This is a split board - You can return to the Split List for other boards.

Can someone explain why the item clause exists?

  • Topic Archived
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon X
  3. Can someone explain why the item clause exists?
2 years ago#1
First of all, let me just say, I like the Smogon rules. It's my preferred method of playing when I battle, and it's so because I agree with the reasoning behind the various clauses.

I agree with the tier system, I agree with the evasion and sleep clause, and I understand why it's there.

But the item clause I could never understand. Granted I still play under Smogon rules most of the time if I can because, even though I don't understand this one clause, I don't think it invalidates the rest of the clauses on the Smogon metagame.

I just want to know the reasoning behind it. I figured it's to promote diversity in the game, but I just don't see how having 2 of the same items really hurts that. I can see why having two of the same Pokemon can, but I don't see having two Pokemons with both holding the same item really hurts the game.

I'm not trying to debate (although I know there is a good chance it will happen), but I just want to understand the thought process behind it.
---
Victory does not just mean that I must succeed, but that others must fail
2 years ago#2
TC9834 posted...
First of all, let me just say, I like the Smogon rules. It's my preferred method of playing when I battle, and it's so because I agree with the reasoning behind the various clauses.

I agree with the tier system, I agree with the evasion and sleep clause, and I understand why it's there.

But the item clause I could never understand. Granted I still play under Smogon rules most of the time if I can because, even though I don't understand this one clause, I don't think it invalidates the rest of the clauses on the Smogon metagame.

I just want to know the reasoning behind it. I figured it's to promote diversity in the game, but I just don't see how having 2 of the same items really hurts that. I can see why having two of the same Pokemon can, but I don't see having two Pokemons with both holding the same item really hurts the game.

I'm not trying to debate (although I know there is a good chance it will happen), but I just want to understand the thought process behind it.



I never see item clause in Gen VI OU, or last gen.

But heres why it is a good thing

6 Pokémon with Focus Sash or
6 Pokémon with leftovers and protect.
---
http://www.techieanalyst.net/index.php?/index
1461-7255-1809
2 years ago#3
... How long has Item Clause been in Smogon? It wasn't there in the BW2 meta. Item Clause is an official Nintendo clause, but I don't recall it being in effect for Smogon's OU.
---
3DS FC: Anthony | 2320-6462-6471
Pokemon FS: Wooper, Nincada, Palpitoad
2 years ago#4
Smogon doesn't have an item clause. That's the official Nintendo Tourneys.
---
FC: 1590-5187-3451
2 years ago#5
GilgameshSwords posted...
TC9834 posted...
First of all, let me just say, I like the Smogon rules. It's my preferred method of playing when I battle, and it's so because I agree with the reasoning behind the various clauses.

I agree with the tier system, I agree with the evasion and sleep clause, and I understand why it's there.

But the item clause I could never understand. Granted I still play under Smogon rules most of the time if I can because, even though I don't understand this one clause, I don't think it invalidates the rest of the clauses on the Smogon metagame.

I just want to know the reasoning behind it. I figured it's to promote diversity in the game, but I just don't see how having 2 of the same items really hurts that. I can see why having two of the same Pokemon can, but I don't see having two Pokemons with both holding the same item really hurts the game.

I'm not trying to debate (although I know there is a good chance it will happen), but I just want to understand the thought process behind it.



I never see item clause in Gen VI OU, or last gen.

But heres why it is a good thing

6 Pokémon with Focus Sash or
6 Pokémon with leftovers and protect.


That's what I assume it targets as well.
---
Pokemon X: 4313-0450-2944
2 years ago#6
GilgameshSwords posted...
TC9834 posted...
First of all, let me just say, I like the Smogon rules. It's my preferred method of playing when I battle, and it's so because I agree with the reasoning behind the various clauses.

I agree with the tier system, I agree with the evasion and sleep clause, and I understand why it's there.

But the item clause I could never understand. Granted I still play under Smogon rules most of the time if I can because, even though I don't understand this one clause, I don't think it invalidates the rest of the clauses on the Smogon metagame.

I just want to know the reasoning behind it. I figured it's to promote diversity in the game, but I just don't see how having 2 of the same items really hurts that. I can see why having two of the same Pokemon can, but I don't see having two Pokemons with both holding the same item really hurts the game.

I'm not trying to debate (although I know there is a good chance it will happen), but I just want to understand the thought process behind it.



I never see item clause in Gen VI OU, or last gen.

But heres why it is a good thing

6 Pokémon with Focus Sash or
6 Pokémon with leftovers and protect.


While I do see that in some way hampering diversity, I just don't think having 6 pokemon with leftovers or focus sash viable enough to have a clause preventing that.

A well balanced team will have members that carry out different roles, and for each role, there is an item that would be better suited for that role and the Pokemon carrying out that role.

For example, focus sash and leftovers are better suited for walls and support members right? (For the most part, there are of course exceptions), and would you really want a team of purely support or walls? Maybe I'm just not that good in competitive battling yet, but I don't see that as a viable strategy, so that even if there were no item clause, I wouldn't have all my guys holding the same items.

Again, that's just me, thanks for trying to explain it, but I still don't see the point of it. It just seems redundant that's all.
---
Victory does not just mean that I must succeed, but that others must fail
2 years ago#7
I'm pretty sure Smogon doesn't do item clause at all.
---
"Amaura's been in my line up pretty much the entire game. Guess I'll start cramming protein down his throat for the next three hours."
- barneyonfire
2 years ago#8
GilgameshSwords posted...
TC9834 posted...
First of all, let me just say, I like the Smogon rules. It's my preferred method of playing when I battle, and it's so because I agree with the reasoning behind the various clauses.

I agree with the tier system, I agree with the evasion and sleep clause, and I understand why it's there.

But the item clause I could never understand. Granted I still play under Smogon rules most of the time if I can because, even though I don't understand this one clause, I don't think it invalidates the rest of the clauses on the Smogon metagame.

I just want to know the reasoning behind it. I figured it's to promote diversity in the game, but I just don't see how having 2 of the same items really hurts that. I can see why having two of the same Pokemon can, but I don't see having two Pokemons with both holding the same item really hurts the game.

I'm not trying to debate (although I know there is a good chance it will happen), but I just want to understand the thought process behind it.



I never see item clause in Gen VI OU, or last gen.

But heres why it is a good thing

6 Pokémon with Focus Sash or
6 Pokémon with leftovers and protect.


Wow this is so bad i hope you're joking
Inb4just casual and wanna satire
---
3DS FC: 2449-4661-4119
2 years ago#9
Wow, so if Smogon doesn't have an item clause, I've been just playing Smogon rules, with one more additional ruleset I added on to myself.

I feel like an idiot. I don't know why I thought Smogon had an item clause, I just figured it did, and been playing with it under that assumption, never bothered checking it. I think I might double check exactly what clauses they have now, but still, the fact that an item clause exist for some metagame confuses me.

Thanks to everyone that is trying to claify it for me and shedding some light on it.
---
Victory does not just mean that I must succeed, but that others must fail
2 years ago#10
GilgameshSwords posted...
TC9834 posted...
First of all, let me just say, I like the Smogon rules. It's my preferred method of playing when I battle, and it's so because I agree with the reasoning behind the various clauses.

I agree with the tier system, I agree with the evasion and sleep clause, and I understand why it's there.

But the item clause I could never understand. Granted I still play under Smogon rules most of the time if I can because, even though I don't understand this one clause, I don't think it invalidates the rest of the clauses on the Smogon metagame.

I just want to know the reasoning behind it. I figured it's to promote diversity in the game, but I just don't see how having 2 of the same items really hurts that. I can see why having two of the same Pokemon can, but I don't see having two Pokemons with both holding the same item really hurts the game.

I'm not trying to debate (although I know there is a good chance it will happen), but I just want to understand the thought process behind it.


Items like Focus Sash and Leftovers are there because they're good. It's only recently that we've gotten a wider variety of viable items.
I never see item clause in Gen VI OU, or last gen.

But heres why it is a good thing

6 Pokémon with Focus Sash or
6 Pokémon with leftovers and protect.

---
"Murder of the living is tragic, but murder of the idea is unforgivable." - Janus, speaker of the synod
  1. Boards
  2. Pokemon X
  3. Can someone explain why the item clause exists?

Report Message

Terms of Use Violations:

Etiquette Issues:

Notes (optional; required for "Other"):
Add user to Ignore List after reporting

Topic Sticky

You are not allowed to request a sticky.

  • Topic Archived