Thread: More Clauses/Rules

Over the past few days I've noticed some gym leaders attempting to use rules for their gym battles that do not actually exist. Using rules that do not exist in All About Battles is not allowed. However, some of the rules I've seen gym leaders try to use aren't actually a bad idea, and some are common in standard play in non-URPG Pokemon. The current set of rules you can turn off and on are as follows...


-Sleep Clause: Only 1 Pokemon per side may be put to sleep by the opponent. Self induced sleep such as Rest does not count towards Sleep Clause. {Default is Sleep Clause On.}
-Freeze Clause: Only 1 Pokemon per side may be frozen. {Default is Freeze Clause Off.}
-Gameboy: Battle using only 4 moves, like the Gameboy. You must send the moves to the Referee in advance. {Default is Gameboy Off.}
-Holding Items: These are a part of every battle. Both Trainer must agree before the battle to not use them, otherwise they are fair game. {Default is Holding Items not used.}
-OHKO Clause: OHKO moves like Fissure and Sheer Cold will always fail. {Default is OHKO Clause Off.}
-Evasion Clause: Moves that increase evasion like Double Team and Minimize will always fail. Abilities that increase evasion like Sand Veil and the move Acupressure will still work normally. Accuracy lowering moves like Sand Attack will still work normally. {Default is Evasion Clause Off.}

The Time Clause proposal was unpopular, and as future head ref (or am I already?), even though I do not find a problem with it, I don't want to do something many people will dislike. However, you can still talk about its inclusion if you want, and post whether you want it or not. If it turns out it really isn't that unpopular, we can include it.

However, this thread is mainly about these other rules that gym leaders, and perhaps others might like using.

Item Clause: You can not equip the same item to more than one Pokemon. {Default is Off}
Species Clause: You can not use more than one of the same species (having same Pokedex number) of a Pokemon. {Default is Off}

You can also suggest other possible rules.

Personally I don't like Item Clause because I don't think it's a needed limitation. I like Species Clause, because certain Pokemon in quantities of more than one can be really hard for certain gyms. However, it's mainly up to what everyone thinks. Also, remember, these rules are optional, and their default is off.

I like the Species Clause and think it should be added. I almost added it in my gym but then was told by you it wasn't an actual clause in URPG :@

I personally see no issue introducing any of the three clauses - Item/Species/Time. The main point of the time clause was being shouted at was that people wouldn't be able to enforce it in opposing gyms since they make the rules.

I agree with Buzzer. I don't really have any problem regarding those three clauses. I personally would like Species and Time. Item is ok, but meh.

I think all of them should be included in some way or another, but then again I like the ability to have as much variety as possible. I'm not too fussed about the Time Clause, that could be left out, as long as I can still put send time limits on my FFAs ^^;

Regarding Item Clauses, I think it should be implemented, because it happens in actual tournaments and it might give Gym Leaders a bit of an edge. For example, I have many different items I can utilise - Leftovers, Expert Belt, Flame Orb, Life Orb, Custap Berry, Toxic Orb, Focus Sash, Lum Berry, etc etc. You never know - limiting the amounts of Life Orbs and Leftovers challengers can bring into my gym might make all the difference I need to pull off a win.

And Species Clause should DEFINITELY be in - it's incredibly annoying when you struggle to overcome one Pokemon and suddenly there's another one to take its place. Kingdra/Accelgor/Whimsicott, anyone?

Originally Posted by ChainReaction01

Kingdra/Accelgor/Whimsicott, anyone?

Who's used multiple Whimisicotts/Accelgors? o_O

Originally Posted by We Taste Pies...

Who's used multiple Whimisicotts/Accelgors? o_O

No one, yet. And that "yet" is what absolutely terrifies me O.O

Besides, I wouldn't relish trying to take down two Crobats >_>

Originally Posted by ChainReaction01

No one, yet. And that "yet" is what absolutely terrifies me O.O

Besides, I wouldn't relish trying to take down two Crobats >_>

inb4 I buy a second Crobat

Originally Posted by ChainReaction01

Besides, I wouldn't relish trying to take down two Crobats >_>

*whistles*

But yeah, I like the idea of putting those rules into effect, since they are used outside of URPG sometimes.

Just wondering, is weather considered a special rule? Since most gym leaders use that but I don't recall it needing to be approved.

Originally Posted by WinterVines

*whistles*

But yeah, I like the idea of putting those rules into effect, since they are used outside of URPG sometimes.

Just wondering, is weather considered a special rule? Since most gym leaders use that but I don't recall it needing to be approved.

Yes, setting weather is fine, and the same goes for terrain. Odd enough, choosing weather has never been in All About Battles...

I was just thinking, what about a clause that stop the use of attract, cause i can see that beeing completely abused

Originally Posted by eternus_situs

I was just thinking, what about a clause that stop the use of attract, cause i can see that beeing completely abused

Attract is only useful if the opponent is the opposite gender (unless Pidge decides to do another gay FFA :3), and loses its effect upon switching out. Any status ailment can be 'abused', to an extent, but that doesn't mean we need a Paralysis Clause, a Confusion Clause, an Attract Clause, a Flinch Clause, etc, etc.

Besides, most people tend not to rely on hax, just using it as a last resort. I haven't seen Attract around a huge deal, so it's obviously not a big issue. And, as they say, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

I swear Item Clause has been in the all about battles thread before... I've never used it (never found a need to, tbh) but meh, guess it wasn't in there.

I don't think I've ever reffed a battle that used duplicate Pokemon on the same team. The only issue I've ever seen arise from it is that one time someone wanted two Kingdra in their Water Gym or something? So, Species Clause seems a bit pointless to me.

Well, I am for all of these being included. Especially if they are still up to gym leaders. It just let's people prevent things that could possibly turn the tide against them.

Anyways, Species clause wouldn't be used very frequently, but there are cases where it might help. Of course, if gym leaders get to decide there is no stopping double jolteons and such. You could potentially do the sane to then, though.

Haha so doesnt' this mean that the B/W tournament can't have item clause ;)?

Tournaments don't really have restrictions on what can and can't be used regarding rules (they have to be approved, though).

Also, there is no item clause rule in that tournament, it's just that your pool of items you can create was not allowed to have duplicates.