Project Pokemon Design Thread: VENUSAUR!

[jwindjackal]

I would like to point out that because the community picked standardized effects for the markers, we have to get the burn status effect in order before Charmander can be approved. I have included a few options that I see would fit well. I also suggest we have a vote soon (not necessarily on my options) too see what the effect will be.

At the end of every round players must roll the d20 for each figure they control with a Burn Marker on it.

(Here are three possible die roll combinations)
First, (the option I made up and like the best)
1-5 The Burn Marker is removed
6-10 Nothing Happens
10-19 The figure receives one wound
20 The figure receives two wounds

Second, (the option that says the burn doesn't go away)
1-10 nothing happens
10-19 the figure receives one wound
20 the figure receives two wounds

Third, (the option that allows only for one wound to be inflicted)
1-5 remove the Burn Marker
6-10 nothing happens
11-20 Inflict one wound

Fourth(the current effect listed in Wulf's Ember and the one I like the least)
1-10 nothing happens
10-20 the figure receives one wound.


P.S. I still firmly believe that most fire attacks should have a chance of inflicting a burn, Ember and Flamethrower wound have like a 5% chance, while Will O' Wisp might have a 20% chance.

[Balantai]

Fifth:
1-10 remove the Burn Marker
10-20 the figure receives one wound.

[Xn F M]

Originally Posted by jwindjackal

I would like to point out that because the community picked standardized effects for the markers, we have to get the burn status effect in order before Charmander can be approved. I have included a few options that I see would fit well. I also suggest we have a vote soon (not necessarily on my options) too see what the effect will be.

I'm going to second the request for Wulf to call a vote on this. I think with Balantai's addition we'll have just about every reasonable burn effect in consideration.

[mac122]

If a majority wants it, I won't fight status marker removal as a possible result, but I'd rather leave it as a healing function of a trainer, glyph, or Pokemon Special Ability. That seems more thematic to me.

[Xn F M]

Originally Posted by mac122

If a majority wants it, I won't fight status marker removal as a possible result, but I'd rather leave it as a healing function of a trainer, glyph, or Pokemon Special Ability. That seems more thematic to me.

Personally I think status effects should supercede eachother. It's how they work in the game and it would prevent ridiculous status effect stacking. I should have incorporated that into my proposed wording, but I'm at work and only have so much time to type when I'm not on a break.

[White Knight]

Originally Posted by wulfhunter667

Charmander
If this Pokemon inflicts one or more wounds, roll a 20-sided die.

I forgot to menion that I really like the idea of getting burn only AFTER a wound is inflicted. This gets around burn markers on squads, and it isn't an automatic takedown of the Deathwalkers.

This more applies to Poison Powder, but if a Deathwalker was immediately poisened it would have a round or two and then be out. Of course, we could say that Soulborgs cannot be poisoned.

[tcglkn]

Originally Posted by White Knight

I forgot to menion that I really like the idea of getting burn only AFTER a wound is inflicted. This gets around burn markers on squads, and it isn't an automatic takedown of the Deathwalkers.

This more applies to Poison Powder, but if a Deathwalker was immediately poisened it would have a round or two and then be out. Of course, we could say that Soulborgs cannot be poisoned.

Would that mean that lava resistant figures are immune to Burn Markers? You might want to add a line about that.

[White Knight]

Proposed wording change:

EMBER SPECIAL ATTACK
Fire. Range 4. Attack 2.
If Charmander inflicts 1 or more wounds with his Ember Special Attack, roll the 20-sided die. If you roll a 19 or higher, place a Burn Marker on the defending figure's card and remove any other status marker from that card. At the beginning of each round, before placing order markers, each player must roll the 20-sided die in turn for each figure they control with a burn marker on it. If you roll 1-10, place 1 additional wound marker on that figure's Army Card. Fire type Pokemon cannot be burned.

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

I forgot how we were going to handle same-types, so I added in the extra wording.

[Xn F M]

Originally Posted by tcglkn

Would that mean that lava resistant figures are immune to Burn Markers? You might want to add a line about that.

Can we not go down this road again, please?

Basically this discussion boils down to theme vs. use of text. Personally I don't think the theme outweighs the addition of "Do not place burn counters on figures with the Lava Resistant special power" on (potentially) every fire-type attack.

Yes it's a(n almost) cool little thematic thing but having that text on every card that can cause a burn is going to be more annoying that having to repeat the rules for burn markers on all the cards.

@ White Knight, I like that overall wording, except that I think we may need to use the fire symbol to indicate fire type pokemon (and that particular portion of the wording may need a little bit of a tweak, maybe "Do not place burn markers on figures with the ~fire symbol~ type" ? Also, "additional" is unnecesary in the second to last line).

I was hoping Wulf would wiegh in when he was here a few minutes ago because we really need his imput in getting the burn markers finalized.

[tcglkn]

Originally Posted by Xn F M

Can we not go down this road again, please?

Basically this discussion boils down to theme vs. use of text. Personally I don't think the theme outweighs the addition of "Do not place burn counters on figures with the Lava Resistant special power" on (potentially) every fire-type attack.

Yes it's a(n almost) cool little thematic thing but having that text on every card that can cause a burn is going to be more annoying that having to repeat the rules for burn markers on all the cards.

Sorry I missed this discussion. I guess you could always house rule it yourself.

[mac122]

Originally Posted by Xn F M

Personally I think status effects should supercede eachother. It's how they work in the game and it would prevent ridiculous status effect stacking. I should have incorporated that into my proposed wording, but I'm at work and only have so much time to type when I'm not on a break.

I agree that there should only be one status marker at a time. I was referring to the d20 roll having the possibility of auto-healing. I'm for keeping it simple.

[Chardar]

A couple of observations. Charizard is a lizard pokemon, not a flame lizard pokemon. Will-o-wisp does not inflict damage, it only causes a burn, so I think that it should at least be a 6 or higher. I realize that a 100% chance would be a little too strong, although making it inflict damage after every round instead of every turn might balance it out.