Ruling Did You Notice…?

NotSeen

NotSeen

Aspiring Trainer
Member
Hi guys,

I just read a opic on Bulbapedia, after which I'm a bit confused, because of what I have read.
Here's a link to that article: http://bulbanews.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Changes_to_Definition_of_the_Term_%E2%80%9CDefending_Pok%C3%A9mon%E2%80%9D

And here's what confused me a bit:
Bulbapedia's article said:
Fighting Stadium is also a card that we will confirm how the effect should be resolved. It uses the text "Defending Pokemon" which indicates that if Landorus EX uses the attack Hammerhead while Fighting Stadium is in play, then it would get the bonus for damage done to the benched Pokemon as well, if it chose a Pokemon EX on the Bench. However, some players have noted that the language used in Japan would correspond to what is now being translated as "opponent's Active Pokemon".

For now, we have to go by the text as printed, so Benched Pokemon EX, if damaged by a {F} Pokemon's attack while Fighting Stadium is in play, will take the bonus damage.
Click to expand...

Especially the latter paragraph seems weird. It basically says, that the extra damage can now be resolved on benched Pokémon, too; in this case for Landorus EX's attack, when it hits opponent's benched EX Pokémon while Fighting Stadium is in play.
I don't actually ask anything, I'm just curious about this new situation…
 
As of this very moment, yes. Because the definition of "defending pokemon" was changed to "any pokemon receiving an attack" the benched pokemon-EX would receive the extra 20 damage from hammerhead.

However as the article points out, there may have been a mistranslation from the Japanese to English, so it's not out of the question that we see an errata for this in the near future. I don't want to be "that guy" that speculates, but given the mistranslation and the fact that this ruling was entirely missed for regionals, I would just pay close attention over the next few days to see what happens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top