[OOC/Sign-ups] Surge Story

[Chim]

Surge OP

Anyway I think the same as Flux. You might need to remind those that have a steel type when they face an electric type.

[Chevaleresse]

Makes just as much sense as water being weak. (Since pure water doesn't conduct electricity anyway. . .) Personally, I understand it not being weak because while steel does conduct electricity, it also doesn't really suffer for being able to do so. (In fact, it's better off: Put a lightning bolt into a steel rod and it heats up, do the same thing to a tree and it explodes.)

[Supernovae]

Honestly as a physics major I'd say that steel would be better off being immune to electric attacks, rather than being effected super effectively. Basically all a conductor does is move the electrons around on the surface to compensate for any electric field, allowing for it to keep its charge on the inside. This unique effect of perfect conductors allows whatever is inside the conductor to be completely unaffected by any outside electric field. In layman's terms a conductor blocks any electricity from entering inside of it. So if you were to say, sit inside of your car while it was struck by lightning you would be perfectly fine. Or if your heart was in the middle of a perfect conductor that was struck by lightning, your heart would likewise be perfectly okay.

Proof:

[Sutoratosu]

Honestly as a physics major I'd say that steel would be better off being immune to electric attacks, rather than being effected super effectively. Basically all a conductor does is move the electrons around on the surface to compensate for any electric field, allowing for it to keep its charge on the inside. This unique effect of perfect conductors allows whatever is inside the conductor to be completely unaffected by any outside electric field. In layman's terms a conductor blocks any electricity from entering inside of it. So if you were to say, sit inside of your car while it was struck by lightning you would be perfectly fine. Or if your heart was in the middle of a perfect conductor that was struck by lightning, your heart would likewise be perfectly okay.

Proof:

Holy mother of god... Well, there goes my career as a Gym Leader.

Wait, you're a physics major, Soldier? why didn't you say so earlier, we could really use one of those around here.

But dammit, guess that means... that Steel would have to be immune to electric. well, thank god I have Infantry...

[Supernovae]

Well, I said immune was a better option than super-effective, but I really think not very effective is the best option. That was a controlled experiment to show off the idea of a Faraday cage. If you notice the voltage wasn't insanely high and the car wasn't on. That's because while the charge inside the conductor doesn't change their are other problems that electricity can cause to metal objects.

The main problem though is heating, if someone were to apply electricity to a conductor (or any object really) for a long period of time the object will heat up. Electricity (especially something like a lightning bolt) holds a large amount of kinetic energy and when that energy hits our metal conductor you better believe that energy is going to do something and that something generally involves heating up that metal. But, again we use conductors as wires for a reason, the electricity won't be in their all that long, so unless you have your pokemon holding its electric attack on the steel type for a long period of time or you can jack your electric bolts up to insane voltages (like if you were a Zapdos) then your electric attacks won't do anything.

So if I had to use my judgement RPing I'd go by these rules to keep it fair and interesting.

1. Weaker electric type pokemon can't cause any real damage to steel types, however they can cause temporary or permanent functionality issues, depending on the discrepancy of both level and power.

2. While being attacked by an electric type a steel type would be paralyzed and unable to move.

3. If a moderately powerful electric type is allowed to keep its attack on a steel type for a large period of time the steel type can experience melting issues.

4. If an incredibly powerful electric type/legendary electric type uses an attack on a steel type it'll demolish them.

Sorry if that was a bit long winded. You don't have to use these rules that's just what makes the most sense to me personally. Also, if you guys need any physics advice I'd be glad to see what I can do.

[Sutoratosu]

well it's making a whole lot of sense to me too from the way you've described it.

What could be done is just create another category of type effectiveness: Dependent. So it would then be Super Effective, Not very effective, completely immune, and then Effectiveness Dependent on Scenario

Hell, we could even use this system for Poison VS Steel (Since it seems that Acid is included under the general "Poison" typing.) and have the effectiveness of that be dependent on the scenario as well, (Ex: like how the thing with if Strong electric attacks are exposed for a long period on a steel type)

what do you all think? should we just sat screw it and go a little rogue here?

[Supernovae]

I'm all for that. We would definitely need to re-think how sound based attacks work as well because those being included in the same category as 'tackle' really makes no sense.

[Chevaleresse]

What if we forgot the type chart entirely and only did things that made sense? For example, all of Flying's weaknesses fall under the realm of common sense, but others might be less so, such as Bug resisting Ground.

[Sutoratosu]

Yes, Anarchy!!!!

Best idea I've heard yet on the matter, Murdoc. To hell with it, we already use Common sense as a major basis for moves used and the battle system, so why not do the same with the Type match ups in general? I should've done this sooner, but I was to afraid to break away completely from the basic principles of the game mechanics and such...

But you know what? this ain't pokemon anymore, it's our own revised, edited version of it where things are actually going to make sense a lot more. This is a Sci-fi, not a fantasy. With that genre conversation, certain aspects must also change and be converted. It's time I accept that and break away from tether I made myself.

From this point on soldiers, we follow our own Mechanics in this RP. We'll only use ones shared with Game Freak's creation if they actually make sense, and if they don't, we go with our own guidelines, which will make sense. I'm fairly certain I know what everyone's going to say, but here's a poll anyway...

http://www.strawpoll.me/2962503

let's get cracking, Spark Alpha.

EDIT: I have no idea what I've just done to my mouse there... you'll see.

[Supernovae]

I'm all for this, if we can meet a few conditions.

1. More Communication: We'll need to be open to discussing a large amount of moves and match ups until we can come to a consensus about things. I.e. say Nathan and Lars are battling and Lars' Ghastly uses something like Night Shade on Nathan's Bagon. Murdoc may argue that the attack wouldn't have a large effect on his Bagon due to the stoic and headstrong nature of his GAO, while Flux may argue that the attack wouldn't depend on the nature of the pokemon at all, that the night shade would find SOMETHING that Bagon was afraid of and exploit it.

In this instance or one of the many that I can imagine being similar to it, we'd have to all come together and make a decision about how it would play out. I'd imagine we as a group would be capable of having nice conversations about how we imagine the nature of battling, but we'd have to be diligent about being vocal. As soon as your not entirely sure of how an interaction may work, you'd have to express that here and everyone else would have to put their input in as well. This will likely increase the length of all fight scenes, particularly at the beginning, but I think it would be worth it.

2. Everyone has to be in on it: This would change the rigid structure of pokemon battling into a very abstract experience and I completely understand why some people wouldn't enjoy that. By using more real life rules we'll completely remove a lot of the real life balance that is built into the pokemon games. Most types that are currently seen as OP would only get more powerful and most of the weaker types would only suffer. Take for example the steel type, who could realistically lose both its fighting weakness and ground weakness. However, this is only during immediate battles if we work together we could provide tangible weaknesses and strengths to each type that could exist outside of battle. Grass types could become even more potent in their healing abilities and could be given absurd amounts of durability due to their ability to regrow themselves, whereas steel types could be very high maintenance.

However, this requires cooperation and work and while I think everyone here is capable of this type of thing I do understand if someone isn't interested in removing themselves from the nice world of pokemon that has already been established. If just one person isn't interested then the idea won't work and that's why it's important that we're all on board before we start doing it.

[Ragnar]

I love the idea and all, but how about Ghost type? since were not relying on the weakness chart.. surely they're intangable, they could dodge anything we throw at them.

EDIT: how far is the enemy exactly? i've sent Luxio and Crogunk in search of them by the way.. since they're close range and all.

Edited November 10, 2014 by typhlosionrulez

[Flux]

Well, I'd imagine ghosts could still be harmed by other ghosts, so that makes sense. Sound based attacks could likely still have an effect. And it just seems right to me that Psychic attacks could hit them. I don't really have a reason that I can describe for that last one, other than it just seems to make sense.

[Chevaleresse]

I see the Steel-type weaknesses as making logical sense. Steel is very hard; Fighting's whole thing is breaking apart hard objects. Steel can be brittle; a blow that hits it hard enough to do damage will do a LOT of damage. Ground operates similarly.

[Ragnar]

Ghost types can phase through projectiles and melee attacks, even if infused with an element(lightning,fire,ice,etc.) since we're putting logical sense, since ghost are intangable objects. but yes sound attack and other ghost attack would definitely hit them as Flux stated. nerf Ghost types lol

Edited November 10, 2014 by typhlosionrulez

[Chevaleresse]

I see ghosts as being affected by non-Normal, non-Fighting attacks because they are infused with energy, and ghosts exist as energy,

[Supernovae]

I've always thought that Ghosts, as Typh said,should be immune to most physical attacks as they were in Gen. 1 and could be effected by any 'special' attacks. The rare exception to physical attacks landing could be sneak attacks. These could be planned by the trainer, such as using tackle when it's not looking/your pokemon is hiding or by being sneaky in nature like most dark attacks are.

So essentially all types would be able to hit them in some way or another. Normal types can use their sound attacks or hyper beam (seriously why wouldn't a god damn hyper beam hit a Gengar but a flamethrower would?) and fighting types such as Lucario can just launch aura sphere's at them. However Ghosts would get the ability to avoid any physical attack that they see coming. I don't know I think that's a fair trade off. It makes ghosts fill a certain niche. They become much stronger in one on one battles where it'd be more difficult to fool them (though they wouldn't be any stronger against special based attackers) but they would be a good bit weaker in the chaotic messes our group will surely be in.

[Sutoratosu]

Well look at this, you all conducting the discussion without me having to be here. Impressive, Soldiers.

As for the charge that Luxio and Croagunk are on, I'll include it in the next update, Typhlosion. and the thing about Ghost types being able to be imvulnerable against most physical attacks sounds fair to me.

[Chim]

I agree with the things that have been said.

Also: Fighting vs Dark and Fighting vs Bug. The first I don't see how anyone can punch / kick whatever the dark so I don't think it should be SE against it.

The second one is the other way around. Bugs can be squashed by just stepping on them so not very effective doesn't make any sense to me.

[Jory]

I agree with the things that have been said.

Also: Fighting vs Dark and Fighting vs Bug. The first I don't see how anyone can punch / kick whatever the dark so I don't think it should be SE against it.

The second one is the other way around. Bugs can be squashed by just stepping on them so not very effective doesn't make any sense to me.

I think the basis behind Fighting and Dark is that "Fighting" is roughly equivalent to "noble" or "light" in Japanese, and that good will always triumph over evil. Despite it being scifi, I kind of like the idea that a righteous, positively driven aura would be able to drown out one based on fear and deceit.

[Sutoratosu]

Alright soldiers, in order to do this effectively, we need to have a plan as to how we go about it, I'm talking about an explicit agenda.

Here it is: First we're going to do to tear apart the old mechanics and refurbish them in a better and more realistic implication, is to keep on doing what we're starting to now and go through all the types, In alphabetical order in order to keep it organized, and as we go through we will discuss and decide upon several things as follows:

• The new Effectiveness of that Type against other types, based on logic and common sense as we have all agreed.
• the Threat level that type poses in general (IE how dangerous they potentially are in the world)
• How it's even possible for that type to biologically exist in the first place (I'll be doing a lot of the work for this particular one
• Go through all the pokemon belonging to that type and determine how it is possible for them to even biologically exist in the first place, as well as assign secondary typings that it would make sense for a species to have, yet that it does not already.

Sound good?

Here's the list, in order:

Bug

Dark

Dragon

Electric

Fairy

Fighting

Fire

Flying

Ghost

Grass

Ground

Ice

Normal

Poison

Psychic

Rock

Steel

[Chim]

I think the basis behind Fighting and Dark is that "Fighting" is roughly equivalent to "noble" or "light" in Japanese, and that good will always triumph over evil. Despite it being scifi, I kind of like the idea that a righteous, positively driven aura would be able to drown out one based on fear and deceit.

That explains a lot. I thought Fairy as supposed to be 'light'.

So if we start with Bug:

Super effective against bug: Fire, Flying, Rock and add Fighting. It makes sense that you can squash bugs by punching / kicking them.

Not very effective against bug: Grass and maybe Poison? To be honest I don't think ground should be included and instead should be neutral.

Bug is SE against: Grass, Psychic and Dark (I would keep that as they all make sense in some way)

Bug is not very effective against: Fire, Fighting, Poison, Flying, Ghost, Steel. I believe in-game Fairy is added to this list but I think fairy should take neutral damage. I see no logical way as to way they wouldn't take normal damage.

Just my two cents on Bug types but I'm not good in physics and such.

[Sutoratosu]

That explains a lot. I thought Fairy as supposed to be 'light'.

So if we start with Bug:

Super effective against bug: Fire, Flying, Rock and add Fighting. It makes sense that you can squash bugs by punching / kicking them.

Not very effective against bug: Grass and maybe Poison? To be honest I don't think ground should be included and instead should be neutral.

Bug is SE against: Grass, Psychic and Dark (I would keep that as they all make sense in some way)

Bug is not very effective against: Fire, Fighting, Poison, Flying, Ghost, Steel. I believe in-game Fairy is added to this list but I think fairy should take neutral damage. I see no logical way as to way they wouldn't take normal damage.

Just my two cents on Bug types but I'm not good in physics and such.

I think Poison shoud be SE against Bug because of Peticides and such...

[Supernovae]

So looking through the bug typing I noticed something unique about just about all of them. The bug typing is incredibly agile. Of course there are exceptions such as forretress and shuckle, but as a whole the bugs (just like their real life compatriots) are difficult to squash. Now their biology will also play a role for them. Bugs as we all are aware have an exoskeleton rather than an endoskeleton. While we can imagine this making them more 'squishy' we can also imagine this making them physically stronger. Then we have the moth/butterfly pokemon. These generally rely on unique powders and tricky attacks. This gives us a nice distribution on what a bug can do, most are agile but incredibly susceptible to strong attacks (with notable exceptions such as Shuckle and Forretress), while on offense they can either play hard hitter or play the role of spore carrier.

Now onto the type effectiveness. I'm going to sort things by Always Super effective, Generally Super Effective, Generally Neutral, Generally Not very effective, Always not very effective, Sometimes Immune, Always Immune. Something like Always Super Effective would be something that I'd imagine the biology of the type to be weak against, whereas something like Situationally Super Effective would be a nice match up in general strategy (something like the 'dark vs fighting' match up.)

I'll also be sure to provide reasons and examples for each of my listings, though if something is 'Generally Neutral' I won't include it to save time.

When attacking Bug:

Always Super Effective: Fire (It's easy to imagine a bug as flammable), Poison (like Surge said bugs are highly damaged by pesticides)

Generally Super Effective: Rock (Rock's may be capable of squishing bugs, but they have to be hit by said rock first, a bug's elusive nature should be capable of annoying a rock type for a decent period of time.), Flying (As an element air isn't a natural enemy of bugs, however many birds hunt bugs so I feel as though it works here), Fighting (Similar to the rock type a fist may be able to squash a bug, but it'll have to hit it first.)

Generally Not very Effective: Fairy (Cutesy things generally don't like bugs.)

Always Not very Effective: Psychic (Bugs rely on instinct and commands, not brain power. It only makes sense that the least intelligent type takes less damage from the mind controllers.), Ghost (If the bulk of a ghost's attacks relay on fear then how effective could they be against a mindless hive creature?)

Immunities: None

When Bug attacks:
Always Super Effective: Grass (Bugs eat plants, simple)

Generally Super Effective: Psychic (I like the idea that Psychic is weak to common fears, if a bug can't break your concentration I'm not sure what can), Fairy (Again the lovable cute mons have a fear of our icky bugs.)

Generally Not Very Effective: Fire (It'd be difficult for a bug to actually make contact with a fire type), Poison (Poison types would also weaken a bug far too much for them to make contact and since they are already diseased would not feel adverse effects from spores)

Always Not Very Effective: Steel (Bugs don't break steel, non-organics don't feel the effects of spores), Rock (Bugs don't break rocks either)

Immunities: None

Edited November 11, 2014 by Supernovae

[Sutoratosu]

Hell, I'm down with this, Corporal. Sounds legitimate to me. anyone else feel something should be edited for bug? if not, lets move on to the next point; go through every bug type species and examine them in order to come up with explainations)

[Jory]

Hell, I'm down with this, Corporal. Sounds legitimate to me. anyone else feel something should be edited for bug? if not, lets move on to the next point; go through every bug type species and examine them in order to come up with explainations)

Ghost should certainly not be Generally Not Very Effective. Not all insects are part of a hive mind. Take for example the humble dragonfly. From birth to death it is a solitary animal that focuses solely on hunting and reproduction, similar to many mammals and other invertebrates. I would say that in specific instances (Beedrill, Durant, etc.) this should be the case, but not the norm.