URPG Dungeons

I never got away with it. You can only get a Kecleon to join your team if you steal from their shop and have a slim chance of it after beating them which is ridiculous.

Oh, I like that. A hundred-sided die can be rolled and something like this could happen after completing each floor:

1-10 - Reviver Seed x1 for each player
10-30 - Team fully healed
30-60 - Heal 50% or remove a status condition
60-70 - Heal 25%
70-90 - Berries and one-use items (Oran: 10% heal, Sitrus: 25% heal, Lum: Removes a status condition, White Herb: Prevents a stat from dropping, Leichi: Raises Pokemon's Attack for the duration of that floor and the other pinch berries: Ganlon, Salac, Petaya, Apricot, Starf and Lansat)
90-100 - Nothing!

 

Yeah, I literally beat over one hundred of them just trying to get one to join and none ever did ;[.

 

I don't really think scheduled times will work out - it's not common in URPG for five people to all have a regular two-hour timeslot in common to burn. Unfortunately, activity is going to be the biggest problem if you're looking at a dungeon kind of thing. If it's just like a boss battle, this could be knocked out over AIM whenever people feel like it, but a Dungeon wouldn't be able to be done that fast, I think.

If you guys are looking at doing a full-on dungeon as opposed to just a boss battle, go look at the Pokemon Missions section - I've already got a turn-based mechanics system hammered out, if you want to use that. I might be tooting my own horn a bit much, but I love that system, and unfortunately the Missions died ;-;

I'd be happy to help out with making this a reality, however I think we need to define exactly what we consider to be a "Dungeon" and how we'd go about making it.

 

I completely agree on the last part, since... that's the entire premise of the thread.

However, after skimming over the Missions area, it has a lot of good ideas that could be incorporated too. However, as voiced before, anything that takes too long or is forum-based will probably, more often than not, die. AIM is a better option in this case, though yes - finding x amount of people online at the same time in the same group can be problematic. :/

 

I don't think it'd be too problematic. There could be a specific blast chat for people willing to take part so there'd be an easy means of knowing who's available. Besides, I'm sure there will definitely be say one DM and two/three people willing to take part in a mission at any one time.

 

That's a fair stretch - at 8PM my time, there are no battlers on, let alone ref or judges.

I think Seq is right - this will have to be AIM-based. The question now is, if you're looking at doing a full-on dungeon, how exactly will it be done. A text MUD, Zorc style? Some kind of visual framework? And how will you communicate the map and etc to the people, pastebin? Photobucket? The implementation and physical running of these Dungeons needs to be discussed before how many floors or whatever.

>my quick opinion is any more floors than 5 would get boring real quick and we should aim for 3

 

Why not just assume every floor is a 3 x 3 grid, in which the stairs to the next floor are in one of the grid squares, rolled randomly by the DM.
9 squares/rooms per floor isn't too much, IMO - especially when there aren't many floors.
This is similar to PMD, though with a set number of rooms, rather than a random number of rooms.


I specifically suggested set times so that some people wouldn't be left out, like Chainy @ 8PM his time, while it's the middle of the night for others.

 

The grid idea is pretty neat. I do love grid-based games.

Another idea is to skip the grid entirely if that might be too complicated. Pokemon Battles can be interesting by itself with creative mechanics, unique movesets, etc. If you look at some FFA's we've had, you can see how interesting the rules can get.

This might help create a manageable experience that fits in a given length of time, yet is a fun encounter.

 

Yeah, I think if the grids are going to be that small then they might as well just be skipped. Perhaps HKim's route is best - each floor could be like a Team FFA, where a Dungeon Master controls all the "Wild Pokemon" and/or the Dungeon Boss, and the other team comprises of the 3-5 Adventurers. That way a normal ref can ref the battles too. Some payment system will probably need to be worked out, but that's something to be done a little farther down the road.

 

I like Harry's idea too, as long as it isn't too similar to the Park.

 

I love this idea, but think we should keep it firmly centered in Pokemon. It seems like the few things we've tried to do that strayed from normal Pokemon stuff *cough* Trainer's Estate *cough* have failed miserably. That being said, this could be very interesting. If you're worried about people not being active enough to keep it going, why not make it an event instead of a permanent section, like PE2K's WAR, only maybe twice a year or something. Then there could be teams, etc.

 

I like the idea, and although I think it would be fun to have something like that constantly going on, I agree with Alaska about it probably being more successful as an event or a semi-yearly thing.

I love grid-based things, but if it's going to be like a mini FFA, it might be hard to find a group of people on for several hours, considering it would probably take that long. When FFAs earn better rewards (in theory), people may opt to just do those instead (not that those happen very often anyway) if they're going to be spending a similar amount of time.

I do like it though, and if we could hammer out some clear objectives and how it's supposed to be run, I would definitely help out with it.

 

Yeah, basically what Winter said. It'd probably go a lot quicker without having to manipulate programs to get grids and having to keep going back to them, especially if it was on AIM. I'd like if it was similar to the Park (as it's kind of coming across in some of the posts), but it'd need to have distinct differences, like being able to be used on AIM being most obvious one. I think it'd be nice to know exactly what kind of plots would go on, and maybe a little more on it, if anyone has any ideas?

Edit: And if anyone's played Rumble on the Wii it could end up quite similar to that, which is basically a much more simplified version of mystery dungeon.

 

This is a good option, but there are several concerns this raises.
1. If it's similar to FFAs, a lot of refs aren't going to want to do it, especially with a team of five, when only six are required for an FFA.
2. Depending on the rewards - if they're the same/greater than that of an FFA, then why wouldn't they have limits on them (as the FFA does at one a week). Restriction is not the best way to get something started. If it's less, then why do it?

An event seems like it could be a good idea, but most events (save WAR because of the wide variety of activities) do not get a lot of participants.

I would like more of an idea of Harry's direction, because clear objectives, as Winter says, may help in forming more ideas.

 

Personally, there's been a few times where I'd have liked to host a FFA, but there hasn't even been six people online on AIM, and I haven't been able to. If something were able to be done with 2-5 people, like a small team FFA, I'd be up for it. Something like the team "boss fight" that was suggested could work, imo. It could be a good way for like, three people to get together, and be able to work as a team in a fight, as opposed to participating on a team in a large FFA, which has more people, and no guaranteed teams.

I think it could work if it was laid out as a new battle style, with like a 2-5 people battle against either a boss, or a group of enemies, controlled by the ref, and held on either forum or AIM. Payouts could be similar to a normal battle, with something like $2,000 for a win, and $1,000 for a loss or something of the sorts, and likewise, $500 per trainer Pokemon for the ref. That would only be netting the ref a total of $2,500 if it was restricted to five battlers, and just as much can be made from a regular 5v5. There would be precautions to make sure refs don't become biased, I guess, like they have to publicly roll random moves for the wild Pokemon.

Events surrounding this could go down the lines of a mass, "URPGers vs AI" kind of fight, where there could be 10+ battlers, all fighting against a horde of "wild" Pokemon controlled by a ref, or perhaps a couple of refs.

 

I like the idea of 3-5 people and think it could definitely work out, and the pay doesn't seem to bad either. It'd be cool if say the person with most amount of dungeons cleared every fortnight or month or so would get a little bonus to promote activity. Although, that's probably a little further down the line. Having this work on AIM would be benefecial definitely, imo.

 

I'd like to put together a team to work on this and develop this idea further. This would probably involve planning the mechanics, running a few trials, and polishing it up.

Ultimately, it would be submitted to the URPG leadership for approval, but I don't think that will be too much of a problem.

I'd like to know who here would be interested in being a member of this team.

 

http://bmgf.bulbagarden.net/f460

done

 

Lolpidge

I'd be interested in helping out, I really enjoyed working on the Missions (even though that flopped).

 

I'll help out in whatever way I can