Talk:Move variations

Template?

This page was an excellent idea, but I wonder if there's a way to indicate in each move's article when it belongs to one of these "archetypes". --Johans Nidorino 21:10, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I suggested it but it was forgotten later on; and unfortunately, I don't know how to make templates. -(Llxwarbirdxll 02:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC))

Template namespace. I'll whip one up. --TTEchidna 02:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

New Variation

There neeeds to be a Move Variation for the Following moves:

• Psybeam
• Bubblebeam
• Aurora Beam
• Sludge
• Spark

I have checked them all out and they each have:

• Power: 65
• Accuracy: 100%
• PP: 20

P.S. I don't know how to do this myself so really I'm asking for somebody to do this for me! Tesh 16:53, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm not sure if this should be counted as they each have a different added effect, either a status ailment or a stat change. Somebody gie me their:view...Tesh 20:32, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe keep the status-changing ones together, and keep the stat-changing ones together, but keep them separate. That means Psybeam, Sludge, and Spark go together, and BubbleBeam and Aurora Beam go together.

And don't forget to use the {{m}} template for moves. TTEchidna 00:22, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I think you've got the wrong idea. I'm not sure on how to create the move variation. I only realised they were similar... Tesh 15:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

"Or"

Is "10 or 15" valid here? I'd say the use of every possible move variation no matter the amount of PPs it has would require a redefinition. BTW, Ice Beam and Thunder don't belong in the tables they've been introduced in if following the original criterion. --Johans 05:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I put those there. I'll have them removed. Llxwarbirdxll 08:20, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

LOL, now somebody else did the same with variations of Slash, Waterfall, and Shadow Ball :P --Johans 16:08, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

People are no longer respecting the "PPs" part of the definition. With "Variations of Flamethrower" the article mentions neither 15 nor 10 now. If this is going to continue, maybe Bulbapedia's definition on "move variations" should no longer include PPs, which seems to be the least important of the three columns. --Johans 18:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Seismic Toss and Night Shade?

Those belong on the list, right? Angerman 20:10, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't Night Shade do somewhere from 1 to 1.5x the level? I know Seismic Toss does the level. TTEchidna 23:07, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

No, Psywave does from 0.5 to 1.5x the level. But Night Shade always does damage equal to the level. --Shiny Noctowl 23:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Still, they don't have the same amout of default total PPs. --Johans 01:53, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

They're stretching it nowadays though. Hmm...Zap Cannon and Dynamicpunch... ^ht14 22:11, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'm sure Stone Edge and Cross Chop are variations. Angerman 07:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Definitely ^_^ --Johans 16:46, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Stub?

Is it Still a stub?--Torchic-ken 2:58, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a few missing bits. Angerman 00:10, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Mean Look/Block/Spider Web?

I noticed there isn't a section for these three moves, and while Block and Mean Look fit a "5 PP, Prevents foe from escaping" description, Spider Web only has one thing setting them apart and that's the PP issue. Should I add it anyway? TinaTheKirlia 01:47, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Add only Mean Look and Block. That's what has been done in these cases to agree with the current definition of "move archetypes". --Johans 08:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Counter and Mirror Coat?

I'm really surprised no one did this - they both have 10PP, varying power, 100% accuracy and they both go last and counter the foe's attack at two times the power. I was trying to find a good way to summarize it though - how's this? "Goes last and counters the move used by the foe at twice the power". TinaTheKirlia ♥ File:281MS.gif 21:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

That works. TTEchidna 23:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Softboiled and Milk Drink

Even though they're listed under variations of Recover.. they both can do something Recover can not -- heal other Pokémon's HP outside of battle. I think this deserves a mention. :P Tina ^δ♫ 18:58, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

Contests?

I think it would be incredibly useful to have a version of this page for contests, since many of the moves do the exact same things. Thoughts...? Maki 13:47, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree. However it'd have to be set up differently. It'd be like... effect, cute moves, beauty moves, smart moves, tough moves, cool moves. TTEchidnaFire echy 20:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Blizzard

Are Magma Storm and Focus Blast really variations of Blizzard? Neither inflict a status ailment and Magma Storm sounds more like a multi-turn move. The only similarities seem to be 120 power

Also, I think Thunder should be added as a variation. It has 10 PP, not 5, but it causes a status ailment, has 120 power and 70 accuracy. Drake Clawfang 20:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thunder and Blizzard also have their accuracy at 100% when used during a specific weather condition. Magma Storm seems most like Outrage, though that goes 2-3 turns, and Focus Blast is just... its own thing. Not every move has a counterpart, that's what people need to remember. TTEchidnaFire echy 20:38, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

That's what I mean, a lot of the moves I mentioned, as well as Hydro Pump, Seed Flare and Fire Blast are all similar, but variations of each other? I'd say they're similar moves, but not direct variations. Drake Clawfang 20:40, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Yes. Variations: Do the same thing. Similarity: have the same PP, power, or accuracy but don't do the same thing. Outrage and Thrash are variations, despite Outrage now being 120 power. Focus Blast and Blizzard are not because all they share is accuracy and power. TTEchidnaFire echy 21:21, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

So, should we move some of the moves I mentioned around? That's what I've been suggesting. I think Magma Storm should be grouped with Outrage and Thrash, and Blizzard, Thunder and Gunk Shot should be in a group. Maybe Seed Flare and Focus Blast too, their effects are identical except for accuracy. Drake Clawfang 00:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Order

Why aren't they in alphabetical order? MathijsP

Beats me. Last time I organized them I put them in order by damage. TTEchidna 01:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Dragon Claw, X-Scissor, Seed Bomb

Aren't these all variations? They all do 80 damage, have 15 PP, and no added effect. Can I add them? --Dark Sage 18:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

You forget to mention the accuracy, but it happens that it's the same! So yeah, they're move variations. --Johans 18:20, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Great. I guess I'll add them now. --Dark Sage 18:25, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think I know how to do the template. Can someone else do that? --Dark Sage 18:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, I got them. :) --Dark Sage 21:05, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Ice Beam?

Ice Beam has only 10 PP, yet it's claimed to be a variation of Flamethrower and Thunderbolt, which have 15 PP. Can I remove that? --Dark Sage 21:08, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Ice Beam is the most useful of all three, but is still the same. Same power, accuracy and rate to inflict a status problem. Part of Ice Beam may be the fact frozen Pokémon are helpless. Gywall^(Talk) 21:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Ice Beam is one of the more visible move variations in normal gameplay. --FabuVinny ^{|Talk Page|} 21:21, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

Ah. I see. OK. --Dark Sage 00:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Air Slash?

I wonder if, shouldnt Air Slash be in the "variations of Slash" since it IS a Slash move after all? o: what do you people think? I havn't really looked up the PP, accuracy and power, but its very similar to Night Slash and Slash. :c--Angela-Samshi 17:50, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Slash and Night Slash have high critical-hit ratios, Air Slash may cause the opponent to flinch. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 17:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, ok thanks. --Angela-Samshi 18:09, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Pound <-> Gust?

Gust isn't a variation of Pound, is it? - Hazardous FIRE! 00:08, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes it is. 35 PP, 40 power, 100% accuracy–yup, variation. --Baby G (talk to me) (see my edits) 23:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Arm Thrust

I read that the accuracy of Arm Thrust was 100 percent, but it was under the variations of Barrage, saying that its accuracy was 85 percent. Is its accuracy 85 or 100, cuz I don't wanna do an edit with wrong info.---Hitmonchan90 23:07, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Bulk Up and Calm Mind?

They both have 20 PP, and raise Attack and Defense/Special Attack and Special Defense one stage, respectively. Variants? All signs point to yes. Master Lucario

Yep, variations. Added. --Baby G (talk to me) (see my edits) 21:30, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Reorganised

Since the moves were looking kinda messy, since the order was somewhat random, I went and moved the sections around to order it A-Z. Exceptions being Elemental X and the OHKO moves as they are listed differently. Gywall^(Talk) 17:27, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I believe the order was by Base Power of the attacks. The Placebo Effect 13:29, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Sections for both Tail Glow AND Agility?

I've noticed that there are two sections that both share similar attributes, both sections detail moves that have 20 PP but increase a stat two stages, however, One details just Special attack raisers while the other details the other ones.

Should there be two or should they be put together? PDL 00:22, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I was thinking the same thing, but then I found out that all the listed variations of Agility (including Agility itself) have 30 PP, and that Tail Glow and Nasty Plot have 20 PP. --Chocolate 00:23, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Agility has 30 PP.Otherwise, I would say yes--DCM_{((TalkContributions))}

I just noticed that now as well ^^; PDL 00:35, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Crabhammer

Both Crabhammer and Blaze Kick used to be signature moves. Should this be noted? --Raijinili 21:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it should. ^Chocolate 21:47, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Lock-On/Mind Reader

How about them? ^ht14 23:19, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

I remember them having the exactly same effect, so if my memory serves me right, they could be added. UltimateSephiroth ^{(user · talk · contrib)} 23:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

How about Whirlwind and Roar? ^ht14 04:05, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Spikes / Toxic Spikes

Should these be parterned up?--RexRacer -talk 16:26, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget about Stealth Rock, too. ^Chocolate 16:28, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

This page needs work

First of all, should PP be accounted for or not? Right now, some do and some don't. I don't really care which one we go with, so long as it's consistent.

Second, effects are not being grouped together consistently either. Example: Spark has a 30% chance of inducing Paralyze. Psybeam has a 10% chance of inducing Confusion. 30 != 10. Another example: Flamethrower has a 10% chance of inducing Burn. Surf has 0% chance of inducing anything at all, and has a different target range on top of that. Also, the diffence between "Acid Armor variations" and "Amnesia variations"? Ignoring the PP difference (the Acid Armor variations already do this anyway), who really cares if they raise Special stats or not? You could just as easily group them by Defense or Attack stats. On the other hand, I say just go with "raises a stat by two stages" and leave it at that.

Third, I do not think "non-volatile" means what you think it means. Why not just put "non-damaging effect" or something else a bit more clear and grammatically correct? Dragoness 04:57, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

I never thought PP should be accounted for. A lot of the moves might have the same PP but if all the important other stuff is the same, the moves are pretty much variations! ~Toastypk - ^Loom. 05:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Thief and Covet will never be counted as variations if taking PP into account. --Kaoz 15:57, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

And that's the sad thing, they're pretty much the same kind of item-stealing damaging move. PP is a moot point! ~Toastypk - ^Loom. 00:22, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

If there's only one thing different about a move variation, it can still be considered a variation. For example, Surf is one of the Flamethrower variations, because it has the same power, PP, and accuracy. The only thing different is the effect. Chocolate (Chat with Me) 00:44, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Actually, you could argue that Surf is a variation of Earthquake, since they have the same range and the same effect (none). Surf has more PP and less power, but it also has two things different from Flamethrower: range and effect. See? You can't just go "Oh they're close ENOUGH", you have to pick your criteria and stick with it. Either effect counts or it doesn't count. Either range counts or it doesn't count. Either PP counts or it doesn't count. If you start flubbing things, that's only going to make things more complicated down the line. Dragoness 03:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Earthquake has the anti-Dig effect. --Raijinili 02:55, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Good point, that's another thing they have in common, since Surf can hit during Dive too. Dragoness 03:15, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I don't think there needs to be a set of rigid rules for move variations. By definition, variation implies differing conditions, character, and degree. That said, I do think that a move variations should have identical or very similar effects. PP and base power are relatively unimportant to me, when two moves have unique identical effects. Consider Bind, Fire Spin, and Whirlpool: they are all multi-turn attacks that trap their foe. They work exactly the same, and have relatively unique effects (only a handful of moves work like this). However, Bulbapedia currently only considers Fire Spin and Whirlpool as "variations". — Laoris _(Blah) 03:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I think that trapping should have its own page. It's not as if the creators sat around and thought, "Hey, wouldn't it be cool to have a clone of this move for that element?" I think the process was more like, "Hey, why not have this as a mechanic?" --Raijinili 05:12, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Minor problem with that though. Ember, Flamethrower and Fire Blast (and probably others but those are the big ones) all have a 10% chance of causing burn. Moreover, they're all Fire attacks. If we go solely by effect, then that makes them variations of each other. So then we have moves that are multiple variations in one. Is that really ok? I mean, I can see it going either way...

One possibility is to split it into two things, where there are moves that are strictly exact copies of each other minus type and specific effect (not % chance of effect though, that has to say the same), and then other moves that just do the same thing but are not exact copies. Like, if I want to look for moves that cause Burn, there could be a category that I could go to and look there, and likewise for moves that cause trapping, or moves that hit everyone on the field. Does that sound reasonable? Dragoness 01:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm not talking about secondary effects like 10% of burn or confusion. I agree that there should be a list of moves that burn (not a category, unfortunately), but I don't think they should be considered variations. In my mind, examples of move variations are moves that have some unique game mechanic, such as multi-turn trapping moves, moves with an initial invulnerable turn, moves that prevent escape, or moves that can negate all negative effects—Moves that work so similarly that there are, for example, abilities that negate the set of them or moves that counter-act a set of them. These should be considered move variations. — Laoris _(Blah) 01:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Starting tabs over.

I've always considered anything that does not cause damage on an otherwise damaging move to be a secondary effect so I think we are going to differ in thought there, unfortunately. Example: Razor Wind requires charging, has a high crit rate and deals damage, so the charging and high crit rate are both secondary effects. Screech causes only Defense down, so Defense down is the primary effect.

Taking each thing in turn, I don't think that just because Wrap and Magma Storm both cause multi-turn trapping is enough for them to be considered variations. They ought to have a page specifying this, but this does not make them variations, in the same way as Ember and Flamethrower. Ditto with with the semi-invulnerable moves. They are different enough (note which moves can hit which during the invulnerable turn, not to mention Power) to warrant an obviously acknowledged similarity but not actual variations.

As for your last two examples, those moves DO essentially do the exact same thing in every way, with the exception of PP, so I think, if we decide to exclude PP from the criteria (which I am fairly convinced we ought to do by now), then yes, I would consider those move variations.

(Somewhat off-topic, why not a category instead of a page? Then there would be links from the moves pages themselves, so they can actually be found... The Pokédex has tons of categories, I've noticed...) Dragoness 02:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Also, Mud-Slap and Sand-Attack are both Ground moves with a 100% chance of lowering Accuracy, and this can be prevented by abilities such as Keen Eye, but they're still clearly not variations of each other, right? (Asking because I consider Wrap and Bind and the like to be moves with 100% chance of causing trapping) Dragoness 02:24, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Why aren't Wrap and Magma Storm variations? They have the same primary effects (inflict damage over several turns at the end of each turn) and secondary effects (trap target during those turns). (Though there's no official source ordering those as primary and secondary; they could just as easily be reversed.) I realize that Ember and Flamethrower also have the same primary and secondary effects, but another issue I pointed out above is unique game-mechanics. There are a hundred moves that have the same primary effect as Ember and Flamethrower (inflict damage) and very similar secondary effects (10% of a major status ailment). However, there are only 5 moves that work like Wrap and Magma Storm. I think that makes them remarkable enough to be noted as move variations.

Since the definition of variation means details can vary. That means we could consider numerous damaging moves to be variations of each other. But I don't think it's notable if they don't have something that sets them apart from other moves.

(As for the category thing, I don't know for sure, but the tons of categories issue might be the reason they didn't want even more categories for each detail.) — Laoris _(Blah) 02:39, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me like what you want would be better expressed in a different page, like "Moves that cause the same unique effects" ...Okay, "same unique" is a bit oxymoronic, but you know what I mean. ^^;

The reason I chose Mud-Slap and Sand-Attack as examples is because they ARE unique, in that Accuracy is not a standard stat, and there are only 5 moves that lower accuracy (and none that raise it, I think): Mud-Slap, Sand-Attack, Flash, Mirror Shot, and Muddy Water, but these are clearly not similar in any other way but that. (Asides from Flash and Sand-Attack, I would consider those variations of the other, with Gen IV's de-nerfing of Flash.) This page seems to have been created to illustrate which moves have only minor differences, with Power, Accuracy and % effect and PP cited specifically as things that must be the same. No matter which way you cut it, the only thing Wrap and Magma Storm have in common is their secondary multi-turn trapping effect, and I consider multi-turn trapping damage to be a single secondary effect (You are never going to have one of those moves inflict one without the other). Primary effect defaults to damage except for moves that do not ever deal damage. The game even categorizes them as Physical File:PhysicalIC.gif and Special File:SpecialIC.gif, not Status File:StatusIC.gif. You can cite their uniqueness, but there are only so many moves that do unique, specific things, like Burn, or charge, or high-crit, but then you'll end up with almost every move out there having at least one if not multiple variations. If you want to get really unique, Flame Wheel and Sacred Fire are the only moves that can thaw out their user. That makes them variations according to your definition, but they have nothing in common according to the definition already defined on this page. I think this all does deserve to be noted somewhere, but I don't think this is the right place, is what I'm trying to say. ._.; Dragoness 04:06, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

I am aware that calling certain moves variations of each other would go against the narrow definition of move variations already defined by this page, but I think it is incorrect. I give up though, so I'll just continue ignoring it. — Laoris _(Blah) 04:40, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Protect? Detect?

Aren't they variations of each other? --Phred 08:18, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Someone should go down this whole talk page and just do it. --Raijinili 08:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Phred: They have the same effect, it looks like, but Detect has half of Protect's PP, so no, not according to our definition.

Raijinili: What? --((Marton imos)) 08:30, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Although there are moves that say "10 or 15 pp" or something similar, so maybe... --((Marton imos)) 08:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

I think a difference in PP is a poor reason not to consider two moves as variations of each other. They obviously have the same effect. — Laoris _(Blah) 08:40, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

To the point where the two moves share the same success rate. --Phred 23:47, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Rock Slide and Air Slash

Both have 75 BP, 30% Chance of Flinch, and 95(?) Accuraccy. I think that makes them variations on the same move.--Purimpopoie 16:01, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Thief and Covet

The only item-stealing damaging moves, with same power and accuracy, are yet to be covered here. I dropped a line earlier in hopes of the issue being picked up by more people, but it failed, my mistake. So I chose to be more direct in approach and now I ask, if other moves have ignored PP in favor of more relevant traits, shouldn't these two be listed as variations? I think there even used to be a template for both, but it got deleted. --Kaoz 16:13, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Glare and Stun Spore

Same effect, PP, accuracy and power (or the lack of it), varies on type only . These are variations, so I'll add them, but I don't know how to put the template on the move pages... Mr. Charlie 22:57, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Strength as first in a variation

I've realized that Dragon Claw and the others are exactly like Strength but in type, so i've changed that, and made Strength as the first in the variation. This is my first edit, i hope it's all-right, I don't know if the move wasn't in there because it is a HM.

--PokeTech 12:48, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Kudos for effort there. But yeah, we don't include HMs so it'll have to go back to how it was. Sorry. R.A. Hunter B. 21:31, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

we don't include HMs Doesn't explain Waterfall, and no, "it wasn't a HM originally" doesn't seem like a good rationale to me. Frugali 12:09, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Well, I hadn't realized this at the time, but the variations of Waterfall have the flinching effect. And I see what you mean when you say that about not explaining it well. R.A. Hunter B. 22:08, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Weather Moves

Aren't the weather moves variations of each other? Or at least Rain Dance/Sunny Day and Snadstorm/Hail? I mean, they all change to a weather for five turns. Mr. Charlie 18:25, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I guess you could consider them variations of each other, but I've never really thought of them like that. I'd wait to add it untill more people agree or disagree. R.A. Hunter B. 18:51, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

They all change weather but their effects are different. Well, indirectly. — Tenno Seremel 21:40, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

That's the thing... I don't know if it should be added or not... they're like the elemental punches (damage + chance of status problem), because they change the weather condition during the battle and have a side effect... R.A. Hunter B. 22:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Go for it. Sunny Day, Rain Dance and Hail are all exactly the same (IIRC) and Sandstorm has 5 more PP. I'm not sure whether that matters, coz you guys had a huge argument about that... — THE TROM — 23:26, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

Should I add it as "Variations of *insert weather move*" or as "Weather Conditions/Moves"? I'll add it anyways, but should it need to have the title changed I'll do that. R.A. Hunter B. 16:04, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Or should it be, like the original question, Rain Dance/Sunny Day and Sandstorm/Hail? Eh, I'll put it all together for now and it can be changed later.... R.A. Hunter B. 16:09, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

Powders and Flattering

How come that PoisonPowder, Sleep Powder and Stun Spore aren't move variations? They have the same accuracy, animation, the same Contest appeal and Pokémon learn them around the same time, it kind of makes sense that they are.
Also Flatter and Swagger are variations as they both confuse but Swagger ups attack and Flatter ups Special Attack, I'm not sure how to add them lmao, I thought I should say it here first though ;) --Ripp145 12:23, 26 August 2009 (UTC)