Partially Implemented Freeze Clause

[Finchinator]

Approved by Old Generation Council leadership and Current Generation OU Council leadership

Recently the prospect of adding Freeze Clause to more generations has been brought up across OG and CG OU council chats.

Currently Freeze Clause is only in generations 1 and 2, but there has been varying levels of support for implementation of the clause from council members across other generations. This is still a new development, but the potential for more (or all) generations to adopt Freeze Clause warrants a new thread.

In particular, some generations 3 and 4 players have discussed how they believe this clause would be beneficial to their metagames. Pokemon like Ice Punch Jirachi find themselves common, which can easily derail games if it gets multiple freezes and it oftentimes has ample opportunity.

There is still no consensus and this thread is open to discussion for this reason. We understand that this will require taking a step away from cartridge mechanics if implemented, but we also believe that this has potential to make games more competitive.

 

[Plague von Karma]

Ok so I'm gonna make a serious post as someone who plays a Freeze Clause generation.

It's not worth doing it this way and I think it actually misses the point by a smidge.

Combine Freeze Clause with Sleep Clause under an "Immobile Clause". This used to be done on NetBattle, was perfectly fine, and got forgotten about for some reason. Players can have one, but not the other. If you get both outside of RBY you're up to some malarkey.

Like, this isn't a thing about it being uncompetitive and whatnot - I don't care for socratic discussions about the intricacies of randomly clicking Freeze-Dry with Kyurem behind a Substitute - but moreso a principle. Both of these mechanics achieve the same thing, that being making a Pokemon immobile for an undefined period of time. If you want to reduce variance, then it seems far better to group both of the most swingy, lopsided statuses in the game under one banner like the reviled things they are. It's not complicated, is fairly easy to grasp, and makes the game healthier.

Having a Pokemon frozen and slept at once is usually a sign you're losing for reasons out of your control and I don't think it's a great position for anyone to be in. I think the only gen you can work out of that without extreme luck are the gens where the rules are like this already - RBY/GSC - because the games go on for long enough for variance to settle down. Even there, we used to run this forgotten clause, and I would legitimately argue for it to be brought back if the RBY community could stop flitting between wanting DQs for violating sleep clause or not every other week. I guess you kind of need both for such a bulky generation...

Anyway! We generally expect one Pokemon to be incapacitated by this in a generation where sleep is viable, yeah? So why do we group freeze somewhere else? Doing this means we reasonably expect both to happen, at least to me. I'm having trouble articulating this in a way that makes sense, but I don't think this is really the mindset most players have? Every time I see both happen the player just seems to blow up, forfeit, and complain on Discord for half an hour.

Outside of tradition towards a 20 year old game that also missed the mark itself, I can only think of one reason to separate them, and that's "to add skill to the sleep game". Like, for example, you getting a random freeze may mess with your sleeper's game plan due to having a specific target. But honestly, at that point, I think we're splitting hairs. There's a simpler solution here that doesn't result in adding a rule, and I don't think anyone would actually miss the old system unless they were up to some tomfoolery.

I would personally argue for this to be a thing across all generations and redefine Smogon's Sleep/Freeze Clause entirely, but I'm sure someone will dredge up an argument against me other than the sleep game thing, so I'll let the x gen enthusiast pelt me with haha reacts over it or something.

Angry react if you like video games

 

[ABR]

easy to support, arguing against it should be alongside sleep clause removal but that’s not desired so add freeze clause rn

bonus: 2 generations already have it and it functions fine there

at the bare minimum i’d add this to gens 3 and 4

 

[in the hills]

can't get on board with this proposal as it relates to current gen in any form. Modding the game aside, this seems way too close to an attempt at restricting frankly basic hax. I can't speak on old gens since it's certainly true that with different mechanics or even different metagames (citing generations where Ice Punch Jirachi is popular is probably fair, i guess, i genuinely don't know old gens) freeze could fall under the "too much" part of the Tiering Policy Framework's section on probability based tiering, but in current gen I can't think of a single example where Freeze is consistently making metagames worse to a point where action would have to be taken on it. Sure, hax sucks, but that's something we have to deal with in games. Adding Freeze Clause seems like way too big of a step into banning RNG as a whole to me, and I can't support it. The slippery slope fallacy is often cited too often but I can't help but feel like this clause is not something we should invest in for this reason, how long is it until people decide that full paras are too uncompetitive (not long especially if the Immobile Clause idea gets accepted), that getting crit is uncompetitive?

I also don't get the comparison to Sleep Clause Mod in this case as Sleep and Freeze are two very different statuses when it comes to how they're inflicted, but since the comparison has been made already I'll say it again, modding how the game works should always be a last resort. Modding the game over sleep when there's 8 moves that automatically inflict sleep is one thing (which yeah, i don't support sleep clause mod either but it has a strong history that i can understand the standpoint of it remaining in tiers), but modding the game over a status that can only be inflicted through secondary effects of moves is quite different. I just can't see how freeze realistically would reach a level of impact in current gen that we'd need to mod the game to fix it.

Yes, restricting freeze would make games somewhat more competitive, that's a given. But slightly improving competitiveness isn't really enough to convince me of the need for this clause, nor do I think it's sufficient enough of a reasoning to break the status quo here as it can be argued for almost any form of RNG.

just to play devil's advocate here: why does Freeze Clause restrict freeze to just one Pokemon? Surely if we've decided both that freeze is so uncompetitive that action has to be taken on it and that modding the game is fine, why is having one Pokemon frozen okay? Basing the clause off of Sleep Clause Mod seems entirely the wrong play when freeze is a completely different status that is entirely based on RNG, if you want to do something about freeze by modding the game just make it so moves can't freeze at all, don't do this half-assed ban.

 

[ABR]

ice may be slippery but this slope isn’t

the idea of freeze clause only exists because it already does (in gens 1-2)

a para clause would get no traction so there’s nothing to worry about

 

[Plague von Karma]

Adding Freeze Clause seems like way too big of a step into banning RNG as a whole to me, and I can't support it. The slippery slope fallacy is often cited too often but I can't help but feel like this clause is not something we should invest in for this reason, how long is it until people decide that full paras are too uncompetitive (not long especially if the Immobile Clause idea gets accepted), that getting crit is uncompetitive

You mention the slippery slope fallacy while falling directly into it.

Why go down the slope when the idea is to reinstate a perfectly good clause, possibly even improving upon it? Freeze clause itself has existed for decades and if anything steps have gone back ever since, there is no evidence to support an actual slippery slope.

This strongly feels like fearmongering without any actual point.

just to play devil's advocate here: why does Freeze Clause restrict freeze to just one Pokemon? Surely if we've decided both that freeze is so uncompetitive that action has to be taken on it and that modding the game is fine, why is having one Pokemon frozen okay? Basing the clause off of Sleep Clause Mod seems entirely the wrong play when freeze is a completely different status that is entirely based on RNG, if you want to do something about freeze by modding the game just make it so moves can't freeze at all, don't do this half-assed ban

Having one Pokemon frozen is ok because of a history spanning multiple decades of one Pokemon being incapacitated in a game being the expected number. This is something that dates back to the earliest days of competitive Pokemon and has generally been seen as the standard since. Sleep and Freeze Clause were imported from Stadium and old online battle simulators built in the early-2000s and stuck because they were perfectly good clauses that were healthy for the game. Back in the day, having a Pokemon put to sleep and that was it was an expected inevitability, and that has cemented itself into battle culture ever since.

Why is freeze being inflicted differently a reason to qualify it as something else? You're pointing out that it's different, but not why that difference is substantial enough to move in a different direction. Sleep is also inflicted completely by RNG if used by anything but Spore without accuracy drops, and the length of time is also randomised. Freeze just happens with damaging moves and lasts an undefined length of time, which is less frequent, but that's pretty much the only difference. You can argue intention - which I think you're trying to say - but given people can and do fish for freeze in some tiers, I'm not sure if I agree from a consistency standpoint.

 

[Excal]

I am honestly indifferent about freeze clause in gens 5+ because of things like scald and serene grace + freeze move users being not nearly as prominent. However, it is very important that we implement freeze clause in ADV & DPP for the following reasons:

1. Jirachi's Ice Punch is extremely spammable. This is a competitive burden and needs to be addressed
2. I can't speak further for ADV, but in DPP there are defensive teams that spam ice moves and can consistently freeze > 1 Pokemon over a long period of time, which is also problematic given the current metagame and its foreseeable future

It is unanimously supported by ADV and DPP councils to implement freeze clause and improve our metagames. Although adding a unilateral freeze clause has some merit, we shouldn't need this additional tax to strengthen the decision for ADV and DPP. Let's implement freeze clause for these generations as soon as possible, then we can talk about whatever semantics policy review frequenters enjoy discussing for ages to little avail.

just to play devil's advocate here: why does Freeze Clause restrict freeze to just one Pokemon? Surely if we've decided both that freeze is so uncompetitive that action has to be taken on it and that modding the game is fine, why is having one Pokemon frozen okay? Basing the clause off of Sleep Clause Mod seems entirely the wrong play when freeze is a completely different status that is entirely based on RNG, if you want to do something about freeze by modding the game just make it so moves can't freeze at all, don't do this half-assed ban.

Not really a great instance to play devil's advocate with these kinds of hyperboles because no one seriously considers or wants anything like this. We do not want to completely get rid of Pokemon's core mechanics unless absolutely necessary. It's hard to get behind the majority of your post because there's precedent in previous generations already having freeze clause and there's a lot of exaggeration when it comes to the fallacy of "banning RNG" for the hell of it. But like I said, I don't really care much about freeze clause in current gen but don't see it doing any harm.

 

[freezai]

This feels like an emperor has no clothes situation so I'm just going to say what I'm thinking

it's nuts to try and mod the cartridge itself, this isn't a rom hack

 

[Lalaya]

Same opinion as whoever said that current gen OU (well, basically Gen5+) should be perfectly fine without it, as it's basically just hax at that point and there are a good bunch of ways to thaw on purpose, but oldgens that might need to fight a particularly annoying freeze user might need it (or action towards the freeze user itself)

tl;dr let each council decide for itself, but if its not possible I'd say readding the Freeze Clause isn't that bad of an idea

@ no this isn't gonna be the start of clauses against hax don't worry

 

[Eve]

EDIT: excal makes good points, this doesn't solve everything, glad it got some discussion going at least lol

Prefacing by saying I'm not exactly an active player of Gen 4, but neither are several other posters here and I like policy discussion + spectate a decent amount of both so I'll give my two cents.

Hot take: looking at the arguments here, it really seems like the issue is quite particularly with Jirachi, and more specifically Serene Grace, bringing the level of RNG too high compared to other luck-based elements. Don't worry, I am not about to suggest destabilising a meta I don't play by removing its best Pokemon, I am not that dumb!! But if modding is on the table, there's another solution that solves multiple problems at once. Please only post your laugh reacts once you're done reading.

I'd like to propose modding Serene Grace to have no effect in these Generations. You can call it Serene Grace Clause if you want.

To address questions you probably have:
Why?
The Ability pretty much only causes headaches, both in terms of tiering policy and its in-battle effects. Poor Jirachi in DPP has been suffering from success for a long time because of it; the Pokemon is fundamentally amazing, but add literally twice as much variance to it as anything else in the metagame and of course it'll feel awful to fight. The tier needs Jirachi, but Serene Grace makes that a rough deal because there's really good odds something stupid will happen. At least, this is what I have seen from multiple posts over my time on this site, and the results of the recent DPP tiering survey showing that 100% of people think Jirachi is unhealthy but only 20% think it can be removed from the tier. People think Jirachi is problematic, but they don't have a solution due to its unique circumstance in having Serene Grace as its only Ability, and banning it being suboptimal because every other aspect of the Pokemon is healthy for the metagame. No banning Sand Veil to save BW Garchomp here, that would be far too impactful on such an established Generation. Ice Punch freezes are just another part of the annoyance that is Jirachi- Body Slam + Iron Head ParaFlinches, timely Fire Punch burns, etc.. Any Pokemon can make these things happen, it's just that it's far more likely with Jirachi (and, uh, Dunsparce). Serene Grace having a healthy impact on the game is practically nonexistent- it makes Togekiss stand out, and whether it does that in a healthy manner is up to your judgement, but that's about it really. Serene Grace Clause has minor collateral and solves both the primary issue with Freeze and the issue that stops Jirachi being a healthy part of the metagame by bringing its variance in line with other Pokemon.

Slippery slope! Let's mod Drizzle to do nothing and unban Kyogre.
Luckily, this isn't the case- the impact of these Abilities are totally different. I'll split abilities into two categories to explain this, those being Raisers and Enhancers. Raisers are Abilities like Drought, Clear Body, Unseen Fist, Intimidate, Tough Claws, Magic Guard, Intrepid Sword, Water Absorb, Flame Body, and so on- they raise the Pokemon's peak potential and let them do something they couldn't do before, whether that's more maximum damage, better peak defensive capabilities, the potential to bypass checks or ignore setup, whatever it may be. Enhancers, on the other hand, don't impact your Pokemon's peak potential- instead, they simply make your Pokemon more likely to reach that potential. This is stuff like Super Luck, Wonder Skin, Compound Eyes, and, of course, Serene Grace. These Abilities have absolutely no impact on what a Pokemon could potentially achieve, but they make achieving that potential occur on a higher basis. I think equating such Abilities is a fundamental mistake, as removing the latter has little to no impact on what good players should account for when fighting the Pokemon (yes, you might get crit or flinched when fighting an Absol or Jirachi anyway, even if it's less likely), while removing the former objectively decreases the threat level of the Pokemon (Kyogre now has more safe switchins as it does less damage). Of course, modding out an Ability to remove it shouldn't be a primary solution for problematic Enhancers, but when one is uncompetitive and near-impossible to take tiering action on otherwise, I think it's seriously worth considering. When all is said and done, Jirachi can still do everything it could without Serene Grace Clause, but it's put in line with its competition in terms of variance and therefore uncompetitiveness.
EDIT: Also I trust people to not be idiots, this is a very unique case

Smogon doesn't do this kind of thing!
Appeal to tradition is not a good counterargument unless there are other strong reasons to oppose this idea, which there probably are, but those also don't need to be backed up by appeal to tradition. This is the subforum for changing Smogon policy.

Why is this better than Freeze Clause?
Whether it is is really up to your discretion, but it solves the ongoing Jirachi issue too and that means fewer headaches down the road. No more seriously discussing an Iron Head ban or whatever you guys are talking about would be needed and your top tier would become largely unproblematic. Also in general I think if we're gonna consider Freeze Clause then just making Freeze not happen at all sounds like a better option from a competitiveness standpoint.

 

[Corazan]

we're slowly taking away every mechanics from the cartridge game (and I do get the point of removing some of them, everytime there is a valid reason), I once said for fun that smogon should create his own world with his own mons, own mechanics.... for example gen8 restricted the dex but whats stopping smogon from not respecting that and allowing every mons for each tier ? In opposite of the cartridge game, every pokemons are implemented on showdown. Gen8 half-killed smogon with all those new changes (for example being forced to ban the mechanic of the gen sounds crazy even if again, I do approve this) and we'll see how it goes with the arrival of the new gen but if there are changes like in SS that make 6v6 harder to play then smogon has to take decisions for the future of the site and the competitive world.

 

[Antares]

Or maybe we can accept we have chosen to play a rng based game

 

[ABR]

I am sympathetic to the notion of not wanting to alter cartridge mechanics but if you oppose freeze clause on that basis then you really should oppose sleep clause as well.

Solution

Remove sleep clause + ban sleep moves in gens 6+ (5 already did this) and don’t have a freeze clause

Keep sleep clause and add freeze clause in gens 3-4 (1 and 2 already have both)

 

[Chloe]

Not going to attempt to speak seriously for pre-ORAS gens since I don't know those but if this is seriously being considered for modern gens, then this is an incredibly silly proposal. What is the purpose of modding the cartridge yet again, just to fix something that isn't remotely broken. Multiple freezes are not derailing a significant portion of games in any recent metagame. If it was, I'd understand this proposal but as it stands there's literally no viable reason for this to happen.

I don't have to play older gens to know a "Serene Grace mod" is not even close to the answer though. If spamming Ice Punch Jirachi is genuinely a problem in ADV / DPP, then yea a freeze clause is an answer, or just like banning Jirachi (not going to pretend to know these metagames so I don't know how feasible this is). Changing the functionality of an ability is the last thing that should be considered.

Also "immobile clause"?? why? why are we going to extreme lengths just to avoid common sense? Add a Freeze Clause to ADV + DPP if needed and have that be the end of it.

 

[Paulluxx]

Prefacing by saying I'm not exactly an active player of Gen 4, but neither are several other posters here and I like policy discussion + spectate a decent amount of both so I'll give my two cents.

Hot take: looking at the arguments here, it really seems like the issue is quite particularly with Jirachi, and more specifically Serene Grace, bringing the level of RNG too high compared to other luck-based elements. Don't worry, I am not about to suggest destabilising a meta I don't play by removing its best Pokemon, I am not that dumb!! But if modding is on the table, there's another solution that solves multiple problems at once. Please only post your laugh reacts once you're done reading.

I'd like to propose modding Serene Grace to have no effect in these Generations. You can call it Serene Grace Clause if you want.

To address questions you probably have:
Why?
The Ability pretty much only causes headaches, both in terms of tiering policy and its in-battle effects. Poor Jirachi in DPP has been suffering from success for a long time because of it; the Pokemon is fundamentally amazing, but add literally twice as much variance to it as anything else in the metagame and of course it'll feel awful to fight. The tier needs Jirachi, but Serene Grace makes that a rough deal because there's really good odds something stupid will happen. At least, this is what I have seen from multiple posts over my time on this site, and the results of the recent DPP tiering survey showing that 100% of people think Jirachi is unhealthy but only 20% think it can be removed from the tier. People think Jirachi is problematic, but they don't have a solution due to its unique circumstance in having Serene Grace as its only Ability, and banning it being suboptimal because every other aspect of the Pokemon is healthy for the metagame. No banning Sand Veil to save BW Garchomp here, that would be far too impactful on such an established Generation. Ice Punch freezes are just another part of the annoyance that is Jirachi- Body Slam + Iron Head ParaFlinches, timely Fire Punch burns, etc.. Any Pokemon can make these things happen, it's just that it's far more likely with Jirachi (and, uh, Dunsparce). Serene Grace having a healthy impact on the game is practically nonexistent- it makes Togekiss stand out, and whether it does that in a healthy manner is up to your judgement, but that's about it really. Serene Grace Clause has minor collateral and solves both the primary issue with Freeze and the issue that stops Jirachi being a healthy part of the metagame by bringing its variance in line with other Pokemon.

Slippery slope! Let's mod Drizzle to do nothing and unban Kyogre.
Luckily, this isn't the case- the impact of these Abilities are totally different. I'll split abilities into two categories to explain this, those being Raisers and Enhancers. Raisers are Abilities like Drought, Clear Body, Unseen Fist, Intimidate, Tough Claws, Magic Guard, Intrepid Sword, Water Absorb, Flame Body, and so on- they raise the Pokemon's peak potential and let them do something they couldn't do before, whether that's more maximum damage, better peak defensive capabilities, the potential to bypass checks or ignore setup, whatever it may be. Enhancers, on the other hand, don't impact your Pokemon's peak potential- instead, they simply make your Pokemon more likely to reach that potential. This is stuff like Super Luck, Wonder Skin, Compound Eyes, and, of course, Serene Grace. These Abilities have absolutely no impact on what a Pokemon could potentially achieve, but they make achieving that potential occur on a higher basis. I think equating such Abilities is a fundamental mistake, as removing the latter has little to no impact on what good players should account for when fighting the Pokemon (yes, you might get crit or flinched when fighting an Absol or Jirachi anyway, even if it's less likely), while removing the former objectively decreases the threat level of the Pokemon (Kyogre now has more safe switchins as it does less damage). Of course, modding out an Ability to remove it shouldn't be a primary solution for problematic Enhancers, but when one is uncompetitive and near-impossible to take tiering action on otherwise, I think it's seriously worth considering. When all is said and done, Jirachi can still do everything it could without Serene Grace Clause, but it's put in line with its competition in terms of variance and therefore uncompetitiveness.
EDIT: Also I trust people to not be idiots, this is a very unique case

Smogon doesn't do this kind of thing!
Appeal to tradition is not a good counterargument unless there are other strong reasons to oppose this idea, which there probably are, but those also don't need to be backed up by appeal to tradition. This is the subforum for changing Smogon policy.

Why is this better than Freeze Clause?
Whether it is is really up to your discretion, but it solves the ongoing Jirachi issue too and that means fewer headaches down the road. No more seriously discussing an Iron Head ban or whatever you guys are talking about would be needed and your top tier would become largely unproblematic. Also in general I think if we're gonna consider Freeze Clause then just making Freeze not happen at all sounds like a better option from a competitiveness standpoint.

we're slowly taking away every mechanics from the cartridge game (and I do get the point of removing some of them, everytime there is a valid reason), I once said for fun that smogon should create his own world with his own mons, own mechanics.... for example gen8 restricted the dex but whats stopping smogon from not respecting that and allowing every mons for each tier ? In opposite of the cartridge game, every pokemons are implemented on showdown. Gen8 half-killed smogon with all those new changes (for example being forced to ban the mechanic of the gen sounds crazy even if again, I do approve this) and we'll see how it goes with the arrival of the new gen but if there are changes like in SS that make 6v6 harder to play then smogon has to take decisions for the future of the site and the competitive world.

Okay, so I feel like I have to weigh in as a member of the Pet Mods community, what you’re describing here is just that. Pet Mods

If you want to modify the game, to add or remove mechanics, to change the way the game is played you totally should, but changing the way the game is played far away from cartridge, makes it not an official metagame, it’s still Pokémon. But it’s a Pet Mod, and considering it to be more than that is an insult to both Pet Mods and official metagames.

Also to weigh in on Freeze Clause, in one of the Pet Mods, Megas For All, we implemented Freeze Clause due to Mega Feraligatr’s ability Savage(bite moves hit 2-5 times at reduced power(later changed to 3 hits static as to mitigate rng), gave a high likelihood of freeze). And, this was the correct decision, because 1: it was a pet mod and 2: despite it not being especially good, the likelihood of a freeze was a possible hindrance on competitivity. Personally I think only one of these things need to happen for freeze clause to be justified. If you want your metagame to be a pet mod, just add freeze clause, or remove freeze, easy peasy. But if its a possible hindrance to competitively playing the game(Like in ADV or DPP) and the player base agrees(like in ADV or DPP), it should be implemented.

Also Mays suggestion of bringing back Immobile Clause from the netbattle era is, by far the most Kumbaya idea and doesn’t really remove from any generation other than RBY.

 

[Dorron]

Why does this thread exist.

I can't believe that people come up with several problems a tier has (talking about DPP) and that we should get rid of, then you all realize that all those problems are related to the same Pokemon, (Jirachi) and you still think we should tackle those problems instead of the only one causing them? Jirachi was, is and will be an unhealthy presence for the tier without modifying cartridge mechanics, thus should be banned. You can't (well, shouldn't, but I'm not the one in charge) modify cartridge mechanics because of a single Pokemon. Isn't that a hint of the Pokemon being problematic? Answer: yes. Jirachi is unhealthy for the tier in flinching everything, paralyzing everything, burning and freezing everything, and having like a hundred viable sets. There will always be a Jirachi set you won't probably deal with easily, and in case you can, paraflinch will wear your team down or you will be burned in the worst turn. Once again: the problem aren't the mechanics, is the Pokemon abusing them. Wasn't Cloyster abusing King's Rock in Gen 5 and 8 and we dealt with it without modifying cartridge mechanics?

Now, those who think Jirachi's departure will shake the tier, like making Latias broken. Have you considered that Latias could be banned aswell? It's not like it had been a staple since 2006, it was introduced to the tier a few years ago so banning it shouldn't have major issues than some mons like nape becoming better.

Do whatever, but if you have to modify cartridge mechanics for something so easy to solve as banning a Pokemon, you're failing Tiering Policy. As Antares said, we've chosen to play a rng based game. If you don't want luck, once again, I offer you an alternative: Luckless.

 

[Eve]

I don't have to play older gens to know a "Serene Grace mod" is not even close to the answer though. If spamming Ice Punch Jirachi is genuinely a problem in ADV / DPP, then yea a freeze clause is an answer, or just like banning Jirachi (not going to pretend to know these metagames so I don't know how feasible this is). Changing the functionality of an ability is the last thing that should be considered.

Jirachi spamming literally anything appears to be the issue- Freeze is just one part of the problem, and yet it's pretty much all this thread targets. Freeze Clause in a generation where Freeze is pretty much entirely different from the generations the Clause is currently in fits the current tiering framework no better than a Clause for an Ability, and yet it seems to be proposed as if such a difference is meaningless. If banning Jirachi was on the table that would obviously be the perfect solution, but the people that posted this:

seem to be reluctant to take that approach. Freeze Clause still doesn't stop Jirachi being the main proponent of an uncompetitive strategy that has no consistent competitive value (it notably lacks the guaranteed one turn of freedom Sleep provides, meaning it's not something that optimal play should make use of) and that can frequently steal games, only a flat-out removal of Freeze would achieve that and that appears to have been shut down too. It also still ignores Jirachi stealing games in its other ways, making it a somewhat minor nerf. Disabling Serene Grace is, in my opinion, the next best option beyond those. Dismissing it because it's something we haven't done before, in favour of something only loosely related by name to something we've done before, doesn't feel like a strong argument.

EDIT: also we're literally talking about changing the functionality of moves here, why are Abilities sacred?

 

[Plague von Karma]

Also "immobile clause"?? why? why are we going to extreme lengths just to avoid common sense?

What's extreme or crazy about it? I think I did a pretty bang-up job of explaining the common sense approach, to be honest. The expected number of Pokemon to be pseudo-KO'd for an extended period of time is usually one. Does it not make sense for sleep and freeze to share a slot in that case?

Whenever Freeze Clause is listed on its lonesome, it always looks useless to an outsider. It's the penis bad clause that you roll your eyes at and move on from. You know it, I know it, the gremlin stealing copper wire from under your house knows it. Sorry about that by the way, force of habit. That's why it got cut around the ADV era in the first place: a few bureaucrats who didn't play the game enough saw it as "unnecessary", got frozen twice, then they remember why it was there in the first place. It culminates here.

Given how optically terrible freeze clause is, why dedicate it to a slot? But also, why deal with the expected number of one immoblised Pokemon being violated? It makes sense.

I'm legitimately confused about how this defies common sense at all.

--

I like how people are writing paragraphs clutching pearls about this "modding the cartridge again" when this has been a standard in multiple generations and early official Nintendo-sanctioned play in the past. At that point, I think the argument is moot.

So many false equivalences have been drawn with crits and such but all of this disregards that freeze clause, unlike literally all of these dreamed up strawman mods, is something we actually play with in a myriad of metagames. Sleep and freeze clause are there to replicate the gentleman's agreements of DQing double sleep and requesting redos with double freeze that were agreed upon on old simulators and link battles without having to replay the game. It is a simple thing to grasp and a good QoL enhancement to something that you'd otherwise have a gentleman's agreement towards. I don't see why something with this much precedent is met with such vitriolic aversion?

If you're so serious about freeze clause being this eldritch horror that shouldn't exist because "muh mods", do you want to argue for freeze clause to be removed from RBY/GSC to be consistent with that ideal? Have fun with that one. I guess you can say "w-well they can potentially be infinite, plaguey!!!!" to backpedal, but I think we both know that's not your actual reason...

Also, I think the people being all grabby about Jirachi aren't quite getting how DPP operates. You ban that, you're starting a long, long, long ban chain. Don't bother. I see the survey results as a very pressing thing indeed - 0% of users seeing it as balanced is telling - but banning it is also difficult, thus the way it turned out. There is no good solution to tiering Jirachi.

Haha react if you like video games :3

 

[R8]

I am sympathetic to the notion of not wanting to alter cartridge mechanics but if you oppose freeze clause on that basis then you really should oppose sleep clause as well.

Solution

Remove sleep clause + ban sleep moves in gens 6+ (5 already did this) and don’t have a freeze clause

Keep sleep clause and add freeze clause in gens 3-4 (1 and 2 already have both)

Or add a grey sleep move clause, which was mentionned in the last sleep clause thread - which so far i didn't see any actual criticizm against that isn't "don't fix what isn't broken" or calling people stupid.

EDIT: just saying that to oppose the "banning sleep is the only way to remove sleep clause" point. This should not be seen as an incentive to derail the thread from freeze clause.

 

[Excal]

Didn't think this needed to be clarified, but Jirachi is not the only reason we want to implement freeze clause in DPP.

1. Ice Punch Jirachi has a 10% chance to freeze 2 Pokemon and is extremely spammable. This is a competitive burden and needs to be addressed
2. I can't speak further for ADV, but in DPP there are defensive teams that spam ice moves and can consistently freeze > 1 Pokemon over a long period of time, which is also problematic given the current metagame and its foreseeable future

Defensive teams are the most common playstyle in the tier, and many of which come equipped with 3 or more Pokemon carrying freeze moves. Inflicting freeze on > 1 Pokemon simultaneously happens often enough to where it would be a significant quality of life change to benefit the metagame. More specifically, this can include Ice Beam Latias, Ice Beam Milotic, Ice Beam Clefable, Ice Beam/Punch Tyranitar, and Ice Fang Gliscor.

Prefacing by saying I'm not exactly an active player of Gen 4, but neither are several other posters here and I like policy discussion + spectate a decent amount of both so I'll give my two cents.

Hot take: looking at the arguments here, it really seems like the issue is quite particularly with Jirachi, and more specifically Serene Grace, bringing the level of RNG too high compared to other luck-based elements. Don't worry, I am not about to suggest destabilising a meta I don't play by removing its best Pokemon, I am not that dumb!! But if modding is on the table, there's another solution that solves multiple problems at once instead of being what seems to be a subtle, fairly ineffective attempt to nerf a controversial Pokemon. Please only post your laugh reacts once you're done reading.

I'd like to propose modding Serene Grace to have no effect in these Generations. You can call it Serene Grace Clause if you want.

To address questions you probably have:
Why?
The Ability pretty much only causes headaches, both in terms of tiering policy and its in-battle effects. Poor Jirachi in DPP has been suffering from success for a long time because of it; the Pokemon is fundamentally amazing, but add literally twice as much variance to it as anything else in the metagame and of course it'll feel awful to fight. The tier needs Jirachi, but Serene Grace makes that a rough deal because there's really good odds something stupid will happen. At least, this is what I have seen from multiple posts over my time on this site, and the results of the recent DPP tiering survey showing that 100% of people think Jirachi is unhealthy but only 20% think it can be removed from the tier. People think Jirachi is problematic, but they don't have a solution due to its unique circumstance in having Serene Grace as its only Ability, and banning it being suboptimal because every other aspect of the Pokemon is healthy for the metagame. No banning Sand Veil to save BW Garchomp here, that would be far too impactful on such an established Generation. Ice Punch freezes are just another part of the annoyance that is Jirachi- Body Slam + Iron Head ParaFlinches, timely Fire Punch burns, etc.. Any Pokemon can make these things happen, it's just that it's far more likely with Jirachi (and, uh, Dunsparce). Serene Grace having a healthy impact on the game is practically nonexistent- it makes Togekiss stand out, and whether it does that in a healthy manner is up to your judgement, but that's about it really. Serene Grace Clause has minor collateral and solves both the primary issue with Freeze and the issue that stops Jirachi being a healthy part of the metagame by bringing its variance in line with other Pokemon.

Slippery slope! Let's mod Drizzle to do nothing and unban Kyogre.
Luckily, this isn't the case- the impact of these Abilities are totally different. I'll split abilities into two categories to explain this, those being Raisers and Enhancers. Raisers are Abilities like Drought, Clear Body, Unseen Fist, Intimidate, Tough Claws, Magic Guard, Intrepid Sword, Water Absorb, Flame Body, and so on- they raise the Pokemon's peak potential and let them do something they couldn't do before, whether that's more maximum damage, better peak defensive capabilities, the potential to bypass checks or ignore setup, whatever it may be. Enhancers, on the other hand, don't impact your Pokemon's peak potential- instead, they simply make your Pokemon more likely to reach that potential. This is stuff like Super Luck, Wonder Skin, Compound Eyes, and, of course, Serene Grace. These Abilities have absolutely no impact on what a Pokemon could potentially achieve, but they make achieving that potential occur on a higher basis. I think equating such Abilities is a fundamental mistake, as removing the latter has little to no impact on what good players should account for when fighting the Pokemon (yes, you might get crit or flinched when fighting an Absol or Jirachi anyway, even if it's less likely), while removing the former objectively decreases the threat level of the Pokemon (Kyogre now has more safe switchins as it does less damage). Of course, modding out an Ability to remove it shouldn't be a primary solution for problematic Enhancers, but when one is uncompetitive and near-impossible to take tiering action on otherwise, I think it's seriously worth considering. When all is said and done, Jirachi can still do everything it could without Serene Grace Clause, but it's put in line with its competition in terms of variance and therefore uncompetitiveness.
EDIT: Also I trust people to not be idiots, this is a very unique case

Smogon doesn't do this kind of thing!
Appeal to tradition is not a good counterargument unless there are other strong reasons to oppose this idea, which there probably are, but those also don't need to be backed up by appeal to tradition. This is the subforum for changing Smogon policy.

Why is this better than Freeze Clause?
Whether it is is really up to your discretion, but it solves the ongoing Jirachi issue too and that means fewer headaches down the road. No more seriously discussing an Iron Head ban or whatever you guys are talking about would be needed and your top tier would become largely unproblematic. Also in general I think if we're gonna consider Freeze Clause then just making Freeze not happen at all sounds like a better option from a competitiveness standpoint.

This post is a quintessential example of the timeless "I'm not an active player of x tier, but..." where someone writes an essay on a topic they lack significant knowledge about and derail a thread with nonsense. Refer to my previous post re: ban rng fallacy & please don't misrepresent the survey findings when it's really not your place to give an interpretation without understanding the dynamics of DPP and Jirachi whatsoever.

Why does this thread exist.

I can't believe that people come up with several problems a tier has (talking about DPP) and that we should get rid of, then you all realize that all those problems are related to the same Pokemon, (Jirachi) and you still think we should tackle those problems instead of the only one causing them? Jirachi was, is and will be an unhealthy presence for the tier without modifying cartridge mechanics, thus should be banned. You can't (well, shouldn't, but I'm not the one in charge) modify cartridge mechanics because of a single Pokemon. Isn't that a hint of the Pokemon being problematic? Answer: yes. Jirachi is unhealthy for the tier in flinching everything, paralyzing everything, burning and freezing everything, and having like a hundred viable sets. There will always be a Jirachi set you won't probably deal with easily, and in case you can, paraflinch will wear your team down or you will be burned in the worst turn. Once again: the problem aren't the mechanics, is the Pokemon abusing them. Wasn't Cloyster abusing King's Rock in Gen 5 and 8 and we dealt with it without modifying cartridge mechanics?

Now, those who think Jirachi's departure will shake the tier, like making Latias broken. Have you considered that Latias could be banned aswell? It's not like it had been a staple since 2006, it was introduced to the tier a few years ago so banning it shouldn't have major issues than some mons like nape becoming better.

Do whatever, but if you have to modify cartridge mechanics for something so easy to solve as banning a Pokemon, you're failing Tiering Policy. As Antares said, we've chosen to play a rng based game. If you don't want luck, once again, I offer you an alternative: Luckless.

Refer to above point: Jirachi is NOT the only reason we want to implement freeze clause and I don't even think it's much more significant (if at all) than the defensive teams spamming ice moves over a long game. It may surprise you, but believe it or not the DPP council has actually considered the ramifications of banning Jirachi. I encourage you to educate yourself by reading the recent DPP Post-SPL Survey as opposed to posting in policy review whining about how unfair Jirachi is.

As for sleep clause, I don't care. Let's just stay focused on implementing freeze clause in generations 3 and 4 where there is precedent to do so and will be a welcome quality of life change by all the tier's players. Then we can talk about freeze clause in current gen/sleep clause/whatever else people want to discuss. Complaining about Jirachi as opposed to implementing a solution with no expense is really not the hill to die on.

 

[Eve]

Deleted my previous post because it sucked, my bad

Would like to note that the responses in the survey don't seem to mention freeze at all outside of Jirachi, so we can't really get a good grasp on the impact from there, but I appreciate the explanation about defensive styles- if freeze really is a significant and common problem outside of just Jirachi, then handling it individually makes sense. Still question whether it's not just better to remove the status entirely if you're going to mod things anyway, unless someone can explain why it has legitimate competitive value when it's limited to a single occurence (the defensive teams vs defensive teams scenario usually leads to Blissey taking the Freeze these days anyway, from the examples I've been shown, which bypasses almost any value of Freeze Clause).

 

[Irpachuza]

I encourage you to educate yourself by reading the recent DPP Post-SPL Survey as opposed to posting in policy review whining about how unfair Jirachi is.

This thread really doesn't really make a case against freezing in DPP, nor, as Eve points out, that being Jirachi's main issue.

Defensive teams are the most common playstyle in the tier, and many of which come equipped with 3 or more Pokemon carrying freeze moves. Inflicting freeze on > 1 Pokemon simultaneously happens often enough to where it would be a significant quality of life change to benefit the metagame. More specifically, this can include Ice Beam Latias, Ice Beam Milotic, Ice Beam Clefable, Ice Beam/Punch Tyranitar, and Ice Fang Gliscor.

As Old Gens councils leader, it'd be great if you could point us, the less knowledgeable, to instances where defensive cores abusing freezes made such a huge impact on the formats that you are here claiming that the only way to fix is by modding further the games. For King's Rock, it was Ladder Tour, and the decision wasn't even modding, just stretching the limits of what we usually ban. Please educate us, this thread is asking for huge stuff, that, you like it or not, clearly makes other people feel allowed to suggest things like modding abilities, modifying clauses, or vanishing status from existence. You'd need to understand why there is a logical level of cautiousness.

 

[Excal]

This thread really doesn't really make a case against freezing in DPP, nor, as Eve points out, that being Jirachi's main issue.

As Old Gens councils leader, it'd be great if you could point us, the less knowledgeable, to instances where defensive cores abusing freezes made such a huge impact on the formats that you are here claiming that the only way to fix is by modding further the games. For King's Rock, it was Ladder Tour, and the decision wasn't even modding, just stretching the limits of what we usually ban. Please educate us, this thread is asking for huge stuff, that, you like it or not, clearly makes other people feel allowed to suggest things like modding abilities, modifying clauses, or vanishing status from existence. You'd need to understand why there is a logical level of cautiousness.

I linked this thread not because of freeze clause but because the poster seem very uninformed/not knowledgeable about Jirachi and DPP. I also never stated the magnitude for abusing multiple freezes, rather that it's a quality of life implementation that would improve the metagame. Why must it be a "huge" impact, and yes I could probably go grab some example replays about why it's bullshit but the council's unanimous support of wanting freeze clause and our playerbase supporting it should be indicative enough that it would be a positive change.

I don't understand why people are so hesitant to implement freeze clause for old generations where it would benefit the competitive metagames and there's already precedent in freeze clause being implemented for generations 1 and 2. We are not adding an additional mod into smogon tiering, rather we're extending a mod that's already been made to cover two more generations that would benefit. I'm of the opinion that it is unhelpful for people with little/no stake in these tiers to play devil's advocate and exercise caution with respect to this hypothetical crusade against all hax in Pokemon.

 

[Irpachuza]

I'm of the opinion that it is unhelpful for people with little/no stake in these tiers to play devil's advocate and exercise caution with respect to this hypothetical crusade against all hax in Pokemon.

But like I said, I don't really care much about freeze clause in current gen but don't see it doing any harm.

I agree with you, that if ADV and DPP councils hard agree with it, there is not much to it nor it makes sense arguing against extending the clause until gen 4. My post was about showing lack of etiquette regarding policy discussions. This thread has less than 24 hours, and as an open thread to discuss different policy measures, including but not limited to ADV and DPP, it has got already game breaking/modding suggestions all around. For all generations. Including the OGC leader opening the possibility of a CG change (and hey, that's fine it's your opinion and you are a very validated member and tiering leader!).
So yes, your point is clear, just asked for more solid examples of why ADV and DPP were so eager about the clause, since instead you decided to send someone to "educate themselves" by posting a non-useful post on an all-gens thread about freeze clause. It really didn't help your case, which as you say, shouldn't be a difficult one to argue for.

I also never stated the magnitude for abusing multiple freezes, rather that it's a quality of life implementation that would improve the metagame. Why must it be a "huge" impact, and yes I could probably go grab some example replays about why it's bullshit but the council's unanimous support of wanting freeze clause and our playerbase supporting it should be indicative enough that it would be a positive change.

I'd also still appreciate this, if you want to share it, because frankly, QoL changes are not worth a modding. RBY freeze is unbearably broken, and GSC is on a different bulk level so defense + freezing + 10% thaw chances can easily be seen as uncompetitive (more below). That being said, I can be behind an ADV+DPP clause addition, I trust the people that know.

Just reminding that this policy thread is called Freeze Clause, not ADV/DPP freeze clause, so you'll have to bear with out-of-old-gens opinions. And that tiering leaders have a communitary role on educating, and policy threads are the best to do that and, furthermore, leave solid precedents.

Here are some posts about why GSC has freeze clause and why it wasn't implemented in later gens, for anyone interested:
https://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/gsc-freeze-clause.3624522/
http://www.smogon.com/forums/threads/freeze-clause.3563226/

 

[Meri Berry]

I don't really think we should entertain modding out Serene Grace or Immobile Clause, and I think its out of the scope of this thread regardless. As for Freeze Clause, every OU council has agreed that they would implement it, with gens 3 and 4 being the most enthusiastic about it with their unique situation. However, the reason this was brought up for current gen is because the freeze mechanics of gens 3 and 4 are very similar to that of the rest of the generations, so it just made sense that it would be worth implementing in those generations if its considered broken in gens 3 and 4. There's slight differences, such as the prevalence of thawing moves such as Scald and the drop of moves such as Ice Punch, but the actual mechanics of freeze are the same. As I see it, this thread has 3 outcomes:

• Freeze clause isn't implemented into any new generations (with possible extra action for gens 3 and 4 afterwards).
• Freeze clause is implemented into gens 3 and 4, but not 5-8.
• Freeze clause is implemented into all generations.

I do admit that it's a little tricky for me to grasp how gens 3 and 4 could benefit from it more than other tiers, but I'm not really opposed to it because there's precedent for its implementation in gens 1 and 2, and it helps to make the game slightly more fair. People are free to disagree on those points, that's the point of the thread, but I think other mods are probably outside the scope of what this thread aims to accomplish.