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. --T T Echidna 02:53, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe this is not the right place to suggest, but take a look at the template (Flamethrower as an example):

Variations of the move Flamethrower
	Flamethrower \| Ice Beam \| Sludge Wave \| Thunderbolt

Flamethrower mentioned twice, while there is no actual link to Variations of Flamethrower. I believe it will be better this way:

Variations of the move Flamethrower:
	Flamethrower \| Ice Beam \| Sludge Wave \| Thunderbolt

--ЫъГЬ 11:09, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

I agree. It does make more sense that way. --SnorlaxMonster 11:12, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

New Variation

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

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. T T Echidna 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. T T Echidna 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... ^ht 14 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". Tina The Kirlia ♥ 21:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

That works. TTE chidna 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. --Cho col ate 00:23, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

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

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? ^ht 14 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? ^ht 14 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)

Apparently, Flatter only raises Special Attack one stage, while Swagger raises Attack by two stages. Also, both have different accuracy. Too many differences to qualify. --Kaoz 02:33, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

The powders aren't considered variations yet?! Alpha Cu bo ne King 02:36, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

If we're discussing variations to add, I have a couple suggestions.

Arm Thrust as a variation of Barrage

Bind and Wrap as variations of Fire Spin

Dark Pulse as variation of Zen Headbutt

Fire Blast and Megahorn as variations of Blizzard

With all these variations, they share identical effects, power and PP. The only difference between the suggested moves and the established moves is that accuracy is a tiny bit higher or lower. Also, some of the moves listed as variations don't qualify but are listed anyway. Drake Clawfang 03:02, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I made a change that in hindsight I'm unsure of. In Gen 3, Leaf Blade fit the requirements to be considered a variation of Slash - 70 power, 15 pp, 100% accuracy, high chance for critical. But in Gen 4 it's power is 90, and it has its own variation now, Attack Order. So....what do we do? IMO, it should be considered variations of both, depending on the Generation. Drake Clawfang 04:01, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, no. The Barrage variations all have the same power and accuracy, Arm Thrust only has the same power. Fire Blast and Megahorn are different than Blizzard for a lot of things: Fire Blast has more accuracy, Megahorn has more accuracy, Megahorn has no secondary effect. Dark Pulse has more accuracy than Zen Headbutt. Bind, Wrap, and Fire Spin all have differnt accuracies. There's more to this page than just "Oh, it looks similar or has similar accuracy/PP/Power/type!" There's reasons that most of these aren't on there. The ones that don't seem like they fit are included because they either were the same, or are now the same. And Leaf Blade doesn't count, because it's already in a category that's more specific. R.A. Hunter Blade 20:15, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Why does Leaf Blade not count? It fit all the requirements before it's power was changed, if it doesn't count than neither does Zap Cannon as a variation of Dynamic Punch. Drake Clawfang 20:26, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

And like I said, there's already moves listed as variations that don't fit the requirements to count, or the requirements are flexible like "move does X or Y". Drake Clawfang 20:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I went through the list, here's some examples of the above:

Blizzard's requirements are "5 or 10 PP", because otherwise Thunder wouldn't qualify. Also, Focus Blast doesn't qualify because it doesn't cause a status ailment

Zap Cannon is listed as a variation of Dynamic Punch, but it has different power.

Seed Flare is listed as a variation of Fire Blast, but it doesn't cause a status ailment.

Surf is listed as a variation of Flamethrower but doesn't cause a status, and it says so right on the page

Giga Drain's requirements again, "5 or 10 PP".

I'm just saying, why are exceptions made for some moves to count them as variations, and not others? Drake Clawfang 20:47, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

PP is the only exception we make for differences. Zap Cannon and DynamicPunch are different than Leaf Blade. Did you even bother READING what I said about Leaf Blade other than that it doesn't count? It's in a category that's much more specific. It's with Attack Order. Seed Flare and Fire Blast have the same power and accuracy, and both can have a secondary effect. As for Surf, I've always wondered that. I'll take that out of the template and this page. R.A. Hunter Blade 21:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Yes I did read it, and I asked why Leaf Blade counts for Attack Order over Slash, when at times it has fulfilled the requirements to be a variation of both. And in that case, I'll assume Focus Blast gets the same exception as Seed Flare does. Drake Clawfang 21:20, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Moves can't be in more than one category, which is why Leaf Blade is with Attack Order, since they match exactly except for type. And you're still missing what I've been saying. If they have different accuracies, they don't match. Focus Blast has 70%, and Seed Flare has 85%. R.A. Hunter Blade 21:29, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I am paying attention to what you're saying. Now pay attention to what I'm saying. Focus Blast does not cause a status ailment as the other variations do, and Seed Flare doesn't either. Zap Cannon and Focus Blast have different powers. So why are they listed? And again, Leaf Blade can count as a variation of both Slash and Attack Order, so why do we count one over the other? Why are some exceptions made and not others? Drake Clawfang 21:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't think you are. Focus Blast has a secondary effect like the others do, it's not limited to status or stat changes. As for Zap Cannon and Focus Blast, I just realized that yeah, it shouldn't be there. I'll change that too. If we put Leaf Blade in the Slash variations, then there wouldn't be one for Attack Order. And yeah, Leaf Blade used to be in both categories. It's not anymore. It has more power than Slash. The only ones that I can find that have different powers as of Gen IV are the Petal Dance variations. I'll see what I can do about that too. R.A. Hunter Blade 21:57, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

That would be nice. I'm not trying to cause trouble or anything, and I'm sorry for arguing with you. I'm just noticing a double-standard in regards to the variations of some moves and want them sorted out one way or the other. Drake Clawfang 22:00, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't mind. Arguments need to be more than just "I'm right, you're wrong!" and stupid things like that, and thankfully this wasn't one of those times. This article has also had some issues with getting things like that straight, so glad you said something or it would have stayed that way. R.A. Hunter Blade 22:04, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I admit I'm biased though, when I think of move variations I'm not as tight in my requirements as this page. I still feel like Hydro Pump ought to be a variation of something, but it doesn't fit any profiles here. Drake Clawfang 22:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Lock-On and Mind Reader

Why aren't they here? Drake Clawfang 03:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Swapping moves

Heart Swap (maybe), Power Swap, and Guard Swap. All Psychic-type, 10 PP, Status. What do you think? ^ht 14 00:52, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Support. Don't forget Skill Swap! Drake Clawfang 02:06, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

That's ability though... also, what you did is a redirect. Learn... ^ht 14 02:20, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Still a Psychic-type, 10 PP, Status. As for redirect, so? It's a talk page. Drake Clawfang 02:25, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Argh... no... may as well say EVERY single status move. It doesn't matter typing as long as it's related. As for redirect, this still applies... ^ht 14 02:29, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

No, not "every" status move. I see four moves with "Swap" in their names all of which involve switching some sort of statistic with the opponent. What's the problem? Drake Clawfang 03:03, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Never mind. We'll keep it as that then. ^ht 14 03:08, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

So we're adding them? Drake Clawfang 03:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Screech Variations

Couldn't Cotton Spore be a Screech Variation? It's not a sound move, but it does lower one target's speed by two levels and has the same PP and Accuracy. Mr. Charlie(TalkToMe) 04:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Karate Chop and Poison Tail

25 PP, 50 power, 100 Accuracy, high critical-hit ratios. What do you think? Also, would this need a new template to stick on the bottom of the move pages? Drake Clawfang 05:46, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Creating and adding. Any other moves that could go on this template? R.A. Hunter Blade 13:34, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

I don't think so, I looked at the other Critical Hit moves, none fit the definition. Air Cutter is close but its not exact. Drake Clawfang 15:05, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Alright. Just wanted to make sure nothing needed to be added. R.A. Hunter Blade 21:16, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Counter Moves

Hey, i'm a fan of the counter moves and i've noticed something, why isn't Metal Burst counted as a variation? I've used Mirror Coat and Counter with Glaceon and Hitmonchan respectively and Metal Burst does the effects of both Mirror Coat and Counter. Geomexis 12:51, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Because they aren't very close. If the effect has something different (such as Metal Burst has both, while Mirror Coat and Counter only have one), it isn't a variation. Turt wig A (talk | contribs) 13:00, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Counter specifically only repays physical damage double what was taken, and Mirror Coat specifically only repays special damage double what was taken. Metal Burst repays 1.5 damage, or what was taken plus half of that amount. R.A. Hunter Blade 19:02, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Kisses

Lovely Kiss and Sweet Kiss

Same accuracy, same PP. First cause sleep, second - confusion. Aren't move variations? --ЫъГЬ 15:08, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Tackle and Peck together?

Tackle and Peck

The two moves are in a grouping together, but I believe they should not be. They share the Base Power of 35, but while Tackle is 95% accurate, and it mistakenly says Peck to be, Peck is 100% accurate. -- User:Mattman324 22:58:00, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Peck and Tackle aren't variations. Especially in generation V, where Tackle received a BP of 50. Myself, I would put Peck with Vine Whip, because they both have 35 BP, 100% accuracy and no special effect. Their PP, however, differs significantly, but does that really matter? (see below) --Grrgrrgrr1000 15:47, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Signal Beam

I know it seems weird, but Signal Beam is kinda of a variation of the elemental punches... 75 power, 100 acc, 15 PP and 10% of causing status. It breaks the "tradition", so to speak, but it fits more than many of the other variations here. Mr. Charlie(TalkToMe) 23:38, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

This page needs COLOR!

Seriously, it looks really dull, which is especially bad seeing as it's pretty much all tables. One of the coding wizards here should try to make a template that incorporates colors for the type of each variation and whether they are physical, special, or a status move. For status moves, color them differently based on which stat they change or status effect they inflict—whatever it takes to make this dull-looking article into an attractive resource. --Andy^P_K^M_N 16:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

I was just thinking of that myself, then I thought something like this would be perfect. But, you know, with colors for generations and stuff. I'm not a coding guy, I just throw the ideas. I don't mind working on the entire page, if needed, but I really don't know how. Mr. Charlie(TalkToMe) 12:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Move	Type	Cat.	Gen
U-turn	Bug	Physical	IV
Volt Switch	Electric	Special	V

That looks good. You can probably lose the class="sortable" since the tables are all small. And make sure you use the region colors for the generation. —darklordtrom 10:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah... The "how" with the generation/region colors is my issue here. Could you, or anyone, show me how to do it? Really not my area of expertise. Mr. Charlie(TalkToMe) 21:58, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

How's this Edit: link removed for a quick mock-up? Werdnae (talk) 04:40, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I likey. Let's use it. --Andy^P_K^M_N 11:20, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

I like the idea, but don't forget that it will take longer to load this page.--Grrgrrgrr1000 15:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

PP

In the article it says that moves need to have the same PP to be variations, but throughout the article it lists moves of differing PP as variations. Should they be removed? Pikiwyn ^talk 17:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I would think so. You can't have the article contradict itself, can you? ;) The Exterminator 17:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree, for my edit and talk page reasons. It's Turtwig A! My talk or wiki edits 00:52, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

An article indeed shouldn't contradict itself. That's why the definition itself needs to be altered. --Grrgrrgrr1000 16:27, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Definition

The definition isn't specific enough. "Move variations are moves that are identical to each other in terms of damage, PP, and accuracy, but have different elemental types, damage categories, or secondary effects." The definition works for damaging moves but according to it almost all status moves that have the same PP are variations of each other. So I'm thinking maybe the article needs a different definition for status moves? Pikiwyn ^talk 17:33, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

How about something like, Status move variations are moves that raise or decrease the same number of stats by the same number of levels. It makes more sense because that way moves like Iron Defense will be a variant of Acid Armor, instead of the current description which makes Baton Pass a variant of Acid Armor. Pikiwyn ^talk 13:37, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

This is what the definition should be: "Move varations are moves that are identical in terms of dammage and accuracy, and have similar secondary effects." --Grrgrrgrr1000 16:33, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Thrash, Petal Dance, and Outrage

Here's my question. Thrash and Petal Dance are grouped together, but Outrage is not included only because is has 15 PP instead of 10. This difference seems minor to me, and so I think Outrage should be insluded in this group, with a note on it. If this doesn't work, then it doesn't work, but I know for a fact that most people focos on the actual move and its effects, not the PP it has. There are even people in this talk (although from 2 years ago lol) that group them together, and I know that most people think they are the same move with different types, especially now that they have the same power in Gen V. --Jdthebud 23:11, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I know that we don't want the article to contradict itself in this regard, but I think that these three moves are so similar that this could be the exception to the rule. --Jdthebud 23:23, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Outrage should be included. Reason: see below.--Grrgrrgrr1000 15:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

PP shouldn't be taken into account

Taking the PP into account makes the list messier and more incomplete. They are also not the most important aspect anyway ingame: it doesn't really matter if a move has 35 PP or 40 PP. Seperating Night Slash from Slash, for example, causes an unnecesary amount of slots.--Grrgrrgrr1000 15:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree 100%. PP is such a minor detail, it shouldn't even matter. The important thing is base power, similar or identical side effects, and accuracy. Any move that only serves to boost a stat by two stages is a variation of Acid Armor. Well, I'm not entirely sure on Body Purge, given its other effect of halving the user's weight, but still. My point is, PP shouldn't be taken into account. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 16:35, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I agree too. IMO, the amount of PP is more minor than Damage Category.----無限の知性 ◎ ＤＥＮＮＯＵ◆ＺＥＮＳＨＩ 16:44, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

I also agree, it doesn't make sense that something like acid armor isn't a variant of iron defense. Pikiwyn ^talk 17:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

OK, so if the majority think that PP shouldn't count, we can put it back how it was. I changed it because it seemed that people wanted PP to count. I think it should be considered at least under some circumstances. I will stop changing the templates for move variations until the issue is resolved.

Also, it did not create an excessive amount of categories—several were deleted and several were made, balancing out. And PP is much more influential the damage categories. --SnorlaxMonster 08:12, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok, it's maybe better to wait until there aren't any issues about that anymore. You can always watch the version regardless of PP (where I was responsible for) at this URL: http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/w/index.php?title=Move_variations&oldid=1253819--Grrgrrgrr1000 19:38, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

After discussing it with a couple of other admins, we decided that the PP does not have to be the same, but it should be similar. i.e. it should differ by five or less. More than that is an indication that the moves aren't especially similar. Werdnae (talk) 20:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Different catagories

I have seperated the status moves from the other moves. The sharply-stat raising moves (besides those of 15PP) are now next to each other.--Grrgrrgrr1000 16:56, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Haze & Mist

Can someone add Haze & Mist to the list (they are counterparts)?Vuvuzela2010 08:32, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Shadow Ball/Crunch as variations of Waterfall

I added them to variations of waterfall and changed the definition of waterfall so that they both fit. But since all previous variations caused flinching, and the two I added lower defense /sp. def should they be considered two different moveset variations? Also, the templates under shadow ball and crunch I left as they are because I have no idea how to do it, or if even they are in fact variations of waterfall. Thanks...

Extreme Speed and Sucker Punch

ExtremeSpeed now has +2 priority instead of +1. So, isn't it not a variation of Sucker Punch anymore? Also Sucker Punch work in different way, so this moves seems even less likely to be variations. --ЫъГЬ 09:39, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Elemental Surfs?

Discharge is like surf, affecting all opponents. Also a poison move.

Also Poison Fang should be with the fangs.Tesseract 08:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Discharge does not have the same base power as Surf. Therefore, not a variant. Poison Fang also does not have the same base power as the other fangs. --ケンジの ガール 08:58, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Order of Oath Moves Doesn't Matter

Hasn't it been confirmed that the Oath moves can be used in any order to produce the same effect? Each individual page should be updated accordingly. (I figured I'd say this here instead of repeating myself on each individual page. This page (Move Variations) seems correct, but the individual pages are not.) Grei 18:01, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Ignore base power differences, if the rest of the move is similar?

There may be one or two other examples of this, but the main one I'm thinking about is Zap Cannon in relation to DynamicPunch and Purgatory. Just because the base power of Zap was increased to 120 shouldn't disqualify it from being a variation of the other two moves, because they all have the same, and probably more important and notable properties of 50% accuracy and the guaranteed infliction of a status ailment (type/ability permitting).

Also, as an aside, why disqualify Surf from being similar to Tbolt, Flamer, Ice Beam and Slime Wave? It's also the Base 95, fully accurate move of it's type... TheChrisD ^{Rants•Edits} 02:21, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Surf hit all opponents in double battles, while Ice Beam can freeze, Flamethrower inflict burn and so on, there is the difference. It's noted that Zap Cannon was a variation. Is there any other moves, which are similar except for base power really? --ЫъГЬ 09:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Still though, it does mean that they all have a secondary effect, simply because one of those effects does not actually inflict a status ailment shouldn't be enough to disqualify it from being considered a move variation, when in that case, the real important points to note of those moves are that they are the Base 95 move of their type.

While Zap is currently being taken as a former variation, that's simply because of the change in Base Power - but in the case of their group, the most notable feature of them is their 50% accuracy and the infliction of the status ailment. Just because one of them was upgraded (for some unknown reason) really shouldn't be enough to disqualify it. I'm not sure of any other cases where this could apply - Leaf Blade's base power increase was a different thing, because the other aspects of the group probably weren't as notable since it was just the "high crit rate" factor. TheChrisD ^{Rants•Edits} 22:59, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Moves with different base powers and accuracies really aren't variations. PP is less of a concern, as it does not affect how the move functions (except Trump Card, where a variation would require identical PP). --SnorlaxMonster 10:51, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Psycho Shock

Psycho Shock and Sword of Mystery (Keldeo's signature move). special attack, 100% accurancy, 10 PP ,damage based on user's sp. attack and target's defence, but shock has 80 base power and sword has 85. --EzekielMaple 18:42, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

If you're going to even think of these as variations, why not Psycho Break? Blazios 18:48, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Right, i forgot that one, thanks --EzekielMaple 18:53, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Worry Seed

and Simple Beam.

Yes? No? |>|-|1|23 •57R1K3 22:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Iron Tail And Dragon Rush?

Same Accuracy, Power, Similar PP, Iron Tail Has a 10% Chance to cause a Defense drop, Dragon Rush has a 20% chance to flinch, Similar enough to qualify, do we think? ContraOmega 15:47, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

According to the current definition, they should be considered variations. --Johans (talk) 18:21, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Surf question?

Isn't Surf variation of Flamethrower? Because if Sludge wave is then Surf should also be because it has the same base power of 95. Flygonfanno1 07:32, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Sludge Wave should not have been marked as a variation, it has different targeting to Flamethrower variants. Surf is neither because it has different targeting and no secondary effect, while Sludge Wave has a 10% poison chance. Werdnae (talk) 07:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Variations of Bite

I'm sorry but those moves have barely anything in common beyond power. The PP ranges, the Physical/Special changes between moves, they LOOK nothing alike, and the percentages of doing anything extra also vary. This should be removed. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 13:18, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Looks and damage category don't matter, but with such all over the place effects, I agree. The wide range of chances mean that they are similar, but not variations as far as I'm concerned. That said, 20/25PP is probably close enough that the 30% chance ones could be considered variations. (I discussed this with several admins about a year ago, and viewpoints ranged from them needing to be identical PP, to PP not mattering. We reached an agreement that 5PP different was the maximum allowable, provided that they are the same in other aspects (power, accuracy, target and side effect chance). 5PP and 10PP would probably not be acceptable though.) Bite and Heart Stamp definitely are variations. Werdnae (talk) 03:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

So in short...? Bite and Heart Stamp stay but the rest go? I'd be happy with that. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 11:12, 4 December 2011 (UTC)

Bite and Heart Stamp stay, Dragonbreath could stay or go. What the effect is often doesn't matter, but then it's usually that they all give the same class of status effect, e.g. prz/frz/brn/psn/slp. Question is whether they are similar enough for the PP difference to be overlooked. (Opinions on this one would be nice, RC watchers), the rest definitely go. Werdnae (talk) 02:02, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Someone call for opinions? Quite a few of these wouldn't pass for variations of anything. But then again, I have issues with the whole system here. I would naturally lump Hyper Beam and Giga Impact together, but the last thing I would put together would be Bite and DragonBreath. Truth seeker 4449 02:17, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Giga Impact is a Physical variation of Hyper Beam. Variation can include damage category variations as well as type. Werdnae (talk) 02:53, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Wrong Signature moves

Counter and Dig weren't Hitmonchan and Diglett Sign. Moves, because there were TM that taught them even in Gen I. - unsigned comment from Reizo20 (talk • contribs)

This needs changes

Template says that Sludge Bomb is a variation of Hyper Voice and Dragon Pulse, page doesn't... what? It needs changes (as in title). Marked +-+-+ (talk) 10:28, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Work Up and Bulk Up?

Shouldn't "Work Up" be listed as a variation of the move "Bulk Up"? - unsigned comment from Slkr95 (talk • contribs)

Dig - Dive - FLY?

I think that Fly might count as a variation of Dig. All three moves involve the user vanishing for a turn, so that only certain attacks work, then attacking when its opponent least expects it. Nutter Butter (talk) 14:53, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

This page is subject to very strict guidelines in order to prevent speculation. Please read the first sentence of the main article to see why your suggestion is invalid. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 16:57, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Taunt Variations

Could Disable be added to the list of variations of Taunt? It meets the PP and Accuracy requirements, and it does limit the opponent in some way. Schiffy (Speak to me|What I've done) 19:05, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Weather Ball and Payback

Could they be considered as variations? They're both moves of 50 base power that doubles under certain conditions, and they have the same PP, accuracy and targeting. The only difference is the type changes of Weather Ball. - unsigned comment from El shendee (talk • contribs)

Sludge Bomb

Now that Flamethrower and its variations have been reduced to 90 base power, they all now have the same base power as Sludge Bomb. On top of that, Sludge Bomb has the same amount of PP as Ice Beam, and they've all had the same accuracy the entire time. Would this not qualify Sludge Bomb as a Flamethrower variation now? - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 23:36, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Flamethrower variations have a 10% chance of afflicting a status condition, Sludge Bomb has 30%. glik^glak 23:44, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Well, not all of Aurora Beam's variations have a 10% chance for their side effects. Sludge and Spark have a 30% chance to paralyze and poison, respectively, and Low Sweep has a 100% chance of lowering Speed. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 23:56, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Aurora Beam isn't Flamethrower; moves have different stipulations that determine their variations and they're not going to be the same. Aurora Beam variants all share three points with one point differing amungst them. Flamethrower variants share four points and one differing point, so we can't add another; that's why Sludge Wave isn't a variation, since it would add another differing point. glik^glak 00:13, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Should Sweet Scent be considered a variation anymore?

Unlike its variations, it now decreases evasiveness by two stages, whereas its variations lower accuracy by one stage. Trainer Yusuf (talk) 11:39, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Fairy Wind

Fairy Wind seems to fit into two tables at once (Water Gun and Gust). Eridanus (talk) 12:03, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Which is why the rule that allows moves to have different PP, but not by more than 5, is flawed. Either any PP constraint should be removed, or PP should be required to be the same (my preference). --SnorlaxMonster 12:11, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

Dragon Rush - Iron Tail - Egg Bomb

Suggestion for addition:

10 or 15 PP, 100 Power, 75% Accuracy

Chance of causing a secondary effect

Move	Type	Cat.	Gen	PP	[[{{{effects}}}\|{{{effects}}}]]	[[{{{signature}}}\|{{{signature}}}]]	Secondary effect
Iron Tail	Steel	Physical	II	15	{{{effects}}}	{{{signature}}}	30% chance to lower defense
Dragon Rush	Dragon	Physical	IV	10	{{{effects}}}	{{{signature}}}	20% chance to flinch

There is also Egg Bomb - 10 PP, 100 power, 75% accuracy, but no additional effect.

Comments? Drake Clawfang (talk) 21:50, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

I disagree. They have significantly different additional effects, which all have different chances of occurring. --SnorlaxMonster 03:35, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

So do the listed variations of Blizzard, Crunch, and Waterfall. Drake Clawfang (talk) 05:13, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Head Charge

Is the a reason why Head Charge isn't listed as a variant of Double Edge? Or can I add it to the table? Megalorex (talk) 12:35, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

The amount of recoil differs. --SnorlaxMonster 07:09, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Oops, was looking at the gen 1 summary Megalorex (talk) 11:50, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Sludge and Heat wave

I think that these two moves are variations because they share the same 95 power,10 PP,100% accuracy,the same 10% chance for a second effect, and can hit all nearby foes. Would you guys agree? CoolMan6001 (talk) 03:45, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Actually heat wave has 90% not 100% CoolMan6001 (talk) 13:14, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

PP variation in both directions

After some debate about whether or not PP should matter, it was agreed upon that it wouldn't as long as it was within 5. This created a problem in Generation VI with variations of Strength. Strength has 15 PP, some of its variations have 20 PP, but Dazzling Gleam has 10 yet is similar enough in every other way to be rightly included. It only differs from the "base" move by 5; however it is in a different direction than the other variations. Excluding Dazzling Gleam would be as absurd as adding it but excluding Power Gem and Drill Peck. For this reason, I've added it, and strongly feel it should stay. (This issue may arise with other moves I haven't looked at yet, in which case I'll do the same thing). Some may point out that Dazzling Gleam differs in being able to affect multiple targets. However, this has never been an issue with variations, because Blizzard does the same thing. I see no reason not to include it. — KiANGLO ^TALK 05:05, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Different targeting is supposed to preclude moves from being variations, but it seems variations ignoring targeting have crept in over time. Ideally they would all be weeded out... --SnorlaxMonster 05:06, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I disagree wholeheartedly. If we did that, we'd have to split Acid's variations into two groups: one for Acid, Bubble, and Powder Snow (which affect multiple targets), and one for Ember and Thunder Shock (which don't). Blizzard would also be removed from the list including Thunder and Hurricane (despite the moves being basically perfect examples of variations otherwise. I don't think it would make sense to do this, as these are all still variations in every other way. And targeting shouldn't be terribly relevant here, as it is irrelevant in single battles, which comprise an extreme majority of all in-game battles. Perhaps if there are only two moves in question and they have different targeting, it might make more sense. But when we're talking affecting the lists I mentioned (and probably several more), I think it's just a step too far. — KiANGLO ^TALK 05:39, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Outdated Template

I personally went through each move that was introduced in Gen VI, and added any that fit on this page to their respective tables. Can the "outdated" template be removed now? — KiANGLO ^TALK 06:20, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Chatter

Just a small tidbit. Is Chatter considered a move variation of Aurora Beam? According to the template used on the Aurora Beam page it is, but it isn't listed on this page. Chatter seems to fulfill the criteria, except that a staff member removed it in a previous edit (though it may have been an oversight as they were reverting several edits in one go). --Wowy_(토크) 11:00, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Chatter's effect is guaranteed; Aurora Beam is not. Unowninator (talk) 15:52, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

That's what I was thinking. But then Low Sweep is still considered a variation which has a 100% effect chance also. Should that be removed then?--Wowy_(토크) 22:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Focus Punch variants

Based on the definition of this article, Focus Punch and Shell Trap should not be considered variants based on their PP varying over 5. ^ht 14 01:50, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Anchor Shot & Spirit Shackle / 5 PP limit

This article states that move variations are only valid if their PP is within 5 of each other. Despite this, it still lists Anchor Shot and Spirit Shackle as variants, even though they have a difference of 10 PP.

I feel that either the PP limit should be updated, or the table on Anchor Shot / Spirit Shackle should be removed. Right now it is just contradictory and confusing. - ImNotGoodAtPasswords (talk) 00:21, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Edit: I just noticed the section directly above this one. At this point, I think it would just be better to update or completely remove the arbitrary PP limit, rather than just delete entire sections. Thoughts? -ImNotGoodAtPasswords (talk) 00:27, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Y'know, the entire point of me going to the Talk section is to start a discussion and gather opinions before making any edits. If you people are just gonna go ahead and make the changes without even bothering to say anything, then I really don't see the point in even having a Talk page in the first place. -ImNotGoodAtPasswords (talk) 06:19, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Debating whether to change the PP requirement is fine (I have no strong opinion one way or the other), but until a new consensus is reached, the old requirement must be enforced. That's all I was doing. Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 06:44, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Speed Swap

Speed Swap: does it exchange Speed, or does it exchange changes to Speed? This article says "changes to Speed". --Johans (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

King's Shield

Since King's Shield only protects against damage dealing moves, I think it's not a true variation of Detect. All the other moves in that list "protects user from all moves" except for King's Shield. So it should be removed from that list and stand alone. ----Jdthebud (talk) 09:11, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

PP Limit Update

I think most would agree that Reflect and Light Screen are variations of each other - both are also affected by Light Clay and Infiltrator, and can be broken by Brick Break, Defog, or Psychic Fangs. Problem is, their PP levels are 10 apart. I believe the current definition should be changed to allow these moves to be considered variations. Lanthanum (talk) 05:17, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

No information about priorities of Counter/Mirror Coat in Generations I and II

Counter's priority was -1 in Generations I-II. Mirror Coat's priority was -1 in Generation II. TheICTLiker4 (talk) 14:38, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

new rules

it's a fan term,so i say the pp should be the same. moves with different pp shouldn't be considered variations,even if they are only 5 apart.Pikachu210 (talk) 04:16, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Why was I reverted?

I should wonder why, Force Fire, have you reverted my edits on this article. I don't understand. --TheICTLiker4 07:08, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

It was irrelevant.--Force Fire 07:25, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

variations of bouncy bubble

Why are they not in alphabetical order? Pikachu210 (talk) 19:04, 4 November 2019 (UTC)

Variations of Icy Wind -- Mud Shot

Shouldn't Mud Shot be removed from this list? Unlike the other three, Mud Shot is a single-target move, as opposed to targetting both adjacent foes.

Rosaline Li (talk) 16:56, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Remove "similar PP" as a criteria

The similar PP criteria is not only arbitrary, it creates several cases where A is a variant of both B and C, but B and C are not variants of each other...

For instance, Dragon Breath (20 PP) is a variant of Needle Arm (15 PP), which is a variant of Force Palm (10 PP). However, because of the arbitrary PP criteria, Dragon Breath is NOT a variant of Force Palm. This violates a transitivity that is implied with move variations. The only way to address the transitivity issue is to ensure strict PP equality or not have PP as a criteria at all.

It also creates cases where moves that obviously should be variants are not classified as such (e.g. Reflect (20 PP) and Light Screen (10 PP)), but for the case of the barrier moves, an arbitrary exception was made anyways. Other examples include Spirit Shackle and Anchor Shot (10 PP vs 20 PP), and more glaringly... Fury Attack and Double Slap- which are identical in every way except PP. TehPerson (talk) 19:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

I personally agre with this. I think it's a bit dumb that things like Harden isn't a Defense Curl varriant exist, and other things mentioned here I agree with. CoolMan6001 (talk) 20:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I myself never picked up on the discrepancy, so good job on that. I’m gonna have to agree--KnightGalarie (talk) 20:22, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Flip Turn

Is Flip Turn considered a variation of U-Turn and Volt Switch?

Iluvchess (talk) 19:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

due to having just the slightest difference in base power between Flip Turn and U-Turn/Volt Switch, (60 compared to 70) that would be a no with regards to the set of rules in place. CoolMan6001 (talk) 00:26, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Weather Ball variations

10 PP, 50 Power, 100% Accuracy

Power doubles and changes type on certain conditions

Move	Type	Cat.	Gen	PP	[[{{{effects}}}\|{{{effects}}}]]	[[{{{signature}}}\|{{{signature}}}]]	Condition
Weather Ball	Normal	Special	III	{{{PP}}}	{{{effects}}}	{{{signature}}}	Weather*
Terrain Pulse	Normal	Special	VIII	{{{PP}}}	{{{effects}}}	{{{signature}}}	Terrain

Do you think this should be added? LaprasLaplace 11:33, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Water Pulse, Dragon Breath, Needle Arm, and Force Palm?

Would these be considered variations of each other? Water Pulse and Dragon Breath specifically both do 60 damage and have a chance of causing a secondary effect, and both have 20 PP. The PP varies wildly between all of them, but at least Water Pulse and Dragon Breath are similar enough to be considered variations. They can be separate from Needle Arm/Force Palm. BNK^Talk 22:24, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Field move variations?

Even though field moves no longer exist as of gen 7, I think it may be worth listing similar moves here. Here's my starting list of proposed groupings: HP-restoring moves(Milk Drink, Softboiled), Obstacle-traversing moves(Waterfall, Whirlpool(HGSS only), Rock Climb), Obstacle-destroying moves(Cut, Rock Smash, Whirlpool (GSC only)), encounter-forcing moves(Sweet Scent, Headbutt), transport moves (Fly, Dig, Teleport)

Obviously the fact that field moves no longer exist may make it a bit obsolete, and a few of these moves aren't even field moves during certain generations, which is why I'm proposing it here. What do you guys think? Anna Says Hi (talk) 23:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)