That poison mechanic is atrocious. It might have worked marvelously in the context of Pokemon, but... in DnD I see it as suck and bookkeeping, and this is so the reason they swapped the 3.0 wounding mechanic with con damage.

...and now I am reminded of having played Pokemon, and that somehow I still remember how poison worked in that game. The shame of it all.

Hey, could you elucidate on Pokemon a bit more?
I missed it due to age, but it must have been a great game, no?
Kids aren´t stupid, they play what´s fun.

Quote from: SettembriniHey, could you elucidate on Pokemon a bit more?
I missed it due to age, but it must have been a great game, no?
Kids aren´t stupid, they play what´s fun.

In its heyday Pokemon wasn't played - it was collected and traded. Most kids didn't even know (or cared to bother) that it was a card game. Presumably, they all knew the game boy iteration of the property, and they thought the cards were an expansion to that one.

Edit: It just occured to me that beejazz could have meant the game boy game. In that case ignore my tangent.

So the poke-kids were stupid?
The mind boggles!

Quote from: SettembriniSo the poke-kids were stupid?
The mind boggles!

I wouldn't call them stupid. To them the cards were more like Top Trumps and less like Magic The Gathering. (Remember, some of the Pokemon fans were very young.)

Mmmm.
But.
That would mean they cared more for the *gasp* franchise´s aesthetics than for the gameplay.

And that would diminish the merit WotC had in all this.
And therefore the Hasbro purchase would have been made on false assumptions.

Interesting.

Quote from: SettembriniThat would mean they cared more for the *gasp* franchise´s aesthetics than for the gameplay.

Yes. Of course they did.
I could share war stories from my time in the trenches of the game stores... (and so could Koltar, I guess).

QuoteAnd that would diminish the merit WotC had in all this.
And therefore the Hasbro purchase would have been made on false assumptions.

Not necessarily.
Hasbro purchased WotC because they made heaps of money with the Pokemon licence. They couldn't care less whether this was because of the kids playing a game or merely collecting the cards.

It can be argued that WotC purchased the Pokemon licence on false assumptions.
Ryan Dancey told at a retailer seminar at Gen Con (1999?) that WotC had become aware of Pokemon because of a sales spike MTG had in Japan. WotC had done no special marketing during that period, so the increase in MTG sales was unexplicable. Research of the situation hinted at another game acting as a gateway product: Pokemon.
WotC acquired the Pokemon licence because they wanted to repeat this in the US. Little did they know that Pokemon would become an order of magnitude bigger than Magic. And with a success like that, why should WotC whine that the kids don't "get" the 'game' part of 'trading card game' ?

In the end, I do believe that WotC got its way nonetheless. Pokemon familiarised kindergarten kids with the concept of collectable cards and games, and Magic is reaping the profits of that to this day.
Heck, even Pokemon itself is having a comeback right now!

My nephews want Pokeman cards for Christmas. They don't play - they just like to collect, show off, and trade the cards.

Quote from: SettembriniHey, could you elucidate on Pokemon a bit more?
I missed it due to age, but it must have been a great game, no?
Kids aren´t stupid, they play what´s fun.

Well... it worked like wounding weapons or the quoted description for poisons. You'd just take a point (or I guess ten points because Pokemon had stuff in multiples of ten) every round. It was like this for both the card game and the video game, and it worked great for both (in the case of a card game you just put one of the little counters on the card every time your turn came around, and in the game... computer keeps track of it for you).

Anyway, I say it worked great for the card game but would be a poor fit for DnD because in the card game it was easier to keep track of. I mean... it was one on one fights every single time, and all you had to remember was "It's my turn, I take damage." In Dungeons and Dragons, it wouldn't work that way. This is both because of the number of combatants and the way hit points work.

And as others have said, most kids probably only collected the cards. I have a vague memory of being bothered by the way mana/energy worked in the game, though I can't recall why.

Quote from: Christmas ApeSee my "three sessions of asking how to roll basic shit and you're out" rule. You can pick up the base mechanics of a game in eight hours if you're expending at least the mental energy God gave the shovel.

I would have to kick out all of my players if I followed that advice.