Let's have a thread about pokemon tabletop rpgs

Ain't know shit about Pokemon. Trying to work out how a Digimon one would work out.

>>54263207
Depends on whether you want to focus on gamism, simulationism, or narrativism.

>>54263183
What would you say the main differences are between the two? What don't you like about PTU/A that you like about Pokerole?

Never tried either, but I'm interested to hear your opinions.

I've read a lot about PTU and it looks complicated as fuck but with a lot of potential


The main difficulty comes from the game, instead of going the easy retarded furry route of "you are pokemon lol" they want to make the player a trainer, but not a trainer from the games, not a trainer from the anime, oh no babe, the players are the badass trainers from the manga who, if I recall correctly, give no shits about using several pokemon at once outside of official battles, attacking the other trainer directly or even going as far as themselves punching the face of the pikachu of their opponent if they run out of pokemon

Awesome

But sadly it makes it complicated when it comes to rules, forcing you to use a grid and requiring that your players are not retarded. Still, it doesn't look boring like D&D4ed

I have absolutely no issue with Pokemon Tabletop United. It's clearly designed to be very crunchy and based off of the manga where everything is balls-to-the wall crazy compared to the anime and games. I can get why it's not for everyone, for the same reason Shadowrun isn't for everyone, because it may be too crunchy for people who aren't into that thing.

Still, for me, bring on the multiclassing.

>>54264542
Not who you are asking to, but from a GM standpoint Pokerole is easier to manage, in both PTU and pokerole you take the role of a trainer and can have up to six pokemon with you; But during combat there are a higher number of variables and things to take into account in PTU than in Pokerole. Battles in both systems can go slowly, but I have witnessed 2-3 hour rounds in PTU that make you lose immersion and the focus of the group, and while you can still use various pokemon at the same time in pokerole, the system discourages overcrowding by reducing the experience or making it more difficult for a group of pokemon to recognize the orders their trainers is giving them.

Apart from less time per round, and less mechanics, Pokerole relies heavily on the GM's discretion, this may be good or bad depending on your preferences, but to me is good as it prevents you from interrupting the game in the middle of something.

Over all both games have their strengths and differences but in esscence they are the same, although with a different focus. So if you want light adventures and an anime-like experience choose Pokerole; or if you want to crunch numbers and go for manga-style action choose PTU/A

>>54264787
There are actually rules in PTU that prevent you from using more than 1 Pokemon at a time. Though if you want a gym battle or something to be doubles you can allow it.

>>54264542
PTU is just a better version of PTA. PTU is better for crunch while Pokerole is better for lighter stuff. I prefer PTU just because Pokerole leaves too much up to the GM and some Pokemon are just gimped or too strong from stats. You can be busted in PTU too, but only from trainer stuff. Stuff like Pokemon being big and having 5 times the HP of others.

>>54266443
PTA is a fundamentally broken game, but I prefer it to PTU. It doesn't take so much work to make the game fun for the players or the GM, there's more focus on style and flashy classes rather than endless math and combat trainer combos. PTU feels like a game that would play better if you took the Pokemon out of it.

>>54267153
>PTU feels like a game that would play better if you took the Pokemon out of it.

This.