445
edits
Talk:Move variations: Difference between revisions
→This page needs work
| Line 178: | Line 178: | ||
::::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". — [[User:Laoris|Laoris]] <sub>([[User_Talk:Laoris|Blah]])</sub> 03:18, 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". — [[User:Laoris|Laoris]] <sub>([[User_Talk:Laoris|Blah]])</sub> 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?" --[[User:Raijinili|Raijinili]] 05:12, 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?" --[[User:Raijinili|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? [[User:Dragoness|Dragoness]] 01:14, 15 January 2009 (UTC) | |||
== Protect? Detect? == | == Protect? Detect? == | ||