Dark Flareon · Team Rocket (RO) #35

9 comments

1. 

   Zoxo

   (3 years ago)

   As far as I can tell, there isn’t any way to use Playing with Fire without actually having any Fire Energy on it, so it seems weird that it has that specification. I can’t translate it myself, so I wonder if the Japanese card says something similar.

   Reply
   • 

     IgnisZoxo

     (3 years ago)

     The Japanese text does say something similar. I think effects like ‘Metronome’ from Clefairy and Clefable cannot copy this attack without fire energy (the text doesn’t say “in order to use this attack”, see faq from wizards on the subject).

     Reply
     • 

       UserIgnis

       (3 years ago)

       The Japanese text is similar but it is still a mistranslation. Clefairy and Clefable should be able to copy the attack even if they do not have any {R} Energy attached, but the attack will do 0 damage if they flip heads as a result of being unable to discard an {R} Energy, and 30 if they flip tails.
       http://blog.livedoor.jp/aqwsderft/archives/50635422.html

       Reply
2. 

   Michael

   (1 week ago)

   If I understand this card correctly, a strict reading of this card means that Metronome is NOT able to copy Playing with Fire unless Clefairy/Clefable has Fire Energy attached because Metronome bypasses Energy cost entirely. But Ditto CAN copy Playing with Fire because Transform effectively treats any attached Energy card as Fire Energy (and every other type, of course), so Ditto could discard, say, a Psychic Energy via Playing with Fire because that Psychic Energy is Fire-ized by Transform.

   Do I have that right?

   Reply
   • 

     djcashtagMichael

     (1 week ago)

     The text requiring {R} Energy to be attached to use the attack was added by WoTC. The original text is:

     「コインを投げて「おもて」なら、20ダメージを追加して、このカードについている「炎」エネルギーカードを1枚トラッシュする。(トラッシュできない時、このワザのダメージは0になる)」

     Machine translation (I verify this is accurate): “ Flip a coin. If heads, this attack does 20 more damage, and discard a Fire Energy card attached to this card. (If you cannot discard one, this attack does 0 damage.)”

     So the attack will work via Metronome as long as you flip tails is my understanding.

     Original text reference from: https://pcg-search.com/card/1st/1st4017.php

     Reply
     • 

       djcashtagdjcashtag

       (1 week ago)

       I’ve only recently found the Silver Bible PDF myself, which states slightly different attack text (although meaning is basically the same) compared to what is printed on the card:

       「コインを投げて「おもて」なら、20ダメージを追加して、自分についている「炎」エネルギーカードを1枚トラッシュする。トラッシュできない時、このワザのダメージはなくなる。」

       Referring to “yourself” instead of “this card”, and “this attack damage goes away” instead of “this attack damage becomes 0”.

       I haven’t had a chance to read the whole PDF yet, is this common for the Silver Bible text to differ from what’s printed on the card? The Silver Bible text strikes me as more updated language.

       Reply
       • 

         Squirchampiondjcashtag

         (1 week ago)

         Good catch!

         I don’t know how interested you’ll be in the full history lesson that follows, but the short answer is “It’s somewhat common for the Official Card Book 2000 to have modified text for cards, especially the ones from Base–Rocket, but less so for the Gym cards.”

         The deal with that text about requiring {R} Energy for the attack to work is a little tricky; Japan appears to have errata’d Fire Energy-discarding attacks like Flamethrower on Charmeleon fairly quickly to specifically address the interaction with Metronome and other copy attacks. This is why Charmeleon’s Flamethrower says
         ◆ 自分の「炎」エネルギーカードを1枚はがしてすてる。
         but Jungle Flareon’s Flamethrower says
         ◆ このカードについている「炎」エネルギーカードを1枚はがしてすてなければ、このワザは失敗する。

         Now, if I can anticipate the follow-up question without coming across as presumptuous – if Jungle Flareon released in Japan in March 1997, and Dark Flareon released in Japan in November 1997, then isn’t there a sort of contradiction? If the problem was allegedly fixed, why does the Official Card Book 2000 have updated language after the fact?

         My friend Windows2000 thought he left comments on this site about what he always calls the “language reforms” of the Gym block, but I can’t find them anymore. The general idea was this: for English cards from Base–Rocket, when you look at the original text, you will find a lot of differences where it appears like WOTC changed the text or even added things that weren’t there in the first place. Now, this gets very muddled very quickly – there are a lot of instances where that’s exactly what WOTC did, either intentionally or due to poor translation work, but there are also some attacks where it looks like Creatures might’ve actually provided WOTC with the errata’d text. The question of how attacks like Flamethrower work obviously directly affect gameplay, but there are also some interesting quirks in language that give it away a bit. I remember the example of Jungle Marowak, whose original text for its second attack says
         ◆ 自分の山札から「闘」ポケモンを1匹選んでベンチにだす。その後、その山札をよくきる。進化カードは選べない。自分のベンチに空きがなければ使えない。

         which translates to something along the lines of “Choose one Fighting-type Pokémon from your deck and put it onto your Bench. Then shuffle your deck well. You cannot choose an Evolution card. You cannot use this move if you do not have an empty slot on your Bench.”

         Now, this is functionally identical to the language of the English Marowak, but the English Marowak mentions something that the JP card doesn’t; the specific mention of Basic Pokémon as a searchable category of card. Across Japan’s Base–Rocket, there is not a single mention of たねポケモン. The concept obviously exists, but they didn’t quite have a name for it yet, so effects intending to search your deck for what we now know as Basic Pokémon would say things to the effect of *”search your deck for a Pokémon (excluding Evolution cards)”, and the first time たねポケモン is mentioned as a specific category seems to be on cards like Erika’s Dratini, Lt. Surge, and Erika’s Perfume.

         Talking about Jungle Marowak and the ‘Basic Pokémon’ category has absolutely nothing to offer insofar as Michael’s question, but the fact that ‘Basic Pokémon’ wasn’t a commonly mentioned term in the Japanese card game in 1998, but several cards were errata’d Japan-side to have the term ‘Basic Pokémon’ later on, and meanwhile we see that WOTC was using the term ‘Basic Pokémon’ right from the get-go when they would’ve started working on translating at some point in 1998, all strongly suggest that WOTC was working off a set of errata’d text that Creatures provided them. Of course, they made a bunch of translations in addition on top of that, so you can’t use their text as a reliable indicator of what that errata’d text would’ve looked like – so we’re lucky to be aware of the Official Book 2000, and can use it as a fairly authoritative resource for questions like these.

         Reply
         • 

           djcashtagSquirchampion

           (1 week ago)

           Thanks for the detailed breakdown! The Jungle Marowak case makes me curious, I wonder if in the early design stages Call for Friend could actually search Evolution Pokémon and that restriction text was added after the fact when it was decided that was too strong? These types of Tutoring attacks are interesting since their cost got dramatically lower over time, from the way over the top expensive Jungle Marowak to Misty’s Psyduck/Brock’s Geodude requiring a coin flip and then Skyridge Rattata being a guaranteed splashable search but with only 30 HP. The lack of easy Basic search in the early Classic era is interesting to ponder on, we take it for granted in the Modern era but could that nearly free Basic search be going way with the rotation of Buddy-Buddy Poffin? Is Poké Pad expected to just fill the void for now? We shall see…

3. 

   Forsaken Wanderer

   (1 week ago)

   Does dark flareon only have three legs? That would explain how the dark variant is different than the regular!

   Reply