Texas Cloverleaf
This user has a custom title
Memento is a (weak) self-KO move. Even at 1 EN I don't see a problem with it.
In cases where a motion has been passed for a decision that directly alters or amends powers given to the ASB Council, that is to say anything not initially agreed upon as to their role and power, a decision towards the motion regarding the powers granted to the ASB Council must be dictated by Deck Knight, the only authority greater than the ASB Council and thus outside the conflict of interest.
support to all three1) Crits ignoring burn in ASB
2) Dodge cap
Just like how Fissure isn't included in damaging ground type moves?IIRC the reason Dodge isn't in the Evasive moves Substitution class is because of its unreliability - some people might want to just go through with the attack and hope for a hit, for example.
Thank you. Fuck that move, and the person who didn't put dodge in evasive.also dodge really should be in the evasive class so even if the cap is maintained we should move it
Fissure is situationally damaging.RE Dodge:
By that same logic, then why are Quick Guard & Wide Guard not covered as Protective Moves in the substitutions class? This is probably because they are situationally protective, just like how Dodge is situationally evasive. So if you are going to consider something situational like Dodge to be evasive, then why not also consider Quick Guard & Wide Guard to be protective moves as well? Just throwing it out there. Also, remember that Dodge is considered a command, & not a move (And yes, there is a difference between a move & a command).9
Fissure is also an attack. Dodge is a command. There is a difference.Fissure is situationally damaging.
And then semantics.
True, that. I was just simply pointing out that one issue—not necessarily a problem, given what other properties Ninjask has—associated with removing the dodge cap would give Ninjask a pretty powerful niche, even though it is cursed with the Bug/Flying Type, noticeable fragility, & not the best offences in the world... But then again, that just gives an incentive to make dodge the first command to be classed in a substitution, right? Not that I am really opposing or supporting the issue...Even if Ninjask's Dodge essentially becomes 100% effective it's still going to be Ninjask...
One problem: Lum Berry already gives it a pseudo-immunity to status, so why would it need to Rest outside of recovery? I mean, you could change it to after the Pokémon acts instead of end of action, but that brings up a new plane of issues, lol.Yeah - thats how lumrest works currently, and this is bad. Its intended to be better than a regular rest - not an expensive Refresh, and we should change it to be so.
Deck already made that ninja edit a few weeks ago (Intimidate = Innate while retaining the command), lol, so... Wish granted already! ^_^New Discussion: Intimidate should be Innate, but retain its additional action property, a la Sand Stream and co.
Defiant/contrary should counter intimidate, and anyways forgetting about it sucks and the reactivation has no en cost lol.
This has not really been considered much of an issue, but may need more votes.Hey, what's up with Memento's stupidly high EN cost of "--".
[box]Memento: The Pokémon leaves an imprint on the target that repeatedly reminds them that they will eventually faint. The Pokémon faints, and the opponent will suffer from a 2-stage Attack and Special Attack drop (Switch = OK: until the opponent switches out; Switch = KO: until the opponent faints).
Attack Power: -- | Accuracy: 100% | Energy Cost: -- | Attack Type: Other | Effect Chance: -- | Contact: No | Typing: Dark | Priority: 0 | CT: Passive[/box]
Is this intentional? Or should we actually have an EN cost there?
This has been generally supported with no real objections, but needs more votes, like one or two more.As I understand some users (pwnemon) are dissatisfied with certain things the council is able to vote upon, I am introducing the following motion, a motion that is really just a logical extension of power:
In cases where a motion has been passed for a decision that directly alters or amends powers given to the ASB Council, that is to say anything not initially agreed upon as to their role and power, a decision towards the motion regarding the powers granted to the ASB Council must be dictated by Deck Knight, the only authority greater than the ASB Council and thus outside the conflict of interest.
Simple enough, and a logical step for reasonability and rational limitation of the Council.
Some users think a discussion may be needed but need more votes.1) Crits ignoring burn in ASB
The DAT used to mention crits ignoring burn in ASB. They don't have this effect ingame, but were given it in ASB for some reason. I guess this description was randomly taken out and this (combined with the fact that it wasn't a well-known ASB mechanic in the first place) has caused a lot of confusion. Can we make up our mind regarding this mechanic and stick with it?
My personal preference is to make crits not ignore burn, because that's how they work ingame and there isn't a good reason I know of to change that mechanic.
Not much has been commented on either idea, though I do not think lumrest is that much of an issue, given Malaconda is already immune to status anyway with a regenerating Lum Berry. Making Power/Guard/Heart Swap work like Skill Swap, on the other hand, seems like an interesting proposition. Any comments on that?Leethoof's random pile of usually crappy ideas:
Power Swap/Guard Swap/Heart Swap should function in the crazy way that skill swap does.
We should fix chesto/lum/hydra/leaf guard rest before malaconda gets here. Perhaps reduced healing (say down to 20), so it functions as a refresh + recover in the right situation