Recent PUI Rulings on PokéGym member questions about Unown G teach us a few things. None of what we learn is really focused Unown G, but that card makes a good test for several cases.
You can read the individual rulings in Compendium LvX or under the Latest Rulings Updates heading for Sept 11, 2008 in the sidebar.
Froslass’ Destiny Bond is the more obvious ruling. I saw it used a few times this last weekend to stall while waiting for a topdeck. Froslass wasn’t facing Unown G at the time I was asked for a ruling. The player wanted to know whether retreating the active “attacked by” Destiny Bond would allow another Pokémon to attack Frosslass. As shown in this ruling, the protection from Destiny Bond is an effect on Frosslass rather than the defending Pokémon. Not only is Unown G irrelevant in this situation, but so is retreating the defending. Now, if you could send Frosslass to the bench, with say Warp Point, then you will remove the protective effect and can attack it.
Sonic Blade puts damage counters on your defending Pokémon and you have to choose a benched Pokémon to switch with it. I know the wording on the card is from the attacker’s point of view, but this is mechanically what happens from the defender’s side. What if you choose a benched Pokémon to switch that can’t be moved by attack effects… perhaps one with Unown G attached? Is that legal? Do you have to choose a movable one, if available? As it turns out, you can choose one to switch that can’t be switched. This calls into question some other rulings… stay tuned, but don’t hold your breath!
Spike Armor is an interesting case… I’ll hold comment on this ruling we received until a future date perhaps.
Looking up Spike Armor in the Compendium LvX makes me notice that the hyperlinked index at the end of the document is truncated before it prints out all the index entries. I’ll work on that and try to get it fixed within the next few weeks.
Thanks for reading this, using the Compendium and for contributing your rulings questions in Ask the Masters.