Pokemon Umbral Theatre 1: Where All the Lurkers...Ah...Lurk

[Dracorion]

Originally Posted by Geminex

Go look for it, ya lazy dick. It was back when I was still posting plans. In fact, one second.
PCHOOOO
...
AH, HERE WE GO.


...
WOW WILL YOU LOOK AT THAT. SOUNDS EXACTLY LIKE WHAT MENARKER PROPOSED. ONLY MORE COMPREHENSIVE. AND MORE AWESOME. DO YOU THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE MADE SURE THAT WASN'T THE CASE BEFORE ATTEMPTING TO CALL ME OUT ON THAT?

A) That was the least offensive thing I said in my post, B) it wasn't meant to be offensive, don't get testy. C) I was short on time, so I couldn't've looked it up. D) I couldn't've waited, because by then (now), Menarker and you would've posted and made my question moot or overshadowed it with bigger problems.

Originally Posted by Geminex

WOW WILL YOU LOOK AT THAT AS WELL. I'M TALKING ABOUT INFLUENCING THE ENEMY'S TARGETING (which, AB, by the way, interpreted correctly as "decide which enemy attacks hit whom") SEVERAL HUNDRED POSTS BEFORE YOU. HUH. WEIRD, ISN'T IT?
Seriously. That's the second time that I propose something for Impact and then you ask for it for one of your characters. Cease thine Plagiarism, foul non-demon.

Originally Posted by Menarker

>_> I "threatened" to slap Drac for copying my custom move I've planned for Umbreon even longer than you did which involved targetting. Don't make me consider a 2 for 1 special! =P

OH FOR GOD'S SAKES, YOU MORONS.

COMING UP WITH A TECHNIQUE INVOLVING A MECHANIC THAT IS PERFECTLY VIABLE FOR ANYONE DOES NOT GIVE YOU EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS TO IT.

ESPECIALLY WHEN SAID MECHANIC, YOUR "INFLUENCING ENEMY TARGETTING" IS FUCKING FROM THE GODDAMN GAMES (Follow Me).

This applies to all of them. If I were to come up with a technique for Pierce that involves a stat boost, I don't want Geminex getting all up in my grill because I plagiarized his Dark Ambition. If I come up with a technique for Sophia that involves protecting an ally or using an extra item, I don't want Menarker dropping the copyright hammer on my balls.

Similarly, I won't be crying if you guys come up with techniques that allow you more actions per turn, or inflict Null Turn on the enemies or some such.

That is, of course, only when the general idea is being copied. If I gave Pierce a technique that used Protect on any allies willing to pay a certain amount of Rage, or gave Sophia a technique that made the Enforcers attack from the rearguard, then you can bitch.

Get it? Good. Now, if I hear you two whining again because that dude came up with a technique that inflicted more damage when allies are at full health which is kinda sorta like my technique that deals more damage when all the allies are dead

*stops to take a breath*

I will make you pay.

Yes, I just made a threat. Don't believe me? Call me on it and watch me make your lives a living hell when I plagiarize all your moves for a start, and claim copyright on all damage-dealing techniques because MY TECHNIQUES INVOLVED DEALING DAMAGE FIRST STFU. Or you can just shut up and admit I'm right.

Geminex, my outburst over your example Tactical Action? Wasn't about plagiarism. It was that I thought you'd rejected my Trainer Actions as overpowered when I had one that was just like yours.

Still, I apologize for the way I worded it.

PS: I assume the first time I took something you proposed for myself was Half-Demonness?

Originally Posted by Geminex

What. What're you talking about.
The system I mean is the "Customize your own character growth" system. As opposed to the "Be limited to 4 non-customizable classes and one hugely customizable class" system. The former is better, and more logical. I prefer it.
Which do you prefer?

Well, sorry. You made a comment earlier about "no one knowing how to combine the classes" or whatever and it just spoke to me of your proposed support system.

Still, it's not that we don't know how to combine the classes. It's that someone had some things they wanted to clarify, and there's nothing wrong with that. It does not instantly mean we're stupid morons and the system is too confusing. And, well, there was also Menarker being Menarker.

So hey AB, could you clarify how PC dual-classes would work once and for all that so there's no confusion, or no belief that there's confusion?

I believe you've already said that Trainer and Snagger won't mesh well, but let's say that someone was to take a character all the way up to level 10 in both classes. They'd be severely gimped because they'd get a bunch of upgrades they've already got, but eventually they would be able to have six pokemon and snag two more, and have ability shifts and custom moves and Xth-level pokemon, and fancy Snagball status effects?

As for PC Battle Masters, I believe they can only have two combatants out at any one time, which could very well be two pokemon, or one pokemon and the Battle Master themself, correct? And they'd carry six items.

Same for PC Legion Mages.

Anyway, don't worry about making us feel stupid. God knows we are if we have to keep asking this.

As to your question, Geminex. I pick secret option number C: "keep the classes, but be able to customize them based on how many level of each you want to take."

Originally Posted by Geminex

Ok, now I'm sure you're just trolling.

When am I not?

Originally Posted by Geminex

Impact will be the villain. I will have plot power.

That's irrelevant. The heroes (us) can have plot power too, as shown by Charlotte when she derailed the plot by putting Moon in the hospital.

Presumably, we can influence it even more. AB's pretty lenient like that.

So I have as much right as you to walk up to AB and ask him what my character's role is going to involve for the sequel. Or something like that.

Originally Posted by Geminex

How on earth has he told me "more about the sequel than he should"? Mind you, in your defense, you can't know how much he told me.
Or even know what he told me.
H3H3H3H3H3

Ah, but how would you know how much I know?

Originally Posted by Geminex

And yeah. Of course. He doesn't have to tell me anything. But I haven't been pestering him for information about the sequel. I have asked him a single question about it and my character's role in it. Am I somehow abusing my right to speak to AB? Does our great and august GM suffer so through my endless (EEEENDLEEEEEE---------ES) questions that he needs you to tell me to shut up? Have I ever implied that it's not his right not to tell me stuff? No?
Then how about I tuck you in bed with a big, warm glass of Shut The Fuck Up.

Hm, point.

Originally Posted by Geminex

Seriously, don't do that. I don't like you when you're a presumptuous dick. Oh, wait, turns out I've never really liked you. Do you think there might be a correlation?

Pot. Kettle. Black.

And if you don't like me, why did you friend me?

Originally Posted by Geminex

Except for, y'know, everything that someone who is not me proposes. Glad to see that we're FAIR AND BALANCED in this RP thread.

To be fair, you propose things a lot more often than the rest of us, so of course your proposal-to-rejections ratio is going to be a lot higher than ours.

All of us have had some suggestions rejected? We don't go sulk in the corner, or start playing victim. We compromise.

I'm not saying you don't compromise either, but when you do it it's more like "Dracorion how dare you defy me! If you will not recognize the stupidity of your stance, I will deign myself to lower my standards to appease you. This time."

Just because our stances don't fall in line with yours doesn't instantly make us wrong! And you do give off that "I'm always right" vibe all the time.

Originally Posted by Geminex

I'm not! I'm saying I'm hesitant to accept because I think he may have snuck something past me, and I wanna take time to make sure he hasn't. I'm not rejecting it on grounds of mistrust. Hell, if we allowed mutual mistrust to stop us from accepting each other's deals, we wouldn't actually get anywhere.

Fair enough, my mistake. Sorry. I was a little too aggresive in that post.

Originally Posted by Geminex

And no, I haven't seen the revised versions of your utterly, utterly overpowered techniques. I you repost them I will be sure to give them an unbiased look. Yes.

Let's see if I can't round them up...

Combined Attack: Pick one of Pierce's pokemon from the field. That pokemon's attack move gains the same type as Pierce's other pokemon's primary type, but the power stays the same.

Okay, this one's crappily worded. Basically, say Tyranitar and Blaziken are out. Tyranitar uses Earthquake and Pierce uses Combined Attack. Tyranitar's Earthquake is now Ground/Fire, and the move's power stays the same.


Menarker noticed there would be some confusion about what would happen if the target of Tyranitar's attack were, say, a Flying-type, so he suggested this to clarify and I approved:

1) The main attacker attack gets divided into two like Double Hit (dividing power in half respectively for each hit).
2) The first hit being the type of the move the attacking pokemon (Tyranitar in this case) uses. The second hit being the primary type of the second pokemon (Blaziken in this case). Thus, the first hit would be ground and the second one would be fire with your example.
3) The total base power is equal to the move that it is based on.
4) All bonuses such as STAB that apply to the first hit also apply to the second even if it wouldn't normally. Both hits use the attack or special attack stat of the main attacker. (Technically, Tyranitar is a rock/dark type so no STAB with your previous example.)

Trainer Attack: Pierce attacks alongside one of his pokemon. That pokemon's attack has 2x chance of inflicting the status associated to Pierce's weapon.

Basically, since Pierce's weapons are the Dragon Slave and the Phantom Staff, one pokemon's attack would either have a 100% chance to decrease the target's Special Defense by -1, or a 50% chance of instant death.


Menarker said it would be overpowered, and he thought that Pierce's attack power would buff the move's power which is not the case. So I clarified:

I mean, something like:

Blaziken uses Fire Blast!
Pierce uses Trainer Attack! Pierce attacks Blaziken's target, except he doesn't actually do damage. In fact, for all intents and purposes, it counts as part of Blaziken's Fire Blast, and adds a chance to cause Instant Death or reduce Special Defense by one stage (depending on which weapon Pierce is using, and based on the chances those weapons normally have of inflicting statuses). No extra damage or anything.

Get it now?

Basically, if Pierce used his Dragon Slave Blaziken's move would have a 50% chance of decreasing the target's Special Defense by 1, or if he used the Phantom Staff it'd have a 25% chance to inflict instant death. Trainer Attack would not cause any more damage.

Menarker said:

So basically you're applying the Slayer effect of the weapon element you use onto a pokekmon move that your affected pokemon uses... But technically, the effect seems like it would be the same if Pierce was just attacking directly, since you aren't applying power to the move and all you're doing is adding the slayer stat affliction of the weapon Pierce is holding.
Is that about right?

Five-Star Deluxe Special: Chizuru cooks up a meal for both of Pierce's pokemon on the field. A small regenerative effect is applied to them.


Menarker thought it would be too weak like that, so I suggested making it either A) regenerate 3/32 of one or both pokemon's maximum HP (1/16 + 50%), or B) heal 10% of one or both pokemon's max HP.

Yes, that would be more regeneration that Leftovers provide, but let's face is, Leftovers are completely worthless right now.

Menarker said: Well... Gem might yell at me, and I apologize if I go overboard... but for Five Star Deluxe I would have it target a single pokemon but regenerate a 20% of max health every turn. Significant enough to be of SOME use during combat, but it won't save you for being ganged up, or at least for long. "Expect no less from Chizuru's cooking"

Which I don't necessarily agree with.

Mock: Pierce taunts one enemy. One enemy's attack is redirected at one of Pierce's pokemon. Multi-target attacks would be centered on Pierce's pokemon. The pokemon targetted does not gain Rage when this Trainer Action is used.


Menarker brought up that I could have a pokemon use Protect and then use this Trainer Action to redirect an enemy's attack at that pokemon, making it effectively a Null Turn move.

So I suggested that the pokemon targetted doesn't take an action, but it does gain Rage.

Willpower: Both of Pierce's pokemon gain 50% resistance to being afflicted with statuses until the end of the turn.

Menarker thought this one was fine as is.

Originally Posted by Menarker

On a similar note, I did say that Drac's techniques even when edited might be too strong to get all at once. That Drac might have to forgo a few of them just on the basis that having 2 or 3 of them might be ok, but all five would border on too diverse.

In that case, you should propose to AB that we grant Trainer Actions with upgrades. Something like, 3 Trainer Actions are Trainer level 3 and 5 at level 5.

Of course, since we're all almost at level 5, that's pretty much irrelevant, isn't it?

Unless you want to lump them into Breeder territory, which we might end up customizing for ourselves anyway, so not much point putting them in there.

You might say that Pierce getting five Trainer Actions at once would be two diverse. Even if he were only going to get like three now, he would have to get the other two at the start of his sidequest, which is like two seconds away.

Y'see? Not much point to making us wait for more Trainer Actions.