Ruling Owned pokemon

Matanui3

Matanui3

Yes, THAT Mata Nui
Member
Are SP pokemon considered to have "an owner in its name" (you know, for the effects of some old tools and stadiums that don't work on owned pokemon), because I can see it either way.
 
Not sure what you mean, but like, Dialga G isn't "cyrus' Dialga G" It's just Dialga G with Cyrus on it. Same goes for FB, GL, 4 and all the rest. It really wouldn't matter anyways.
 
Juliacoolo said:
Not sure what you mean, but like, Dialga G isn't "cyrus' Dialga G" It's just Dialga G with Cyrus on it. Same goes for FB, GL, 4 and all the rest. It really wouldn't matter anyways.
Click to expand...

Yes, but it's dialga "G," meaning it's owned by team Galactic. Or, does this not count?
 
^I think he means that effects that target "Pikachu" would not target "Lt. Surge Pikachu". Like evolving into Raichu.
Same goes for all the new SP Pokes. The name Bronzong G (Team Galactic's Bronzong, whatever) is different from Bronzong and thus it has nothing to with Bronzong (and won't evolve from Bronzor).
 
StealthAngel667 said:
^I think he means that effects that target "Pikachu" would not target "Lt. Surge Pikachu". Like evolving into Raichu.
Same goes for all the new SP Pokes. The name Bronzong G (Team Galactic's Bronzong, whatever) is different from Bronzong and thus it has nothing to with Bronzong (and won't evolve from Bronzor).
Click to expand...

No, I mean like a tool that says "attach to a pokemon without dark or an owner in its name," do the SPs have owners in the name, making it illegal to attach such a tool?
 
Well, there are no cards that say "attach to cyrus' pokemon", or others. If there were, it would be illegal, since they're not actually "whoevers" pokemon.
 
"G" (and likewise C, GL, and FB) does not denote ownership. It's the same thing as the -ex suffix.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top