Hi, I'm Aldaron. I'm a guy who really enjoys actually playing Pokemon. I don't armchair-qb pokemon policy; I play and prioritize the health of the game I play as much as possible.
Just figured I should give you guys an introduction, in case some of you don't know me.
Can we acknowledge, as a community, that exceptions to the rule occur, and if they are declared as exceptions, you cannot debate against proposals that are exceptions and use "bad precedent" or "slippery slope" as a tool for debate.
Inconsistent is one; we banned it mostly for how it turned every game purely into luck. This doesn't mean that we're going to actively go after removing all instances of probability management in the game; Inconsistent was an exception to the rule (regarding luck inducing Abilities, as in we aren't considering banning Super Luck or Snow Cloak or items like Razor Fang).
Can we please declare weather-inducing abilities as exceptions to the rule as well? People are seriously just spouting "simplicity of ruleset" and "slippery slope / bad precedent" for weather abilities, and it is confusing me because weather abilities are literally nothing like the majority of other abilities. Weather abilities affect a MUCH HIGHER number of variables than mostly individualistic based abilities.
Can we stop dealing with weather-inducing "abilities" as though they are the same as other abilities, or even moves / Pokemon? Weather inducing abilities affect such a large number of variables that dealing with them with "simplicity" in mind is silly.
I'm going to go on Drizzle now because that is the current issue at hand in this stage.
Right now, the majority of people believe Drizzle is broken because of never-ending rain turns and Swift Swim (Manaphy is one as well).
People who want to ban Drizzle only are removing an entire set of strategies from the metagame and making it much less diverse (no standard rain stall, no water pokemon heavy teams, sand dominant) and probably just making stuff powerful in the Sand later suspects (Dory / Landlos already are, but they would for sure be banned and Terakion would probably be considered).
People who want to ban Swift Swim are drastically lowering the usage of various Pokemon from the metagame when they could be used with Rain Dance.
Ignoring philosophical concerns like "simplicity of rulesets," the third thing would be...to ban Drizzle + Swift Swim.
This allows us to:
a.) Keep Drizzle as a strategy and keep our metagame diverse on a macro level
b.) Keep Swift Swim as a strategy for teams with Rain Dance
c.) Keep Rain Pokemon in usage.
d.) Keep Sand in check and prevent us from absolutely banning Dory / Landlos / probably banning Terakion
The only arguments presented so far against a Drizzle + Swift Swim ban on the same team are simplicity of ruleset, slippery slope, and Drizzle is broken even without Swift Swim.
However, we entirely ignore simplicity and slippery slope arguments IF we simply declare weather abilities as exceptions. No need to worry about "now we can propose Latios is only broken with Latias on the team" or something like that. Just say that abilities that affect some subjectively determined high number of variables in the metagame are exceptions to the rule. I think any of us can see how auto weather abilities affect a far larger number of variables than Intimidate or even entire individual Pokemon themselves.
So, if we can say weather abilities are an exception and make stuff "complicated" (though that is bullshit anyway since the baseline for "simplicity" is something we have subjectively determined), the only argument for not just doing a Drizzle + Swift Swim on the same team ban is that Drizzle itself is broken without Swift Swim...to which I reply, ok that might be the case, but let's first test Drizzle + Swift Swim, then get to Drizzle by itself.
So what are we going to do as a community. Are we really going to assume Drizzle is the same as other abilities / pokemon / moves and shoot down a proposal for a "complicated" ban without acknowledging that weather inducing abilities are exceptions to the rule?
Or can we finally stop prioritizing philosophical theory and simplicity of rulesets over the actual health and diversity (in strategy) of the metagame and try to ban Drizzle + Swift Swim on the same teams and keep our metagame diverse, keep Sand checked, and test to see if Drizzle by itself is broken?
Just figured I should give you guys an introduction, in case some of you don't know me.
Can we acknowledge, as a community, that exceptions to the rule occur, and if they are declared as exceptions, you cannot debate against proposals that are exceptions and use "bad precedent" or "slippery slope" as a tool for debate.
Inconsistent is one; we banned it mostly for how it turned every game purely into luck. This doesn't mean that we're going to actively go after removing all instances of probability management in the game; Inconsistent was an exception to the rule (regarding luck inducing Abilities, as in we aren't considering banning Super Luck or Snow Cloak or items like Razor Fang).
Can we please declare weather-inducing abilities as exceptions to the rule as well? People are seriously just spouting "simplicity of ruleset" and "slippery slope / bad precedent" for weather abilities, and it is confusing me because weather abilities are literally nothing like the majority of other abilities. Weather abilities affect a MUCH HIGHER number of variables than mostly individualistic based abilities.
Can we stop dealing with weather-inducing "abilities" as though they are the same as other abilities, or even moves / Pokemon? Weather inducing abilities affect such a large number of variables that dealing with them with "simplicity" in mind is silly.
I'm going to go on Drizzle now because that is the current issue at hand in this stage.
Right now, the majority of people believe Drizzle is broken because of never-ending rain turns and Swift Swim (Manaphy is one as well).
People who want to ban Drizzle only are removing an entire set of strategies from the metagame and making it much less diverse (no standard rain stall, no water pokemon heavy teams, sand dominant) and probably just making stuff powerful in the Sand later suspects (Dory / Landlos already are, but they would for sure be banned and Terakion would probably be considered).
People who want to ban Swift Swim are drastically lowering the usage of various Pokemon from the metagame when they could be used with Rain Dance.
Ignoring philosophical concerns like "simplicity of rulesets," the third thing would be...to ban Drizzle + Swift Swim.
This allows us to:
a.) Keep Drizzle as a strategy and keep our metagame diverse on a macro level
b.) Keep Swift Swim as a strategy for teams with Rain Dance
c.) Keep Rain Pokemon in usage.
d.) Keep Sand in check and prevent us from absolutely banning Dory / Landlos / probably banning Terakion
The only arguments presented so far against a Drizzle + Swift Swim ban on the same team are simplicity of ruleset, slippery slope, and Drizzle is broken even without Swift Swim.
However, we entirely ignore simplicity and slippery slope arguments IF we simply declare weather abilities as exceptions. No need to worry about "now we can propose Latios is only broken with Latias on the team" or something like that. Just say that abilities that affect some subjectively determined high number of variables in the metagame are exceptions to the rule. I think any of us can see how auto weather abilities affect a far larger number of variables than Intimidate or even entire individual Pokemon themselves.
So, if we can say weather abilities are an exception and make stuff "complicated" (though that is bullshit anyway since the baseline for "simplicity" is something we have subjectively determined), the only argument for not just doing a Drizzle + Swift Swim on the same team ban is that Drizzle itself is broken without Swift Swim...to which I reply, ok that might be the case, but let's first test Drizzle + Swift Swim, then get to Drizzle by itself.
So what are we going to do as a community. Are we really going to assume Drizzle is the same as other abilities / pokemon / moves and shoot down a proposal for a "complicated" ban without acknowledging that weather inducing abilities are exceptions to the rule?
Or can we finally stop prioritizing philosophical theory and simplicity of rulesets over the actual health and diversity (in strategy) of the metagame and try to ban Drizzle + Swift Swim on the same teams and keep our metagame diverse, keep Sand checked, and test to see if Drizzle by itself is broken?
