Natures: your opinion?

[Ace Trainer 188]

For me, I am more of a mixed bag when it comes to natures. For every badass Adamant Crobat or Modest Magmortar, I have a weak-ass Jolly Quilava or Modest Geodude. But I do Nuzlockes, so I have to accept these bad natures as a part of the challenge and live with it. I know it would hurt it more, but too bad. Of course if I get something really bad, then I would definitely give it the boot some time into the future.

And it's still going on now. In one of my current runs, I got decent stuff like a Rash Pikachu and a Quiet Frogadier, but in another run, not so decent stuff like a Gentle Monferno and a Timid Luxio. But I live with them, because it's part of the challenge.

When it comes to bad natures, I obviously prefer defensively bad natures to offensively bad ones. Take a Rash Sandshrew for example. He is easier to kill with Bubblebeam, but at least he hits as hard as a normal Sandshrew, and that's all I really care about. Even then, I can still like, give attacks to mons with defensively bad natures so that they can somewhat use their boosting stat. Offensively bad ones.... I don't know, really.

So let me ask the community a question: do you feel you are lucky, unlucky, or a mixed bag with natures? And when it comes to bad natures, would you rather have an offensively bad nature or a defensively bad one.

 

[Embernight]

One thing I'm not fond of with trying to get the best natures to match up with a Pokemon's stats is that I end up getting a lot of Pokemon with the same natures, usually Modest, Adamant, or Jolly. It's as if all the Pokemon on my team have the same personality. For a noncompetitive Pokemon, I like to choose natures that sound like they would match that Pokemon or just sound fun to have, like a relaxed Snorlax or sassy Kecleon.
If I had to pick between an offensively bad nature and a defensively bad one, I'd pick the offensively bad nature because at least I can focus on the other Attack stat. With defense and special defense, I prefer neither to be lowered, because it makes my Pokemon more vulnerable.

 

[Hiatus]

In-game, natures don't matter at all, at least for some people. We might find ourselves rolling with anything that we're able to get our hands on. Competitive-wise, however, natures are a big thing, as every single bit of stats matter. I'm sure we want our Pokémon to be the best they could be, and maximizing certain stats help achieve that.

 

[Sun]

I care about Natures, in-game or by competitive aspect. I've loved them a lot since their introduction from Ruby and Sapphire!

 

[Hikamaru]

I sometimes care about natures, since even for in-game runs I always want to have a nature that doesn't hinder my Pokemon's best stats so they can hold themselves. I just use whatever I get otherwise.

 

[DraconianWing]

Good "natures" and "bad" natures are very situational for me, since every Pokemon seems to be designed with a certain nature in mind. I think in-game, bad natures are better off being defensively bad, since you can always make up for it simply by outmatching your opponent in level. Offensive stats are more important for runs since it's very easy to find yourself stuck at a certain point in the game due to your team not dishing out enough damage to leave a dent on the opponent. Competitive is where I get very picky with natures, since you want to max out everything and get the full potential like Peitarchia said.

 

[Sopheria]

I generally don't care much about natures for my in-game team for my main playthrough. On the other hand,when it comes to competitive team building, I always try to get the best natures I can for each Pokemon. I've often spent hours breeding to get the perfect nature for my competitive Pokes (thank you Everstone!) They actually make a pretty significant difference, stat-wise.

 

[Arylett Charnoa]

Natures... I'm kind of conflicted about them.

Thinking of only the game aspect of it, I feel bad when a Pokemon doesn't have its most ideal nature for its stats. As if it will always be inferior and there's nothing I can do about it. It's really bothersome, as I generally want things to be as efficient as possible.

But then, I think about it from a more ethical perspective. It feels rather... uncomfortable to me to breed Pokemon of a certain temperament for my own benefit and then toss the others aside. Just breeding them all to conform to one personality, not appreciating the differentness of each and every one of them. Of course, I would say that this is the fault of the oversimplification of personalities to just being meaningful for stats, a necessity for a video game. But it would be nice if they added some more benefits for the different natures, so people wouldn't just use the same ones over and over again, and we could appreciate every Pokemon's uniqueness.

Due to the fact that I don't do competitive, and I also feel discomforted by the ethics, I typically just go with whatever Pokemon I get. The first one I can catch, that's the nature I have to use. Because in real life, you can't control what your closest friends will be like. And I like to think of my Pokemon as being my character's closest friends, making up some slight backstories for each of them based on the personality. Variety is more appreciated, and it probably does add a bit more challenge to the game anyway.

Also, I'd rather have offensively bad over defensively bad. I prefer survivability over doing some extra damage.

 

[Sopheria]

Natures... I'm kind of conflicted about them.

Thinking of only the game aspect of it, I feel bad when a Pokemon doesn't have its most ideal nature for its stats. As if it will always be inferior and there's nothing I can do about it. It's really bothersome, as I generally want things to be as efficient as possible.

But then, I think about it from a more ethical perspective. It feels rather... uncomfortable to me to breed Pokemon of a certain temperament for my own benefit and then toss the others aside. Just breeding them all to conform to one personality, not appreciating the differentness of each and every one of them. Of course, I would say that this is the fault of the oversimplification of personalities to just being meaningful for stats, a necessity for a video game. But it would be nice if they added some more benefits for the different natures, so people wouldn't just use the same ones over and over again, and we could appreciate every Pokemon's uniqueness.

Due to the fact that I don't do competitive, and I also feel discomforted by the ethics, I typically just go with whatever Pokemon I get. The first one I can catch, that's the nature I have to use. Because in real life, you can't control what your closest friends will be like. And I like to think of my Pokemon as being my character's closest friends, making up some slight backstories for each of them based on the personality. Variety is more appreciated, and it probably does add a bit more challenge to the game anyway.

Also, I'd rather have offensively bad over defensively bad. I prefer survivability over doing some extra damage.

I feel this way too, sometimes :( Especially when I'm doing competitive team building and I'm essentially "rejecting" 40 or 50 Pokemon that didn't have the nature I wanted ;-;

 

[BettyNewbie]

I'd rather have no Natures, period. Still one of the worst things to ever happen to the games, IMO. All they did was further deepen the gulf between casual and competitive play, effectively rendering Story Mode teams worthless.