Zoroark and Reshiram

[Zupwat]

This is a Ruling that is really starting to get under my skin. The context is "Can Zoroark use Foul Play to copy Reshiram's Blue Flare attack without discarding the energy?". It's baffling to me that the ruling is yes, when there are two rules that work together in the compendium that completely overturn this ruling. The first is

"If an attack requires the discard of an Energy card attached to the
Attacking Pokemon, that discard must be fulfilled or the attack fails.
(Jan 31, 2008 PUI Rules Team)"

All this proves is that Reshiram has to discard the energy. But there is another rule that obviously connects these two and has direct relevance to the situation.

"When a Pokemon refers to itself by name, interpret that card as though
the text reads "this Pokemon". This has the practical effect of not
including other Pokemon of the same name. If a Pokemon copies that text,
it refers to itself, not the original Pokemon"

If Zoroark uses Blue Flare as his own, then the effect of the attack comes through as well. This changes the "This Card" to Zoroark, effectively telling you to directly discard 2 fire energy from Zoroark. If you can't do that then the attack fails, I have absolutely no idea how the ruling can be anything but that.

Also there is a ruling, exactly like this in the compendium:

Q. If Clefable metronomes Latias-EX's "Power Crush" attack, what happens if there are no Fire Energies attached to Clefable?
A. Clefable can copy the Power Crush attack without having any Fire Energy to discard as long as the Defending Pokémon is not Knocked Out by the attack. If the Defending Pokémon was Knocked Out and you cannot discard 2 Fire Energies, then this attack does nothing. (Jul 19, 2007 PUI Rules Team)

Exact same situation, Clefable's attack fails if the attack calls for the discarding of energy and Clefable can't do it. Clefable can only avoid discarding the energy if the attack doesn't call for it.

 

[Tagrineth]

As PokePop explained, the reason we have the rule you cited is because of a specific card. The card didn't have the rules text on it, so we got the rule added as a global rule.

Zoroark doesn't have to follow that rule because his original text didn't include the rule either.

In other words, this rule:

"If an attack requires the discard of an Energy card attached to the
Attacking Pokemon, that discard must be fulfilled or the attack fails.
(Jan 31, 2008 PUI Rules Team)"

is 100% bunk and should really be revised and codified asap.

 

[Zupwat]

I'm still having trouble understanding. You're saying that the compendium is not true, and Zoroark gets an exception just because? Where do you find this information? And why does Zoroark get to just ignore rules that aren't supposed to be overruled by card text?

 

[idrumprettywell]

because, quite clearly on clefable ex and other cards that use this attack (barring zoro), it says "you must still do anything else in order to perform that attack" which would be like the energy discard on reshi's attack. HOWEVER, on zoroark, this clause is missing, therefore, zoro can copy that attack even if it can't fulfill all the requirements. but, if it can fulfill the requirements (say that zoro has 2 fire nrg when foul play'ing a blue flare) then zoro would be required to discard those energy.

 

[Tagrineth]

The Japanese pokemon CCG rules do not include the above quoted rule from the compendium at all.

Previous pokemon with attacks like Foul Play, in Japanese, have specifically stated (energy requirements such as discarding must still be met.). The translated versions of said cards omitted that text, and since it wasn't an issue at the time in Not Japan since there were no relevant cards that didn't have that clause, they stuck it in the Compendium as a metarule.

Well, the Compendium's metarule is technically wrong, since now Zoroark's original version didn't have that rules text, and according to Japan's rules, he thus doesn't have to pay secondary costs like discarding Energy.

Because the Japanese version of the card works this way, the US version should work the same way. Thus, the confliction. The Compendium rule is outdated and needs to be removed, and replaced with more specific card rulings.

 

[Alex(charm)ander]

It says discard two "FIRE" energies. If your Zoroark has no fire energy attached then there are none to discard, if it does have fire energies attached it DOES discard two of them (or one if there is only one fire energy attached).

 

[Zupwat]

The Japanese pokemon CCG rules do not include the above quoted rule from the compendium at all.

Previous pokemon with attacks like Foul Play, in Japanese, have specifically stated (energy requirements such as discarding must still be met.). The translated versions of said cards omitted that text, and since it wasn't an issue at the time in Not Japan since there were no relevant cards that didn't have that clause, they stuck it in the Compendium as a metarule.

Well, the Compendium's metarule is technically wrong, since now Zoroark's original version didn't have that rules text, and according to Japan's rules, he thus doesn't have to pay secondary costs like discarding Energy.

Because the Japanese version of the card works this way, the US version should work the same way. Thus, the confliction. The Compendium rule is outdated and needs to be removed, and replaced with more specific card rulings.

Thank you. I don't agree with it, but that actually makes sense. The compendium really needs to be updated though, I refer to it frequently for rulings, and this ruling completely contradicts several things in the compendium. To me this is like all of a sudden, you get two prizes if you KO a Pokemon, but only on Tuesday, but no one knows about it except for the guy that beats you in the top cut with it. It's a fundamental rule that I've always played by, completely broken for no good reason.

 

[psychup2034]

As with any healthy game, the rules need to be amended every so often. The Compendium team works on a volunteer basis, meaning they do what they do because they love the game so much.

Of course the compendium needs to be constantly updated, but the collection of rulings is just so massive that updating all the nuances of a particular rule can take some time.

 

[Zupwat]

As with any healthy game, the rules need to be amended every so often. The Compendium team works on a volunteer basis, meaning they do what they do because they love the game so much.

Of course the compendium needs to be constantly updated, but the collection of rulings is just so massive that updating all the nuances of a particular rule can take some time.

Gotcha. I feel silly now, I'll have to let some people at my league know I was wrong lol. This just means Zoroark is alot more breakable than I thought. Thanks for humoring me, I can get pretty uptight sometimes XD

 

[dialga master]

You wouldn't be able to do it if it said: "...If you don't/can't discard the energy, this attack fails."
But it doesn't sooo..

 

[Chairman Kaga]

I'm still having trouble understanding. You're saying that the compendium is not true, and Zoroark gets an exception just because?

Sometimes rules change. The Compendium will be updated to reflect that soon, I'm sure.

Where do you find this information? And why does Zoroark get to just ignore rules that aren't supposed to be overruled by card text?

There is a more in-depth explanation of this here.

 

[waynegg]

Also there is a ruling, exactly like this in the compendium:

Q. If Clefable metronomes Latias-EX's "Power Crush" attack, what happens if there are no Fire Energies attached to Clefable?
A. Clefable can copy the Power Crush attack without having any Fire Energy to discard as long as the Defending Pokémon is not Knocked Out by the attack. If the Defending Pokémon was Knocked Out and you cannot discard 2 Fire Energies, then this attack does nothing. (Jul 19, 2007 PUI Rules Team)

Exact same situation, Clefable's attack fails if the attack calls for the discarding of energy and Clefable can't do it. Clefable can only avoid discarding the energy if the attack doesn't call for it.

The Metronome ruling which will help you understand the Foul Play ruling is this one:

Q. If Clefable can use Metronome, does it have to discard while it Metronomes attacks that need to discard, such as Charizard's Fire Spin?
A. If the discarding is required like for Fire Spin you do NOT, if it is optional like Moltres' Wildfire, then you DO. (Mar 16 WotC Chat)

As Reshiram's attack isn't optional to discard, then Foul Play ignores that part so long as it doesn't have any Fire attached to it.

Or you can simply take it at face value. Foul Play is a new attack which is unlike any attack before it, though similar to Metronome. If you can pay the cost of attacking with Foul Play then you can use it, plain and simple. In cases of discarding specific Energy, if it isn't attached then you get the bonus of ignoring that particular part of the attack effect. Call it a special exception, much like Feint Attack, accept it, and move on.

 

[Mach]

Foul Play = Breaking preset rules. I don't know why this is so hard, people.