New Substitution Rules

[Frosty]

Yo hallo people.

So we had some weeks of inner discussion and personal johning from me and we came up with the following set of rules:

1. A substitution is made of a "Trigger" and a "Result"
2. Substitutions either activate, or they don't.
   • The result of a Substitute's "activation" can be changed by instance, but the trigger never changes.
3. Substitutions activate whenever the trigger's conditions are met, and the result of that activation is legally usable.
4. All clauses of a substitution's trigger must narrow it's scope.
5. Substitutions based on knowing something can only trigger after that thing is known. (e.g if the opponent crits a2 then counter that action is legal if you were already going to move second a2, but illegal otherwise). (If you know something, your Pokemon knows it). Attack clauses activate based on what would currently be used according to the main order set.
6. Player 1 can substitute for Attacks, Chance, and KOs. Player 2 can substitute for Chance and KOs.
   • All clauses can be appended by 'NOT'.
7. If a substitution causes an infinite loop, then it is ignored. If two or more substitutions would cause an infinite loop, ignore the substitution made by the player who ordered later. If the substitutions were ordered at the same time (Either a single player ordering, or in brawl orders where all player orders are treated as simultaneous), then both are deemed illegal.
8. If, ordering second, your substitution would cause the Trigger of an opponent's substitution which has already legally activated to no longer have it's unknown conditions met (Such as 'AND NOT Encore next action), then it is ignored.
9. In each sub, each action (Action 1, Action 2, Prior action, etc.) can only have one attack clause per Pokémon Out.

Our proposal is that this replaces the core sub rules and we add the extra fluff we have (aka Sub classes, KO Subs, Anti-Pedant Rule, Substitution interaction and pushing back subs and recent Anti-Loop rules)

This is the result of 5 people thinking. Since our community is kinda larger than that, we are now opening this for discussion and possible changes before booth. Thoughts?

This will stay open for 5 days assuming no discussion (don't do that to me). If discussion then...the sky is the limit?

 

[Maxim]

Sounds good overall to me. I'm not too sure about a few of these though, could you come up with some examples that illustrate these concepts better? Thank you.

 

[Mowtom]

Sounds good overall to me. I'm not too sure about a few of these though, could you come up with some examples that illustrate these concepts better? Thank you.

Specifically legal and illegal examples of 8 and 9, please.

 

[acidphoenix]

8-
Player1 Orders
Thunderboltx3
IF Thunderbolt AND not Encore next action then Willowisp
P2 Orders
Thunderbolt-Flamethrowerx2

A sub by P2 of "IF you are burned THEN Encore would be ignored", because it would cause a loop with P1's sub.

9 says that IF Damaging Fighting type move AND NOT Focus Blast is illegal.

 

[Gale Wing Srock]

Just to be clear with the Looping concept, I am assuming that all forms of loops are disallowed over an entire round, and the substitutions that cause a loop are deemed illegal (mostly second order subs).

Eg: Assume Player 1's pokemon is faster.

Player 1 orders:

Fire Blast ~ Focus Blast ~ Fire Blast

IF Fire blast misses on action 1, then replace all instances of Fire Blast with Flamethrower.
IF Mirror Coat is used, THEN use Fire Blast that action instead.

Player 2 orders:

Hydro Pump ~ Doom Desire ~ Hydro Pump

IF Fire blast misses on action 1, THEN use Roar that action instead and use Mirror Coat on action 3.

So the second substitution of Player 1's order would be illegal on action 3, and Player 1's pokemon would use Flamethrower instead?

-------

If a round based substitution is triggered by a main order, no substitution would be able to replace that order?

Eg: In a doubles battle, where Mega Heracross is paralyzed and at 70 HP.

Player 1 orders:

Golem: Endure ~ Fire Blast (Mega Heracross) ~ Flamethrower (Mega Heracross)

IF Toxic is used during the round, AND you are the target, then use Explosion on action 1 instead.

Moltres: Fire Blast (Mega Heracross) ~ Flamethrower (Mega Heracross) ~ Fire Blast (Mega Heracross)

IF Golem's first substitution would trigger, Then use Fly (Mega Heracross) on all remaining actions.

Player 2 orders:

Mega Heracross: Dig (Golem) ~ Rock Slide ~ Toxic (Golem)

IF Golem is KO'd when you would act, THEN use Smack Down (Moltres) that action instead and push actions back.
IF your HP is below 20 when you would act, THEN use Rock Blast (Moltres) that action instead and push actions back.

So in this example both of Mega Heracross's subs are illegal, since they actually replace Toxic in the main order?

 

[Gale Wing Srock]

EBWOP:

Don't get me wrong

I think Tangled Feet is my natural ability.

I just think that the looping concept needs more thinking. It would be better if we establish a trigger timeline and establish an action / round based scope for the substitution classes, Just like we have a timing for effects in the handbook.

 

[Its_A_Random]

No it does not need more thinking. We do not need people exploiting substitutions by making a substitution of their own and ensuring that their sub works and the first order does not work as intended; it shifts the balance of power too far in the second order's favour and is not better for game balance than the status quo.

 

[Frosty]

Rule 9 is there to replace the old "no NOT before attack clauses" rule. You get to use one attack clause (aka IF Thunderbolt) per pokemon out per sub.

So on a 1vs1 singles:

IF Mr. Mime is to use Psychic THEN do a barrel roll - You use 1 Attack clause and there are 2 pokemon out. Legal
IF Mr. Mime is to use Psychic AND Clefable is NOT to use Moonblast THEN do a barrel roll - You use 2 Attack clauses and there are 2 pokemon out. Legal
IF Mr. Mime is to use a Damaging Psychic Move AND Not Psychic - You use 2 Attack Clauses with 2 pokemon out. Legal.
IF Mr. Mime is to use a Damaging Psychic move AND not psychic AND not psybeam AND not extrasensory AND not Psyshock AND not Psystrike AND not Confusion AND not psywave THEN Counter - You use 9 Attack Clauses with 2 pokemon out - Illegal.


On a 3vs3 triples you can do interesting stuff like:

IF You are to Heat Wave AND Infernape is NOT to Feint AND Sableye is NOT to Feint AND Gallade is not to Skill Swap your Flash Fire AND Aerodactyl is to Wide Guard AND Froslass is not to Skill Swap (Cursed Body <-> Flash Fire) THEN Flamethrower (Froslass) - 6 attack clauses with 6 pokemon out - legal.

But you still can't:

IF Damaging Fire move AND not flame burst AND not flamethrower AND not ember AND not Fire Blast AND not Blast Burn AND not Mystical Fire AND not Lava Plume AND not Heat Wave AND Counter isn't disabled AND Counter isn't Imprisoned THEN Counter - 9 attack clauses with 6 pokemon out - illegal.

Technically you could, on a 3vs3 triples or a brawl or something silly like that, use a ton of "not" and "abuse" a sub. Except your opponent will have 3 (or more) pokemon and movepools to work something out and get rid of your sub or make it a non-factor. It won't work well for you, trust me.

The goal of this rule is to allow "NOT", while having a (arbitrary, but everything is) limit on how weird it can get. A more complex sub can account for what all pokemon on the field are to do, so that was the guideline we took. If it is proven to be overpowered, we can use another factor, like number of opposing mons out or something like that. But for now it works well in theory, since the situation where a bunch of NOTs would be more harmful (singles) only has 2 attack clauses to work with, and that is pretty much nothing.

 

[Frosty]

Regarding Gale's posts, I wish it were that simple, IAR, but it isn't. His concerns are valid questions.

Well, the first at least. The second falls under our current loop rules. And yes, I woud be inclined to say "if you put an action that triggers a sub on your main orders, you are allowed to even consider the possibility of having a sub affect it in the slightest". You are ordering last and have the power to determine what goes in, so you pay the price.


Regarding that first point, it is a simple question: If a substitution that orders the change of future actions activates, does it remain activated or it activates, changes orders and then ceases to have any effect? Lemme try to explain.

Consider these orders

Hero: Fire Blast - Fire Blast - Fire Blast
IF Double Team A1 THEN Replace All future instances of Fire Blast with Heat Wave
IF Wide Guard A3 THEN Flamethrower

Villain: Double Team (1 clone) - Protect - Wide Guard

a) If the substitution is to be considered activated at all times: Double Team one triggers the first sub from our hero, which proceeds to use Heat Wave A2 and A3. A3 the Villain also triggers the second substitution, but since the first was still considered activated, two subs activate at once, which means that the top is to be used. Which means Heat Wave is the move used.

b) If the substitution is activate only on the instant it is triggered and then it deactivates: Double Team triggers the sub, which changes A2 and A3 and then ceases to have any effect. A3 comes and Wide Guard activates the second sub. Since it is the only sub active, our hero uses flamethrower, no questions asked.


Based on precedents, I think we go with "b". I see no reason to change tbh. Do you guys think it should be worth discussing.


Regarding everything else, giving 48h before this proceeds to voting.

 

[Its_A_Random]

Frosty I was more or less responding about the second point anyway but okay.

Voting time I guess? IDK how the vote is being handled so I will leave it to you.