GSC Pre-Status, Pre-Damage and Non-Max PP legality

[Enigami]

Soon I'll be working on implementing these in the teambuilder for Showdown (got an in thanks to RBY/GSC Anything Goes needing it to be accurate), and they will become options for both.

With that in mind, what aspects should be quick claused and which should we keep?

Pre-Status (RBY) - Ruins status moves, allows Pokemon to slap Poison or Burn status on everything for status protection.
Pre-Damage (RBY) - Harmless.
Non-Max PP (RBY) - Makes PP stalling partial trapping virtually impossible due to uncertain PP.
Pre-Status (GSC) - Hurts status moves, status is more detrimental in GSC compared to RBY though. Sleep with 0 turns remaining would be overpowered though due to guaranteed status protection until the Pokemon moves, severely hindering status moves. If allowed, perhaps allow statuses to be individually banned?
Pre-Damage (GSC) - Allows 1 HP Pokemon, insuring instant 200BP Flail / Reversal with the cost of 0 bulk and being invalidated by Spikes if the 1 HP Pokemon is grounded.
Non-Max PP (GSC) - Harmless.

Only one I personally think will work out fine is Pre-Damage, Pre-Status for the most part would drastically change the metas and ruin status inflicting moves and Non-Max PP breaks RBY partial trapping.

 

[Lutra]

For Non-Max PP, is there a way you could signify 1x, 1.2x, 1,4x and 1.6x? It would probably be sensible to clause it to one or all these specific values (PP ups) in my opinion for rby partial trapping moves.

 

[Disaster Area]

Imo:
- if it's harmless it should be permitted in the 1U
- Pre-Status and non-max PP should be 1A only. We could have a vote on allowing non-max PP in 1U however.
- Pre-damage and pre-status should be voted on by the playerbase in both 1U-L and 1B

 

[DarkCyborg]

Pre-Status (RBY) - Ruins status moves, allows Pokemon to slap Poison or Burn status on everything for status protection.

Well, Haze is there, though it is learned only by Vaporeon, Weezing and Golbat (as well as the NFE Koffing and Zubat). But I agree with DA, that should be left to 1A and 1B only.

 

[The Idiot Ninja]

I personally think any change to Cleric Clause would be silly. We've played with it in RBY since forever (and it's been known for at least a decent bit that you could get into battle with a burned chansey), the recent discovery concerns GSC and I think pre-damage and pre-status are both pretty toxic for the metagame with non-max pp being pretty much always detrimental so there's not much point to not having Cleric Clause there either.

@ Lutra: It's not only max PP, it's also current PP. You could start a match with any number of Wrap PP and be okay. For all I know it's probably even possible to start at 63 if you get the underflow in game.

So yeah. Implement those for Anything Goes maybe, but I don't think allowing them in metagames makes much sense at all. Maybe the harmless ones because they're not going to get used ever anyway.

 

[Lutra]

@ Lutra: It's not only max PP, it's also current PP. You could start a match with any number of Wrap PP and be okay. For all I know it's probably even possible to start at 63 if you get the underflow in game.

I figured that out. But what I’m thinking is forcing wrap to be like 15PP or whatever so it’s balanced is possibly going too far modification-wise, better to stick to the 4 ‘maximum’ possible PPs or 1 maximum possible PP for the partial trapping moves.

I’m open to exploring no pp ups on partial trapping moves.

 

[DarkCyborg]

Non-Max PP (RBY) - Makes PP stalling partial trapping virtually impossible due to uncertain PP.

That is related to Cleric Clause, isn't it?

I want to bring another case to the discussion: what about Non-Max PP Ups in RBY? That's a very different thing, because in this case, a move can assume different values of PP even if you heal your pokémons with nurse joy before the battle. Of course, in this case, you cannot start a battle using any value of PP, as Cleric Clause would limit it to the standart values of max PP, that would depend of the quantity of PP Ups you have applied to that move. For example, in this case, Clamp could assume 10, 12, 14 or 16 PPs in the start of the battle.

Despite the fact the simulator already sets your PP Ups to max, there's actually no clauses in Pokémon Perfect that forbides to have a move with 0, 1 or 2 PP Ups applied, and things like "Clamp with 10 PPs" are actually legal if you take the RBY clauses literally (there's nothing about using max PP Ups in the complete list).

 

[Enigami]

I personally think any change to Cleric Clause would be silly. We've played with it in RBY since forever (and it's been known for at least a decent bit that you could get into battle with a burned chansey), the recent discovery concerns GSC and I think pre-damage and pre-status are both pretty toxic for the metagame with non-max pp being pretty much always detrimental so there's not much point to not having Cleric Clause there either.

sulcata and Lavos on Smogon commented on this, and I left it alone because it's Smogon and I figured I'd have a lot less leeway to argue about things especially regarding Old Gens. But I really want an answer on this, why is 1 HP Flail/Reversal considered toxic?

Grounded Flail/Reversal mons including Heracross have answers and if Spikes are down, you're playing 5-6.

Flying Flail/Reversal mons basically go Dodrio (which is walled hard by Normal resists), Gyarados (can 2HKOs most things but is also at an iffy speed tier that leaves it outsped by plenty of things, also no STAB so not quite as strong as Heracross/Dodrio), Scyther (Good for Fighting-weak mons especially if you manage to get a SD, but plenty of answers), Crobat (super fast but even Flail is weak), and finally Yanma and Farfetch'd, which are super outclassed by Scyther and Dodrio.

Plus there's the whole being so weak that even Rapid Spin and Toxic OHKO 1 HP mons.

I think pre-damage should at least be tested before deciding it needs to go.

 

[The Idiot Ninja]

sulcata and Lavos on Smogon commented on this, and I left it alone because it's Smogon and I figured I'd have a lot less leeway to argue about things especially regarding Old Gens. But I really want an answer on this, why is 1 HP Flail/Reversal considered toxic?

Grounded Flail/Reversal mons including Heracross have answers and if Spikes are down, you're playing 5-6.

Flying Flail/Reversal mons basically go Dodrio (which is walled hard by Normal resists), Gyarados (can 2HKOs most things but is also at an iffy speed tier that leaves it outsped by plenty of things, also no STAB so not quite as strong as Heracross/Dodrio), Scyther (Good for Fighting-weak mons especially if you manage to get a SD, but plenty of answers), Crobat (super fast but even Flail is weak), and finally Yanma and Farfetch'd, which are super outclassed by Scyther and Dodrio.

Plus there's the whole being so weak that even Rapid Spin and Toxic OHKO 1 HP mons.

I think pre-damage should at least be tested before deciding it needs to go.

It's probably uncompetitive because the best way of checking grounded mons attempting this is spikes and getting lucky roars. Alternatively, doesn't take much to set your hp at just over spikes damage - who doesn't run spikes anyway? super easy to get spikes placed against you if you want them to do so, and a lot of the current meta just gets ran over by a Heracross. I think it's a part of the game that we don't need to deal with and we haven't needed to deal with for as long as we've played the game, but I guess I'm not against testing it...

 

[Enigami]

I just realized the proper way to go about this is leave GSC 1U-L as is, and introduce it into GSC 1A instead. That way we can handle 1 HP (and possibly pre-status) naturally as a part of the re-tiering process instead of messing with a classic tier.

 

[Disaster Area]

Well, with regards to introducing it to GSC 1U-L: we can introduce it to the classic tier if the playerbase wants it (maybe we should hold a vote?).

With regards to GSC 1A: of course we should include it in GSC 1A.