'Battle Styles' Ban List Released, Includes Minor Changes to Energy Recycler

Yeah, that was legit confusing text on the cards at the time as well.

I remember getting in an argument over players because they claimed I had to shuffle exactly 5. Less than doesnt count, so I couldnt use the card if I had only 3 energies in my discard pile, and had to chuck the item card in the discard for failed use, and forgo the energy retrieval effect.

I pleaded that it would be a bit harsh of a stipulation, and text likely meant 'up to 5', but I was countered with the 'all the text on other cards is fine, if it needed detail, they would mention it' and I was biased because I needed the energies on that turn.

Anyway, happy they did this, or you KNOW some family nights in the future are gonna be ruined out of card text arguments.
 
UrGardevoir_callsmeMaster said:
Yeah, that was legit confusing text on the cards at the time as well.

I remember getting in an argument over players because they claimed I had to shuffle exactly 5. Less than doesnt count, so I couldnt use the card if I had only 3 energies in my discard pile, and had to chuck the item card in the discard for failed use, and forgo the energy retrieval effect.

I pleaded that it would be a bit harsh of a stipulation, and text likely meant 'up to 5', but I was countered with the 'all the text on other cards is fine, if it needed detail, they would mention it' and I was biased because I needed the energies on that turn.

Anyway, happy they did this, or you KNOW some family nights in the future are gonna be ruined out of card text arguments.
Click to expand...
Wait [reads article more closely], SO I WAS IN THE WRONG?!!
 
UrGardevoir_callsmeMaster said:
Yeah, that was legit confusing text on the cards at the time as well.

I remember getting in an argument over players because they claimed I had to shuffle exactly 5. Less than doesnt count, so I couldnt use the card if I had only 3 energies in my discard pile, and had to chuck the item card in the discard for failed use, and forgo the energy retrieval effect.

I pleaded that it would be a bit harsh of a stipulation, and text likely meant 'up to 5', but I was countered with the 'all the text on other cards is fine, if it needed detail, they would mention it' and I was biased because I needed the energies on that turn.

Anyway, happy they did this, or you KNOW some family nights in the future are gonna be ruined out of card text arguments.
Click to expand...

UrGardevoir_callsmeMaster said:
Wait [reads article more closely], SO I WAS IN THE WRONG?!!
Click to expand...

You realized the mistake, but for future reference there is never a case where you have to chuck an card for failed use when talking about an card interacting with a public part of the board like the discard pile. Either you're able to play it or you're not, and if you're not able to play something at all you just put it back into your hand.

In this case though, you were both wrong. Basically, with the old text, if you have 1-5 in your discard you have to return them all, and if you have more than 5 you have to return exactly 5. With the new text, you can choose to return how much you want, from 1 to 5. If you have 0, you can't play the card at all with either text and if you tried to play it it would just be misplay and it returns to your hand.
 
UrGardevoir_callsmeMaster said:
Yeah, that was legit confusing text on the cards at the time as well.

I remember getting in an argument over players because they claimed I had to shuffle exactly 5. Less than doesnt count, so I couldnt use the card if I had only 3 energies in my discard pile, and had to chuck the item card in the discard for failed use, and forgo the energy retrieval effect.

I pleaded that it would be a bit harsh of a stipulation, and text likely meant 'up to 5', but I was countered with the 'all the text on other cards is fine, if it needed detail, they would mention it' and I was biased because I needed the energies on that turn.

Anyway, happy they did this, or you KNOW some family nights in the future are gonna be ruined out of card text arguments.
Click to expand...
I believe the rule is "complete as much of the instructions as possible, and ignore the rest", but if the card would have no effect at all, you cannot play it.

It was always a bit baffling to me, because it's not a very intuitive system for beginners, nor very technical for advanced players. The change to "up to" wording is both good for beginners - clearing up any confusion; and for advanced players, giving them more options if there's a specific reason they need it.
 
This ruling actually makes this card much stronger because even if you have 5 or more energy in the bin, but only want, for example, 3, as to not wind back the consistency of cards left in your deck, this card may now actually see play again, and I'm all for a larger card pool :)
 
Is "up to" from 1 to 5, or from 0 to 5? I play a lot of Archiestoise, and Professor's Letter being able to get 0 energy has helped me set up turn 1 Archie many times. Also on the lines of Archiestoise, an errata to Superior Energy Retrieval, sometime, if ever, to also make it "up to" instead of forcing the max would dramatically help setting up turn 1 Archie.
 
If my memory seeves me right on PTCGO cards like it and Blacksmith could be used with <5 or 2 to pick from respectively but as long as there was at least one. (I know for a fact that's how blacksmith worked but i never used energy recycler). You can't use them for 0 like quick ball, energy spinner, etc. because the contents of the discard pile is public knowledge to your opponent
 
NeedleKingSR said:
Is "up to" from 1 to 5, or from 0 to 5? I play a lot of Archiestoise, and Professor's Letter being able to get 0 energy has helped me set up turn 1 Archie many times. Also on the lines of Archiestoise, an errata to Superior Energy Retrieval, sometime, if ever, to also make it "up to" instead of forcing the max would dramatically help setting up turn 1 Archie.
Click to expand...

1 to 5. You're never able to play a card for no effect (beyond removing it from your hand); so here it is "one to five".

Professor's Letter is able to return zero because the deck is private - so you can always "fail" to find things in your deck (meaning it was not known at the time you played it that there were none - and even though you clearly have energy in there, it's permitted to fail to find things.) Your discard pile is public information, so you and everyone else knows it would have no effect if it was empty - and would know there were some in there if there were.
 
ShaunTheBoufflant said:
This ruling actually makes this card much stronger because even if you have 5 or more energy in the bin, but only want, for example, 3, as to not wind back the consistency of cards left in your deck, this card may now actually see play again, and I'm all for a larger card pool :)
Click to expand...

Mmmm, it already saw play even if it forced you to return all energies in discard, this was in Rowleggs - Rillaboom decks past year. The truth is that no top tier deck right now benefits from energy recovery, so its use is still niche - Ordinary Rod remains the supreme recovery tool in this format, and even then, most top decks forgo it because recycling your mons just doesn't come up. Chalk it up to the format being so fast.
 
No changes to Standard or Expanded, says here, but I could have sworn Lusamine is getting unbanned in Expanded. Is it already in effect, or its going to be in a future banlist update?
 
MagnaDrake said:
No changes to Standard or Expanded, says here, but I could have sworn Lusamine is getting unbanned in Expanded. Is it already in effect, or its going to be in a future banlist update?
Click to expand...

They are already unbanned. The announcements of Wally and Lusamine being removed from the Expanded format's ban list came prior to the release of Shining Fates. Any announced changes here wouldn't have gone into effect until April 2nd.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top