Tag: game mechanics

Anonymous asks:

Do you think evasiveness and accuracy should be actual stats rather than just background stats that are the same for every pokemon unless altered in-battle by some sort of move.

I’m going to go with “no.”

Partly this is because I think the game is just better with ‘safe’ attack options, stuff you can always rely on to hit, which wouldn’t be possible with accuracy and evasion as base stats.  Mostly, though, it’s because this would make risk/reward calculations impossible and utterly invalidate a lot of the strategic thinking involved in the game.  Think about it.  If accuracy and evasion are base stats, then both will have EVs and IVs associated with them, and there’s no way you can know how much effort an opponent’s Pokémon has invested in accuracy or evasion.  With most of the other stats you can often make a rough estimate after seeing an attack or two, because if you know approximately how much damage your Pokémon tend to deal or take from different opponents (which you can get a feel for by spending time in the Battle Subway or whatever), you can say things like “well, that’s a lot more than I’d expect; he must have trained very heavily in special attack.”  For accuracy and evasion, though, a single hit or miss tells you nothing; you’d probably need to observe one Pokémon over several battles.  This being the case, not only can you no longer be sure an attack will hit, you can’t even know how likely an attack is to hit!  There is no longer any such thing as a calculated risk under those circumstances, and I just don’t think that’s an improvement.

EDIT: I suppose it might be nice to add a level factor to the equation that determines whether attacks hit or miss, so that Pokémon of high levels are more likely to dodge attacks from Pokémon of low levels, and so forth, but I’m not totally sure about the actual value of doing that – and it would make AI opponents who rely on their inflated levels to compensate for their lack of effort training, like the Elite Four, incredibly frustrating.

OH GODDAMMIT okay non-eloquent now: boiled down to “I read your TYPE CLASSIFICATIONS ARE HARD posts, think it’s neat how it’s hard to define “ground” or “dark” or “normal” type sometimes yet pokemon fans just /get/ what they mean, this is more of a ‘i had an idea do you think it’s cool’ than a question but do you think the existence of types is expressed somehow through pokeworld culture, perhaps as universal archetypes? the thought of elemental astrology or w/e is funny to me for some reason.

[Context: this question has been sent to me at least once before, but was apparently lost in the celestial aether before reaching my in-box]

Hmm…

I’m trying to think of examples that appear to show something like this.  The first thing that comes to mind is the Power of One’s “disturb not the harmony of fire, ice and lightning” maxim, and I suspect legendary Pokémon in general would play a very important part in defining concepts of that kind.  It would certainly make sense if they had ideas like this; the idea of ‘basic elements’ is widespread enough in ancient thought.  I, of course, am most familiar with the four Empedoclean elements of western thought, and their precedent in Thales’ conjecture that all things were made of water (this is really interesting; basically, Thales’ insight was realising that water is the only substance that can be found in nature as a solid, a liquid or a gas, and suggesting that earth and stone were really just further cooled and condensed forms of ice, while air and fire are further heated and rarefied forms of steam – I mean, he was totally wrong, of course, but it was a fascinating hypothesis), but more interesting in terms of Pokémon is the classical Chinese system of five elements – water, fire, earth, wood and metal.  This system has a cycle of relationships of ‘destruction’ reminiscent of Pokémon’s elemental rock-paper-scissors, such as “fire destroys metal” and “wood destroys earth,” but also has a cycle of relationships of ‘creation,’ such as “water creates wood” and “fire creates earth.”  If I were trying to construct a history of the Pokémon world, I’d be tempted to place the origins of the type system in one or more cycles like that.

I tend to think that type is something that, in many if not most cases, actually has little to do with Pokémon biology but is a system of classification imposed by humans largely for the purpose of providing a heuristic framework for understanding the ways in which different Pokémon and attacks affect each other in battle – instead of remembering strengths and weaknesses for every Pokémon and every attack you come across, you can memorise a set of general rules that will usually work.  If I’m right about that, then it would make sense that the system didn’t simply spring into being fully formed, but had a number of more rudimentary antecedents which failed to describe the abilities of different Pokémon as thoroughly or accurately (maybe they had too few types to account for all the variability, or divided similar Pokémon for superficial reasons).  It would further make sense that the earliest of these systems would seek explanations in magic or astrology.  Hell, in the case of Ghost-, Psychic- and Fairy-types, they may be absolutely right to do so.

How about this idea: equippable pokemon. The ability to attach certain pokemon to certain other pokemon for added affects or otherwise. Like a remoraid to a mantine to increase special attack, or equipping a baby kangaskhan (which is an alternate form in this hypothetical game) which will activate its parental instincts and raise its attack, and be required for the baby to mature. They could even retcon evolution methods such as slowpoke’s and magnemite’s with this. Sound interesting?

…hmm.

That does sound interesting.

So, we would be talking about filling an item slot with them, I presume?  Let’s see… there’s a very limited number of Pokémon that this would work with, which on the one hand means you don’t get to do much with it, but on the other gets to emphasise the special qualities of the ones who can work together like this.  I can imagine the extra programming work being something of a burden, but there’s some neat stuff you could do with it.  Obviously all such Pokémon would need to be immune to stealing and switching effects, in the same way as, for instance, Giratina’s Griseous Orb.  I’d have an ‘equipped’ Pokémon gain experience with its partner, and possibly have their effects scale based on level or other stats.

Your Remoraid, for example, could add 1/8 of its own special attack to Mantine’s while equipped (to be honest I think you could easily go to ¼ without making Mantine broken – we are spending his item slot here, after all – but let’s be conservative).  Vespiquen’s Attack Order, Defend Order and Heal Order could all be changed to require an equipped male Combee, and have their power increase when Combee reaches certain levels (say, Attack Order starts at 50, increasing to 70, 90, 110 as Combee hits levels 20, 40, 60; Heal Order gains the ability to heal status effects at some point; Defend Order starts out just boosting defence by 1 stage, picks up +1 special defence around level 30, then changes to +2 defence at 50, and +2 special defence at 70).  And now male Combee actually have a purpose in life!

You could also potentially do some really weird stuff that isn’t immediately obvious – equipping Foongus to Paras or Amoonguss to Parasect, maybe?  That could maybe alter Paras’ Effect Spore to add ¼ of Foongus’ level to the percentage change of inflicting sleep (currently 10%).  Or Rotom!  Rotom could possess Steel-types to give them all the weaknesses, resistances and immunities of a Ghost Pokémon (or, if you wanted to do maybe a more sinister take, give them something like a 50% special attack boost, something really absurd, in exchange for automatically Cursing them at the end of their second turn in battle).

Isn’t there a sword Pokémon in X and Y?  (No, don’t answer that; I’ll find out in my own time).  Seems like it’d be a natural candidate for something like this.

Evolution might be trickier.  Slowpoke to Slowbro is straightforward, but what about Slowpoke to Slowking?  If Slowpoke has Shellder in his item slot, how does the King’s Rock come into play?  I guess Magnemite would work by equipping one Magnemite to a second (producing a sort of Eviolite-like effect that increases all of your Magnemite’s stats by, say, 20%), and then equipping the second Magnemite to a third, which immediately prompts evolution (if you cancel, the second Magnemite drops back into your party – no nested Magnemites!).

In short – sounds like fun!

Hi. This is a mechanics question about abilities and things. If Game Freak, for some unfathomable Game Freak reason, decided to make a Pokémon literally 100% unbeatable (Except against itself) How do you think they would do it? Wonder guard Spiritomb for example, or Sheer Cold + No Guard + fast Pokémon?

Hmm.

Well, neither of those would actually do it; not quite.  Wonder Guard isn’t impenetrable; it can be bypassed by weather damage, entry hazards and, critically, poison damage (so Toxic will still put an end to you pretty quickly if you don’t have Rest or Refresh) – all these things are the real reason Shedinja seems interesting on paper but just doesn’t hold up in reality.  Pokémon with Mold Breaker or its equivalents can also hit you.  Sheer Cold with No Guard doesn’t work either, because even with No Guard some Pokémon like Gigalith and Skarmory are just flat-out immune thanks to Sturdy, and you can still be hurt and perhaps beaten by priority attacks.  Either method can also be stopped by Gastro Acid.

Honestly, I’m not sure anything would do it.  You can obviate the need for Wonder Guard by just giving the Pokémon epic defensive stats and Recover or something, but you’d still need Sturdy so that people can’t one-shot you, and Magic Guard to keep them from wearing you down – you can’t have both (sure, if you have Rest, you can deal with Toxic and other indirect damage pretty easily… but without Magic Guard you’re still vulnerable to Darkrai).  Even then, Gastro Acid, Entrainment and Simple Beam can still deny you your ability, and you’re still vulnerable to Counter and Mirror Coat, so you’ll need to be careful to kill things very slowly.  You can keep Struggle from ruining your day, at least, if your Pokémon can use Recycle, by continually reusing a Leppa Berry.

Obviously there are loads of ways to make a Pokémon that is unbeatable for all intents and purposes, but I don’t think the game mechanics as they stand actually allow for anything completely airtight.

Well, short of giving a Pokémon an ability that says “this Pokémon is immune to all damage and 1-hit-KO moves.”  But really, come on.

How do you feel about combat in Pokemon vs combat in Final Fantasy? Both are entirely different but they are both turn-taking RPGs. Are there elements either could benefit with taking from the other?

Disclaimer: The most recent Final Fantasy game I have played is X (I think they’re up to, what, fourteen or something now?) so I am partially speaking from ignorance here.

Hmm.  I’m not sure there’s anything that would help, particularly.  Most of each game’s distinctive features have counterparts in the other that work differently but serve the same purpose.  Materia, for instance, provides essentially the same gameplay function as TMs – offering a broad base of powers that can be used by most or all characters.  Limit Breaks, as far as FF VII goes, give the individual characters their own special powers, which is something Pokémon already has quite a lot of.  Their item systems work in essentially the same way, and so do their status effect systems – Final Fantasy has a lot more status effects than Pokémon does, but I’m not sure there’d be an particular benefit to bringing that over.  I suppose one feature of Final Fantasy games I’ve always found interesting is the way the turn system works – not one-for-one, but based on a character’s speed, so very fast characters can potentially take more turns than slower ones as well as simply taking them first.  It’s interesting, but shifting that across to Pokémon would be a balance nightmare – it’s not like speed isn’t already an important stat!  As for going the other way… well, the same objections apply; Final Fantasy wouldn’t have much use for TMs, there’s no particular reason to simplify the way speed works in those games or reduce the number of different status effects, and Pokémon’s expansive and complicated type chart would sort of be a waste of time in a game with fewer than ten different player characters – Final Fantasy’s simpler elemental system makes a lot more sense for the needs of the game.  I can’t really think of anything else…

It might be interesting to see the whole idea of Pokémon adapted to a Final Fantasy game, with a sort of ‘beast master’ type character who can tame and raise monsters to fight for the party.  In terms of gameplay, though, a similar niche is already filled by Final Fantasy’s ‘Blue Mage’ character archetype, which can absorb and learn the techniques of the monsters it fights, so… eh.

I was thinking about how many competitive battlers breed many pokemon eggs in order to get the right nature that fits the pokemon they’re trying to get. That got me to thinking, what if each pokemon could learn different moves depending on the nature they had, each with their own specialties that helps them compensate for the difficulties they’d otherwise have? I think it would be a great way to make each pokemon unique and gifted like the living creatures they’re advertised as.

Hrm.

Do you mean, like, if each nature had a list of moves that was available to all Pokémon with that nature, or if each nature had just one signature move that was only available to Pokémon with that nature, or if each possible combination of Pokémon and nature had a bonus move?  All three would be… problematic, put it that way.  The last would be awesome but would require an absolutely ridiculous investment of time on the part of the designers.  The first two could help, but I’m not sure how you’d work them.  For a lot of Pokémon it just isn’t going to make a difference.  Consider Rhyperior – Rhyperior actually has a pretty awesome special movepool already, but that doesn’t really tempt people to keep a Modest Rhyperior, or use its special attacks over its physical ones.  What could you possibly give to, say, an Adamant Alakazam that will make those extra points of attack more useful than the lost points of special attack?  And if you do find something that makes a difference, wouldn’t it be far more powerful in the hands of an Adamant Dragonite or Scizor?  On the other hand, if you’re giving your Adamant Alakazam something that makes its special attacks more useful to compensate for the penalty (and, again, I’m really not sure what this could be)… isn’t that just a roundabout way of making natures count for less?  Why not just remove natures entirely, or remove their effects on stats?

In short… I approve of the direction here, but I think it would take a truly monumental amount of work to make it produce the right sort of effect.

Do you think the pokemon breeding mechanics should be retconned into producing the lowest evolutionary form of either parent instead of just the mother’s, or are they satisfactory to you as of now?

I’m good with them as they are now.  If you imagine Pokémon breeding as being biologically analogous to real-world animal reproduction (which, of course, is not a given, but let’s assume for the sake of argument), then the young will likely develop inside the body of the female – even if they’re in eggs, it still makes sense that they will follow the basic form of the female parent.  In terms of game mechanics, too, there is a good reason – at present, there is a division between male and female of the things the child receives from its parents: species and (if applicable) Dream World ability from the mother, egg moves from the father.  If you make species inheritable from the father, then that’s another dimension of things you have to watch out for when trying to breed egg moves onto a Pokémon – not only do you have to get the nature and ability you want, preferably with solid stats, the children might not even be the right species!

Do you think it’d be interesting to see items like repels have use in battle? Like, repels could lower the accuracy of physical moves.

Apologies to whoever asked this question (and the other two I’m about to answer) which I received about a month ago, just before I stopped posting… Anyway.

Well… to be honest, I’m not sure what it would add.  Using items in battle isn’t a new thing (potions, X attack, etc.), so it’s not really adding a new dimension to the game, and repels are useful anyway.  Also, apart from repels and escape ropes, I can’t really think of anything you could expend on an in-battle effect that wouldn’t be much more valuable out of battle: Heart Scales and shards are too important for learning moves; stones and fossils are too rare to waste; held items like Leftovers or Choice Specs will be far more useful in the long run if you keep them for your Pokémon to use – you get the idea.  All in all, it just seems like a fairly inconsequential change.

Do you think rapid spin should be stronger, have its strength increase when it blows away an entry hazard, and be learnable by almost every flying type? (Yes, this is my idea to try to counter the over-use of stealth rock in competitive play)

Well, this would aim to weaken entry hazards in general, and it’s not really entry hazards that are the problem.  I don’t think anyone really believes that Spikes or Toxic Spikes are over the top; it’s only Stealth Rock that’s particularly controversial, partly because it takes only one turn to set up, partly because it so dramatically tips the odds against any Pokémon vulnerable to Rock attacks (that is, Flying-, Bug-, Ice- and Fire-types).  Honestly, I think the best fix (assuming that straight up eliminating Stealth Rock is out of the question, which I suspect it is) would be to add more entry hazards, with different elemental properties, which cannot be used in conjunction with Stealth Rock (the attack just fails if there’s a set in place already).  Add, for instance, Grass- and Fire-type versions (let’s call them, say, Vine Trap and Burst Mine) – with three alternatives in play, the impact of each individual one will be lessened, and instead of four types being victimised, there will be nine that have to watch their backs.  Of course, anything dealing with type dynamics is difficult to go into in detail, when we know we’re going to have a new type thrust upon us soon…