Should the various Rotom forms be considered as one Pokemon or not?

[X-Act]

If there were such teams on any ladder, then I won't make appliance Rotom OU. I'd wait until I'm sure that you can only use one Rotom form per team first.

 

[Great Sage]

I think that Option 2 is the fairest one and a good compromise. However, that does leave us in something of a sticky situation.

Obviously, it's unfair to count all Deoxys forms as the same because they are vastly different Pokemon, but Species Clause still only allows 1 Deoxys on a team. You could even argue that as the Deoxys forms are so functionally different, they should count as completely different Pokemon, but I digress.

 

[X-Act]

I think Species Clause does not in any way contradict the fact that the vast majority of us want option 2).

Species Clause says that only one Pokemon form is allowed per team, no matter what that Pokemon is. Here, we're saying that Pokemon that are practically of the same calibre are treated as one. This isn't contradictory.

 

[Stellar]

Going to say 2 here.

 

[Stallion]

Option 2

 

[jrrrrrrr]

I still dont think this should be allowed because of the whole OU lite thing, so for me, there is just no point in differentiating them.

This is an amazing point. I find it hard to believe that anyone who would support banning NFEs of OU pokemon in UU play would support counting the Rotom forms as different pokemon.

We count Monferno as being the same pokemon as Infernape, so Monferno is banned from UU. Why would Rotom be given an exception from its "other forms" just because of small stat differences and one movepool difference? The original Rotom has only one move different than the other forms, just like all of the other forms. If you're going to make a "UU shouldn't be OU lite" or "they play exactly the same!" argument, Rotom should be banned from UU when these things become OU.

I'm keeping my vote of #2 because I think that they should be counted differently, with the "other forms" being OU and original Rotom being UU assuming the stats stay that way, i.e. I don't believe in banning NFEs from UU.

 

[X-Act]

This is an amazing point. I find it hard to believe that anyone who would support banning NFEs of OU pokemon in UU play would support counting the Rotom forms as different pokemon.

We count Monferno as being the same pokemon as Infernape, so Monferno is banned from UU. Why would Rotom be given an exception from its "other forms" just because of small stat differences and one movepool difference? The original Rotom has only one move different than the other forms, just like all of the other forms. If you're going to make a "UU shouldn't be OU lite" or "they play exactly the same!" argument, Rotom should be banned from UU when these things become OU.

I'm keeping my vote of #2 because I think that they should be counted differently, with the "other forms" being OU and original Rotom being UU assuming the stats stay that way, i.e. I don't believe in banning NFEs from UU.

Yeah, we need to have a consensus about NFEs and stuff being banned from UU or not before we ban little Rotom from UU. It wouldn't be something that people would like, though, since little Rotom is a very often-used Pokemon in UU.

(Although little Rotom does have an advantage over the other Rotom forms: it outspeeds base 90 Speed Pokemon, unlike the appliance form Rotoms.)

 

[Mekkah]

I believe there was already a widely approved proposal of testing all NFEs in UU.

But UU has a lot of things to work on anyway and has a lower priority than forging OU.

 

[Hipmonlee]

Its not a question that requires testing though. It is just a question of what do people want out of UU..

If people do or dont want to face UEs of OU pokes then we should or should not allow them accordingly, and then worry about testing and removing whatever is broken.

Have a nice day.

 

[Mekkah]

Yes, I'm aware. The agreement was that NFEs would be allowed in UU on principle, and judged on brokeness by individual cases.

There may still be people opposed, though.

 

[junior]

I'm a little late but whatever.

These Pokemon do not have the same base stats...

Nor do Shaymin and Shaymin-S have the same viable moves to work with due to, as what chaos stated above, stats and ability too.

I can't really comment on the Ubers (Giratina forms) as I haven't touched Ubers in many months.

On the Rotom forms, the newer variants are almost exactly the same, and the only thing that really differentiates each form are the new moves it gets. All other features of the new forms are the same (obviously not including physical things, like appearance), thus they should be looked at as the same Pokemon.

The normal Rotom should be kept in UU as a different Pokemon due to the different base stats from its Pt forms (despite being used quite similar nowadays to its OU brothers - restalk and occasional WoW).

Option 2 for me .