Pokémon TCG: Sword and Shield—Brilliant Stars

Unown G vs Mismagius

Everwind

New Member
The new stormfront Mismagius has an attack called "Crash Chant" that allows you to choose up to 4 tool cards in play and discard them. Does this work on Unown G that is attached to a poke as a tool or does the Unown G effect negate it?
 
Your Mismagius could discard your OWN unown G's. You could not discard your opponents unown G's. They answered this question in Ask the Masters a few days ago.
 
yeah i'm getting a little annoyed with unown g, unless i missed it there doesn't seem to be any cards that can remove it from an opponents pokemon
 
How can you disagree with the ruling?

Lets try this, Lets say you are the pokemon, and unown G is a hammer that you are holding.

I try to take away the hammer by using crush chant. Is something being done to you?
yes, the hammer you are holding is trying to be taken away.

Thats why Unown G blocks the effect, however you can target your OWN Unown G's because they are not being affected by an opponent's attack.

Any questions, please dont hesitate to ask.

~Duke
 
maybe he disagrees with the part of the ruling that allows you to discard your own unown g, since it doesn't specify that it guards only the opponent's attacks
 
maybe he disagrees with the part of the ruling that allows you to discard your own unown g, since it doesn't specify that it guards only the opponent's attacks
it does specify that it guards only the opponents attacks. it was errated a few months ago.
 
I too, disagree with the ruling. The problem I have is that it says nowhere on Mismagius that you target a Pokemon. You're targetting tools, so technically you're doing nothing to the Pokemon Unown G is attached to except discarding the tool.

I think Mismagius is poorly worded. It would make a lot more sense if it mentioned actually choosing the Pokemon AND their tools attached to them.
 
Doesn't Electivire lv.X just target pokemon tool and stadiums in play? Why have one ruling different than the other on two cards that do the same exact thing?
 
i think electivire is ruled the same. it cant discard an unown G.

gardevoir was ruled differently imo. an unown g protected pokemon should be able to use powers after being psychic locked. alas it doesnt
 
I also have to disagree with the ruling. Mismagnius is targeting the Unown G directly, not the pokemon it is attached to.
 
You can discard your own Unown G. Unown G only protects you from effects of your opponent's attacks, not your own.

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

EDIT: Also, you are not even targeting the pokemon, you're targetting the tool.
 
Last edited:
But the tool is attached to the Pokemon, so to target the Tool, you have to target the Pokemon, which is where Unown G comes in.

Electivire lv.X was ruled the same exact way,

Q. If Electivire Lv.X uses "Pulse Barrier" to discard tools against a Defending Pokemon with Unown-G's "GUARD" attached, does the Unown-G get discarded or does "GUARD" prevent that effect?
A. The Unown-G would prevent Pulse Barrier's effect of discarding tools, so it would stay attached. But Unown-G does not prevent any tools attached to other Pokemon from being discarded. (Mar 20, 2008 PUI Rules Team)

Electivire reads:

"Discard all of your Opponent's Pokemon Tools and Stadiums in play."

It does not target the Pokemon, it targets the Tools.

Electivire was ruled that it cannot affect an Opponent's Pokemon with Unown G on it, and so was Mismagius.

I don't see any point in fighting the ruling. It's obviously a consistent ruling.

edit: Just for reference, Mismagius reads,

"Choose up to 4 in any combination of Pokemon Tool cards and Technical Machine cards in play (both yours and your opponent's) and discard them"

It's worded very similar to Electivire lv.X's Pulse Barrier attack.
 
And I too disagree with the Electivire ruling, but again, it is what it is and there's no sense in arguing over it. I feel that if something targets the tool specifically, it has no effect on the Pokemon, but that's just my opinion.
 
For those that disagree on the basis of the tool being targeted, not the Pokemon:
What about switching attacks that target a benched Pokemon and state "you may choose a benched Pokemon and make it Active. Do X damage to the new Active".

If Unown G were on the current Active, can you bring up a new Pokemon?
No? Why not? The Pokemon that Unown G is attached to is not being targeted, the benched Pokemon is.
Ah, because that Active Pokemon would be affected by the Switch. And since it will be affected, that effect is ignored. It doesn't matter that it was not the "target" of the effect. It was still affected. Something was going to happen to it.

Same thing here. The tool may be the target (or maybe not, we've not established that a Tool can be the target of an attack, but I'll concede that for the point of this discussion) of the attack, but removing that tool (from where?) affects what it is being removed from. That Pokemon is immune to effects. Taking something away from it is an effect upon it.
It doesn't matter that it wasn't the target. It's affected and so that effect is blocked.
 
I guess all of us old Magic the Gathering players are used to rules like the target of the attack vs the effect and also sorts of weird rules like this. I suspected it could not remove and thus asked the question. If nothing else the only way this would work is if it was a poke power or poke body since Unown G specifically says attack.

Is this a poor translation issue? Did Pokemon really want an un-counterable tool card which blocks all effects other than direct damage vs damage counter and poison and burn? Personally, I feel it is bad game design to have something without a counter.

Based upon these rulings everyone should play Unown G since it stops all effects and there is no counter. One card nullifies all burn/poison/confusion/switch decks and that is too powerful IMHO.
 
The ruling makes perfect sense to me and seem consistent with older rulings. I fail to see why folks have a problem with it.

Unown G is not all powerful. It does not stop any condition generated by powers and there are quite a few of those. It does not remove existing conditions. It takes up a tool slot which prevents use of all sort of other other useful stuff. Finally removal really isn't *that* problematic. Just remove the pokemon using it with direct damage.
 
To answer the Gardevoir question, That places a global efect on the PLAYER, not the Pokemon, so the PLAYER cant use powers.
 
Back
Top