History Main / ThatOneRule

17th Jun '18 11:13:53 PM KingArgorok
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

***Unfortunately, this rule was introduced to avoid game breaking infinite looping combos. Now this issue could have easily been averted if cards for given a once per turn restriction, but Konami did not really think much of it until later. The other alternative would be to ban and the most controversial solution is to edit the cards that cause this problem.
4th May '18 3:51:42 AM KingArgorok
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Ever since Soul the Duelist was released, some cards had the text that said "ignore summoning conditions." This is clearly self explanatory when special summoning from the hand or deck so most likely, the logic for most players at time was that if it applied to reviving it after using a Foolish Burial, then the same situation could occur right? WRONG! According to Konami's official ruling ever since the release of Level Modulation in Elemental Energy, a monster with a special summoning condition, whether it can be revived or not by other card effects must always be summoned properly first before it can be revived, thereby the "ignore summoning condition" clause not applying in this situation. So a monster like Armed Dragon [=LV7=] must be special summoned to the field first if players want to revive it with Level Modulation. The fact that there is an exception to this rule is not implied on the card text, and it makes the game look inconsistent.

to:

** Ever since Soul the Duelist was released, some cards had the text that said "ignore summoning conditions." This is clearly self explanatory when special summoning from the hand or deck so most likely, the logic for most players at time was that if it applied to reviving it after using a Foolish Burial, then the same situation could occur right? WRONG! According to Konami's official ruling ever since the release of Level Modulation in Elemental Energy, a monster with a special summoning condition, whether it can be revived or not by other card effects must always be summoned properly first before it can be revived, thereby the "ignore summoning condition" clause not applying in this situation. So a monster like Armed Dragon [=LV7=] must be special summoned to the field first if players want to revive it with Level Modulation. The fact that there is an exception to this rule is not implied on the card text, and it which makes the game look inconsistent.
4th May '18 3:49:39 AM KingArgorok
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* Summoning conditions in ''TabletopGame/YuGiOh'' in regards to reviving monsters. If a monster's effect says it can only be special summoned one way, can it be special summoned from the graveyard after being special summoned through that method? For some cards (Dark Necrofear, ritual monsters, most fusion monsters), yes. For others (Armed Dragon [=LVs=] 7 and 10, Rainbow Dragon, most Elemental Hero fusions), no. The only way to distinguish between the two is whether the card reads "can" or "cannot... except..." while the rest of the Summon condition text is ''nearly identical''. While the text formatting for modern cards makes the difference more distinct[[note]]Cards that can't be revived with this method contain "...and cannot be Special Summoned by other ways"[[/note]], old cards that have yet to receive a reprint in this format are still subject to this problem.

to:

* Summoning conditions in ''TabletopGame/YuGiOh'' in regards to reviving monsters. If a monster's effect says it can only be special summoned one way, can it be special summoned from the graveyard after being special summoned through that method? For some cards (Dark Necrofear, Necrofear,most ritual monsters, most fusion monsters), yes. For others (Armed Dragon [=LVs=] 7 and 10, Rainbow Dragon, most Elemental Hero fusions), no. The only way to distinguish between the two is whether the card reads "can" or "cannot... except..." while the rest of the Summon condition text is ''nearly identical''. While the text formatting for modern cards makes the difference more distinct[[note]]Cards that can't be revived with this method contain "...and cannot be Special Summoned by other ways"[[/note]], old cards that have yet to receive a reprint in this format are still subject to this problem.
31st Mar '18 11:38:51 AM Reymma
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The balk rule. Balks are sound simple to explain, but they're hard to actually call. A pitcher has balked when he makes a motion towards a base, but throws to a different base. So a pitcher can't act like he's throwing a pitch and then throw to first base to pick off a runner, which is why when trying to pick off a runner, the pitcher will almost always move their front leg towards the base. The problem is, how do you classify a "motion"? Is it when the pitcher starts his windup? When he lifts his leg? When he moves his arm? There's also the issue of what counts as "towards" a base- if a pitcher starts moving in a direction between home plate and first base, for instance, which base is he throwing to? Balks are almost always controversial at the Major League level. Balks can also be called for similarly deceptive moves by the catcher. And there's some other things that count as balks, too- it's also a balk if the pitcher motions towards a base like he's going to throw but doesn't throw, if he starts making a throw without first fully coming to a "set" position, if he throws to home plate while his foot isn't on the pitching rubber, or, well, a lot of other things. There's even a few ways to balk that are clearly completely unintentional, like tripping and falling off the mound or dropping the ball.


to:

* The balk rule. Balks are sound simple to explain, but they're hard to actually call. A pitcher has balked when he makes a motion towards a base, but throws to a different base. So a pitcher can't act like he's throwing a pitch and then throw to first base to pick off a runner, which is why when trying to pick off a runner, the pitcher will almost always move their front leg towards the base. The problem is, how do you classify a "motion"? Is it when the pitcher starts his windup? When he lifts his leg? When he moves his arm? There's also the issue of what counts as "towards" a base- if a pitcher starts moving in a direction between home plate and first base, for instance, which base is he throwing to? Balks are almost always controversial at the Major League level. Balks can also be called for similarly deceptive moves by the catcher. And there's some other things that count as balks, too- it's also a balk if the pitcher motions towards a base like he's going to throw but doesn't throw, if he starts making a throw without first fully coming to a "set" position, if he throws to home plate while his foot isn't on the pitching rubber, or, well, a lot of other things. There's even a few ways to balk that are clearly completely unintentional, like tripping and falling off the mound or dropping the ball.

23rd Mar '18 12:09:19 PM doomquokka
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* ''TabletopGame/{{Diplomacy}}'' is normally a relatively simple game - there are four basic moves and rules for resolving their interactions - except that convoys, where an army moves between locations using a chain of naval units possibly owned by another player, are notorious for creating problems. This began with the discovery that a player could convoy another player's army without their knowledge or consent, and continued into situations creating actual paradoxes. For example, an army which travels via a convoy to kill another army which is cutting the support of a fleet which is attacking the same convoy; if the convoy succeeds, the support is not cut and the convoy defeated, so it ought to fail; but if the convoy fails, the support is cut and the convoy survives, so it ought to succeed. The tournament rule book at one point simply abandoned any attempt at making sense and spent several pages presenting a humanised version of the source code of the automated resolution system.

to:

* ''TabletopGame/{{Diplomacy}}'' is normally a relatively simple game - there are four basic moves and rules for resolving their interactions - except that convoys, where an army moves between locations using a chain of naval units possibly owned by another player, are notorious for creating problems. This began with the discovery that a player could convoy another player's army without their knowledge or consent, and continued into situations creating actual paradoxes. For example, an army which travels via a convoy to kill displace another army which is cutting the support of a fleet which is attacking the same convoy; if the convoy succeeds, the support is not cut and the convoy defeated, so it ought to fail; but if the convoy fails, the support is cut and the convoy survives, so it ought to succeed. The tournament rule book at one point simply abandoned any attempt at making sense and spent several pages presenting a humanised humanized version of the source code of the automated resolution system. system.
15th Mar '18 8:32:26 AM Prfnoff
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** Castling is moving both the king and one of his rooks, the only move allowed in chess where two pieces are moved in the same move. The list of circumstances that must be met is rather long, but it's easy to determine whether all of them have been met or not. The simple version is: Neither the king nor the rook can have been moved at all, at any point earlier in the game. All the intervening squares in the home row must be vacant. The king cannot move through a square where he would be under attack if he were to stop there. You cannot castle to escape check. You cannot castle into check. You cannot capture in the course of castling. You cannot un-castle or re-castle.

to:

** Castling is moving both the king and one of his rooks, the only move allowed in chess where two pieces are moved in the same move. The list of circumstances that must be met is rather long, but it's easy to determine whether all of them have been met or not. The simple version is: Neither the king nor the rook can have been moved at all, at any point earlier in the game. All the intervening squares in the home row must be vacant. The king cannot move through a square where he would be under attack if he were to stop there. You cannot castle to escape check. You cannot castle into check.check (though you can ''deliver'' check or even checkmate). You cannot capture in the course of castling. You cannot un-castle or re-castle.
16th Feb '18 9:35:32 AM Reymma
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The Calvin Johnson rule, which states a ball cannot be considered a catch if the receiver loses control of the ball going to the ground. It's one situation where IfItLooksLikeADuck does not apply. Since the 2014-2015 playoffs, it became unclear among the general public on what a catch is, which led to fans saying, "What is a catch?"

to:

* The Calvin Johnson rule, which states a ball cannot be considered a catch if the receiver loses control of the ball going to the ground. It's one situation where IfItLooksLikeADuck does not apply. Since the 2014-2015 playoffs, it became unclear among the general public on what a catch is, which led to fans saying, "What is a catch?"



* In ''VideoGame/WorldOfWarcraft'' the armor penetration stat ended up so confusing and defining some classes to such a degree that in the ''Cataclysm'' expansion, it was removed from the game entirely. Armor penetration was of course distinct from but interacted with abilities that reduce enemy armor, abilities that bypass enemy armor, and amount of enemy armor.
** Another problem with Armor Penetration was that its effectiveness increased exponentially, making it [[OneStatToRuleThemAll vastly superior]] to other stats for physical damage dealers.

to:

* In ''VideoGame/WorldOfWarcraft'' the armor penetration stat ended up so confusing and defining some classes to such a degree that in the ''Cataclysm'' expansion, it was removed from the game entirely. Armor penetration was of course distinct from but interacted with abilities that reduce enemy armor, abilities that bypass enemy armor, and amount of enemy armor.
** Another problem
armor. And you needed to calculate all this to know with Armor Penetration was that its effectiveness increased exponentially, making what gear and on which fight armor penetration became better than attack power (though by the end of the expansion it became [[OneStatToRuleThemAll vastly superior]] to other stats for physical damage dealers.stack armor penetration, always]]).
15th Jan '18 10:09:26 AM lluewhyn
Is there an issue? Send a Message

Added DiffLines:

** Attacks of Opportunity/Opportunity Attacks started out like this in Third Edition, so each successive edition of the game has mostly scaled them back. The basic principle behind them was simple and understandable: In a game that uses turns for simplicity instead of real-time, there should be some kind of restriction against a character abusing the turn-based rules to simply bypass a whole group of defenders to take out a weaker target, steal an object, etc. The problems occurred with both confusing terminology and an "everything but the kitchen sink" approach as more situations were added to what could trigger an Opportunity Attack. The former described this as a situation where the trigger creature lowers their defenses, but a more accurate description would be a situation where the trigger creature lowers their counter-attack offense: i.e., you can take a free swing at them because you're not worried about leaving an opening for them to swing back at you. The latter issue combines with the first issue confusion to where using an action triggers an attack even though the condition where the action was made isn't changing regardless of the action. To explain, why does attempting to stand up from prone trigger a free attack but simply lying helplessly prone does not, or attacking someone without a melee weapon in hand (e.g., crossbow or punching) triggers an AoO but simply standing there unarmed doesn't? *** Fourth Edition reduced the circumstances to just attempting to move past a creature or use a ranged attack next to them, although oddly giving the defender supposedly unlimited attacks as long as it was against a new target, and Fifth Edition reduced this even further to just moving past the defending creature completely, as you can still circle around an opponent. No edition has brought up the concept of removing your ability to use AoO if other enemies are engaging you (e.g. if you have five creatures engaging you, how can you possibly get a free swing at a different one?), but most likely is due to the rules getting just too complex at that point.
21st Nov '17 11:07:30 PM InfinityPlusTwo
Is there an issue? Send a Message


* The balk rule. Balks are sound simple to explain, but they're hard to actually call. A pitcher has balked when he makes a motion towards a base, but throws to a different base. So a pitcher can't act like he's throwing a pitch and then throw to first base to pick off a runner, which is why when trying to pick off a runner, the pitcher will almost always move their front leg towards the base. The problem is, how do you classify a "motion"? Is it when the pitcher starts his windup? When he lifts his leg? When he moves his arm? Balks are almost always controversial at the Major League level. Balks can also be called for similarly deceptive moves by the catcher.

to:

* The balk rule. Balks are sound simple to explain, but they're hard to actually call. A pitcher has balked when he makes a motion towards a base, but throws to a different base. So a pitcher can't act like he's throwing a pitch and then throw to first base to pick off a runner, which is why when trying to pick off a runner, the pitcher will almost always move their front leg towards the base. The problem is, how do you classify a "motion"? Is it when the pitcher starts his windup? When he lifts his leg? When he moves his arm? There's also the issue of what counts as "towards" a base- if a pitcher starts moving in a direction between home plate and first base, for instance, which base is he throwing to? Balks are almost always controversial at the Major League level. Balks can also be called for similarly deceptive moves by the catcher.
catcher. And there's some other things that count as balks, too- it's also a balk if the pitcher motions towards a base like he's going to throw but doesn't throw, if he starts making a throw without first fully coming to a "set" position, if he throws to home plate while his foot isn't on the pitching rubber, or, well, a lot of other things. There's even a few ways to balk that are clearly completely unintentional, like tripping and falling off the mound or dropping the ball.

17th Nov '17 1:29:58 PM CurledUpWithDakka
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** {{Tournament Play}}ers probably dont' have any confusion about castling or en passant; for them ''That One Rule'' is the long-evolving set of rules about when they are allowed to claim a position as drawn.

to:

** {{Tournament Play}}ers probably dont' don't have any confusion about castling or en passant; for them ''That One Rule'' is the long-evolving set of rules about when they are allowed to claim a position as drawn.
This list shows the last 10 events of 285. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Main.ThatOneRule