Comments for Pokemon D&D

Channel Description:

Latest Articles in this Channel:

03/07/11--06:17: Comment on Ability Scores by Vincent (chan 2816902)

http://pokemondb.net/ev Just read up on EV's. It gets worse and worse in my opinon. I can't see a use for it in a d20 system. The items listed however could be Power/Battle Items that can be used to equip a Pokemon with and treat it as a magical item. An item that gives increased defences, additional temporary Hit Points in combat when activated, bonus to AC or attack rolls. That solves a lot of micro-management irritations. Counting EV's is a tedious chore and in a d20 system it would reduce the fun factor drastically. I've also been thinking about leveling and powers used in general. In dnd 4e a character have 30levels. At first I thought about a Pokemon leveling up whenever a trainer gained 1/3rd of his level. But that would mean a trainer could only train 1 Pokemon. Or have all the pokemon in his possesion level up even if they don't battle. Something I wasn't to pleased with. Why not have two level up systems working alongside of each other. That way even low lvl Pokemon can be used to play with. Those battles will give the trainer less XP then a high lvl pokemon battle of course. But the pokemon in question will just get the XP it needs for itself. Whenever a pokemon gains a lvl it increases its attributes and gains a power/utility at certain levels. I was thinking about having skills such as Growth/harden be lvl 2 utility powers that last till end of encounter. Skills like that don't really have an attack effect or something useful. When a trainer gains his levels he is the aspect of the team that can choose feats every other lvl or so. Feats of expertice to be able and use certain pokeballs which increase his catch rate. Gaining feats that indirectely effect the stats of the pokemon in his possesion. Meaning that those feats show the personality of the trainer and his training methods which would obviously reflect on his pokemon. Using feats to customize the feel of the trainer and his methods and the effects on the pokemon you also remove the need to create classes. Without the need for classes you can then switch to Paragon and have the trainer choose a path he'd like to further specialize in. A brawling trainer, a tactical trainer, a breeder, a researcher, a ranger, a whatever you can think of. And choosing that paragon path will off course come with small boosts to stats and such. All of this would give the player a feel as if it actually matters how he decides to train his Pokemon and what his personal preferences are. Preferences such as a physical trainer or someone who prefers to train his pokemon in order to get rid of their weaknesses giving a Geodude explicit extra defences against Squirtle...allowing a slow Snorlax to be faster due to a lot of endurance training. All is possible with the usage of feats. Giving it bit more depth and roleplay and customizing. I can totally see how some players decide to specialize in a specific type of pokemon or something else. The gameboy/ds games are extremely limited with the customizing and the effect a trainer has on his pokemon. Do we really want to capture that limited feel in a d20 system? Or would it be cooler to re-make the game with everything we'd want inspired by the series and games. Those competitions for co-ordinators could be a skill challenge in the first round. 6 successes before 3 fails. The amount of successes showing the player's described action of the PC and Pokemon. Each success getting the PC higher up the rankings untill there is enough to go through to the 2nd round of regular pokemon battles. Combined with a skill challenge for those bonus points you can gain when an attack is performed beautifully. And charisma would be the starting stat for this part of a d20 pokemon game. Which brings my thought back to classes. I still wouldn't use classes to create a trainer, breeder, co-ordinator PC at first lvl. Even trainers and breeders as well as other "classes" would participate in co-ordinator matches. Just look at Ash in one of the series. Everyone can decide for themselves to participate in the co-ordinator matches by either increasing their Charisma stat...or using feats to get a charisma bonus in certain circumstances. Not sure. But I think the feel of a co-ordinator lies there instead of starting with a class template. If a PC wants to specialize later on he can simply choose a Paragon Path to get further bonusses in the direction he'd wish to take his Pokemon. I've also been looking at IV and PV's. IV's are basically the base stats a pokemon starts with. You wrote a large piece about that. Have to sift through that so can't say much about it at this time. PV's on the other hand... Simply use a Dice roll to determine the nature of a Pokemon. That would decide which stats the +2/+2 stat bonusses would get. As for Characteristic bonusses (http://pokemondb.net/mechanics/hidden). I wouldn't use it other then fluff. It can be used so that you can roleplay the personality of a pokemon, but no mechanical benefits. Those are my further 2cents so far.


03/07/11--06:40: Comment on Using Base Stats 2 by Vincent (chan 2816902)

The size is also a part of calculating the AC, so I went ahead and determined the size modifiers. Tiny +2: 11″ and less (< 0.3 m) Small +1: 1′ – 2’4″ (0.3m – 0.7m) Medium +0: 2’5″ – 6″7′ (0.8m – 2m) Large -1: 6″8′ – 15′ (2.1m – 4.6m) Huge -2: 15’1″ – 30′ (4.7m – 9.1m) Gargantuan -4: 30’1″ – 50′ (9.2m – 15.2m) That I don't understand. Usually a gargantuan pokemon is an evolved pokemon. It has high natural defences and thus a higher AC then something tiny which you can easily crush. An AC isn't only about being big and thus an easy target to hit. It also factors in the damage an attacker can cause and how often said attacker is allowed to hit before a big tough Venussaur loses his match. With such a big AC Penalty even a little pokemon can eventually constantly hit the big pokemon and chop away his HP. In short this needs work :)


03/07/11--08:42: Comment on Using Base Stats 2 by kinkofer (chan 2816902)

If you look at my reasoning, there are only 9 Pokemon between Huge and Gargantuan. Most of these already have great defenses because they are legendary. I'd like to think that a Tiny Pokemon has some chance of hitting a Gargantuan Pokemon, otherwise nothing would be close to touching a Steelix, which by my calculation has a Natural Armor of +9. It would be too easy to choose Pokemon based on height because of its advantage. And I'm only giving the size to AC. These values would be inverted and enhanced for Grappling. I also reference a table that is used in D&D 3.5e that shows weapon damage for the sizes of Medium, Tiny, and Large. So there is more to size than I account for in this post, I was only using AC as a start to define the sizes.


03/07/11--08:56: Comment on Using Base Stats 2 by Vincent (chan 2816902)

Perhaps you could mail me? Then I can give you my MSN. Easier to share ideas if you're interested?


03/07/11--09:00: Comment on Ability Scores by kinkofer (chan 2816902)

To clarify, each Pokemon has a base landspeed. Grant it, it's based on D&D 3.5e, but it's a static, basic number nonetheless. Only certain moves would increase landspeed, but there are only a few. This is one of the reasons I had a second arrangement of stats. If Speed EVs were to increase something of importance, it would increase the Reflex save, therefore it would affect Dexterity. I'm still not opposed to this because, technically, there is speed involved when determining AC. But I'll repeat that landspeed was never intended to change.


03/07/11--09:05: Comment on Ability Scores by Vincent (chan 2816902)

That is where we differ then. I abonded 3.x because of its needless excessive complexity of the game mechanics. 4e is much more comprehensible and flexible to do as you please. In 4th you can assign speed changes in a power. A Flame Charge could mean that you have +2 movement during that attack. and 1 movement equals 5ft in 3.x. Other powers can have an opponent to move around due to forced movement. Which could add a little something extra to a Tangela's Constrict movement for example. That's where I'm coming from anyhow :)


03/07/11--09:09: Comment on Ability Scores by Vincent (chan 2816902)

As an addendum... Certain powers in the Pokemon games do nothing as an attack. It deals no damage, but it increases movement speed/attack/damage etc. These powers then become a utility power in DnD 4th. You can pick it up and get a bonus till end your next turn or end the encounter. Giving such useless powers an actual tactical use I'm also of the opinion not to focus everything on the pokemon and block out the trainer. As given a few examples down below. That could give enough roleplay opportunities besides the combat aspect.


03/07/11--09:12: Comment on Ability Scores by kinkofer (chan 2816902)

I wanted to address the EV situation that ties in to your two previous posts. Personally, I've never been a fan of Psionics. They are not one of the basic classes you'd find in a D&D PHB so I wouldn't want intro players to this system to have to learn that. I've also never been a fan of keeping track of Power Points. I feel this is even more tedious than keeping track of Spells per Day considering you can expend a variable amount of Power Points to augment an attack (if I understand it correctly). Conversely, (and this may be an opinion only shared by me) I liken EVs to collectables in video games. I think it's fun to keep track of them because I know I'm going to receive an award once I collect so many. It may be difficult to keep track of them, but my hope is that it would be no different than adding experience at the end of an encounter (as long as the GM also kept track of the EVs and exp for each Pokemon). Other things I wanted to address: I've abandoned IVs and possibly Player levels. I don't think it's as necessary to keep track of the player as he progresses in terms of leveling up, just for items and achievements and such. Feats are bestowed when Pokemon reach certain levels. This also eliminates having to calculate increases in Pokemon that you own but don't use.


03/07/11--09:44: Comment on Ability Scores by kinkofer (chan 2816902)

It sounds like 4th edition made a lot of changes to the moves. I've started reading a copy of the 4th ed PHB so I'll look into it more. I've been dreading having to implement Moves for a long time. The way I'm doing it is going down a list of moves by power and assigning damage rolls to them and any affects they might have. I'm trying not to associate them with any particular Pokemon. From what I gather in the 4th edition of D&D, the moves are tailored for each class. It looks as if each class has a menu of options to use on their turn, almost like a spell list. In 3.5e, it wasn't quite laid out that way. It seems like it would be better to implement moves as 4e, but I also feel it would take longer. This is all going to be revealed during testing. And I haven't thrown out a focus on Players yet, it's just that I haven't looked at it in quite a while and figured out how it would be helpful. Since the beginning of this year I've only turned my attention to Pokemon. Again, this is something that will probably reveal itself during testing.


03/07/11--10:07: Comment on Ability Scores by Vincent (chan 2816902)

What is a focus actually? Never heard of it before and can't find a use for it either.