• Our software update is now concluded. You will need to reset your password to log in. In order to do this, you will have to click "Log in" in the top right corner and then "Forgot your password?".
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.

Four Moves

866
Posts
11
Years
    • Seen Jul 16, 2014
    All of you know that Pokémon can only use a limited number of attacks in battle, being four.I personally think that they should be able to use atleast 5-6 moves.

    What are your thoughts?Should they be able to use more number of moves or are you satisfied with only using four moves?
     
    Last edited:

    CourageHound

    Trust & Courage. Nothing More
    823
    Posts
    11
    Years
  • Naw I think six moves would be kinda pushing it as it would be literaly game-breaking for the competitive scene. Alot of pokemon with 4 moveslot syndrome would enjoy another move, like say, Muk. Say 5 might be ok. But even then....
     
    8,571
    Posts
    14
    Years
  • The formula of having four moves on a Pokemon has worked for the past 15 years, so I don't see why they'd change it now. It takes some strategy to come up with good movesets for different Pokemon if you've only got 4 slots, but with 6 you'd start to see way too many similar movesets, especially in competitive play. The furthest I could see it being taken is allowing one extra slot for out of battle moves (like Surf, Fly, etc.) that can't be used in-battle, just to combat the need for HM slaves.
     
    866
    Posts
    11
    Years
    • Seen Jul 16, 2014
    I guess 6 moves would be taking it a bit too far, 5 moves would be good but it would seem a bit odd i guess.
     
    50,218
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • The formula of having four moves on a Pokemon has worked for the past 15 years, so I don't see why they'd change it now. It takes some strategy to come up with good movesets for different Pokemon if you've only got 4 slots, but with 6 you'd start to see way too many similar movesets, especially in competitive play. The furthest I could see it being taken is allowing one extra slot for out of battle moves (like Surf, Fly, etc.) that can't be used in-battle, just to combat the need for HM slaves.

    I agree with him, the 4 moves formula has always been successful cos it helps focus on the strategic element in competitive battles.

    It has never changed, and never should change.
     

    sunshinesan

    Pokesho fan
    83
    Posts
    15
    Years
    • Seen May 9, 2014
    I always humored the thought of trading different slots of abilities for move slots, item slots etc.
    i.e. I trade 1 move slot for an extra item slot. So my poke can only have 3 moves but can carry 2 leftovers.
    Or... Trade an ability (banning truant, etc.) for an extra move slot. So I have 5 moves and no ability.
    Or! No items, two abilities!!!1, So Mence can get both Intimidate and Moxie, Loom can get both Technician and Poison Heal, etc.

    drool...
     

    PlatinumDude

    Nyeh?
    12,964
    Posts
    13
    Years
  • A Pokemon having 4 moves is fine as is. Sometimes having an extra moveslot might cause some brokenness.
     
    7,741
    Posts
    17
    Years
    • Seen Sep 18, 2020
    Each monster being able to learn up to only four moves is part of the strategy of the games, a core mechanic the way I see it.
    I don't think it would be unreasonable to introduce an ability that allows a monster to learn five moves; it would have interesting implications for moves which affect abilities.
     

    Ho-Oh

    used Sacred Fire!
    35,992
    Posts
    18
    Years
    • Seen Jul 1, 2023
    I'd want five. It'd help certain Pokemon with the issue of having too many things to fit into four slots and it would help choiced mons more. To counter that probably... decrease the power of the most used TMs or something??
     

    ZettaSlowbro

    Veteran
    45
    Posts
    11
    Years
  • With any more move slots I think you could cover too many bases, meaning that there would end up being that one Pokemon that could just now do his or her job too well, and a lot of people would exploit it.
    As far as competitive battling goes, it probably make stall teams better by alot.
     

    Sassy Milkshake

    It's ok to cry.
    371
    Posts
    11
    Years
    • Age 32
    • Seen Feb 10, 2013
    The only time I'd want more is for Bibarel, so he could have as many HM moves as possible haha. ;P
     

    AMT

    12
    Posts
    13
    Years
    • Seen Jan 2, 2024
    No I cant see it. I feel like it adds a balance to the game.
     

    Firox

    eepz, come help pwease!
    2,585
    Posts
    11
    Years
  • I believe that four is OK for the Pokemon's type (like 4 water attacks, 4 fire attacks, 4 dark attacks, 4 psychic attacks, 4 fighting attacks, and so on) with its limited PP#.

    95% of Pokemon also have teeth and claws, and about 75% others have a tail, so moves like Bite, scratch, growl, howl, tail whip shouldn't be included with the 4 attacks or limit to PP, but should be extra and no limit PP, so if all 4 of the type move runs out of PP, the Pokemon could still use its claws, teeth, or tail in battle. Only doing like 1/3rd the damage. I'm sure it could also apply to many Normal attacks where only teeth, claws, or tail are needed.
     
    Last edited:

    Praisedscooter

    Gym Leader wannabe
    16
    Posts
    11
    Years
    • Seen Dec 9, 2012
    4 attacks is perfect, let's you make a complex move pool without making things to overpowered.
     
    673
    Posts
    12
    Years
  • Personally, I think the introduction of significant move limits is the best thing Pokemon's ever brought to the world of RPGs (I've never liked Digimon games very much, and this is one of the reasons why). With that in mind, I think four is the optimal number - it allows moves like Conversion 2 and Assist to work well and, as has been mentioned earlier, provides for creativity and diversity without allowing Pokemon to become too OP'd.
     
    Back
    Top