This is technically a framework others have already proposed earlier in the thread. However, I think the real potential and CAP-relevance of the framework was overlooked, so I’m “re-submitting” it.
: Non-Uber Cover Legendaries
: A pair of box-art-tier legendaries whose high BSTs are used to enable builds that’d otherwise be unusable.
More precisely, the restrictions / affordances are:
- Two mons
- Both have identical BSTs of ≥660.
- They share a typing AND/OR have conceptually similar abilities.
- Either each of the two has a signature move, or the pair shares a signature move.
This will cover Legendary Duo and Cover Legend CAP.
I think these frameworks risk being detrimental to the metagame. I do not have faith in the community to navigate this type of project with the finesse it requires let alone twice. We have struggled in the past with power balance, especially during Jumbao’s, Equilibra’s, and Astrolotl’s projects. The last thing we need is to greenlight an excess amount of power (more than the example projects I listed) and not be able to responsibly build with it. I think there are only a few routes we could take that avoid an absurd final product and getting users onboard with these reasonable routes will potentially be a difficult task. I am willing to reconsider my stance, but I know for a fact a duo is beyond our capabilities as a community.
I think the bad habit of overpowered CAPs is motivated by: after 8 generations of power creep, even the average non-CAP
OU Pokemon has a fairly well-optimized typing / ability / movepool / stat spread. It isn’t hard for an on-paper great Pokemon to fall through the cracks. So people worry that the concept they spent months contributing to won’t meet the mark without that little bit of extra edge.
“Power Budget” - the idea that you can only afford so many strong tools before you become Overpowered - is brought up a lot, but I think the opposite - “Slack Budget”, where you can only afford so many not-perfectly-optimal traits before you become Outclassed - is on people’s minds just as often, invisibly and namelessly.
A box-legendary stat spread bypasses this concern. >650 BST unhampered by Truant / Slow Start is (in Gen 8’s mega-less meta) viable by default, and is a huge windfall of Slack that can be spent exploring ideas that we otherwise wouldn’t.
Put another way, the central question of this framework is: what can we get away with when we know, going in, that our power budget is being spent on stats?
Some hypothetical examples to illustrate potential concepts (beyond just redoing Kyurem):
- Alternate takes on low-tier concepts (eg Steam Engine while 4x weak to Fire)
- Coalossal invests so many stat points into the bulk needed to eat a 4x effective hit that it ran out of points to spend on its offenses. With a higher BST, it could make more practical use of that ability.
- Theoretically-plausible but ridiculous strategies (eg pure accuracy-boosting setup)
- As an alternative to standard eg Nasty Plot / Swords Dance setup; the mon could have a high attack stat that needs no boost, but only inaccurate moves too inconsistent to use without an accuracy boost.
- Unusually strict restrictions elsewhere (eg Hyper Beam or Sky Attack as its only viable STAB move)
- Theoretically, these moves are another alternative to NP/SD setup, or lite Z-moves. Practically, though, the power gains over single-turn moves are too marginal, and the consequences of losing a turn too steep. However, a mon with high enough base attack and defenses might not be as bothered by these problems.
- Otherwise-outclassed strategies with odd side effects (eg setup with Rototiller or Screech)
- Related to how Zamazenta-C could only boost with Howl; there are a variety of subpar boosting moves with rarely seen effects, that a sufficiently strong mon could afford to have to use. Would likely necessitate some form of item restriction.
- Strange anti-synergies (eg Water-type with Drought; Dragon/Flying-type with Misty Surge)
- An alt take on a neutral/hindering ability, where the ability itself is good on paper but the mon can’t benefit from it. Field effects are particularly interesting because of how foes and allies could use it.
Some other benefits of this framework:
- Can easily include other proposed frameworks; eg forced Normal-type, the various pair-based frameworks
- That all box legendaries have custom elements actually gives more flexibility with how we execute the eventual concept(s); eg we could build around STAB Hyper Beam or Zap Cannon without being forced to run a type of one of the existing variants; we could have a Bug/Ice with a Steam Engine clone that doesn’t send the artists to Hell.
- Having two output mons lets us approach the premise from multiple directions at once. We could make two variations of the same concept (eg anti-synergy with rain + sun), or two completely unrelated concepts.
- However, should two really be too much, the framework wouldn’t break with only one new mon. The exact implementation of this part could be put to vote or something.