Substitutions Overhaul

[Frosty]

Okay, let's face it, the current rules for substitutions are...hilariously obsolete.

For reference, the rules are as follows:

Substitution Rules

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 Priority Moves: Aqua Jet, Bullet Punch, Extremespeed, Fake Out, Feint, Ice Shard, Mach Punch, Quick Attack, Shadow Sneak, Sucker Punch, Vacuum Wave.
• 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

Only one substitution class may be used in one substitution, with the following exception: protective moves and evasive moves may be combined into a single class called protective/evasive moves.

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.

Take for a example: If Paralysed THEN Facade. Anyone see any problem with that? It is a somewhat common sub.

The catch? It is neither an attack sub (paralysed isn't attack) nor a chance sub (Twave has 100% chance of paralysing, for example) nor a KO sub (do you really need to explain), so in theory it is illegal. Same with "IF asleep THEN Snore" or "If with X hp THEN Y" or "IF X is Faster" or "If X has no sub up" or "IF X is under protective/evasive moves" (since in theory it may include transferred protect) etc etc.


And yet we use them and see no problem with that (unless I am missing something). We don't check the rules for anything other than the attack classes.

Want another example? How about our constant usage of conjunctions like "AND", "AND NOT", "OR". The rules don't say absolutely nothing about them. So in theory they are illegal. But nobody lives without them.

Also, we have the tendency to start legal, put an AND and go bananas. Like "IF Thunder AND you don't have a sub up AND rain is up AND Mr. Mime is Confused AND you have more than 30 energy AND Slowbro's next move isn't Bide AND Not Paralysed THEN Protect AND Push back BUT don't do it more than once!". IF Thunder is legal, an attack sub. Everything else isn't. Is that a problem? Not? If you started with "IF rain is up" would it be illegal for not being an attack, condition or KO sub?


My point is: we need to revisit the substitution rules. Even if it is just to explode the current rules (other than the classes) and just say "use common sense" (whatever that is).


What do you guys think? I have more to add, but I my mind isn't working and I can't think in english what I want to say right now.

Either way, let's start with something simple:

a) Should we change the substitution rules to match the way we use them?
b) Should we bother to tackle this considering 6th Gen is around the corner?
c) If yes how should we tackle this?


go go go.

please?

 

[Engineer Pikachu]

Gen 6 shouldn't have any impact whatsoever on how our substitutions work; the substitutions are part of the battle system, while Gen 6 just introduces more stuff for us to battle with. If anything, we should be trying to get substitutions ironed out before it comes out.

I've been messing around with a structure, and here's what I have so far (also why does the current one have so many random capitalizations):

Substitutions woohoo yayayayayya

Substitutions

Before a match begins, battlers must agree on the maximum number of substitutions battlers allowed per set of actions. 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 substitution legality.

A substitution is most basically comprised of an IF (conditional) THEN (action) – if the conditional is true when the Pokemon moves, then whatever action follows will activate. Usage of the boolean operator AND is permitted and will not contribute to the substitution count, while usage of the boolean operator OR is permitted and will add one to the substitution count unless in a Frequency Clause. The conditional section of each substitution is made of Attack Clauses, Chance Clauses, KO Clauses, and Frequency Clauses, while the action section should have some argument related to the Pokemon's action set.

Most battles have two substitutions per action set, though sometimes you may see more or less.

CONDITIONAL SECTION

Frequency Clause

A Frequency Clause has two functions: (1) to restrict the substitution or a clause of the substitution from activating more than a set number of times, and (2) to restrict the substitution or a clause of the substitution from activating outside of certain action numbers. The first function is achieved by adding the restriction in front of the entire substitution, or adding it in the action clause. The second function is achieved by placing the Frequency Clause immediately after an Attack, Chance, or KO Clause. It is impossible for boolean operators to be used in the first case, but, in the second case, using NOT is not permitted while using OR is allowed with no penalties, as the result it gives is identical to NOT but much easier to comprehend. Here are some examples in how to use a Frequency Clause:

• [TWICE] IF (conditional) THEN (action)
• IF (conditional) THEN (action, but only once)
• IF (conditional on A3) THEN (action)
• [ONCE] IF (conditional on A1 or A2) THEN (action)

Attack Clause

An Attack Clause is a clause that activates on one specific attack or command the opponent may issue. This conditional can only be triggered by the opponent's actions, but can trigger multiple times in the same round. Instead of substituting for specific attacks or commands, a battler may also use one of the following substitution classes to make substitutions easier:

• Protective Moves: Protect, Detect
• Evasive Moves: Agility [Evasive], Teleport [Evasive]
• Protective / Evasive Move: Protect, Detect, Agility [Evasive], Teleport [Evasive]
• Damaging Evasive Moves: Dig, Fly, Dive, Bounce, Shadow Force
• Damaging Priority Moves: Aqua Jet, Bullet Punch, Extremespeed, Fake Out, Feint, Ice Shard, Mach Punch, Quick Attack, Shadow Sneak, Sucker Punch, Vacuum Wave
• Multi-Hit Moves: Arm Thrust, Barrage, Bone Rush, Bullet Seed, Comet Punch, DoubleSlap, Fury Attack, Fury Swipes, Icicle Spear, Pin Missile, Rock Blast, Spike Cannon, Tail Slap, Bonemerang, Double Hit, Double Kick, Dual Chop, Gear Grind, Twineedle, Triple Kick
• 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." NOTE: This Substitution applies to all attacks of a certain type that have a BAP, so moves like Rapid Spin and Knock off will trigger "Damaging Normal-type Move" and "Damaging Dark-type Move," respectively.
  
• Damaging [Type] Combinations: All combinations that are of [Type] will activate the substitution. NOTE: A damaging [Type] combination activates a substitution for damaging [Type] moves.
• 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: 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

Only the battler issuing actions first may use an Attack Clause in substitutions. Usage of the boolean operator NOT directly preceding an Attack Clause is not allowed.

In the event that an arena effect would negate an effect of a move that caused it to be placed in a substitution class, the move will no longer fall under the umbrella of that substitution class for the duration of the match. Similarly, if an arena effect would add a property of a substitution class to a move that does not already possess that quality, then that move would be covered under that substitution class for the duration of the match.

Chance Clause

A Chance Clause is a boolean clause that activates depending on the success of a certain action(s) that occur during the round. If replacing the current action's attack with a new attack, the new attack's priority must not exceed the current one's, or else the substitution will be ignored. The following are examples of what may be used as a Chance Clause:

• HP Value: "IF you have less than 27 HP," "IF you have at least 83 HP," and "IF you have exactly 51 HP" are all legal.
• EN Value: "IF you have less than 27 EN," "IF you have at least 83 EN," and "IF you have exactly 51 EN" are all legal.
• Missing an Attack: "IF Hydro Pump misses A2" and "IF Rock Slide misses Volcarona on A1 OR A2" are all legal.
• Critical Hits: "IF Night Slash crits you on any action" is legal.
• Secondary Effects: "IF Air Slash flinches" and "IF Fire Blast burns A1" are all legal.
• Status: "IF you are asleep A2" and "IF you are burned" are all legal. "IF you are statused" is illegal.
• Stat Boosts / Drops: "IF you are at -1 Spe or lower" is legal. "IF you win the speed tie" is illegal.
• Substitutions: "IF none of your substitutions activate" and "IF the above substitution does not activate" are legal.
• Other Effects: "IF you are Taunted A3" is legal. NOTE: "IF Bidoof uses Taunt A3" is an Attack Clause, but "IF you are Taunted A3" is a Chance Clause.

Both battlers may use a Chance Clause in their substitutions. Usage of the boolean operator NOT is allowed and will not give any penalties.

KO Clause

A KO Clause is another boolean clause that activates if an ally or opponent is KOed. These always follow the form "IF Cradily is KOed" or "IF Heracross is KOed on A2." If a substitution's conditional is comprised solely of KO and Frequency clauses, it will not count towards the substitution count. KO clauses are unlimited and so may be used as much as the battler would like.

ACTION SECTION

The action section is much less variegated than the conditional section, mainly because everything in this section must be related to your Pokemon's action set in some way. The following operations and modifiers may be used in the action section and can be combined in several creative ways.

• Replace: An operation that replaces your entire action set with a new one, e.g. "Replace your action set with Hypnosis – Dream Eater – Nightmare"
• Replace / Instead on A[#]: An operation that replaces A[#] with the input, e.g. "Use Fire Blast on A2 instead" and "Replace Struggle Bug with Bug Buzz"
• All Instances: A modifier used with replace, e.g. "Replace all instances of XXX with YYY"
• Specific Instance: Specifically "First Instance," "Second Instance," "Last Instance," and whatever else instance you want. Similar to All Instances, but obviously only referring to one specific instance.
• Push actions (back): An operation that permutes the set {A1, A2, A3} to {—, A1, A2} and the set {A1, A2} to {—, A1}
• Push actions forward: An operation that permutes the set {A1, A2, A3} to {A2, A3, —} and the set {A1, A2} to {A2, —}
• Keep (MOVE as) A[#]: A modifier used with pushing actions that removes A[#] which should be MOVE from the set, applying the operation, then inserting A[#] back into its original location, e.g. "Push actions but keep A3" activated on A1 will permute the set {A1, A2, A3} to {—, A1, A3}.
• Switch AX and AY: An operation that switches two elements of the set {A1, A2, A3}, e.g. "Switch Leaf Storm and Power Whip" or "Switch A1 and A2"

ILLEGAL SUBSTITUTIONS

Substitutions that are illegal by syntax will be ignored. Substitutions that are made illegal because the Action Section would change your action to a move that cannot be performed will still activate and cause your Pokemon to Struggle. Substitutions that exceed the maximum number of substitutions will be ignored; only the first however many listed will be taken into account.

It's a bit long, but I've tried to be as specific as possible. The Chance Clause part is the part I'm most iffy about, but that's only natural since it is the vaguest part of substitutions, after all. Thoughts?

 

[Elevator Music]

That's a super awesome start!!!! I think more examples of what is and isn't allowed would help clarify any confusion left.

I sadly don't have much to contribute except I feel as though we should add to our attack sub classes. IMO, multi-hit moves should have a substitution class due to the effect the have of causing a Pokemon to lose focus (as well as deal damage behind Substitute). There are probably others but that's the most important one that springs to mind.

 

[LouisCyphre]

Substitutions are the game of ASB. If you're good at using substitutions to control your opponent and working around your opponent's substitutions, you're good at ASB. If you are bad at substitutions, you are bad at ASB. There's no other component to this--player skill correlates directly linearly with the ability to use and abuse substitutions. Therefore, we have to carefully fine-tune what's a legal substitution and what isn't. We want enough options for there to be a high skill ceiling that allows for clutch plays and astonishing tactics, but we want to limit options enough that players always know what their opponents are capable of, and to curb (for lack of a better word) bullshit.

Engi's bit is a great start; perhaps some tone changes so as to not intimidate new players. Right now it's rather... stark. Also, surely "Second Instance of [Move]" is legal; same with other ordinal operators?

 

[ZhengTann]

To Engi: I will first echo EMma and Lou's sentiments that you have contributed a great start towards classifying the Substitution rules, and while I don't have a strong, visceral urge to support their suggestions yet (Multi-hit Moves Clause & "Second Instance", specifically), I see no harm at adding them.

IMHO, I think the usage of boolean operator AND cannot be used more than once in a substitution. Sometimes people accidentally abuse it and end up with an essay of a substitution, such as "IF you are not paralysed AND you are burned AND Air Slash crits AND Air Slash does not flinch, THEN use Mirror Coat instead." Limiting the use of boolean operator AND encourages what Lou said - a high skill ceiling that allows for clutch plays and astonishing tactics, while curbing bullshit.

Also regarding the red words: "IF you are faster" is legal / illegal?
I will deign to say "yes" if we clarify in the Action Section that:

The moves to replace the original orders must be of the same Priority level.

Or something along those lines, so that when you're facing an opponent Pokemon with the same speed as yours, you cannot replace Close Combat with Counter if the referee rolls your mon to be slower.

Eg. "IF you are faster when you are to use Close Combat, THEN use Superpower instead." is legal.
Eg. "IF you are faster when you are about to use Counter, THEN use Superpower instead" is illegal.
Eg. "IF you are slower when you are about to use Fake Out, THEN use Revenge instead" is illegal.

(I was just clarifying stuff with the examples, I'm not sure if we need to put the whole package into it)

 

[Engineer Pikachu]

Personally, I don't see an issue with stringing a whole bunch of AND statements together, considering you're only limiting yourself in terms of the the scope of your substitution. Maybe that's just me. By disallowing NOT on Attack Clauses, though, I think we've pretty much already restricted the extent to which "ridiculous" substitutions can be made.

I agree with your priority thing (I was actually going to put it in but forgot -_-) but it makes sense for you to be able to replace Icicle Crash with Avalanche if your opponent uses something like Bullet Punch. What about

If replacing the current action's attack with a new attack, the new attack's priority must not exceed the current one's.

Also when I meant faster I meant literally faster (as in +1 Spe Tentacruel is faster than +2 Spe Tyranitar), not winning speed ties (but that's a good thing to put in). I'm in favor of completely banning "if you win / lose the speed tie" substitutions because then it kind of defeats the point of the speed tie in the first place, but idk?

 

[ZhengTann]

Engi: I'm in full support of that statement within your quote tags. It's simpler and more reasonable, so hats off to you. Plus, it solves the speed tie issue - that way, a smart enough player can work his/her way around it without leaving it all to the RNG. A better measure of control over your chances as a battler, while still remain restricted by fair battling circumstances is what we'd all like, no?

Also, point taken about the AND strings.

And to help EMma's suggestion, I've went through the list to compile thus, bearing in mind that the list includes 2-5 hits, 2-hit, and 3-hit attacks:
Damaging Multi-hit Moves: Arm Thrust, Barrage, Bone Rush, Bullet Seed, Comet Punch, DoubleSlap, Fury Attack, Fury Swipes, Icicle Spear, Pin Missile, Rock Blast, Spike Cannon, Tail Slap, Bonemerang, Double Hit, Double Kick, Dual Chop, Gear Grind, Twineedle, Triple Kick.

EDIT (Elevator Music): There's also Beat Up, should we include that? (I didn't feel like making a new post)

 

[Objection]

I agree with your priority thing (I was actually going to put it in but forgot -_-) but it makes sense for you to be able to replace Icicle Crash with Avalanche if your opponent uses something like Bullet Punch. What about

If replacing the current action's attack with a new attack, the new attack's priority must not exceed the current one's.

I take it this rule about priority applies only to actions for substitutions with chance clauses like if you are faster and doesn't affect stuff like "If he uses Surf, change that action to Protect".

Also, can we please make stuff like "and the above substitution does not activate" legal? While we're at it, can we drop the "first listed sub takes precedence" rule and require that conflicting substitutions need to be resolved by the player otherwise the pokemon either struggles or ignores all subs for that action?

 

[ZhengTann]

To Obj: For the 1st question, I'd agree, and it could probably go into the Chance Clause in Engi's proposal. But for the second question though, I feel that the "First listed takes precedence" rule is the easiest way, rather than having to PM / IRC message the battler, or otherwise spend extra time resolving conflicting substitutions. The battler simply has to take into account about that rule. Could be just me, but to do otherwise so costs extra time when the rule in place is forthright enough to stop conflicts from arising in the first place.

 

[Engineer Pikachu]

Okay, I

• added multi-hit attacks ("damaging" was sort of unnecessary) – Beat Up is not currently on the list, but I think I'll end up adding it in anyways.
• added substitution activation under the Chance Clause portion
• added a section on illegal actions
• clarified to make ordering based on a speed tie illegal

I take it this rule about priority applies only to actions for substitutions with chance clauses like if you are faster and doesn't affect stuff like "If he uses Surf, change that action to Protect".

Yep.

While we're at it, can we drop the "first listed sub takes precedence" rule and require that conflicting substitutions need to be resolved by the player otherwise the pokemon either struggles or ignores all subs for that action?

I'm not so sure about this one. It's a good default rule to have if the player doesn't specify, so maybe something like "first listed sub takes precedence if not explicitly stated which one is first/second/etc."

Anyways, please keep up the discussion :)

 

[LouisCyphre]

Beat Up shouldn't trigger a multi-hit substitution unless it's actually, well, multi-hit at the time of execution. It sounds convoluted on paper, but it's actually the simplest way to approach the scenario.

"Hey, does Beat Up trigger this sub?"
"Is the move multi-hit?"
"No, but it can be-"
"Is the move multi-hit?"
"No..."

 

[Objection]

OK, but this does mean that the right arena effects can make a move that normally triggers a substitution not trigger it, such as a (hypothetical) arena in which 0-priority moves with 4 BAP or less have their priority raised by one stage.

"Hey, does Vine Whip trigger this sub?"
"Is the move priority?"
"Yeah, but it usually isn't-"
"Is the move priority?"
"Yes ..."

I mean, if we're OK with this happening, then we should specify in the substitution rules that any move whose properties are altered to fit the description for a particular sub class count as being in that sub class, and those that are altered to no longer fit the bill for a sub class don't.

Alternatively, instead of listing the moves that match the sub classes, we give a description such as "Moves that, on a hit, inflict paralysis 100% of the time barring alterations based on STAB" for paralysis-inducing move and "Any move that deals direct damage and has greater than 0 priority" for damaging priority moves.

EDIT: Combos. This just occurred to me. Which of the following should be legal?

• Combo of <move> and <move>
• Combo of <sub class> and <sub class>
• <move> (not) in a combo
• <sub class> (non-)combo
• <sub class> (not) in a combo

 

[ZhengTann]

I think we should add Beat Up into Multi-Hit moves - most players would've realised that it doesn't work when you're in a 1v1 or last mon standing matchup. After all, it does have the disruptive properties as per stated in the DAT description. As for hypothetical changes that may be caused by hypothetical arenas, I'm for just leaving them be. We can't possibly sub for every such situation. If Vine Whip happens to be priority on the arena I'm battling in, and it's not covering it with Damaging Priority Moves Clause, well then, it's a hurdle I'll have to handle. As to combos, I see no problem in Obj's bullet list, though an experienced battler would know which ones provided the most advantage in his/her situations.

Wait,

• "IF Combo of Damaging Fighting-type move and Damaging Priority Moves" could be legal?

 

[Objection]

Wait,

• "IF Combo of Damaging Fighting-type move and Damaging Priority Moves" could be legal?

Yeah, that is the one point on the list that I would definitely not want to be legal.

 

[Engineer Pikachu]

I mean, if we're OK with this happening, then we should specify in the substitution rules that any move whose properties are altered to fit the description for a particular sub class count as being in that sub class, and those that are altered to no longer fit the bill for a sub class don't.

Alternatively, instead of listing the moves that match the sub classes, we give a description such as "Moves that, on a hit, inflict paralysis 100% of the time barring alterations based on STAB" for paralysis-inducing move and "Any move that deals direct damage and has greater than 0 priority" for damaging priority moves.

I like the exhaustive list we have right now, just because it's a lot easier to understand. I'll add in a bit that talks about arenas.

EDIT: Combos. This just occurred to me. Which of the following should be legal?

• Combo of <move> and <move>
• Combo of <sub class> and <sub class>
• <move> (not) in a combo
• <sub class> (non-)combo
• <sub class> (not) in a combo

The most basic (combination-related) triggers:

• MOVE: Triggers on MOVE, regardless of whether it's in a combination.
• MOVE (not) in combo: Triggers on MOVE if it is (not) in a combination, obviously.
• CLASS: Triggers on CLASS, regardless of whether it's in a combination.
• CLASS (not) in combo: Triggers on CLASS if it is (not) in a combination, also obvious.

Logical extensions of those triggers:

• Combo of MOVE1 and MOVE2: Equivalent to "MOVE1 in combo AND MOVE2 in combo"
• Combo of CLASS1 and CLASS2: See above.
• Combo of MOVE and CLASS: See above.

From what we have right now, there's actually no grounds in making "Combination of Damaging Priority Move and Damaging Fighting-type Move" illegal, since it's just two perfectly legal clauses linked together by an AND operator – if you think about it, "combination of X and Y" is equivalent to "X on A# AND Y on A#" since there's no other way you could use two substitution-activating moves in one round. I'm not too sure I like it either, but I don't feel as if we can justify prohibiting a class-class combination substitution. This definitely needs more discussion, though.

On another note, I'm adding "Damaging <TYPE> Combination" to the sub class list.

e: done

 

[LouisCyphre]

Combo subs are perfectly fine, I think. It's been a major frustration for a lot of players that they couldn't effectively sub against combos.

 

[Its_A_Random]

[BUTTHURT=Its_A_Random]
Okay, call me butthurt or something—primarily because I keep getting screwed over by EM on this—but I honestly think we need a substitution class for this:

Levitate Inducing Moves: Levitate (Command), Magnet Rise, Telekinesis (Ally)

Yes I know, Command mentioned, what about Dodge, semantics, nomenclature, yadda yadda yadda, but hear me through. A lot of mons get the Levitate command, & three actions to avoid seismic attacks is still pretty powerful in itself, & it is far more reliable at what it does than Dodge, not to mention, it actually gets usage. If you are facing a Magnezone, you would want to use things like Earthquake, & the fact that you have to waste two subs to deal with Magnet Rise & Levitate is pretty stupid. They all have similar effects—Telekinesis also makes everything hit, but it does the same thing Magnet Rise & Levitate command do—they all grant you levitating capabilities, & honestly, we should just group the three together. A couple of users on IRC said it was reasonable, so... yeah.[/BUTTHURT]

Also, echoing the sentiment that combination-related substitutions are fine.

 

[akela]

Just a suggestion, but how about a Sketch Substitution?

Something along the lines of "IF [Opponent] uses a move you do not know, THEN Sketch instead."

 

[Frosty]

Let's try an..unique slate here:

1) Approve of Engineer's proposal and be done with it
2) Approve of Engineer's proposal to be effective immediately and go back to the drawing board to tweak it further
3) The current rules are fine, keep them.
4) The current rules aren't good but neither is Engineer's proposal, so let's go back to the drawing board.

People that choose 2 or 4 are expected to elaborate.

24h warning before booth unless someone objects.

 

[Its_A_Random]

Re-opening this on the basis that the Council voted to go back to the drawing board immediately after the vote... One month later, & we are back to the drawing board I guess. Go post, etc.

Shut up I am not council, but I am staff & I got money.

 

[Its_A_Random]

Okay so the thread was reopened & I did not exactly give much as I was pressed for time, but there are some grey areas in the substitution rules discussed on IRC, so I have provided a log with some context, pruned to remove some irrelevant lines, as a starting point.

I cannot be bothered summarising, but yeah, read the pastebin, etc.

 

[Box]

Condition-related 'AND NOT' Substitutions

While AND NOT (Encore, Taunt, Substitute, T-Wave) are considered illegal, many people circumvent this ruling by stating the generally-accepted If (x) AND NOT (Opponent Behind Sub, Paralyzed, Taunted, etc).

I think we need to determine if these subs should be legal or otherwise.

---
Regarding Infinite Loops caused by pseudo-chance substitutions.

As we know, Second Order is allowed Chance-clause Substitutions, but not Attack-clause Substitutions to prevent infinite loops. In the case of infinite loops, we generally disregard both subs.

However, consider this exploit:

1st Order, Pokemon is faster:
Sub: IF Stun Spore, THEN Substitute (15).

2nd Order, Pokemon is slower:
Moves: Stun Spore | x | x
Sub: IF Substitute is up when you would move A1, THEN Encore.

Now, if "Substitute is up" is generally regarded as a Chance Substitution in most cases, but here we note how it is abused in order for Second Sub to trigger the 'disregard both subs' ruling.

Hence, I propose we make a ruling as follows to prevent such cases:

If a Chance-clause Substitution can be directly equated to an Attack-clause Substitution for a Second-Order Substitution, then the substitution is deemed illegal and disregarded.
​

My 2 centz.

 

[Geodude6]

IMO "if you/opponent are not taunted/encored/imprisoned/etc." should be legal but "If damaging Water move that is not Waterfall/Aqua Tail/etc." should be illegal.

So basically the way they're handled now.

 

[Texas Cloverleaf]

Basically clarification should probably exist between:

"If [Sub class] AND NOT [Move] then..."

and

"If [Move] and [My Pokemon] is not [condition] then..."

The former obviously is illegal to maintain the point of sub classes but the latter should be legal to make it actually possible to order against a faster Encore user

 

[Objection]

The latter wouldn't actually help versus a faster Encore user, since the "[My Pokemon] is not [condition]" bit would have to be phrased as "you are not encored", which means your sub would still activate if you end up encored on the action after it happens.