Pokemon Uranium

Full Version: [Meta Thread] Dragonstrike's Pokerole Test Game: Mount Coronet Mystery
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
(06-25-2019, 06:20 PM)Lord Windos Wrote: [ -> ]

When I say Turn, keep in mind that a Turn is only a small part of the overall Round.  In a), if you have a fast pokemon like Weavile and they attack, they can't Evade until their next Turn comes around because they've already used their Turn to attack.  A fast pokemon can't typically use Conditional Orders to Evade in the case of a) because by the time that Conditional Order would become relevant, they've already used their action for the current Turn of the Round (the obvious exceptions to that being when the opponent uses moves with increased Priority, the opponent does something that puts them higher in the initiative than the Evade user, or when the user is using a move with decreased priority).  You can still take actions other than Evade and Clash during the rest of the Round.

Another consequence of a) is that you can only Evade once per Turn.  Yes, technically, Evading/Clashing would end a character's Turn, as they only get the one Move/maneuver per set of Turns in a Round.

Option b) effectively lets you make multiple Evades per Turn (which is really only relevant when targeted by a move like Fury Swipes or when facing multiple opponents simultaneously)

In both a) and b), Evasions and Clashes still count towards the 5 Action limit per Round.  The main difference between them is mostly how they interact with Conditional Orders.

----------------------------------------------

Yeah, how Clash works in the book is kinda weird.  There's not much going for it compared to Evasion since it can't fully nullify the damage in the base rules.  To say I've not considered changing the mechanics to make it more like Evasion but for Stronger pokemon as opposed to more Dexterous ones would be inaccurate.  I can kinda understand if they wanted to make it a unique thing that was definitely separate from Evasion, but it does feel like Clashers got a bit of a raw deal.

Even if Clash were to fully nullify all damage from both moves, it doesn't change the fact that Clash still costs you a moveslot and Evasion doesn't just by the virtue of how both work, so I kinda want to give Clashers an incentive to use it.  Though granted, the suggestion I just made doesn't do anything for Clashing with a ranged attack...but for the heck of it, if I were to, say, let all moves used as a Clash do some bonus chip damage instead of losing that move's usage for the rest of the Round, would that possibly make it more appealing for the pokemon that rely on it over Evasion? (even if it's only out of necessity) Does that make it better than Evasion? Not necessarily, but I think it would at least make it better than it was before.
(06-25-2019, 06:46 PM)Dragonstrike Wrote: [ -> ]

Which is why even if I want to use it myself just to test it out and give you more data to work with, I find it hard to justify using it. Blocking some Damage ain't as good as avoiding it outright if you can, and Evading doesn't take a Move to pull it off as the current rules stands.

I would be alright for Clash just to become a STR version of Evasion, but even in that case it you pointed out the obvious problem with that. One way to fix that is make it so that any chip Damage has the chance to Knockdown an opponent, or that the chip Damage is enhanced somehow. Then Clashing would become an more appealing option, as getting lucky with it would be more advantagous than outright Evading, as it would still do Damage on top of it (To both Opponent and Defender, but hey, it's still a perk). Wouldn't necessarily make it a equivalent option, but it would make it a darn sight better.
(06-25-2019, 05:54 PM)Dragonstrike Wrote: [ -> ]

About Evasion I don't have an opinion, but Clash I'd actually like to be kept the way it is at the moment, which is simply the way the corebook interprets it/ option b) if I'm understanding this right - I'm just starting to like clashing and will probably invest more XP into this Speciality. Evading a foe's attacks is just not my style, but clashing seems to give me the niche I never thought I'd need battlewise but still always needed. Please don't nerf it that clashing insta-ends your Turn, that's affecting it much more negatively than it is helpful and there is no reason why a Pokemon can't still fire an attack at the foe after they defended themselves by clashing.

What's been done with Core's Flamethrower used to prevent that Arbok from biting him badly looks just fine, in mind I can see that if that snake attempts to bite your hard and you defend yourself by spitting fire (assuming your Clash Roll succeeds), the snake is averted BUT it still manages to nab you WHILE being roasted by the flames. It shouldn't matter whether you defend yourself by clashing a physical move with a special one or vice versa, because why should it? I can't see a general reason for that, may depend on the scenario however (Like, clashing a Hurricane with a Tackle? Good luck trying.)
(06-26-2019, 03:47 AM)PhantomUnderYourDesk Wrote: [ -> ]It shouldn't matter whether you defend yourself by clashing a physical move with a special one or vice versa, because why should it? I can't see a general reason for that, may depend on the scenario however (Like, clashing a Hurricane with a Tackle? Good luck trying.)

Yeah, if a Clash doesn't seem feasible to me, it just won't work, and I'll say as such in the meta thread before rolling anything.  Fire Blast vs Water Gun, for example?  I think the Fire Blast wins out in that scenario, even though it's at a type disadvantage.
Let me make it clear that what I do to how and when Evasion can be used, I'll also apply to Clash.  In the interest of keeping things fair, I won't apply a) to one and b) to the other.

So, there's currently one vote for a), and one for b).   and , your thoughts on how Evasion and Clash work?
(06-26-2019, 06:25 AM)Dragonstrike Wrote: [ -> ]Let me make it clear that what I do to how and when Evasion can be used, I'll also apply to Clash.  In the interest of keeping things fair, I won't apply a) to one and b) to the other.

So, there's currently one vote for a), and one for b).   and , your thoughts on how Evasion and Clash work?

To be honest, my opinion is more or less like of Windos. If Evasion will be implement in this campaigh, its has to have a few nerfs too to be limited for both sides. Kogeki is a ninja and he has a few Pokemon who could maybe benefit from either choice, but it is need think in the whole too.

So I go with option A.
I kinda like the b) interpretation of clash myself. I could see how a) could be useful for nerfing the specialties, but overall, b sounds more practical.
(06-26-2019, 05:52 AM)Dragonstrike Wrote: [ -> ]
(06-26-2019, 03:47 AM)PhantomUnderYourDesk Wrote: [ -> ]It shouldn't matter whether you defend yourself by clashing a physical move with a special one or vice versa, because why should it? I can't see a general reason for that, may depend on the scenario however (Like, clashing a Hurricane with a Tackle? Good luck trying.)

Yeah, if a Clash doesn't seem feasible to me, it just won't work, and I'll say as such in the meta thread before rolling anything.  Fire Blast vs Water Gun, for example?  I think the Fire Blast wins out in that scenario, even though it's at a type disadvantage.

If that's the case, that makes me not want to use Clash even more, as you're going to apply logic/reason to what should be a purely mechanical way of avoiding damage to make it objectively worse, what's the point of using it over Evasion, which works against everything but AoE and Contest Roll Moves? I'm sorry mate, but that's what I see such a decision as, and I can't honestly put my heart into supporting it.

SO there's a split vote now, but since you favored Option B), that's likely going into effect in the end, much to my displeasure as it currently stand. Oh well, I'll just have to come up with ways to screw over Evasion users.
Dear, maybe you're thinking too mechanically or competitively in that case. Because clashing is more than a pure mechanical way to avoid being hit by a foe's move like evading is (at least, in my view and if I think about it now), there's room for creative shenanigans and such - that's probably what I like about it! A Pokemon on your side trying to defend itself from a Fire Blast by using Water Gun looks like someone trying to extinguish a forestfire with a watering can if I imagine it - or Hurricane vs. Tackle, someone running full-blast into the wind to avoid being blown away.

Of course, to each their own I guess? I'll prefer to clash than to evade.
(06-26-2019, 12:57 PM)PhantomUnderYourDesk Wrote: [ -> ]Dear, maybe you're thinking too mechanically or competitively in that case. Because clashing is more than a pure mechanical way to avoid being hit by a foe's move like evading is (at least, in my view and if I think about it now), there's room for creative shenanigans and such - that's probably what I like about it! A Pokemon on your side trying to defend itself from a Fire Blast by using Water Gun looks like someone trying to extinguish a forestfire with a watering can if I imagine it - or Hurricane vs. Tackle, someone running full-blast into the wind to avoid being blown away.

Of course, to each their own I guess? I'll prefer to clash than to evade.

To each their own, I agree. Logically, Tackling a Hurricane or putting out a Fire Blast with a Water Gun is absurb, but I'd say Pokemon is an inherently absurd, escapist fantasy to begin with, so why not let those things happen from a mechanical perspective? I play these roleplaying games to escape reality and do things in them I can't IRL, not be sudden hamstrung by it.

Right now, Evasion and straight slug fest seems to be the ore preferable choice to me, but I'm willing to try Clash out on my slower Pokemon.