Still falls under "Do as much as you can," it doesn't say "Attach two energy from your hand or this attack does nothing." If you want other cards to think about it with think about Zoroark versus Reshiram. Zoroark can copy Blue Flare even without two fire energy to discard. Same idea unless the attack tells you it's doing nothing you can still do it.
Pump up smash? How will it be ruled
- Thread starter thepokemonnetwork100
- Start date
dancingaway
New Member
This will be a nightmare to enforce 
Not to mention, if you play Terrakion you risk either (a) annoying judges or (ii) showing the opponent your hand to verify if you don't attach 2 energy.
Ah well, worse things happen at sea
Not to mention, if you play Terrakion you risk either (a) annoying judges or (ii) showing the opponent your hand to verify if you don't attach 2 energy.
Ah well, worse things happen at sea
ShuckleLVX
Active Member
The card doesn't say to reveal your hand, so you don't have to. No one should EVER rule that you have to reveal your hand. If this happens anywhere, appeal it as high as you can.
This will be done just like Engineers/Portrait, or baiting Power Spray with Roast Reveal. If you really believe your opponent has the energy, call over a Judge. That's all we can do.
This will be done just like Engineers/Portrait, or baiting Power Spray with Roast Reveal. If you really believe your opponent has the energy, call over a Judge. That's all we can do.
You never have to show your opponent your hand I'm not sure why that ever came up. You're only going to annoy judges if you consistently call someone over for Pump Up Smash. When I say consistently your opponent uses Pump Up Smash with 1 card in hand and you want it verified it may seem excessive. Let's say most decks play roughly 12 energy (pretty fair assumption I think.) Terrakion EX has 3 of the 12 leaving 9 still in deck. They've used Pump Up Smash once already and attached two energy they now have 7 energy. This is assuming they haven't had to discard any with Professor Juniper or Ultra Ball. This also assumes they play no special energies. This also assumes no energy is prized. Not entirely sure what a fighting deck will use energy wise, but there's a break down of something realistic. Now if their hand is two cards and you want it check three turns straight with no energy any time a judge may be questioning of you. Remember judges do have other responsibilities so if they take a minute to get there you are using match time that may make the game go in your favor. Our PTO is making the penalties clear on the improper use of Pump Up Smash at the start of the tournament. Usually the looming penalties is enough to curb the desire to not use a card properly.
Let me be clear you're not going to annoy the judge, but if you're the "Boy who cried energy" you're going to draw more attention to yourself than your opponent.
Let me be clear you're not going to annoy the judge, but if you're the "Boy who cried energy" you're going to draw more attention to yourself than your opponent.
DragonairMaster8
Active Member
I don't understand why it would be that huge of a deal if they made you show your hand, anyway. If you're playing correctly you should be assuming your opponent has the best possible hand anyway. Outside of N, rarely will what you do change on what your opponent has in hand, as you will be playing as if they have what is the best possible thing they could have.
It is being ruled that it is up to the judges' discretion to "verify hand contents". Why should this be necessary? The game should be able to be played without judges' interference. A judge should be there to fix things if they get messed up, or to deal with rulings - not run around looking at people's hand for Energy cards.
This entire nightmare (on both the players and judges) could be revealed, with a quick, 5-second hand verification showing that no cards in your hand are basic energy.
Not 10 seconds. Not enough time to write down all of your cards. Just "There are no Basic Energy in my hand" and done.
It is being ruled that it is up to the judges' discretion to "verify hand contents". Why should this be necessary? The game should be able to be played without judges' interference. A judge should be there to fix things if they get messed up, or to deal with rulings - not run around looking at people's hand for Energy cards.
This entire nightmare (on both the players and judges) could be revealed, with a quick, 5-second hand verification showing that no cards in your hand are basic energy.
Not 10 seconds. Not enough time to write down all of your cards. Just "There are no Basic Energy in my hand" and done.
Box of Fail
New Member
This has just become a much more real problem than Power Spray/ Roast Reveal and Portrait/ Engineer's. Imo it was a bad ruling from the start; the game should not know the contents of your hand. You aren't allowed to play a Supporter to no effect, but you're allowed to use a Power to no effect, so an Engineer in the opp hand should have been an automatic optional fail (choose the Engineer and fail the effect). Admittedly a Roast Reveal bluff was sort of problematic; you should have been required to reveal the fire, since using Roast Reveal is essentially claiming you have one in hand.
Now with Terrakion, a very viable card that causes this need for a judge all by itself, something should be done imo. The most logical course is just to allow the fail of a hand check, since it isn't public knowledge. But since the change has to come from PCL and friends in Japan, it's doubtful there will be any fix.
Just generally, no card interaction should require the presence of a judge for the game to continue. That's destructive to the game. Surely you can't just stipulate that a third party (and in a casual game, a potential liar) be present, or that you just "trust your opponent"? That's either harmful to the game and inconvenient to players, or silly and open to abuse, depending. Pride in winning the game may be sufficient motive for a player to lie about the contents of his hand, and it hurts the game if you need a third person around who's willing just to verify hands and the like without playing. That person may also be dishonest.
Now with Terrakion, a very viable card that causes this need for a judge all by itself, something should be done imo. The most logical course is just to allow the fail of a hand check, since it isn't public knowledge. But since the change has to come from PCL and friends in Japan, it's doubtful there will be any fix.
Just generally, no card interaction should require the presence of a judge for the game to continue. That's destructive to the game. Surely you can't just stipulate that a third party (and in a casual game, a potential liar) be present, or that you just "trust your opponent"? That's either harmful to the game and inconvenient to players, or silly and open to abuse, depending. Pride in winning the game may be sufficient motive for a player to lie about the contents of his hand, and it hurts the game if you need a third person around who's willing just to verify hands and the like without playing. That person may also be dishonest.
Last edited:
DragonairMaster8
Active Member
Box of Fail more accurately described what I meant.
Most other CCGs would disagree with you.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
There's NOTHING on that card that requires the interaction of a judge. What it requires is the honesty of the players.
That really shouldn't be the same thing.
Box of Fail
New Member
Fine. Don't listen to me.
Like I don't have 13 years experience of dealing directly, person to person, with the people that you're trying to influence and have no idea how they will take certain things, such as players betting money on a Pokemon game.
Well, all I meant by my example was that you can't just expect a player to trust what his opponent says is in his hand. That while one can cite SotG to a point, it's not really applicable to a game outside of a tournament setting.
When I read "seriously in the way you'd WANT it considered seriously" perhaps I read it differently than you meant it. No matter how explicit the OP rules are about gambling in OP games, I can't imagine they'd have a problem with players' use of the cards outside an OP setting.
But no, you're right. I really have no idea how the Japanese side of OP works, or really even who they are. I think it's sufficient to say that not everybody is honest all the time, so the game should never depend on a player's honesty regarding the contents of his hand or on a third-party "hand checker." Pride in winning the game may be sufficient motive for a player to lie about the contents of his hand. Maybe my example was over the top, and unnecessary to my case. Even without the circumstances I gave, there will be instances where no "hand checker" is on hand (or the one who is is dishonest) and players have sufficient cause to be dishonest to each other about game state.
Wish the card wasn't worded as it was, but instead something like "up to 2 energy".
All points considered in the post I believe it should be down to the honesty of the players, and if caught will get some sort of penalty. It messes up the idea of your knowledge of whether or not your opponent has energy to attach to the active however, as well as whether or not he/she drew it.
All points considered in the post I believe it should be down to the honesty of the players, and if caught will get some sort of penalty. It messes up the idea of your knowledge of whether or not your opponent has energy to attach to the active however, as well as whether or not he/she drew it.
RazquazaFang17
New Member
There is no honest player if it means to gain an advantage in any card game. Leaving it up to honesty will only kill the game. There is no harm in showing your hand when you fail to attach an energy due to you should already assume the best possible board or hand your opponent can have like dragonairmaster pointed out.
King Piplup
Active Member
There is definitely harm in showing your hand, at any point in the game.
baby mario
Front Page Article Editor<br><a href="http://pokeg
Speak for yourself.
The majority of players are completely honest.
If you think there is no harm in showing your hand, you don't know much about this game at all
It sounds like you are assuming the player is revealing the best possible hand. Yes, you should certainly assume your opponent has the best possible hand if you don't know what their actual hand is. However, if you know that your opponent does not have the best possible hand then you may make different choices.
You may find yourself in a position where you know your opponent cannot play a supporter but can greatly influence the game in their favor with the right combination of cards. Based on your own hand you decide you have two choices: counter your opponent's "best possible play" before they make it or risk losing this turn by making a play that will win you the game next turn. If your opponent reveals their hand to you then there is no risk. You can now win the game with this knowledge.
That said, I can't think of a time when that situation would arise. I also can't think of many situations where you would want to leave the energy in your hand. After all, people play Terrakion EX for that attack, right? From a theoretical perspective it is a big deal. It's just not a practical consideration.
RM
RazquazaFang17
New Member
if knowing whats in your opponents hand was so important and could make a difference maker why wasnt mr. mime abused? i understand that you have to show your hand as well but realistically your gonna use a supporter to get a new hand anyways. if your having to reveal your hand just cuz you have no energy you should be winning the game anyways. realisticly your gonna fail to attach 3-4 during the game in which means that your energies are already on board (winning the game) so your opponent cant really deal with so many guys already set up.