Spitballing a Poke-change: Move Evolution?

[Zapp Branniglenn]

Was chatting with a friend the other night about the evolution of Pokemon's mechanics generation to generation, and I mentioned an idea I remember having as a young lad obsessed with the PS2 Ratchet & Clank games. In those games, individual weapons accrue experience and eventually evolve into bigger, crazier versions of themselves. What if using a move enough times  upgraded it to a better move? For instance, Ember becoming Incinerate, Bubble becoming Bubblebeam, Tackle becoming Quick Attack.

Why suggest a change like this? Well it always bugged me that Pokemon has moves that become obsolete 100% of the time. Not just for competitive play, but in the latter half of your own single player experience. Why hang on to Ember once you learn Flamethrower? Or Water Gun once you've gotten Surf? And how do Pokemon designers decide WHEN pokemon ought to learn extremely powerful moves like that? It always seemed like only the "optimized" late game moves are balanced against each other. Furthermore what if the evolution of moves was branched? Allowing the player to choose what to prioritize in that slot, and consult a Move Relearner if they want to change it to the other option. Let's lay out some potential move evolution branches:

• Ember > Incinerate OR Fire Spin OR Will-O-Wisp > Flamethrower OR Fire Blast Or Heat Wave
• Thunder Shock > Nuzzle Or Shock Wave OR Charge Beam > Thunderbolt OR Thunder OR Zap Cannon
• Tackle > Quick Attack OR Fake Out OR Take Down > Double Edge OR Giga Impact OR Body Slam
• Absorb > Mega Drain > Leech Life OR Giga Drain 
• Cotton Spore > Poison Powder OR Stun Spore OR Sleep Powder
• Mega Punch > Thunder Punch OR Ice Punch OR Fire Punch Or Drain Punch Or Mach Punch
• Bite > Crunch OR Fire Fang OR Ice Fang OR Thunder Fang OR Poison Fang

With the precise move options that you can choose being tailored to that specific pokemon. For instance, you can't have any pokemon that knows Bite have access to ALL those elemental fang moves unless the game balancers want that pokemon to have a ton of coverage options there. A Fire type pokemon's version of tackle would probably evolve into Flame Charge and Flare Blitz rather than just other Normal type attacks. And Camerupt or Typhlosion's final evolution of Ember should include a choice for Eruption since that's the sort of move that feels "signature" to them. 

Bonus idea: What if you maintained access to previous versions of a move without using up one of your 4 move slots? Once upon a time, 4 move slots was more than enough, but move pools have gotten so deep that it's genuinely hard to decide what to give up, let alone deciding an optimized set for a more competitive battle. So imagine having free access to your previous, lower tiered version of your move. You might not use it nearly as often, but having something like Quick Attack, Rapid Spin, or Pursuit in your back pocket can be clutch when that situation arises. Ditto for on the fly stategizing like "I REALLY need to burn or paralyze my opponent, so I'll go for that before I go for damage". It might even help solve PP usage concerns...if PP was ever a system in pokemon that underwent serious consideration. I've played other monster catching games, and they tend to ditch PP in favor of a Stamina bar, with different moves having different stamina costs. If Pokemon had a system like that, you could balance the PP usage in a way that the Tier 1 moves also have some use whenever you're trying to conserve. 

So what do you guys think about these ideas? Would you be interested in Move evolution as a means of progression outside of just gaining levels? Does making branched decisions allow for greater individuality with the pokemon we raise? How would you iron out the kinks of an idea like this? Or do you look at a move like Tackle and see no problem that needs to be addressed in the first place? I look at this idea and don't necessarily see it as a direct enhancement, just a way to shake up the experience. A way to make raising a pokemon you're already familiar with feel new again. And maybe even shake up Competitive Play by giving players more tools to work with while also forcing a choice between two potentially "optimal" attacks. There aren't a lot of scenarios in modern pokemon where one Pokemon with better min maxed stats is actually lesser than another pokemon with the more diversified move pool and balanced stat spread, so a change like this would be a good opportunity to redesign the cast's move pools from the ground up so that roster choices can matter again.

[FailWood]

Maybe cause they wouldn't want players to have high powered moves early if it were based on number of times used rather then learning it at a certain level.

I know this isn't the same thing that you're suggesting, but in the Mystery Dungeon games starting with Gates to Infinity, there was a mechanic called Move Growth, where using a move like Quick Attack a lot would improve the move, like making it do more damage, be more accurate (because accuracy isn't the same in those games other then the never miss moves like Swift or Shock Wave), and increase the number of PP the move has so it could be used more.  Best part about it is that it the upgrades apply to all Pokemon who know the move, so having multiple Pokemon know useful moves like Discharge or Brutal Swing is a good idea, plus it makes moves that would normally be weak (like Quick Attack) potentially remain useful for the whole game.

Edited January 25, 2022 by FailWood

[Lord_Brand]

A skill tree like you're suggesting has been done by other similar games such as Monster Sanctuary. Not saying Pokemon shouldn't do that, just pointing out there's a precedent for it.

Honestly, a skill tree would be a cool twist for the Pokemon series. Different Pokemon's skill trees could be geared towards different strategies. For example, do you want your Lucario to favor physical attacks, special attacks, or balance the two? Is your Gardevoir going to be a special sweeper, or more of a supporter for Double/Triple battles? Do you value having status buffs at the cost of attack diversity, or do you prefer more diverse attack options?

Furthermore, instead of the Pokemon having "empty" levels, moves can be learned or upgraded by acquiring skill points. However, to help balance the game, certain moves require your Pokemon to be a certain level before you can learn/upgrade to them. Your Charmander has to be Level 20 before it can learn Flamethrower, for example. But you might be able to unlock some power boosts for Ember beforehand. Say, +10 at Level 10 and +15 at Level 15? That would raise Ember's power up to 65, not quite Flamethrower's level but still stronger than when you first get Ember.

This of course begs the question of where TMs and TRs come into play. In a system where each Pokemon has a baked-in skill tree, TMs and TRs might cease to be relevant, unless they too unlock skill trees.

But you know, there's always the option of an original IP. ; )

Edited January 26, 2022 by Lord_Brand

[Zapp Branniglenn]

16 hours ago, Lord_Brand said:

A skill tree like you're suggesting has been done by other similar games such as Monster Sanctuary. Not saying Pokemon shouldn't do that, just pointing out there's a precedent for it.

Honestly, a skill tree would be a cool twist for the Pokemon series. Different Pokemon's skill trees could be geared towards different strategies. For example, do you want your Lucario to favor physical attacks, special attacks, or balance the two? Is your Gardevoir going to be a special sweeper, or more of a supporter for Double/Triple battles? Do you value having status buffs at the cost of attack diversity, or do you prefer more diverse attack options?

Furthermore, instead of the Pokemon having "empty" levels, moves can be learned or upgraded by acquiring skill points. However, to help balance the game, certain moves require your Pokemon to be a certain level before you can learn/upgrade to them. Your Charmander has to be Level 20 before it can learn Flamethrower, for example. But you might be able to unlock some power boosts for Ember beforehand. Say, +10 at Level 10 and +15 at Level 15? That would raise Ember's power up to 65, not quite Flamethrower's level but still stronger than when you first get Ember.

Another natural balancing mechanism would be the skill Tree expanding upon evolution - which is tied to levels in the first place for most pokemon. It wouldn't make sense for Charmander to be able to pick up flying type attacks until he's a Charizard for instance. And Eevee's skill tree of moves would obviously change dramatically depending on what evolution you go for. I do like the idea of skill trees, since at the very least it gives you an obvious flow chart of your potential progression, without having to look up what turns into what on bulbapedia. Can't say that I'm into the previously mentioned Mystery Dungeon approach where moves stay the same, but their base power or accuracy increases. I pitched the idea of "move evolution" since evolution was always such an integral part of the Pokemon experience. Things turning into obviously better things. It felt right to double down on that, without rocking the idea that pokemon have only 4 move slots. But really I wouldn't be surprised if most pokemon fans would be happy to see that 4 move limitation disappear some day anyway. 

Instead of skill points, how about Effort Values as the "currency" for the skill tree? That way the player can get the moves they want, then spend the excess EVs on stat boosts. The branching paths of a skill tree also naturally lends itself to build creation. Getting a special attacking move leads to better special attacking moves, which itself leads to boosts for the Special Attack stat. Institute a cap of maybe 1000EVs per pokemon, where the competitive player can choose the right balance between having the most decked out moveset (going beyond the standard 4 move limit even) or pushing for the highest stats. Since we already live in an era where you can reset a Pokemon's EVs, think of how much of a difference resetting your skill tree would make. Completely changing that pokemon's build and utilities. They could even go further than moves and stats. What if your pokemon's Ability was chosen at the start of the skill tree? What if you could allow yourself two abilities instead of one, or even splurged on giving yourself a resistance or immunity that your typing doesn't normally provide? 

Of course I may only be suggesting EVs be used for this because I'm just not a fan of them. I think they had it right the first time with Stat Experience. But both times it was dumb to have this stuff be invisible to the player. The theoretical improvement with EVs is that it lets you tailor a "build" around that pokemon's two most important stats. But since Pokemon battles are so straightforward there's no real choice being made. Tanky pokemon occasionally beef up their defenses while literally anybody else wants maxed out speed and attacking power. It doesn't add any depth to competitive play in practice. And If you know how EVs work in a casual playthrough, there's an annoying part of your brain that tells you your Squirtle in Fire Red is permanently disadvantaged, because he defeated a Mankey that gave him a useless attack EV. And said EV could have gone to stats he actually cares about.

Quote

This of course begs the question of where TMs and TRs come into play. In a system where each Pokemon has a baked-in skill tree, TMs and TRs might cease to be relevant, unless they too unlock skill trees.

I'm not particularly married to the idea of TMs. But I do like move tutors, or did before they were consolidated into the various Battle Tower shops as an expensive commodity. This idea that your pokemon needs to train with a special "tutor" in order to discover a hidden talent is pretty compelling compared to learning an awesome power from an item that sits in your bag. Imagine greyed out parts of the skill tree that you need to find the right tutor to unlock as an option.

Or perhaps your own player character is the Tutor, and he learned these various moves by completing side quests for NPCs or difficult battles that inspired him to think of interesting techniques that he can teach to his pokemon. This latter option isn't too different from TMs in terms of raw gameplay (even a gym leader gives you a TM along with the Badge), but their acquisition is more interesting than an item on the ground and exemplifies the unique bond that your character supposedly has with his pokemon. I always laugh at the end of a pokemon game where the Professor shows up to tell me that I won because of my bonds with pokemon, and I'm just thinking about how my character only releases them from the pokeball to fight something. Never so much as fed them food over the course of an adventure. I'm no better than the Team Rocket member that loudly shouts that Pokemon are just tools.