(Data) Substitution Rules

[Orcinus Duo]

So it’s become clear that sub rules aren’t getting solved anytime soon. So what I’ve done here is create a set of rules that we can build upon. I am a strong believer that nothing is ever going to get done by theorying all day, so hopefully this ruleset could spawn some talking points.

The main gripe I have with sub rules right now is that it relies on sort of an honour code for people not to abuse a pretty glaring loophole. Here we have the substitution rules in the Referee Resource Thread:

Originally Posted by Fat Korski

Before a match begins, battlers must agree on the Substitution Rules of the match, namely how many Substitutions battlers are allowed to make per Round. It is the referee's job to determine the legality of Substitutions and to ignore them when they don't adhere to ASB's specific rules regarding legal and illegal Substitutions.

Attack Substitution:

For each of their Pokemon, a Player acting first may create a Substitution based on one or more specific Attack or Command the opponent can issue and Substitute their called Actions. This conditional can only be triggered by one of the opponent's Actions, however it may apply to multiple consecutive Actions for the trainer's Pokemon in that round. Battlers may also use "Substitution Classes" to have the same effect but cover a wider breadth of moves:

• Protective Moves: Protect, Detect
• Evasive Moves: Agility (Evasive), Teleport (Evasive)
• Damaging Evasive Moves: Dig, Fly, Dive, Bounce, Shadow Force
• Damaging TYPE Moves: Covers all of Flamethrower, Lava Plume, Fire Blast, Ember, etc. under the umbrella of "Damaging Fire-type Move." Covers all of Psychic, Psyshock, Confusion, Dream Eater, etc. under the umbrella of "Damaging Psychic-type Move." Etc. NOTE: This Substitution applies to all attacks of a certain type that have a BAP, so moves like Knock Off, Incinerate, and Rapid Spin will trigger this Substitution.
• Paralysis-Inflicting Moves: Thunder Wave, Glare, Stun Spore
• Poison-Inflicting Moves: Poison Gas, Poisonpowder, Toxic
• Sleep-Inflicting Moves: Spore, Hypnosis, Sleep Powder, Sing, Grasswhistle, Lovely Kiss, Dark Void, Yawn
• Confusion-Inflicting Moves: Confuse Ray, Supersonic, Sweet Kiss, Teeter Dance, Swagger
• Switch-Preventing Moves (Only allowed during Switch = OK): Block, Mean Look, Spider Web
• Trapping Moves: Fire Spin, Sand Tomb, Whirlpool, Magma Storm, Bind, Wrap, Clamp
• Switch-Forcing Moves: Whirlwind, Roar, Circle Throw, Dragon Tail
• Self-Switching Moves: U-Turn, Volt Switch, Teleport (Switch)
• Healing Moves: Roost, Slack Off, Recover, Moonlight, Synthesis, Morning Sun, Softboiled, Heal Order, Milk Drink, Swallow
• Status-Healing Moves: Aromatherapy, Heal Bell, Refresh
• Lock-On Moves: Lock-On, Mind Reader
• Attack-Reducing Moves: Growl, Charm, Featherdance, Memento
• Defense-Reducing Moves: Leer, Tail Whip, Screech
• Special Attack-Reducing Moves: Captivate, Memento
• Special Defense-Reducing Moves: Fake Tears, Metal Sound
• Speed-Reducing Moves: String Shot, Cotton Spore, Scary Face, Bulldoze, Icy Wind, Mud Shot, Rock Tomb, Electroweb, Glaciate, Low Sweep
• Accuracy-Reducing Moves: Flash, Kinesis, Sand-Attack, Smokescreen

Chance Substitution:

Battlers may also create Substitutions based on the success or failure of a previously ordered Attack or Attack effect. This conditional can only be triggered by the success or failure of a previous Action, and as such cannot be applied to the first action of a Round. Ex: IF Body Slam Paralyzes the opponent, THEN use Bounce on the following Action. This Substitution can be made by either Player (or both) when issuing Actions, but it will still count toward the total number of Substitutions allowed.

KO Substitution:

For each of their Pokemon, either player in a multiple battle (Doubles or more) may order an alternative set of actions based on a specific opponent fainting. KO Substitutions do not stack with Attack or Chance Substitutions in terms of Substitution limits, although only one is allowed per Round.

As it stands, there have been several debatable keywords used in substitutions today (AND NOT, UNLESS, NON-CONSECUTIVELY, cascading everything, etc.), but I’ll set them aside for now. This thread aims to codify what is legal in attack substitutions.

Attack substitutions aim to allow battlers to substitute for a single situation.

And immediately we see a problem—the problem that defines most sub arguments. What is “a single situation”? And to what extent can battlers “substitute”?

I think the crux of the debate boils down to that. We see that the basic formula for a substitution is IF X THEN Y. So, quite simply, all we have to do is codify what is legal for X and what is legal for Y. Right?

X will now be termed as the trigger, Y as the response.

Trigger
Triggers must only be one specific instance. Keywords such as AND may be allowed to specify the trigger to a narrower instance. They can be a substitution for an Attack, Command, a Substitution Class (see above), the presence of status, Chance/KO Substitutions, or the presence of an existing condition to a Pokemon (has a substitute, has screens, etc.) (these may apply to the user or the opponent).

-It may be specified on which action the trigger may activate.
-It may be specified on in what specific circumstances the trigger may activate. However, this specific circumstance must be the presence of another legal trigger.
-Derivatives of Attacks, Commands, or Substitution Class may be used, unless it inclues a move which is part of a sub class that is included in the trigger.
-Pokemon have prior knowledge of what actions the opponent ordered.
-You cannot use more than one individual move from the same move class to be used for the same action by the same pokemon in the same substitution.

IF Fire Punch AND you do not have a substitute up: Legal.
IF Fire Punch ON action 1 or 3: Legal
IF Fire Punch is ordered on any action: Legal
IF damaging Fire type move is ordered on any action AND another damaging fire type move is ordered on any action: Legal
IF NOT Fire Punch: Legal

IF Fire Punch on A1 AND Protect on A2: Legal
IF Fire Punch on A1 AND NOT Protect on A2: Legal
IF Fire Punch on A2 AND you used Protect on A1: Legal
IF damaging Fire Type move AND NOT Fire Punch: Illegal

IF less than 12 en: Illegal

Response
Response must be a direct reaction to the trigger. The response may not include any further conditional clauses. Hence, responses such as:

Pushback WHEN X is replaced

Is illegal because ‘WHEN’ is conditional.

-Responses must be universal for all instances of the trigger, with two exceptions: You may choose to add exceptions for consecutive instances of the trigger.
-Responses may include action strings.

THEN replace with action string X~Y~Z upon consecutive uses: Legal
THEN alternate X~Y upon consecutive uses and pushback: Legal
THEN alternate X~Y upon consecutive uses and pushback on replacement of protect: Illegal
THEN protect and pushback, but not consecutively: Legal

Discuss.

[TIO]

What about saying IF below X hp, THEN Y?
This would be useful for stuff like Dman-Z and Eruption.

[Objection]

Originally Posted by Fat TIO

What about saying IF below X hp, THEN Y?
This would be useful for stuff like Dman-Z and Eruption.

This is why I would like to see another substitution category called situation sub or something like that. Chance subs could be merged with this category.

[Pwnemon]

why the hell is "And not" not legal

It is perfectly legal provided it is not used to "chip away" at a substitution class

for example what if i wanted to say:

"IF Dragonite uses Protect a1 AND NOT Fire blast a2 then chill a1"

that's a perfectly logical, unabusive sub and should be legal. The only type of AND NOT that's illegal is "IF Damaging Evasive move AND NOT Dive" which can be cleared up by saying that if you sub for a substitution class, every move in that class triggers the sub, no matter what

[Box]

Regarding Pwnemon's point, consider that the above Sub substitutes for 2 sub classes of attacks on two different actions (Protective and Fire Damaging).

In my opinion this either makes it illegal or consumes 2 Subs in one.

I quote: "For each of their Pokemon, a Player acting first may create a Substitution based on one or more specific Attack or Command the opponent can issue and Substitute their called Actions."

This of course would include also the Substitution Classes. To that effect, I can see why AND NOT subs could be disallowed.

[Pwnemon]

wait, you're saying it would have to be written as "if protect a1 then chill" "if fire blast a2 then ignore the above sub and use substitute"?

i think and not is perfectly legal in the given scenario

[Orcinus Duo]

AND NOT subs are abusable. I intend to make all legal subs cascadable. Here is how they are abused:

IF Damaging Water Type Move AND NOT Waterfall AND NOT Aqua Jet AND NOT (list all the physical water type moves opponent has)

Effectively allows you to substitute for special water type moves, which contradicts the spirit of substitutions.


I do not comprehend why people like IAR is refusing to see this.

[Pwnemon]

Originally Posted by Fat me, 5 min ago

The only type of AND NOT that's illegal is "IF Damaging Evasive move AND NOT Dive" which can be cleared up by saying that if you sub for a substitution class, every move in that class triggers the sub, no matter what

i dont see why people like orcinus are refusing to read

derp

[Orcinus Duo]

EDIT: OP fixed.

[Objection]

I'd have to side with Pwnemon on this one. I do not see the problem with making a particular kind of substitution clause "conditionally legal". If the problem is it conflicts with the idea of making all legal subs cascadable, I'd say the problem is with that idea.

EDIT: How does Pwnemon's suggestion make "if Fire Blast a1 and Protect a2" illegal? Protect is not in the Fire Blast category of subs.

[Box]

No, my understanding of it is simply that the former AND NOT Sub contains situational substitutions based on two Substitution Classes, hence in the very least it should be classified as the equivalent of two Subs.

[Its_A_Random]

Originally Posted by Fat Orcinus Duo

AND NOT subs are abusable. I intend to make all legal subs cascadable. Here is how they are abused:

IF Damaging Water Type Move AND NOT Waterfall AND NOT Aqua Jet AND NOT (list all the physical water type moves opponent has)

Effectively allows you to substitute for special water type moves, which contradicts the spirit of substitutions.


I do not comprehend why people like IAR is refusing to see this.

Since I appear to have been called out, I might as well respond to this.

Basically, under the current rules, your example is illegal anyway, given it basically counts for a gazillion substitutions. You are Substituting for:

• Damaging Water Move
• NOT Aqua Jet on the same action
• NOT Waterfall on the same action
• NOT <Physical Water Move> on the same action

Basically, the substitution is not exactly what you would call "sequential", so it would be classed as a gazillion substitutions.

Compare it to this sub I used against Yarnus of Bethany:

IF Pow! uses Fake Out (Utilitand) A1, AND Zap! does NOT use (Protective/Evasive move) A2, THEN use Tailwind A1, pushing actions back.

One could agree that it is a little shaky & pushing the rules a bit, but it is basically substituting for a specific action sequence. Of course, the OP declares such a sub to be legal, so I will not go into details. Then you get something far more suspect like the Substitutions I made in my match vs. Objection in the Team Tourney, but that is another story for another day, given such a substitution would likely be codified to be illegal when this is done?

Originally Posted by Fat Box

No, my understanding of it is simply that the former AND NOT Sub contains situational substitutions based on two Substitution Classes, hence in the very least it should be classified as the equivalent of two Subs.

As long as it is semi-sequential like my above example, it would be fine to class AND NOT as one substitution. Something like "IF (Damaging Fire Move) is issued, AND Flame Charge is NOT issued..." on the other hand, would be classified as two, according to my logic, since it is not exactly sequential in nature, if you get what I mean, which I doubt anyone does, but w/e.

Basically, AND NOT should be legal/count as one sub if it is "sequential", that is, you are not subbing for multiple moves/categories from one particular opposing Pokemon on the same action.

[Yarnus of Bethany]

The OP is perfect the way it is. Let's move on to whether out not there should be situation subs.