Ruling baby evo

[MANAPHY=)]

lets say i do sand damage and my oppenent has elekid pichu or happiny or even magby and baby evos all them i cant give damage any more can and please reply cuz i have people whinning about this at the league igo to

 

[Lieutenant Houndoom]

They're evolved Basics. Thus, they are hittable. Things that say it can only hit non-evolved or something will fail. I think. But I'm assuming they are still classified as basics.

 

[Charizard]

This should be in tcg question section. Moved.

Anyway, sand damage only damages basic pokemon. So, once those baby pokemon evolve into magma, chancey, pikachu, etc, they are considered as evolved pokemon. Sand damage won't deal damage to them.

 

[PMJ]

Well, I'm not so sure about that...

Pokemon that evolved from Pokemon that used Baby Evolution would be Basic Evolved Pokemon, wouldn't they?

== RELY ON FRIENDS (Wailord - EX:Legend Maker)

Q. If I use the Strange Cave stadium or an Omanyte uses "Team Assembly" to put other Omanytes on the bench, they are to be "treated as a Basic Pokémon" per the text on the card. Now, after evolving that benched Omanyte (that has no fossil under it) into Omastar, do you treat Omastar as a Stage 1 or as a Stage 2 Pokémon for the purposes of Wailord's "Rely on Friends" attack ("...does plus 10 more damage for each of your Benched Stage 1 Evolved Pokémon")?
A. The Omastar would still be considered a "Stage 2" Pokémon, even if there is no Fossil underneath it. The Omanyte would be a non-evolved (Basic) Pokémon that is "Stage 1". (Feb 16, 2006 PUI Rules Team)

So, in that example, any Omanyte left unevolved would be Stage 1 Basic Pokemon, wouldn't it? Stage 1 is written on the card, but it's being treated as a Basic. That's what makes me think that Evolved Electabuzz and friends would still get nailed by Sand Damage.

I can't find any rulings in the Compendium that cover the question presented in the topic, but I did find this ruling that throws everything I just said RIGHT out the window:

Q. If I use "Baby Evolution" to evolve Pichu into Pikachu, or Wynaut into Wobbuffet, is the resulting Pokémon. (Pikachu, Wobbuffet, etc.) considered an "Evolved Pokémon.", or is it still considered as a "Basic Pokémon."?
A. Any time you evolve a Pokémon. into another stage, it is considered to be an "Evolved Pokémon.", even if the words written on the card say "Basic". Alternatively, the quick and dirty way to figure this out is...is there a Pokémon. underneath it? If yes, then it's evolved. (Jan 22, 2004 PUI Rules Team)

So... according to this, wouldn't that mean that Sand Damage only hits a Pokemon that has no lower stage on it? A... "Basic Basic Pokemon?"

 

[Mewstor]

Since there are two different answers, I think I can come and settle this.

Charizard is right. They are no longer considered to be basic, even if the card says basic pokemon.

PMJ: Any pokemon in play, that doesn't have another pokemon card underneath it, is considered to be a basic pokemon. (stage 1 fossil pokemon for example). A fairly simple rule

And to add, when a basic baby pokemon evolves through baby evolution to it's next stage, it is an evolved basic. But since it is evolved (has another pokemon card underneath it) it can use DRE. A stage 1 Kabuto put in play by a strange cave stadium for example, couldn't do that. Since the Kabuto doesn't have another pokemon card underneath it, it is not considered to be an evolved pokemon (although it is still a stage 1 pokemon), and DRE can only be put on an evolved pokemon.

Hope that helps

 

[Master of the Six Kings]

^Darkrai, Palkia and DIaglga Lv.X PWN your simple rule. Anyway, as soon as the effect has "this counts as evoling" in the text, you must consider it to be a normal condition of evolution, meaning that if the card that was being evolved is a basic, the next card must be a stage 1. This is why for example, Flygon ex d can't damage a sudowoodo on the bench if it used bonsly's baby evolution. This wasn't true when cards said "baby pokemon" on them. This insinuated that the card you were evolving wasn't a basic, ergo the bpokemon placed ontop did not qualify as a stage 1. Now that baby Pokemon do NOT have the old baby text or ruling, evolution is considered evolution, and you can't evolve into a basic, meaning a Baby evolutioned Electabuzz is a stage 1.

 

[Chairman Kaga]

^Darkrai, Palkia and DIaglga Lv.X PWN your simple rule.

Um, Mewstor's simple rule is exactly right. A Pokemon (except for Level X) with another Pokemon underneath it is considered Evolved. A Pokemon with no other Pokemon underneath it is considered Basic.

When an effect refers to Basic or Evolved Pokemon in play, it refers only to the above definitions, not to what's written on the cards.

Level X are the exception, which is specifically spelled out in the rulebook. Level X retain the evolution stage from the card they are leveled up from. Darkrai, Palkia, and Dialga are still non-Evolved Basics, even after you level them up. Leveling up does not alter their evolution state.

Anyway, as soon as the effect has "this counts as evoling" in the text, you must consider it to be a normal condition of evolution, meaning that if the card that was being evolved is a basic, the next card must be a stage 1.

"This counts as evolving" indicates that the action counts as that Pokemon's one evolution per turn. That's all. This is to keep you from using Baby Evolution and then further evolving on the same turn.

A Basic Pokemon evolved into another Basic via Baby Evolution does not magically become a Stage 1. It's still a Basic. It's just an Evolved Basic, as opposed to a Basic Basic (one that's non-Evolved).

This is why for example, Flygon ex d can't damage a sudowoodo on the bench if it used bonsly's baby evolution. This wasn't true when cards said "baby pokemon" on them. This insinuated that the card you were evolving wasn't a basic, ergo the bpokemon placed ontop did not qualify as a stage 1. Now that baby Pokemon do NOT have the old baby text or ruling, evolution is considered evolution, and you can't evolve into a basic, meaning a Baby evolutioned Electabuzz is a stage 1.

No, it's an Evolved Basic. The reason Sand Damage doesn't affect an Electabuzz evolved from Elekid is because Sand Damage only affects Basic (non-Evolved) Pokemon.

Sorry to break it to you, but this would apply even to pre-EX Baby Pokemon. If there's another Pokemon underneath, it's not Basic anymore, regardless of what the card says.

 

[Mewstor]

^Darkrai, Palkia and DIaglga Lv.X PWN your simple rule.

Um, Mewstor's simple rule is exactly right. A Pokemon (except for Level X) with another Pokemon underneath it is considered Evolved. A Pokemon with no other Pokemon underneath it is considered Basic.

When an effect refers to Basic or Evolved Pokemon in play, it refers only to the above definitions, not to what's written on the cards.

Level X are the exception, which is specifically spelled out in the rulebook. Level X retain the evolution stage from the card they are leveled up from. Darkrai, Palkia, and Dialga are still non-Evolved Basics, even after you level them up. Leveling up does not alter their evolution state.

Yes. Thank you. I forgot to add that.

And to still add about the lv.X cards...

A lv.X card on top of another card is completely different from an evolved pokemon. Lv.X and the card underneath it are considered to be one and the same. Imagine it like you took the lv.X and it's previous level and glued them together to form one card.
And how could Creselia evolve from Creselia? Or Darkrai from Darkrai? (Their names are the same. Lv.X is not a part of their name.)

(I think there should be a level X faq topic on this area. Like for Rare Candy and Wally's training has. The lv.X questions just keep popping up.)

And still to add... IMO there should be a rule made that the lv.X has to be played next to the pokemon card it levels up from, to avoid confusion when if the card is on top of the previous level :/