Approved The Mediocre Mon

[Birkal]

This concept by Tarontos was approved for discussion. Is this concept worth pursuing? If so, what questions could we ask? How could we improve this? Everyone is free to discuss the following submission as if this was a concept discussion.

---

Concept Name: The Mediocre Mon

General Description:
This Pokemon has only OK stats, ability, typing, and movepool but none of them are truly excellent. But when put together, they make the Pokemon a true threat either offensively or defensively or somewhere in the middle. This Pokemon is meant to be good, yet have no particularly good parts.

Justification:
We have seen many Pokemon over come crippling disabilities through amazing stats, abilities or stats or movepool. Examples of this include Greninja (let's be honest his stats aren't that good) who overcame his only respectable stats to be banned from OU. We also have an example of from one of of two ice types in OU: Kyruem-B who overcame the deficiency with legendary stats. But we also have Clefable, something with mediocre stats who over came through fantastic typing a godlike pair of abilities and an expansive movepool. But we don't really have any thing that is really only "ok" in everything, but some how pulls those traits together to make something devastating. Bisharp is the only currently really good Pokemon that really shows something like this )its stats to be honest are mediocre out side of attack). It however manages to be viable because it discourages Defog and has a very strong Sucker Punch and can kill fairies.

Questions To Be Answered

• How do the various attributes of a Pokemon mix to make it "good"?
• What abilities are OK but don't stand out?
• What typing are OK but don't stand out?
  
• What stats are OK but don't stand out?
  
• How can a movepool be only OK?
  
• What can make or break a Pokemon in the metagame?
• Exactly how bad can part of something be made before it is entirely debilitated?
• Can it be done with out making its role too niche?

Explanation: There aren't really any only OK Pokemon that excel in OU with only OK things they all have one or two things that bring them up to snuff to deal with. Everything that is in OU is either good in every area or excels in one or more.

 

[Tarontos]

So i personally enjoy this concept(as it is mine).

Some additional questions are
how important are the various attribute's of a Pokemon?
what roles due the ability play in the use of a Pokemon?

To expand on the can it be built with out making it's role too niche: i believe this is the most difficult part of the Pokemon to balance many threats are predictable but most of these have very particular roles that they do very well and such can afford to be predictable on the other hand we things that can run a multitude of sets but is not ideal for most of them. So where id this line of thought going-
-How much do these traits influence predictability? how much does predictability play into how viable something is?
To answer : exactly how bad can part of something be made before it is entirely debilitated?--very-- look at Sableye's base forms stats and what it can do with it's ability and supportive move pool pretty much wall every physical attacker. it's role may be very niche but it shows how much disability something can over come.

on what can make or break a mon

• Ability: the ability can make a Mon but given we leave out truant defeatist and Slow start they can not really break a Mon(at least in the bad sense).
• Typing: Typing definitively plays a factor in what a Pokemon can do and can often make or break something, imagine if kyruem-b was a dragon steel type instead.
• Move pool : this can make or break a Mon but interacts heavily with ability examples of this are contrary serperior(good interation), Rock head Tyrantrum(good interaction), and Areodactyl(in the does not interact while section).
• Stats: perhaps the most defining part of a pokemon they determine what can be done by the user but often interact with the ability.

The rest are more discusion specific So i'll leave those alone.

Birkal Could you do a minor edit on my concept(in the justifaction part) if i blanked about Mamoswine as an ice type in ou so could you change where i say "the only ice type" to "one of two ice types"

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

this Pokemon has only OK stats, ability, typing, and move pool but none of them are truly excellent but when put together they make the Pokemon a true threat either offensively or defensively or somewhere in the middle.

The problem with this is how to make something viable without making it more than OK in 1 particular area. If you have mediocre stats, mediocre ability, mediocre typing and mediocre movepool, then what does the Pokemon have that others can't do better? Or as Pawou put it: "If it's mediocre (in the truest sense of the word) at everything, how would it be viable?"

After having a talk about it in the PS CAP Room, we came to the conclusion that:
This concept is impossible, because everything that is a threat isn't mediocre, almost by definition. The only thing mediocre Pokemon can do is a fill a niche. So the answer to: "can it be done with out making it's role to niche." is no. Because the concept is impossible, we need to change it, to something more like what cbrevan suggested: "What roles can it perform without having inflated stats/typing/movepool?"

 

[Empress]

After looking over the description and justification, I don't think this concept is feasible. If a mon is "just ok" in all of typing, ability, stats, and movepool, then it really won't be much of a factor in OU. This concept looks like it would create a mon that is jack-of-all-trades but a master of none. The closest thing we have to that is Mew, which doesn't fit the description here because of its inflated movepool. If there's nothing that a mon excels in, it really can't fill a niche in OU, which is why I don't believe in this concept. I like the idea behind it, but it does not work on paper.

 

[Imanalt]

The problem with this is how to make something viable without making it more than OK in 1 particular area. If you have mediocre stats, mediocre ability, mediocre typing and mediocre movepool, then what does the Pokemon have that others can't do better? Or as Pawou put it: "If it's mediocre (in the truest sense of the word) at everything, how would it be viable?"

After having a talk about it in the PS CAP Room, we came to the conclusion that:
This concept is impossible, because everything that is a threat isn't mediocre, almost by definition. The only thing mediocre Pokemon can do is a fill a niche. So the answer to: "can it be done with out making it's role to niche." is no. Because the concept is impossible, we need to change it, to something more like what cbrevan suggested: "What roles can it perform without having inflated stats/typing/movepool?"

celebi is an interesting argument. Yes it has a good bst, but it has good but nothing great bulk, mediocre offenses, a solid but again not great movepool. I think this is more what we want to be thinking, perhaps taking a relatively generous definition of mediocre to extend to anything that isn't particularly standout.

I really like this concept. It will be challenging for us, and the lack of being able to see ahead to get just enough to do what we need in all areas especially makes it hard, but it is doable. And even though i don't see us completely being "successful" with this concept, the goal isn't just to be successful. This is an attainable enough goal that the inability to attain it will prevent us from trying effectively, and it will push us in ways to think beyond simple answers to things and really question exactly how much we need.

My bigger concern with the concept is not attainability, its the fact that its so general. It doesn't offer us any initial direction, and so the early stages, especially typing and ability, seem to revolve largely around blindly picking something that is average. Perhaps we could look at typing combinations that are combinations of two not great types but combine to be a little better than the sum of the whole? I'm not sure, and i think thats what would be the concern. That said, I do think that we can have ok discussions in this stage, and the "just pick something" is not that different from what we always do, and so the benefits of later stages i think outweigh this con.

 

[Tarontos]

You guy's seem to misinterpreting the intention(at least some of you)
mediocre!=ok
Bad--not good at something (magicarp)
mediocre--usable but not your first choice(Flygon)
ok--adequate( Mega Sceptile)
good-- above average(tyranitar(he's realy great/good but you get the idea)
Great--out classes a lot of things(charizard X)
Epic-- see the S tier Definition

the goal(as my original intention) would primarily be too make something that is made up of ok parts good or great
Mediocre was just the name choice because of alliteration and i thought it sounded cool

I agree that it will be difficult and if/when the actual topic discusion comes around we would need to agree on Some kind of focus on a role or two to kind of focus on.

Typing would be difficult because mos't typings aren't bad except poison, bug, and maybe physic so we could pair one of those up with another type that doesn't necessarily cover the other well i guess--but that would be off topic for this discussion
I feel like with this concept there would be a very heavy ramping up effect-- you pick the typing then base the ability heavily on it and the move pool would lily be pretty set by that point with other things as well

 

[NumberCruncher]

What typing is actually only okay offense and defense typing? The only typing that I can think of that's just okay at both is pure-Normal, and even then you can argue that that's reasonable good defensive typing.

 

[ginganinja]

mediocre--usable but not your first choice(Flygon)

Since when was Flygon even usable?

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

You guy's seem to misinterpreting the intention(at least some of you)
mediocre!=ok
Bad--not good at something (magicarp)
mediocre--usable but not your first choice(Flygon)
ok--adequate( Mega Sceptile)
good-- above average(tyranitar(he's realy great/good but you get the idea)
Great--out classes a lot of things(charizard X)
Epic-- see the S tier Definition

the goal(as my original intention) would primarily be too make something that is made up of ok parts good or great
Mediocre was just the name choice because of alliteration and i thought it sounded cool

I agree that it will be difficult and if/when the actual topic discusion comes around we would need to agree on Some kind of focus on a role or two to kind of focus on.

Typing would be difficult because mos't typings aren't bad except poison, bug, and maybe physic so we could pair one of those up with another type that doesn't necessarily cover the other well i guess--but that would be off topic for this discussion
I feel like with this concept there would be a very heavy ramping up effect-- you pick the typing then base the ability heavily on it and the move pool would lily be pretty set by that point with other things as well

I'm sorry, I don't understand. What does "the goal(as my original intention) would primarily be too make something that is made up of ok parts good or great" mean?
Are you trying to say that it's a jack of all trades, master of none? Maybe that it has some good parts and some OK parts? If it is the second one, how is that different from any other OU mon?

Also, how is mediocre not OK? They are synonyms.

 

[Tarontos]

Mediocre--of only moderate quality; not very good.(google)
OK--satisfactory but not exceptionally or especially good.(google)

Those two definitions are not the same or atleast to me mediocre is something that is bad or inadaquit while ok means it is barely adaquate.
It is possibly a fine line but one i feel is distinct. I am of the opinion that every word means something unique even synonyms no matter how fine the line is.
mediocre to me is one step above unusable
well ok is one step below good
exceptional>Very at least in my mind

ginganigga It isn't really viable(for but it is still has the niche of being a defogger resistant to all hazards. and it is on the viability ranking so i put in in the mediocre spot. I would personally never use him in OU but i have seen him rarely.

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

Mediocre--of only moderate quality; not very good.(google)
OK--satisfactory but not exceptionally or especially good.(google)

Those two definitions are not the same or atleast to me mediocre is something that is bad or inadaquit while ok means it is barely adaquate.
It is possibly a fine line but one i feel is distinct. I am of the opinion that every word means something unique even synonyms no matter how fine the line is.
mediocre to me is one step above unusable
well ok is one step below good
exceptional>Very at least in my mind

ginganigga It isn't really viable(for but it is still has the niche of being a defogger resistant to all hazards. and it is on the viability ranking so i put in in the mediocre spot. I would personally never use him in OU but i have seen him rarely.

Right, so we have established that OK is slightly better than mediocre, but we still haven't established what does "the goal(as my original intention) would primarily be too make something that is made up of ok parts good or great" means.
Are you trying to say that it's a jack of all trades, master of none? Maybe that it has some good parts and some OK parts? If it is the second one, how is that different from any other OU mon?

 

[Tarontos]

I have no clue

The five ways i see it going are
A jack of all trades who gains viability through unpredictability
A focused jack of all trades(basicly a jack of all trades focused on offense or deffense)
Some how a not to niche thing that is miraculously not overly versatile but still very viable
or the OK and good parts one(which doesn't really make it fit the concept)
Some thing related to current meta that's role is not filled well or at all.

To be honest i just thought the concept sounded fun what it would become is up for interpretation. it is a very meta proccess concept.

What i was trying to get across with the "ok parts to good or great" i have really no clue that was the inspiration for my concept
If it was more focused then i would of been more focused on my topic.

 

[Burt Racecar]

Take a look at Clefable.. that's pretty mediocre, but its stats, typing, abilities and movepool pull together to make it something amazing.

The one thing that changed for clefable in the transition to BW to XY was fairy typing, another 10 sp. attack and an additional move in Moonblast, I believe. Those changes were enough to make something go from RU to become a mainstay in OU.

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

A jack of all trades who gains viability through unpredictability

The problem with this is that how is going to be unpredictable with a only OK movepool? I suppose, since it will have OK physical attack and OK special attack you don't know it it going to be physically or specially offensive, but that isn't enough to make it viable, since it's offence isn't that great anyway. Similarly, you won't know if it is physical or specially defensive, but its not going to be bulky enough anyway, because it has only OK defensive stats.

A focused jack of all trades(basicly a jack of all trades focused on offense or deffense)

Since it only has OK attack and OK defense, why not run something that has better defences or better offensive stats instead? If it is acting as either an offensively or defensive mon, why not have a dedicated wall or a dedicated attacker?

Some how a not to niche thing that is miraculously not overly versatile but still very viable

Miracles are not a thing the process knows how to perform. To my knowledge, anyway.

or the OK and good parts one(which doesn't really make it fit the concept)

I still have no idea what this is? Do you mean a Pokemon which has some good parts and some OK parts? In which case, how is it different from other OU Pokemon?

Some thing related to current meta that's role is not filled well or at all.

This is too vague, you need to explain further.

Take a look at Clefable.. that's pretty mediocre, but its stats, typing, abilities and movepool pull together to make it something amazing.

The one thing that changed for clefable in the transition to BW to XY was fairy typing, another 10 sp. attack and an additional move in Moonblast, I believe. Those changes were enough to make something go from RU to become a mainstay in OU.

Clefable does not fit the concept at all actually. It has mediocre stats... and that's it. It has a great defensive typing, a choice between 2 great abilities in Unaware and Magic Guard and also a great, varied movepool. Therefore, it's not mediocre, except in its stats, and therefore it doesn't fit the concept.

 

[Imanalt]

clefairy is a poor example because of its stellar type, i really think celebi is the better example...​

 

[Alfalfa]

clefairy is a poor example because of its stellar type, i really think celebi is the better example...​

Grass / Psychic is not the worst typing in the world; it does give Celebi useful resistances that allows it to switch into a number of Pokemon, despite being weak to a lot of common types.

 

[Imanalt]

Grass / Psychic is not the worst typing in the world; it does give Celebi useful resistances that allows it to switch into a number of Pokemon, despite being weak to a lot of common types.

Grass/psychic is an average to below average type. Both of these are so-so not great offensive typings, and combining them changes nothing, meanwhile while it does have a decent number of useful resists, grass/psychic also has the most weaknesses of any typing in the game. It gives and it takes away from what celebi can do, and i think thats in a lot of ways exactly what we shoudl be looking for with this concept. Things that aren't good in a vacuum but can do just enough to make their user good.

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

While Celebi might have an OK or mediocre typing, it has a good ability in Natural Cure, better than OK stats and access to a great and varied movepool: Calm Mind, Swords Dance and Nasty Plot to set up, Baton Pass, Heal Bell, Screens, Perish Song, Leech Seed, Trick, Stealth Rock and Thunder Wave as support options, reliable recovery in Synthesis and Recover, Charge Beam, Dazzling Gleam, Energy Ball, Giga Drain, Leaf Storm, Psychic and Shadow Ball on the special side, and Seed Bomb, Zen Headbutt, Sucker Punch and U-turn as physical attacks. It can even set up Rain, Sun and Sand manually.

Therefore, I would argue Celebi is more than mediocre.

 

[MKSLAYER97]

I think Zapdos seems to fit the description fairly well. Its movepool is pretty standard (most flying types get Heat Wave + Roost + Defog, everything gets Hidden Power/Substitute/Toxic, and most electric types get TBolt/Volt Switch), its ability is generally not useful, each of its stats are OK at best, and while its defensive typing has good resistances, it's also weak to Stealth Rock, which is generally a hazardous (get it? hazard?) quality to have.

 

[Burt Racecar]

All these mons have at least one factor that contributes to people having an opinion that they're mediocre, but they each have elements which when combined actually makes them OU viable.

Clefable has good abilities when combined with its typing and support movepool.
Celebi has a good ability, stats, support movepool, and some nice resists at the cost of some serious weaknesses to common attacking types.
Zapdos is the only defogger that Bisharp users would think twice about switching into, despite its somewhat shallow movepool and rock weakness (though personally I don't think Zapos is that mediocre).

In order for our mediocre mon to be OU worthy, it's going to need some sort of saving grace, otherwise we'd be creating a pokemon that actually has no place in OU.

 

[Imanalt]

While Celebi might have an OK or mediocre typing, it has a good ability in Natural Cure, better than OK stats and access to a great and varied movepool: Calm Mind, Swords Dance and Nasty Plot to set up, Baton Pass, Heal Bell, Screens, Perish Song, Leech Seed, Trick, Stealth Rock and Thunder Wave as support options, reliable recovery in Synthesis and Recover, Charge Beam, Dazzling Gleam, Energy Ball, Giga Drain, Leaf Storm, Psychic and Shadow Ball on the special side, and Seed Bomb, Zen Headbutt, Sucker Punch and U-turn as physical attacks. It can even set up Rain, Sun and Sand manually.

Therefore, I would argue Celebi is more than mediocre.

ok let me go through this one by one.

First off I'm going to start with stats. Yes celebi has a good 600 bst, but that doesn't tell the real picture. celebi has good speed, but low power, so has underwhelming offensive potential, and this is not surprisingly shown by the fact it is pretty much always used defensively. From a defensive standpoint celebi has good 100/100/100 bulk, but that bulk is... good but not that good. Sure its probably above average for the tier as a whole, but for a defensive mon it really is not particularly above average. I'll freely admit this is where i have the most questions about calling celebi "mediocre," but I think the spirit of this concept is more about having nothing standout that says at a glance "yes this makes this mon good."

The movepool argument is really weak to be honest. Celebi appreciates reliably recovery but this is certainly nothing standout, and besides that it has like 6 viable moves. Celebi can run giga drain, psychic, baton pass, substitute/nasty plot/calm mind, stealth rock, and maybe thunder wave or heal bell. I listed sub/np/cm together because theyre really doing the same thing. They're all primarily geared towards passing something. Realistically though, very few of these moves have poor distribution. Lots of things can on paper cm pass, or sub pass, or even nasty pass, but because of celebi's other traits its actually viable on celebi.

Ability... i don't even know. I don't think anyone really considers natural cure a good ability? Yeah it has use, and healing scald burns from keldeo is nice, but there's no way you look at a mon and say "ooh it has natural cure I want to use this"


Anyways, that aside, i think this whole discussion is somewhat sidetracking us from the goal here. If we accept my spirit of this concept that I proposed earlier that "this concept is more about having nothing standout that says at a glance yes this makes this mon good." then I think this whole argument is moot. There's no question there have been and are viable mons with nothing standout that are still usable. This says there is an attainable goal for the project, and thats whats important. Yes, a goal we're 100% sure we can attain is nice, but the cap process is such that it doesn't matter if we don't do what we set out to do, because we can see "oh because we didnt give it enough x its not good" (or more commonly for us, because we gave it too much y its broken), and we can still have interesting conversations about things as we're building. The point of cap is not to build a mon we necessarily like, its to through building this mon learn as much as possible, and thats why I like this concept.

PS. if tarontos disagrees with my interpretation of the concept uh, idk. That'd be kind of awkward,,,

 

[Tarontos]

Like i said i have no clue as to what it would become-- like i said if i knew i would have said so from the start an the it would be much differnt concept.

Imanalt Your interpretation is pretty much spot on.
The concept is very Meta in it's goals. the whole learning about the process from in side the process.


good typing tends to be based on the meta and mixed types become much more mixed-
-i don't think any one is going to argue that bug is a good type.
Offensivly
resisted by six types
has stab u-turn
hits three types super effectivly
Defensivly
resits
grass(bad offensive type)
fighting good to resist
ground good to resist
weak to
rock-horible
fire-not a good thing to be weak to-due to fire/dragon/ground coverage
flying-birdspam
i am not argueing that all bug types are bad but that the bug type is not that great it has some niches in u-turn and pairs well with other types notably steel.
mono types are in general pretty bad on offense

Zapdos- doesn't have anything that makes stand out but it is still good-- that is actually a pretty good example. the bisharp fearing to switch in has nothing to do with standing out that is just it's niche

Celebi-So does being able to batton pass now mean something stands out.--how about an ok ability
natural cure is good ability there are however much better options(regenator-magicguard/magicbounce) so i would say it is an ok ability not like say pressure
just because an ability is useful does not make it good

I think the best way to deal with abilities is to see what we think is most useful and work our way down from there
i think off the bat we could cut any of the attack boosting abilities(shearforce tough claws ates adaptability etc)
and the magic abilities(bounce/guard)
probably regenerator
The usefulness of an immunity i feel is very type dependent after all would you say rotom-f has a good ability as opposed to say rotom-h who has pretty much the best ability he could have.
same with resist- no one wants to give a fire type thick fat but a grass type yeah thats a good ability





move pool--so an ok move pool would contain Stabs-maybe some support options and a few coverage so basicly every thing would have an ok move pool. except like wobbafet

 

[KhosroTheGreat]

Hide

ok let me go through this one by one.

First off I'm going to start with stats. Yes celebi has a good 600 bst, but that doesn't tell the real picture. celebi has good speed, but low power, so has underwhelming offensive potential, and this is not surprisingly shown by the fact it is pretty much always used defensively. From a defensive standpoint celebi has good 100/100/100 bulk, but that bulk is... good but not that good. Sure its probably above average for the tier as a whole, but for a defensive mon it really is not particularly above average. I'll freely admit this is where i have the most questions about calling celebi "mediocre," but I think the spirit of this concept is more about having nothing standout that says at a glance "yes this makes this mon good."

The movepool argument is really weak to be honest. Celebi appreciates reliably recovery but this is certainly nothing standout, and besides that it has like 6 viable moves. Celebi can run giga drain, psychic, baton pass, substitute/nasty plot/calm mind, stealth rock, and maybe thunder wave or heal bell. I listed sub/np/cm together because theyre really doing the same thing. They're all primarily geared towards passing something. Realistically though, very few of these moves have poor distribution. Lots of things can on paper cm pass, or sub pass, or even nasty pass, but because of celebi's other traits its actually viable on celebi.

Ability... i don't even know. I don't think anyone really considers natural cure a good ability? Yeah it has use, and healing scald burns from keldeo is nice, but there's no way you look at a mon and say "ooh it has natural cure I want to use this"


Anyways, that aside, i think this whole discussion is somewhat sidetracking us from the goal here. If we accept my spirit of this concept that I proposed earlier that "this concept is more about having nothing standout that says at a glance yes this makes this mon good." then I think this whole argument is moot. There's no question there have been and are viable mons with nothing standout that are still usable. This says there is an attainable goal for the project, and thats whats important. Yes, a goal we're 100% sure we can attain is nice, but the cap process is such that it doesn't matter if we don't do what we set out to do, because we can see "oh because we didnt give it enough x its not good" (or more commonly for us, because we gave it too much y its broken), and we can still have interesting conversations about things as we're building. The point of cap is not to build a mon we necessarily like, its to through building this mon learn as much as possible, and thats why I like this concept.

PS. if tarontos disagrees with my interpretation of the concept uh, idk. That'd be kind of awkward,,,

Well, I asked about natural cure in the CAP room, and people agree that it is a good ability. It gives a mon the ability to absorb status for the team. I think you are underestimating Celebi's movepool entirely, because it really is quite good for a support mon, which is the role usually given to Celebi. Natural Cure can help it with this role. Also, if someone needs a status absorber for their team, I don't see why they can't say "ooh it has natural cure I want to use this".

In regards to the concept as a whole, I think what you're suggesting is that we change the concept to something more like "A Pokemon which doesn't look viable on the surface, but is viable in competitive play". The key being that it is ''viable', not 'usable'. The difference between these 2 for me is that viable means that it a threat in the meta, but usable is just something that could be used but is outclassed by other Pokemon. The challenge in this is that most intelligent players will be able to spot a viable mon from its moves, ability, typing and stats, so finding something that slips under the radar will be difficult and will probably end up being niche. However, I don't think we can fulfill this concept without it being niche. So, what do you think, Tarontos?

In regards to Tarontos' most recent post, it seems to be a simulation of some kind for the CAP with a Mono-Bug typing. I would argue Zapdos is better than OK, but taking away its impressive SpA, it is above average, but not amazing, in all areas. The niche it has is that its a defogger than Bisharp doesn't want to switch into, but we need to make something like this, except not as good, but still able to fill a niche.

 

[Tarontos]

I was just showing that there are mediocre types-- there are other ones as well i just don't have time to do indepth analysis on every thing

On natural cure
So we can all agree that magic bounce is better than natural cure on a status absorber
Toxic heal too
As is magic guard in most cases do to the lack of life orb recoil
Shed skin is about the same level
Natural cure is sub par on a status absorber because it is outclassed by numerous other abilities.
A lot of ability viability is relative. i'm preaty sure we can agree that celebi would be much better with magic bounce or toxic heal(which makes the opposite of sense flavor wise)

in your opinion then what makes a ok move pool
offensive mon
Stabs
some non-redundant coverage(say dark on a ghost type)
Setup--sometimes
Required moves
Defensive mon
Recovery--depends on ability and stats
Status
Ceric(wish, aromatheropy etc.)--sometimes

 

[NumberCruncher]

On natural cure
So we can all agree that magic bounce is better than natural cure on a status absorber

Agreed, though not by a significant margin

Toxic heal too

Why do you want a burnt Toxic healer?

As is magic guard in most cases do to the lack of life orb recoil

Agreed, though still not by a significant margin

Shed skin is about the same level

So you'd rather leave your poisoned/burnt pokemon on the field to keep taking the damage in the hopes that it'll wear off, rather than just switch it out. Most of the time, returning the pokemon to reset the toxic is better anyway.