[Meta Thread] Dragonstrike's Pokerole Test Game: Mount Coronet Mystery

[Dragonstrike]

Spoiler

To clarify:

A) If Option A is used, does that mean if an opponent Evades or Clashes with our Pokemon, they can only do those Actions for the rest of the Round? Or does it mean that you can't use Conditional Orders if you choose to Evade/Clash at some point in a character's Action que? Or when an Opponent Evades/Clashes, does their Turn end right there?

B) How do Evasions and Clashes constitute towards the Move and Turn Limit of battles?

Personally, I've already expressed my thoughts on Evasion and how it should be reworked to be more fair/balanced, and as it stand/from what I understand neither of these options really address the issue I have with it. If I had to choose based on what I understand of your options now, I'd choose Option A, as if Evasion is going to be exploitable as it stands/as it was in Candice's Battle with Ran, then I want to be able to exploit it myself too and make it less useful for the very types of charas that could exploit it most effectively. Its how I was able to screw over her Weavile in the first place, so I rather that flaw with Evasion remain. On my end, Beethoven, Stymph, and Zorn could all easily get 3 Evasion Points and just start Evading the Actions of their Opponents, then set up and fight back when it's convenient for them, or just go on the offense straight away if they're faster, so they benefit from Option A regardless. 

The only Pokemon I'd invest in Clash right now would be Diam, Puck, and one of Ran's unrevealed , as they're not geared towards Evasion really. 

----

Logically, I find your interp. sound, but mechanically I don't like it. If you Clash, then it shouldn't matter if the Move is Special vs Physical or vice versa. If the defender succeeds in the Clash, then it should always be fully effective in blunting the Damage of ALL Moves involved in the Clash imo. Otherwise, I'd rather take my chances with either Evasion or just tanking the hit and returning back with a non-nerfed Move.

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.

[Lord Windos]

Spoiler

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

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.

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.

[PhantomUnderYourDesk]

Original Post

Hmmmmm...regarding Evades and Clashes, which way would you guys prefer we use them?

a) Using them takes up your whole Turn, preventing you from taking another action until your next Turn.  Conditional Orders for Evading/Clashing generally only work when you're slower than your opponent in this case, and you have to dedicate a whole Action to Evading/Clashing.  Ironically, this makes it hard for speedy characters to abuse them unless they know they're facing a really slow/weakened opponent and can attempt to dodge everything, then fight back.  This is the method I used during Randolph's battle with Candice and Octavia's Swift.

b) Using them does not take up your whole Turn, but still counts towards your number of Actions for the Round as normal (makes it a little more work for me to keep track of when moves are being fired off if Turns are being used that quickly, but it generally makes them more useful even if you're faster than the opponent).  Initiative doesn't matter in this instance, only that you still have actions remaining in the current Round of combat, but there's little to no reason to dedicate an entire Action to Evading/Clashing in this case.  This is the method I just used for Core's Flamethrower.

At this point in time, I think I'm leaning towards option b), if only to make the two specialties more useful (particularly Evasion, since being too speedy in option a) can be more of a hindrance than a help due to it being harder to utilize that specialty you've invested in).

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

And on a related note, what did you guys think of the thing I did with that Flamethrower Clash?  I imagine that if you were to Clash with a physical move, some of the force of the move that impeded the attack would still reach your target.  Different story if you're clashing with things like laser beams and other ranged attacks, though.  Hopefully that make Clash a little bit more appealing in the face of Evasion.

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.)

[Dragonstrike]

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.

[Dragonstrike]

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).  @Mikaruge108 and @Spiritmon, your thoughts on how Evasion and Clash work?

[Spiritmon]

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).  @Mikaruge108 and @Spiritmon, 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.

[Mikaruge108]

Spoiler

Hmmmmm...regarding Evades and Clashes, which way would you guys prefer we use them?

a) Using them takes up your whole Turn, preventing you from taking another action until your next Turn.  Conditional Orders for Evading/Clashing generally only work when you're slower than your opponent in this case, and you have to dedicate a whole Action to Evading/Clashing.  Ironically, this makes it hard for speedy characters to abuse them unless they know they're facing a really slow/weakened opponent and can attempt to dodge everything, then fight back.  This is the method I used during Randolph's battle with Candice and Octavia's Swift.

b) Using them does not take up your whole Turn, but still counts towards your number of Actions for the Round as normal (makes it a little more work for me to keep track of when moves are being fired off if Turns are being used that quickly, but it generally makes them more useful even if you're faster than the opponent).  Initiative doesn't matter in this instance, only that you still have actions remaining in the current Round of combat, but there's little to no reason to dedicate an entire Action to Evading/Clashing in this case.  This is the method I just used for Core's Flamethrower.

At this point in time, I think I'm leaning towards option b), if only to make the two specialties more useful (particularly Evasion, since being too speedy in option a) can be more of a hindrance than a help due to it being harder to utilize that specialty you've invested in).

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

And on a related note, what did you guys think of the thing I did with that Flamethrower Clash?  I imagine that if you were to Clash with a physical move, some of the force of the move that impeded the attack would still reach your target.  Different story if you're clashing with things like laser beams and other ranged attacks, though.  Hopefully that make Clash a little bit more appealing in the face of Evasion.

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.

[Lord Windos]

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.

[PhantomUnderYourDesk]

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.

[Lord Windos]

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.