|
Author
|
Topic: New Slowking and new Chaos ruling -- major impact!
|
Ch4oz
Member # 97520
|
posted December 03, 2002 05:23 PM
I really dislike the new rulings of the slowkings. Isn't the idea of playing Unlimited so there's less flips? Getting chaos back in Unlimited is bad ENOUGH. Wouldn't slowking/chaos be too strong? Is Muk the only solution to this? Iggly/pichu/magby aren't. I think unlimited is t going back to sneasel/slowking/chaos. Notice all those cards require flipping?
--------------------
Proud member of Team Rocket, World Champs in Team Sealed!
Aim: ch4oz
From: Arcadia, California | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark and Vile
Member # 74653
|
posted December 03, 2002 06:03 PM
This ruling on Slowking still looks to have little if any effect on Modified.
Is there any effect AT ALL on Modified? Am I missing something here?
From: Melbourne, FL | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
IPGeek21
Member # 184
|
posted December 03, 2002 08:06 PM
Chaos no... Slowking yes... I had a tourney sunday and well... WE MAY have found something VERY annoying.
It shall be cleared up thurs.
hint: Elm vs King
ANY Supporter vs King.
I truly HOPE we are wrong...
--------------------
Drafts bring out the BEST of the WORST cards in Pokemon
*TC Member/WizpogMOD_Squad/Master_Prof*
+GodFather to an Angel:RIP-Paloma Geronimo
-=-=-=-=-=-
TheCompendium
Team Random
Proud bro of SSJ3DVP11
ipgeek21.com
SHUT UP & DO something about it
From: The here, BUT WHERE shall we go? | Registered: Feb 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark and Vile
Member # 74653
|
posted December 03, 2002 09:02 PM
quote:
Originally posted by IPGeek21:
Chaos no... Slowking yes... I had a tourney sunday and well... WE MAY have found something VERY annoying.
It shall be cleared up thurs.
hint: Elm vs King
ANY Supporter vs King.
I truly HOPE we are wrong...
Interesting.
Are you saying that if you are trying to play Elm and it fails, you can't play any more trainers? (or any more supporters on a failed attempt to play a supporter?)
I can actually live with that. You know going in that, assuming it works, you won't be able to play any more. So if it fails, you're still in the same situation (except that you were not able to use that trainer, a la the Slowking power).
It will be interesting to see how this gets ruled.
From: Melbourne, FL | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Onix95
Member # 103241
|
posted December 03, 2002 09:45 PM
In a previous ruling, I believe, when you flip tails for a Supporter or Trainer that disallows you to play trainers for the remainder of the turn while Chaos Gym is in play, you could play another one of those cards, so I assume that Slowking works the same way.
From: Honolulu, Hawaii | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Big_Pappa_Poke
Member # 3495
|
posted December 03, 2002 10:10 PM
I don't think the Elm/Supporter vs. King is a problem.
Not playing another trainer/supporter is an effect of the card which would resolve with the other effect. If King stops it, those effects would not work. Especially with the supporter, which would not remain in play, but be placed on top of your deck. Remember, it would remain in play as a reminder that you can not play another supporter.
As for this whole ruling against CPU search, item finder, etc... I believe it is WRONG. Not that I would have a problem with it, but in reading the text, it never should have been ruled that way.
Computer Search reads:
"Discard 2 of the other cards from your hand in order to search your deck for any card and put it into your hand. Shuffle your deck afterward."
Item Finder reads:
"Discard 2 of the other cards from your hand in order to put a trainer card from your discard pile into your hand."
Where does it say "Discard 2 of the other cards in your hand in order to play this card"? Have those cards been errattaed? If not, the ruling is wrong. the discarding of the cards has to be done in order to recieve the desired effect, NOT to play the card.
A similar situation happened a few months back. I disagreed with the ruling then, and I was correct. The ruling was changed shortly after the conflict between the rules and the ruling (which I can't remember off the top of my head) was pointed out.
Unless there has been the erratta I have mentioned, I feel this ruling will be changed too. The rules and logic dictate it.
--------------------
** The preceding message was brought to you by the nEw WeEzInG oDoR **
Winner - Skyridge SBZ Dayton 15+
Winner (with Nathan "Silent Bob" Spenny) - Origins Team Limited
Evolution - Second in the World in Team Limited
Third - WotC's final Pokemon event (Sunday Modified at GenCon)
Adventure, excitement... a Jedi craves not these things.
Would you like a chocolate covered Pretzel?
From: Portsmouth, OH, USA | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
