Cacturne · Sandstorm (SS) #2

1 comment

1. 

   Ambassador

   (2 years ago)

   – This Cacturne does indeed originate from ADV2 (as does Cacnea SS 57, but SS 58 Cacnea didn’t get released until ADV ex1, where it sits awkwardly, with no Cacturne to evolve into).
   – That Cacnea and Cacturne share the Poison Payback Poké-Body is mirrored by this set’s Growlithe and Arcanine sharing the Fire Veil Poké-Body¹, and shared Powers across evolution lines ends up being a semi-recurring thing in the ADV and PCG era, with – I think – the precedent being e-Card Hoppip and Skiploom sharing one together.
   – This Cacturne got a retrain in SM6b in Japan (slash made it into CES for the English game), which I have to say is a little surprising. It’s a good card, right, and might’ve made a splash in pre-releases/drafts with the ability to inflict free Poison, but doesn’t stick out to me as being particularly format-defining. Feint Attack is a solid, decent attack that does damage only slightly less than proportional to the Energy cost it asks for in exchange for its novel effect, and has shown up on cards that have been serious threats in formats and also shown up on cards that didn’t influence the meta whatsoever. Together, though, I guess this caught someone’s attention, and Poison Payback especially so, as SM6b seemed to, maybe, be aspiring to increase the amount of cards inflicting Special Conditions in the SM era.
   – Either way, it brings me to the question I ask of all Sandstorm cards – did WOTC design this card, and does any of the above lean us one way or another? I’m mostly leaning towards it being a PCL card. It’s a solid card, but it’s also kind of “boring” one that borrows from already existing elements of the TCG, and I’m increasingly sold on the idea that WOTC would’ve made over-tuned cards to show off just how much better they’d be at designing cards if only PCL would give them more of a chance, blah blah blah. The only thing that gives me pause is the choice to reprint the card in SM6b. There is at least one other ADV-era card that got reprinted in SM6b that I believe is a card originally designed by WOTC, so maybe PCL chose these cards as tips of the hat to their influence? Problem with this narrative is that it’s been so long and between memory lapses, employee turnover, etc. that’d have to be something actually documented and considered worth retaining, and I don’t think it has. e.g. I suspect it’s entirely possible that someone at WOTC who designed Jamboree cards, then got hired onto PUSA, and even to this day still works for TPCI, might not recognize their own creations/cards that they influenced. So a retrain for the sake of an internal hat tip/homage would be wasted energy².

   So to tl;dr that last point; did WOTC design this card (or influence its design)? I doubt it. Conviction on this is decent, but would love to read opposing views.

   ¹ n.b. that Growlithe and Arcanine don’t come from ADV2, but released internationally first under SS Sandstorm and only later made their way into Japan’s ADV ex1.
   ² I also came at this from the other way – “Does Cacturne being reprinted prove it’s definitely a PCL card, because they wouldn’t want to reprint a WOTC-designed card?” No for very similar reasons; (1) I think 1 WOTC-designed card got retrained in SM6b anyways, and (2) even that level of antipathy, if it existed, would require documentation and memory retention and etc., and I just don’t think the will/interest to approach the card game’s history like that would exist. I’d certainly roll my eyes at the idea a grudge like that was held for that long, and I seem to be one of the people most interested in elements surrounding it.

   Reply