Ruling Should this be errata'd?

[Kirlia7755]

Yea, I found some cards which, if errata'd, will be more fair.

Forretress UF and Weezing (Liability)

Instead of: Put 7 damage counters on Forretress, or Weezing does 70 damge to itself, wouldn't it be more fair to put: Forretress is now knocked out or Weezing is now knocked out? Because if a player attachs Energy Root to Forretress especially, he can KO Lugia EX and still survive. So who's with me?

 

[Mew the source of all]

It's too far to errata it but you're rigth you can put an energy Root on it then it's still alive

 

[Clmnt_86]

Is not an errata....
Is just that the effects is for you to understand the combo you vcan do with the others card.

 

[Kirlia7755]

Hmm, I said "Should it be errata'd" and not "Is this an errata"

 

[Abhorsen]

The reason why they said "Put 7 damage counters on Forretress" instead of "Does 70 damage to itself" was because of Metal energy. I dont think it's broken, it's completely fair. Just because it can OHKO an Ex doesnt mean it should be errated. Are you suggesting that they make Ex's even stronger by removing their counters? I dont think so...

If something needs to be errated then the Compendium guys will do it, but seeing as UF was a few sets ago, it's not gonna happen not matter how much you talk about it.

 

[Kirlia7755]

Hmm, no, Im saying instant KO to itself if Forretress uses Pop.

 

[Abhorsen]

Forretress has no need to be instantly knocked out. If it did then it wouldnt be very useful. The idea, like already stated, is to use Energy Root. You would have no energy since they are all moved with Pop, but Weezing > Forretress anyway.

 

[Kirlia7755]

Ah OK. Thanks. Mods pls lock