"Rabbit Logic"

[Toffee.]

You like Rescue Rabbit?

[spoiler=Well here is an image of Rescue Rabbit, made of Rescue Rabbits]

[/spoiler]
[spoiler=Now here is a firefighter]

[/spoiler]
 
Ok, stupid/relevant images aside, let me get on with the point of this topic.
Why do people play unrelated things "just because"?
You know why they do? It's the easist answer ever, and sums up the whole topic:

No, really, that's just it. I mean, why would you care, as long as it does just that?
Because it's consistent? Because it "wins games"? Because you are an original character and people shouldn't steal you?

See, heres the issue with this, and WHY it's so damn stupid in the first place.
Say for example, you made your deck:
[spoiler=Rabbit.dek]
[/spoiler]
Simply put:

It's the fact the deck runs off the premise of:
+
is a "good ratio" for Rabbit. How is that effecient? I mean, yes, you drew into 6 of your Rabbits and got one of them to accomplish your goal. But now you have 37 dead Rabbits. Who the hell plays like this? I mean, say you even had your Rabbit Veiler'd, and then the following turn you drew Sabersaurus, of all cards. What then? Scoop Phase? Dishwasher? No. You lost. It's your own damn fault, too. I mean, WHY would you play with a mindset of potentially giving yourself un-needed dead draws?
So lets try this again:
+
Now we have an equal set of stuff to play, and in a fairly large ammount. No, this doesn't mean you can run 1 Rabbit and 2 Sabers, because that's still dumb logic and relies too much on it being that situation, and that situation only. Because, again, drawing any of the pieces outside of that order will kill it. Solution? Lets actually run more of a variety of targets.
So now we have:
/ +

We have a large number of targets for Rabbit, and we are even playing Rabbit in a larger number at that.
This improves both effeciency and consistency, on the grounds that you have more Rabbits you can draw into, and drawing any of your Normals won't kill Rabbit.
No, this doesn't mean you can be all:
/ +
Because now you have an overabundance of targets, for 1 card. While this looks cool on paper, heres the catch: You now have a single-minded game going for yourself; Do you use Rabbit to make X or Y? You cant choose both because you only have 1 Rabbit, and no matter which one you pick, it's going to render all your other ones dead. Don't say "But Arm, Vanillas aren't dead"- In a Rabbit deck, if you draw them, and don't have Rabbit, then yes, they are dead.

Basically, to put it simply, JUSTIFY YOUR MOVES/CARD CHOICES!
Or at least try to, and not make yourself look desperate.
Yes this is a rather obscure way of thinking, but heres a thought-
Say your win condition requires Dark Hole to function. K, we got that. Dark Hole has no cards that can specifically search it. Dark Hole will prey on your mentality that using it without your win condition makes your "win condition" more of a vulnerable thing. Why? Because you used your only asset too early, and are now at a loss of it because you chose to randomly toss it out and not think about it. Is that the Opponent's fault he randomly had Dark Bribe to screw you over? No. It's your own damn fault for not thinking. So now, the rest of your "win condition" has no means of being able to function. Same rules apply to things like Tour Guide. Yes its at 2, and it being obscure like that measn you can get the other one easier due to the nature of them. Now this is a weird case of Rabbit Logic where something like that is just randomly tossed into everything; Say that said Guide gets Veiler'd/Chain'd/etc; You just lost your 2nd Guide and it's now a dead draw. Not saying these scenarios always happen, but they do. It's why people used to run Night Assailant for the fact it's another Level 3 Fiend with an effect that doesn't contradict the deck itself, as it's just a simple FLIP-Effect monster. So if you loose your 1st Guide, your 2nd Guide could just grab Night. Or if Guide 1 got Guide 2, you still have Night, and Night actually does something along the lines of what Guide -> Guide -> Rank 3 would usually do as well.

TL;DR SPLASHABLE MONSTERS SHOULD BE A CHOICE YOU PUT THOUGHT INTO
But not the point of your deck becoming nothing but them, because now you've wondered into the realms of (basically) cookie-cutter, and that's a different subject all together. Point is, people shouldn't just toss specific monsters in that have no relation to any of the deck's goals what so ever, outside of the fact they percieve them as "good". That's tacky and lazy.

And no, this isn't just on Rabbit itself, but rather, card choinces in general that follow a similar pattern. Like if you only played 1 Tenki and then 3 Bear. Only 1 Bear is going to be able to destroy something with it's effect OR deal damage and search for that 1 Tenki. It's just absurd.

Discuss.

Also if this is in the wrong section, please move it to an appropriate one, or whatever.

[:^)]

Honestly sick of Rabbit. Please Konami, Forbidden in Jan 2014?

[Lonk]

Rabbit is stupidly designed anyways, and I honestly hate how everyone likes to ride his elongated penis.

 

Also, that firefighter rescuing the rabbit is adorable.

[Trebuchet MS]

This phenomenon reminds me of the novice mistake of running a certain card for the sake of a certain combo, whether it fits into the Deck or not. Only that the fallacies circling things like Rabbit and Tour Guide are slightly harder to spot.

 

Come to think of it, this also reminds me of Gravekeeper's Spy being splashed for the sake of durable replicating Tribute fodder in the past.

[goddamnit names are a pain]

You say "used to run Night Assailant"

I still do. xD

 

And that Rabbit deck needs Reload because win moar.

 

 

What then? Scoop Phase? Dishwasher? No. You lost.

So true. I'm not afraid to admit this, but this is what my first few runs of my Quasar deck looked like.

[Toffee.]

Honestly sick of Rabbit.

Rabbit is stupidly designed

Topic isn't exactly about Rabbit, per say. It's about the mindset of "teching" random stuff just for the sake of playing it, despite having no real reason to it, other then "because I had room".

Come to think of it, this also reminds me of Gravekeeper's Spy being splashed for the sake of durable replicating Tribute fodder in the past.

What, in things like Monarchs?

[ihop]

GK Spy was splashed in certain decks due to it being a 2K wall, being additional tribute/synchro fodder and being a DARK for Allure/Dark Armed.

[The Hounds Of Anubis]

idek how GK Spy is an example of a splash.

Ignore the name for a second, and it's really, really easy to see why it was used. Because it was just a really, really solid standalone card.

[Zincoshine]

You are hating the wrong card, it's leviair and sangan that was making rescue rabbit a problem, the former has been banned now and that along with semi limiting tour guide and rescue rabbit had already stopped dino rabbits from being a tier 1 deck. Rescue rabbit by himself is not much and only promoted diversity and creativity. Last august i recommended that leviair be banned. Maybe this January konami will get it right. Anyway I really hope rescue rabbit comes back to two, getting sick and tired of seeing nothing but generic archetype decks made by konami for the obvious purpose of making money. The last format was one of the worst ever but when people weren't using e-drags, evilswarms, or spellbooks there were some really creative decks out there to duel. This format people are playing a variety of decks but they are all archetype based with the exception of chaos dragons.

 

 

In a Rabbit deck, if you draw them, and don't have Rabbit, then yes, they are dead.

 

 

[Toffee.]

I think you are hating the wrong card-

It's not a topic specifically on Rabbit, just uses it as an example, but rather... Cards that use it's same logic of being mindlessly splashed into things.
I mean, it would be like if you played Black Luster in Rock Stun just because you randomly Xyz Summoned a DARK monster, to go with that 1/40 Veiler you used earlier.

[Zincoshine]

It's not a topic specifically on Rabbit, just uses it as an example, but rather... Cards that use it's same logic of being mindlessly splashed into things.
I mean, it would be like if you played Black Luster in Rock Stun just because you randomly Xyz Summoned a DARK monster, to go with that 1/40 Veiler you used earlier.

hmmm this reminds me of idiots who put "the calculator" into their dark worlds deck just so they can put BLS in there also.

[The Hounds Of Anubis]

For the record, Rabbit is probably the actual worst card you could have used as an example, Armz. Rabbit isn't a "splash card" it's an engine and generally one you build your deck around to optimize but not rely on.

[Sleepy]

The concept sounds like people don't have a lot of experience in deck-building.

 

You could main that "Dark Magician Knight" for that one combo, of Tributing a "Dark Magician" with "Knight's Tittle", be it a Prisma or not. Or virtually all Dark Magician evolutions for that matter, except "Dark Magician of Chaos" for obvious reasons.

 

Or you could be more like: (Warning. My bad combos)

"Dream Clown" works in here because it's searchable by "Giant Rat" as a 4th target and is left in a good position if it survives until my turn, matches the Level with other monsters for easy Xyzs or as a match with my Tuner(s) for that Synchro(s), Is also a viable target for my RotA and "Warrior Returning Alive" as well as covering "Drako Equizte"s requirement. Not to mention "Curse of Anubis is a generic defensive card I already run that helps it, and....

 

This almost doesn't apply to staples though....hmmm

[Darj]

It's not a topic specifically on Rabbit, just uses it as an example, but rather... Cards that use it's same logic of being mindlessly splashed into things.
I mean, it would be like if you played Black Luster in Rock Stun just because you randomly Xyz Summoned a DARK monster, to go with that 1/40 Veiler you used earlier.

 

Would Ananta in a Reptile Engine fall in this category, or the card is an actually good tech?