Variations

[SnorlaxMonster]

I really don't like the way we consider so many moves to be variations: move variations. I have no problem with Elemental Fangs, Elemental Punches, OHKO moves, Pledge moves, Blue Flare/Bolt Strike, Counter/Mirror Coat, etc.; and Dig/Dive, Eruption/Water Spout, etc. don't really bother me. However, when the PP or targeting is different, or the effect is different other than by something like the status ailment it inflicts or the stat it reduces, they should not be considered variations.

Some ridiculous examples currently considered to be variations include Fire Blast/Seed Flare (10% chance of burn/40% chance of lowering Special Defense), Needle Arm/Force Palm (15PP 30% chance of flinch/10PP 30% chance of paralysis), Fling/Natural Gift (15PP flings item to damage foe/10PP consumes Berry to damage foe).

Ability variations aren't perfect either; really, Storm Drain is not a variation of Sap Sipper just because it makes you immune to a certain type - it is a variation of Lightningrod only, while Sap Sipper is a variation of Motor Drive. Also, I'd rather not call Dry Skin a variation of Rain Dish and Ice Body due to its other effect.

 

[MAGNEDETH]

i agree. many of these were made with either too much leeway, or too vague of descriptions. thing is, should we remove some, most, or all of them?

 

[Luna Tiger]

Minor input on a somewhat relative nature.

Do the variation templates on the move pages necessarily have to be templates? Can't the move pages just have a variation header (maybe between description and Learnset) and list the moves that are related? Because "Variations of Fire Fang" is misleading, especially when the elemental fangs all debuted in the same generation and we have no idea which one was actually thought up first, so let's slap them together in alphabetical order (and if it's done for one, it should be done for all, yanno?). Sure, templates are nice, but there's no great need for them, and they don't explain why they're variations without having to click to the next page.

 

[MAGNEDETH]

i agree with that was well. if the template were to stay, simple calling it "elemental fangs" would be fine.

 

[Werdnae]

I should note that I've never understood why they are separate templates, given that those templates are literally a single use of the base template. Saving my opinion on the other matters until a few more people have commented.

 

[SnorlaxMonster]

I would say as a bare minimum, if the PP or targeting is different, stat lowering is complemented by status-inflicting, the percentage chance of additional effects occurring is different, or volatile status ailments are used as a counterpart to non-volatile ones (with the possible exception of confusion), they shouldn't be considered variations.

 

[The Outrage]

So out of curiosity, I looked up Sap Sipper and it mentions it as a variation of Justified...but Justified powers up with multi-hit moves while Sap Sipper does not (I don't know of any multi-hit electric move to test Motor Drive), and does not cause immunity, so under this proposition it isn't a variation, correct? And Lightningrod/Storm Drain seems to only be added onto that list because it now gains a "raise stat" effect when hit with a move of a certain type.

I think the problem here is the term "variation" as it is open to a more liberal interpretation as I can see how Justified varies from Sap Sipper based on minor changes, whereas the overall effect stays the same (raise stats when hit by a certain type). However, Sap Sipper/Motor Drive and Storm Drain/Lightning Rod are basically the same ability with a type change. Perhaps a better term could be used to describe it? I was thinking something along the lines of analogue/analog given that these abilities seem to effectively be the same ability, but independently derived within the species.

Or

A third option in which we don't get technical and just call it "Related moves" and "Related abilities" based on the criteria of similar effects?

 

[Werdnae]

Come on people. I'm holding off my opinion so that I can see what non-staff think before I chip in. Only one person that's commented in this thread so far isn't staff. (Thanks BTW) I know there are more of you out there with opinions, so let's hear them.

 

[Blockhead Pippi]

Well, for my thoughts on the matter, I think it might just be better off to not use the term "variation" anymore, even if two or more moves are indeed variations. The term has become very interpretive at best, which was what probably lead to all of these different moves seemingly becoming "variations". Basically, what The Outrage said.

The problem with that is finding different terms to describe variations. "Elemental punches" is easy enough, but what would we call "Counter/Mirror Coat", and so on.

 

[Kookamooka]

I'm non-staff and I have to agree with the OP. The term is being used way too much and way too loosely. The Elemental Fangs and Punches, they're all clearly variation, same PP, same Power, Same Accuracy, All have % chance to inflict a status aliment, and they're all physical. They're fine.
It's things like 'Variations of Crunch' that get me. They don't all have the same PP, they don't all have the same % chance to lower a target's stat, and they're not all physical. For that, I'd say Energy Ball and Flash Cannon are quite clearly variations, but I really don't see how Crunch and Shadow Ball are.
Really what I see the page has become is a place where moves with the same Accuracy and Power are listed. I don't think they should count as variations, because with the amount of moves in the game, some are bound to have the same Power and Accuracy.

I think guidelines should be put in place for variations to be added, guidelines that are very clearly readable at the top of the page. Say something alone the lines of:

Move variations are moves that are identical to each other in terms of damage, accuracy, PP, damage category and similar secondary effects, but are different in type.

That's my opinion.

 

[Bikini Miltank]

I've been having the same thought for a while now. I agree with the above poster's definition, though I'd expand the definition just slightly to allow for differences in damage category: Hyper Beam and Giga Impact are clearly variations on the same theme, for example.

As for secondary effects, does anyone think we should be drawing a line between regular and volatile status effects? For me, a move that causes paralysis has more in common with a move that causes poison than it does with one that reduces evasion, or whatever.