Feedback is always more than welcome!

I might just change Paralysis at this point, it’s been a bit annoying to track in playtesting and if it’s apparently hard to understand as well it may not be worth it. The general goal of conditions was to have them go away as quickly as possible to keep things simple, which is why Paralysis disappears at the end of the start of turn, but having it just be no-movement for 2 turns is probably the better option. I’ll have to do some playtesting first, though.

And capitalising Move is probably the easiest option. I’d have to check if that causes anything weird, but probably not.

Hmm, techniques might work, but space is often limited and it’s quite a bit longer than “move”. I’m aware of the issue, but didn’t have a clean way of solving it. I couldn’t use “attack” since there’s already an Attack die and abilities are also a thing in Pokémon in general. If it was going to be confusing regardless, I figured I might as well stick with the name used in the games. Basically, move as a noun is an “attack”, move as a verb is movement. I may have to try to fit that clarification in somewhere…

The thing to keep in mind with Paralysis is that every round starts with determining turn order, any Paralysed Pokémon move to the end of the turn order and then loses Paralysis. The not-being-able-to-move bit is only relevant if the Paralysed Pokémon hasn’t acted yet that round.

Thanks!

I have never actually run a Pokémon TTRPG I didn’t make myself, but having read through a few, I was always struck by how much work they demanded from the GM. Having to basically design each Pokémon the players will face seems like such a daunting task. On top of this, enemy Pokémon usually have to be run the same as those of the players, which again means a lot more work for the GM. I’m a lazy GM at heart, and that just would not be possible for those games.

I tried my best to make things as easy on the GM as I could. With some experience, you should be able to start a battle from scratch in less than a minute, and you don’t have nearly as many decision points as the other players during the battle.

Feedback is always welcome!

The issue is that for out-of-combat actions, the move die has the same function for both types of moves, so giving it a different name could lead to more confusion. Additionally, any number mentioned on the move card always refers to the move die, so having different names might again be more confusing.

I hope I made it clear that special moves have a very different procedure, and as soon as you realise that, knowing that the “move die” is the die on the move card should hopefully make things fairly clear.

Part of the impetus behind the combat rules was trying to make a singular “Special” stat not just functional but logical. If it was just going to be SpA/SpD combined, there’d be no reason not to split them. Having the split be damaging moves and effect moves solved that issue nicely, but it did necessitate very different mechanics.

Thanks for the feedback, though!

It wouldn’t. A tetrahedron has four sides, hence the name, while an Egyptian-style pyramid has five (if you include the base, otherwise it isn’t even a polyhedron).

No, I agree that independence is necessary, not just because of “always”, but because if, as a crude example, your odds of hitting B halve each time you hit A, an infinite number of tries isn’t guaranteed to give you Shakespeare, even if the odds aren’t technically 0. My problem was that what you originally described wasn’t independence, it’s uniformity, which isn’t a prerequisite. And it’s up to 9 upvotes now so I don’t know what’s going on.

What? That’s not what independence means. They need to be independent, yes, because otherwise you might get into weird corner cases where the probably doesn’t converge to 1, but they don’t have to be equally likely. In fact, weighing the odds based on how often letters are used by Shakespeare should lower the expected timeframe. Heck, Shakespeare doesn’t use “J”, why would that key even be relevant? Where in the world do normal distributions even come into this? How does this comment have 4 upvotes? What am I missing here?

I’ve heard him (accurately) being referred to as a serial one-hit wonder. He also did Mouth Sounds, made the comic about Ariel getting 8 legs, and did the Guide to the Races of Star Trek and its spin-offs.

Oh no, I’m so sorry, the microplastics got you too: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Language_and_the_euro&diffonly=true#Written_conventions_for_the_euro_in_the_languages_of_EU_member_states

And Last Chance to See! It’s somehow almost as absurd as his fictional works.

… it’s not really an opinion piece? It’s mostly a breakdown of the church’s dubious history and leadership. I’m sure they also do video game stuff, but that feels like it has no bearing on the actual facts presented.

It seems quite a few modern birds (Aves) lineages survived the K-Pg extinction (at least 5, last I checked), but when exactly they diversified is apparently still a contentious issue. The common ancestor almost definitely lived sometime during the cretaceous, so not THAT long ago in the grand scheme of things, but it definitely lived either before or during T-rex’s reign.

I was referring to Avialae, which is the clade defined as all dinosaurs more closely related to budgies than to deinonychus. Many of them would have seemed quite birdy to us, but like the other dinosaurs not many of them made it to the current day and the ones that did are all Aves.

In case anyone genuinely has this misconception: birds branched off from the other dinosaurs during the Jurassic, probably over 100 million years before the astroid hit. Dinos didn’t suddenly grow feathers and a beak because a big rock hit them.