" . If you do sounds to me it's not needed, and what if you can't?????

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

That's not a matter of requirements. It's just a matter of what comes first and what comes next. Some Trainer/Supporter cards like Island Hermit have "coordinated" effects: the result of one effect does not exclude the other one.

Someother, like Professor Oak's Visit and Team Galactic's Mars, have "subordinated" effects, united by the magic word "then": the second part of the card, the one after the "then", is directly dipendent to the result of the first part. So if you can't do the first part, you can't do the second one.

Oke, what about Bill's Maintenance? Looks to me as a "coordinated" effect. It doesn't say on the card it fails when you cannot shuffle 1 card back.

 

[Magic_Umbreon]

Once again, you do the first part, THEN you do the second part only if the first part has occured. No different to Oak's Visit or Mars.

1st part: If you have any cards in your hand, shuffle one into your deck.
2nd part: Draw 3 cards.

1st you do what part 1 says and THEN you draw 3 only if part 1 has occured. In this case, part 1 always occurs because you only need to shuffle back if you have a card, as it says. Part 1 still occurs with an empty hand, you simply don't have to shuffle because the card instructs you not to. Part 1 has still occured.

The "then" term is more to end the conditional. Here, you only have to shuffle back if you have a card as it says. The "then" shows the end of that conditional meaning the next part can be done whatever (not subject to teh first condition of needing a hand).

 

[supertyranitar]

The rules are you cannot use something to no effect. Since you are putting a card on the bottom, I think the move is legal

Right, it also doesn't say anything otherwise. It doesn't have the text saying: "If you can't draw three cards, this card does nothing". IMO, I think this would be kind of like the Claydol ruling, in the sense that you can still put up to two cards on the bottom, without drawing should you have more cards in hand.

 

[Nemes]

No it should say, "after you did" . If you do sounds to me it's not needed, and what if you can't?

"If you do" sounds like a thing that happens only "if you do" the previous part. It's crystal clear to me! If you can do the first part but not the second, there's no problem. If you can potentially do the second but not the first, the card/effect/etc. cannot be used. Why? Because it is written on the card, by the "then" word, that the second part is a consequence to what comes before. It's like a chain of events.

Oke, what about Bill's Maintenance? Looks to me as a "coordinated" effect. It doesn't say on the card it fails when you cannot shuffle 1 card back.

"Looks to me", "sounds to me"; these are (wrong) subjective statements which are not needed, because the rule to follow is "printed" on the card: it's not "coordinated" because there's the "then", which implies a consequence.

Back to back posts merged. The following information has been added:

The "then" term is more to end the conditional. Here, you only have to shuffle back if you have a card as it says. The "then" shows the end of that conditional meaning the next part can be done whatever (not subject to teh first condition of needing a hand).

I am not sure if I understood correctly.

Bill's Mainteance says that if you can't shuffle a card into your deck, you can't draw 3 cards. So the "draw 3 cards" IS subject to the condition of needing a hand.

 

[Magic_Umbreon]

Right, it also doesn't say anything otherwise. It doesn't have the text saying: "If you can't draw three cards, this card does nothing". IMO, I think this would be kind of like the Claydol ruling, in the sense that you can still put up to two cards on the bottom, without drawing should you have more cards in hand.

Yes it does!

It's not phrased exactly like that but if you read my and SpyRevenge's posts, we've expressed it quite clearly.

 

[Nemes]

Right, it also doesn't say anything otherwise. It doesn't have the text saying: "If you can't draw three cards, this card does nothing". IMO, I think this would be kind of like the Claydol ruling, in the sense that you can still put up to two cards on the bottom, without drawing should you have more cards in hand.

Please read all the posts. What I'm trying to say is that IT IS written on the card with the "then" word. (I did not understand the Claydol thing.)

Official help please!!! They're too many for us!!!!

 

[BJJ763]

"Then" means something has previously occurred.

If that previous something has not occurred, there is no "Then" part to do.

 

[Magic_Umbreon]

I am not sure if I understood correctly.

Bill's Mainteance says that if you can't shuffle a card into your deck, you can't draw 3 cards. So the "draw 3 cards" IS subject to the condition of needing a hand.

Bill's Maintenance says:

If you have any cards in your hand, shuffle 1 of them into your deck, then draw 3 cards.

Sorry I was completly wrong, I hadn't seen the ruling you can't draw on an empty hand. But the text itself doesn't say anything either way.

I interpreted it as:

IF (cards in hand > 0)
.....Shuffle 1 of them into your deck
THEN
Draw 3 cards

Whereas I can now see the actual ruling is:

IF (cards in hand > 0)
.....Shuffle 1 of them into your deck
.....THEN
.....Draw 3 cards

The text itself can be interpreted either way, just that it's been ruled one is right and one is wrong.

I mean the bits after the dotted lines are what happens when the condition is met (of having cards in hand).

So the use of "then" still applies, doing one thing only if the first thing has happened. Just that here the "do this then do that" only happens if you have cards in your hand.

I don't see how reading Bill's Maintenance text says you can't play it on an empty hand, it's where you interpret the "if" bit to end.

 

[Nemes]

You OWNd me anyway because you gave a far more brilliant explanation than mine :O

 

[PokePop]

Official help please!!! They're too many for us!!!!

There's been a ruling. That's the "official help"

 

[Rainbowgym]

While for most English speaking natives it seems clear what is meant, it isn't for foreigner trying to read/translate the cards.


Anyway I found THIS ruling and am confused.

Pokepop please explain why you can discard with this power, even when it has no effect, while you cannot with Delcatty.

 

[Nevermore]

I'm not PokePop, but I can still explain it.

Lunatone's Power has two parts - Lunatone allows you to discard a card from your hand. Then, if you discarded a card, you draw one if you have Solrock in play.

The difference here is that Lunatone's power by itself allows you to discard a card. That's it, simple. The second part is optional, as it requires a special condition to be met. Cards like POV, however, have a second part of their effect that is mandatory - You don't do it under the condition that something else happened/is present, you do it in order to completely resolve the effect.

In layman's terms: Lunatone's power discards a card and is done. The second part is a BONUS. POV's second part is a REQUIREMENT.

 

[Magic_Umbreon]

How is the second part optional?

Once during your turn (before your attack), you may discard a card from your hand. Then, if you have Solrock in play, draw a card. This power can't be used if Lunatone is affected by a Special Condition.

Part1: You may discard a card from your hand.
THEN
Part2: If you have Solrock in play, draw a card.

It says "draw a card" not "you may draw a card". If you use the poké-power with a Solrock in play, you have to do as much as you can. Much like the drawing part of Oak's Visit is compulsory.

However, with a Solrock in play you can't just use the poké-power and draw without discarding, even if your hand is 0. That works like the returning a card part POV.

To say you can't discard (the first part) unless you can draw (the second part) is like saying you can't play Team Galactic's Mars to draw unless your opponent has cards in their hand. Which makes no sense.

Remember the "THEN" works one way but not the other. You can't do part 2 unless you can do Part 1 but that doesn't mean you have to be able to do part 2 to do part 1.

---------------------------

If I'm right about that, then you could play Bill's Maintenance on an empty deck, as long as you have a card to shuffle back. Which is strange because that wouldn't actually accomplish anything apart from reducing your hand size by 1 (bill's m itself) but with the deck being not public knowledge it means once you put the card in your empty deck, it's unknown what you'll draw.

---------------------------

By the way, I have something else to say about all this. With POV saying "then", it means you only do the second part if you've done the first part of drawing. OK, now this sounds really crazy but even without a deck, you've still drawn 3 cards. Ha ha Seriously, if you play it and draw 2 does that mean you don't have to shuffle back? No of course not, so why not for 0? Zero and two are both less than what the card tells you to draw. Drawing 0 is not drawing three and drawing 2 is not drawing three, so how does one satisfy the "then" meaning you have to shuffle while the other doesn't? Surely whatever occurs for when you only draw 2 occurs when you only draw 0? I don't get why its considered a failure when your deck is zero but a success when you have 1 or 2. I've only heard the "do as much as possible" rule applied to cards as a whole, not individual effects within a card as here.

 

[SPARTA]

Its optional because you don't have to do it if you don't have a Solrock in play, whereas you cannot use a card like Bills Maintenance if you have the requirements (a card in your hand).

 

[Magic_Umbreon]

Its optional because you don't have to do it if you don't have a Solrock in play, whereas you cannot use a card like Bills Maintenance if you have the requirements (a card in your hand).

the draw or the power?

I don't get the use of "don't have to" in anyone's posts concerning Lunatone. The only thing you have choice on is whether you use the power itself, and if you do, you HAVE to do what it says, which is discard and draw OR just discard depending on whether you have Solrock out or not. There's no option or "don't have to".

EDIT: Thanks to SPARTA and Nevermore's posts , it's clear now.
VV

 

[SPARTA]

the draw or the power?

I don't get the use of "don't have to" in anyone's posts concerning Lunatone. The only thing you have choice on is whether you use the power itself, and if you do, you HAVE to do what it says, which is discard and draw OR just discard depending on whether you have Solrock out or not. There's no option or "don't have to".

The draw is optional because if you don't want to do it, you don't have to play the Solrock.

 

[Nevermore]

Simple: it's optional because nobody forces you to have a Solrock in play when using the power. Or, to make it even more simple: You can activate Lunatone's power without having a Solrock in play.

I guess you can say you activate "half" of Lunatone's power. Lunatone/Solrock is a one-way effect, because while B only activates when A was done, you can always activate A without B (simply by not having Solrock in play). You cannot activate "half" of POV, because they're a two-way-effect. POV has A and B intertwined, you cannot do A without B (or B without A for that matter).

There IS an option, indirectly. It's "Do I play Solrock before or after I activate Lunatone's Power?".

 

[ZAKtheGeek]

Hmmm, actually, I don't get why you can't use Energy Draw with no deck... Discard, THEN draw, so why doesn't "do as much as you can" apply?

 

[Rainbowgym]

Hmmm, actually, I don't get why you can't use Energy Draw with no deck... Discard, THEN draw, so why doesn't "do as much as you can" apply?

Exactly my point, you are not allowed to use Energy draw (Delcatty) when you have no deck, while you can use the Lunatone power even if you know there is no Solrock --> so you cannot draw a card.

If you can activate Lunatone, you should also be allowed to activate Delcatty Energy Draw.

 

[SPARTA]

Lunatone says "if you have solrock", thus acknowledging you can use the power without Solrock.