Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Oak´s Visit and 0 cards in deck

Glumanda

Glumanda

Rulings Compendium Translator
Regarding this ruling question
http://pokegym.net/forums/showthread.php?t=63724,

I do not understand why you are not allowed to play this card when you have no cards left in your deck.
This card has two effects:
1. Draw 3 cards.
2. Put one card from your hand under your deck.
You cannot play a trainer card for no effect, but even if you have no deck, this card has an effect. Effect No. 1 will change nothing to the game state, but effect No. 2 will do: It brings your deck count from zero to one card which is a pretty strong effect.

There are other rulings in the compendium where you only need to be able to use parts of the effect in order to play the trainer card. E.g. Island Hermit has two effect as well:
1. Flip 1 or 2 face-down prizes.
2. Draw 2 cards.
Even if the first effect fails because all prizes are face up, you are still allowed to do the second one.

Same thing with Warp Point. You are not allowed to play it if both players have no bench pokemon. But as soon as one of them has, you can play it although half of the effect can not be played out.

And: The card you put under your deck is not a cost of Oak´s Visit (like on the Holon supporters).

So, I don´t understand this ruling given existing metarules and other rulings.
 
HornetsBasketballFan said:
Its because you Draw 3 before you put 1 card on the Bottom of the deck. If you cant draw 1, 2 , 0r 3 Cards, you Cant put one on the bottom of the deck.
Click to expand...

What happened with "do as best as you can".

Oak's visit has still an effect what is happening -> card on bottom of your deck.
As far as I see it, you cannot draw cards, but you can put 1 on the bottom -> card works. (so it's not burning a card).
When there are 1-2-3 cards in the deck you should draw them but with 0 cards in the deck you must do what you can.
 
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
 
Returning a card is considered a cost by the ruling. Holon Mentor's discard is a cost because if you can't discard you can't play it - it is required. The crucial word here is "then". If you look at the text:

Draw 3 cards. Then choose a card from your hand and put it on the bottom of your deck.
Click to expand...

So you only get to return a card after the first part is fulfilled.

Part 1: Draw as many cards up to 3 as possible
Once Part 1 has occured: Return a card

If you have 0 deck, neither parts can have an effect because you cannot do part 1.
 
Magic_Umbreon said:
Returning a card is considered a cost by the ruling. Holon Mentor's discard is a cost because if you can't discard you can't play it - it is required. The crucial word here is "then". If you look at the text:



So you only get to return a card after the first part is fulfilled.

Part 1: Draw as many cards up to 3 as possible
Once Part 1 has occured: Return a card

If you have 0 deck, neither parts can have an effect because you cannot do part 1.
Click to expand...

Sorry but the return of 1 card is not a cost, but it's a "drawback" a very nice one if you are at the point to become decked out.
For the Holon trainers you have to pay a cost before you can play it (stated on the card) but I fail to see that here.
 
Yep, looks like the "then" makes it so that the second action can only happen after the first. Neither Island Hermit nor Warp Point include any "then," they just state two "unrelated" effects.
 
^I just realised, that TG Mars is phrased the same way with "then" so if the reasoning works it also applies to Mars, meaning you can't use Mars when your opponent has an empty hand!
 
I don't know about that. Mars says first to draw 2 cards, and the card-to-bottom effect is second. I would think you need to be able to draw if you want to drop the card, but not the other way around.
 
i have a question, as stated oaks visit says

Draw 3 cards. Then choose a card from your hand and put it on the bottom of your deck.
Click to expand...

say i have 2 cards left in my deck, since oaks visit says "draw 3 cards" i cant play it because i cant draw 3, i can only draw 2?

is this correct?

danny
 
Regarding the "then": I would only see it as an expression giving the order of the effects. For effects which depend on another effect coming first, we have the phrase "If you do,..." (e.g. on Claydol).

If Prof Oak´s Visit would read: "Draw 3 cards. If you do, put...." I would absolutely agree to the ruling given.
 
It's just an area in which this TCG is severely lacking compared to other TCGs: Consistent, clear templating and in company of a ditto rules system. ;)
 
Today I viewed a lot of trainercards, and I fail to see sometimes what might be the requirement and what is the effect.
If I find time I will make a topic about it, I feel we really need some more consistent "rules".
 
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.
 
mars is the same way, the draw 2 cards isn't dependent on the next part, so if your opponent has no hand you can still draw, but if you didn't have any cards in your deck you wouldn't be able to discard
 
Mars discards? :eek: I've been playing that card ALL WRONG!!

No, but seriously... I get it now, but I agree that this whole "then" thing should be worded better. The wording they use doesn't really fit the meaning, I'd say, and it's so easy to overlook. "If you do" FTW!
 
ZAKtheGeek said:
but I agree that this whole "then" thing should be worded better. The wording they use doesn't really fit the meaning, I'd say, and it's so easy to overlook. "If you do" FTW!
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top