Difference between revisions of "Talk:Move variations"

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Psycho Shock)
(Worry Seed: new section)
Line 447: Line 447:
:If you're going to even think of these as variations, why not Psycho Break? [[User:Blazios|Blazios]] 18:48, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
:If you're going to even think of these as variations, why not Psycho Break? [[User:Blazios|Blazios]] 18:48, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
::Right, i forgot that one, thanks --[[User:EzekielMaple|EzekielMaple]] 18:53, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
::Right, i forgot that one, thanks --[[User:EzekielMaple|EzekielMaple]] 18:53, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
== Worry Seed ==
and Simple Beam.
Yes? No?
<span style="border: 1px solid">[[User:PH1RESTRIKE|<span style="background:Blue; color:#78C850"> |>|-|1|23 </span>]][[Special:contributions/PH1RESTRIKE|•]][[User talk:PH1RESTRIKE|<span style="background:#FFFFFF; color:Green">57R1K3</span>]]</span> 22:18, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:18, 1 May 2011


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)
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
Special Flamethrower | Ice Beam | Slime 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:
Special Flamethrower | Ice Beam | Slime 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. 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)


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)


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". TinaTheKirliaFile: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)


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)


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)


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)


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)


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 PhysicalIC.gif and Special SpecialIC.gif, not Status 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 CuboneKing 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? ht14 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... ht14 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... ht14 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. ht14 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. Turtwig 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)


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. --AndyPKMN 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 Change  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. --AndyPKMN 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)


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)


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 (talkcontribs) 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DENNOUZENSHI 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 RantsEdits 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 RantsEdits 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)