• Ever thought it'd be cool to have your art, writing, or challenge runs featured on PokéCommunity? Click here for info - we'd love to spotlight your work!
  • Welcome to PokéCommunity! Register now and join one of the best fan communities on the 'net to talk Pokémon and more! We are not affiliated with The Pokémon Company or Nintendo.
    Register

Should the Trainer be involved in battle?

SBaby

Dungeon Master
    • 2,005
    Posts
    20
    Years
    • Seen Apr 9, 2015
    So far in all the Pokemon games, all the Trainer does is use items, give commands, and send out Pokemon/Capture them. I think they should be as much of a target as the Pokemon are, especially when fighting wild Pokemon. I also think they should be able to fight in battles too. It would make things more interesting (They could have their own stats and levels too). What do you all think?
     
    I think that's a great idea! And it would test the loyalty of a pokemon to protect his/her trainer form harm. Like for pokemon that you don't treat well won't protect you. Or your most trusted would. Or the trainer diving in to protect his/her pokemon. Yes. very interesting.....
     
    The trainers in the game are you. If you were in the world of Pokemon and had to fight other trainers, how would yoiu feel?

    Besides, if you were doing so it would be personal. That wouldn't be Pokemon. That would be inhumane. =X

    Personal human to human fighting is also down on earth. This is called as idiotic and immature. Now: the trainer is the focus of battles. He trains the Pokemon to be the best. He is also acknowledged through this. He commands, he gives items, he does lots of things.

    S'far as I'm concerned about your "giving trainers the stats" theory, that wouldn't be based on battles. (Human fighting the POKeMON? Now wouln't NOA call back the games and ban Pokemon? Why? Because it's animal abuse.) Trainer experince would be based on age. Yearly.

    Your theory is unlikely to happen. v_v Common sense.
     
    The whole idea of having humans as battlers sia bit farfetched don't you think? The stats idea wouldn't work anyways, sicne humans aren't bits of data clustered together, but are made up of living (or dying... apoptosis is confusing). Also, humans battling against other Pokemon and even other humans? We're not primitive anymore. Humans don't battle for the sake of battling, it's just... inhumane.

    Bah... I hardly see the executives at Game Freak jumping with joy at this idea. -_-
     
    Asher said:
    The trainers in the game are you. If you were in the world of Pokemon and had to fight other trainers, how would yoiu feel?

    Besides, if you were doing so it would be personal. That wouldn't be Pokemon. That would be inhumane. =X

    Personal human to human fighting is also down on earth. This is called as idiotic and immature. Now: the trainer is the focus of battles. He trains the Pokemon to be the best. He is also acknowledged through this. He commands, he gives items, he does lots of things.

    S'far as I'm concerned about your "giving trainers the stats" theory, that wouldn't be based on battles. (Human fighting the POKeMON? Now wouln't NOA call back the games and ban Pokemon? Why? Because it's animal abuse.) Trainer experince would be based on age. Yearly.

    Your theory is unlikely to happen. v_v Common sense.
    Click to expand...


    As if it's really humane to actually have creatures fighting each other just for sport... Oh yeah. It's really mature... As for NOA, while they call back Pokemon, they should call back Baldur's Gate and Final Fantasy, since there's animal abuse in those too. My point, that wouldn't happen.

    Mr Cat Dog said:
    The whole idea of having humans as battlers sia bit farfetched don't you think? The stats idea wouldn't work anyways, sicne humans aren't bits of data clustered together, but are made up of living (or dying... apoptosis is confusing). Also, humans battling against other Pokemon and even other humans? We're not primitive anymore. Humans don't battle for the sake of battling, it's just... inhumane.

    Bah... I hardly see the executives at Game Freak jumping with joy at this idea. -_-
    Click to expand...

    Pokemon aren't bits of data. They are the animals in their world. What's your point? Besides, Trainers should become stronger like the Pokemon do anyway. Also, they might fight, or they might give commands. It still depends on the player. Humans also make Pokemon battle just for the sake of battling. So in their world, they just might be. Am I wrong?

    Think about it. Wouldn't wild Pokemon realistically actually try to attack the Trainer every once in awhile? Also, it would add a whole new level of gameplay; if the Trainer is KOd, you can't give the Pokemon commands, or bring out any more. Of course if you still win the battle, your Trainer comes back with 1 HP. I think it would at least be a little bit more realistic. The Trainer isn't invincible (which is a major Pokemon cliche).
     
    Last edited:
    The idea is weird, but just to let you know, in the Pokemon Special manga, trainers are somewhat involved in the battle. After a difficult battle, they come out panting... O_O
     
    Having trainers fight each other would certainly weed out physically inept trainers (like yours truly). But that would mean people like Mitsuru-kun would never have a chance to explore the world with Pokemon. In a way, that would make things better (and safer), but in a way, it would be terribly unfair, too. Because then Pokemon battling would become like some sports where no matter how smart or good of a strategist you are, the brawn will ultimately triumph over the brain.

    Oh well, less trainers = more children staying in school, right? Do they even have schools in the PokeWorld? They must, considering how many scientists there are...
     
    Who is this ... Mitsuru kun? And of course they have schools there. Probably advanced than ours. Or it depends on the person?

    SBaby said:
    As if it's really humane to actually have creatures fighting each other just for sport... Oh yeah. It's really mature... As for NOA, while they call back Pokemon, they should call back Baldur's Gate and Final Fantasy, since there's animal abuse in those too. My point, that wouldn't happen.
    Click to expand...

    I nver care for other games...
    ... what sport? Pokemon? C'mon. Pokemon fight for their trainer. Not because they have to. BECAUSE THEY WANT TO. ?_? Let's take Charmeleon and Charizard for example. Why DID he go off with Ash when while he was a Charmander, he LOVED Ash? Then hated him?
    Answer: Because he didn't want to. But he loved Ash after some several eppys because he knew Ash cared. The Pokemon games seemed to follow the anime, while actually, it's in reverse...

    The Ash in the game. Soon later, it became the almost same Ash in the anime.
    May? The games came at least a few months earlier than the season's anime.

    Unless you have something to do against what I said, I rest my case.
     
    Heh, no trainers shouldn't be involved in battles. What about battles with other trainers? Are they supposed to beat each other up while their Pokemon battle non strategically? And plus, who would want to take a hit from a massive blood thirsty Nidoking/Rhydon just for their Pokemon's loyalty? Not me, that's for sure. But the trainer could have a new feature to cheer on their Pokemon in battles to increase their loyalty and make them do better.
     
    ... battling and gaining levels without fainting does that... as well as vitamin giving...

    ... y'know, a human can never lost long in a battle against a Pokemon. If that ever happened, Pokemon would be violent and rated "M" instead of the usual 'E'...
     
    Yea u are right if the trainers fought the pokemon thjat would change the whole meaning of the games and t.v show about the stats maybe if it was like
    Smartness: and stuff like that
     
    ... battling and gaining levels without fainting does that... as well as vitamin giving...
    Click to expand...

    I know, but I ment like Final Fantasy wise or something.. XD. Like you cheer them on and they do better in the battle and then it stops taking effect when the battle ends. It's sort of hard to explain.. XD.
     
    Asher said:
    ... battling and gaining levels without fainting does that... as well as vitamin giving...

    ... y'know, a human can never lost long in a battle against a Pokemon. If that ever happened, Pokemon would be violent and rated "M" instead of the usual 'E'...
    Click to expand...

    Evidently, you've never played a real RPG... Most RPGs nowadays are rated "T".

    Just think about it. In real life, if these things actually took place, the Trainers would actually be as much at risk as the Pokemon are. Do you think Team Rocket would realistically just go after the Pokemon in a battle, when KOing a Trainer would turn the tide of a fight in their favor? I think the answer is as plain as day here.

    Plus, normal Trainer battles and Pokemon Contests would be run like they are now, just Pokemon against Pokemon. I am more talking about encounters in the wild and Team Rocket Battles. Not only that, but if they ever decide to throw in a really nasty villain and make his defeat the point of the game, the Trainer might actually have to step out of the sidelines with his 'Sword of Annihilation' and wipe the floor with the last boss.

    Example of why this works: Heroes of Might and Magic waited four Game Generations before letting your Heroes (Trainers) fight alongside your troops (Pokemon). Because they did this, it added a whole plateau of strategy and depth to the game. Attack the huge freaking creature, or the Hero?

    If this ever actually happens in Pokemon, I predict that it will add just as much interms of depth to the game. After all, it gets kind of boring using Pokemon as Bullet Shields all the time...
     
    SBaby said:
    Pokemon aren't bits of data. They are the animals in their world. What's your point? Besides, Trainers should become stronger like the Pokemon do anyway. Also, they might fight, or they might give commands. It still depends on the player. Humans also make Pokemon battle just for the sake of battling. So in their world, they just might be. Am I wrong?

    Think about it. Wouldn't wild Pokemon realistically actually try to attack the Trainer every once in awhile? Also, it would add a whole new level of gameplay; if the Trainer is KOd, you can't give the Pokemon commands, or bring out any more. Of course if you still win the battle, your Trainer comes back with 1 HP. I think it would at least be a little bit more realistic. The Trainer isn't invincible (which is a major Pokemon cliche).
    Click to expand...

    Whilst I completely agree with you that the trainer would have been in just as much danger as the Pokemon, I'd hardly expect anyone to go up to even a Rattata and try and punch it. If the trainer would be killed (heaven forbid XD), then your effects would come into place, but if the trainer didn't die - then they wouldn't have HP, since a human's health cannot be measured with a numbered scale.
     
    If trainers get attacked directly in the show, they can be attacked in the games. Well maybe. The developers would have to come up with some new wild concept to get the trainers involved. Maybe give them the ability to transform into Pokemon themselves like Bill the lighthouse scientist. Then they could battle with rules similiar to the duels in that one Virtual World saga of Yugioh; where an alternative to winning other than knocking out all six pokemon is to knock out the trainer/pokemon itself by using special 'trampling' attacks. This kind of concept wouldn't necessarily have to be implemented in the main series of Pokemon games, more like a spinoff of pokemon games. Ah, wishful thinking...
     
    I like the idea... It would make it much more personal... And that girl that said it revolved around the trainer is wrong.. Have you ever had one gym badge and was traded a Pokemon above your level? It didn't listen to you, right? Only their loyalty will help you in battles. Why do you think they came out with Return and Frustration? The more they like you, the better Return will work. I do think the trainer should be able to show the Pokemon he really likes it, other than just commanding it to battle...Which is why they should have kept all the groomers from Gold and Silver. I understand that in the new ones there are Pokeblocks, and your rival's sister will groom them, but there should be other places for that too (as in Gold and Silver) and there should be other ways for the trainer to show their affection to the Pokemon and built up their loyalty and friendships in that way. I mean, Ash does all that stuff in the tv show, right? He fights for his Pokemon, and they love he because of it. The games should hold the same depth!
     
    u guys changed my mind I like that idea and don't trainers do enough in the Safari Zone and Contests and so on
     
    ummm, trainers be a target... hmm, very weird idea. I would have to disagree with this one... it should be species vs species, but thats just my opinion...
     
    Pokemon isn't a real RPG... 4% is my view of how much RPG it contains. the other 96% is strategy. Purely. A game is a game. And the rated 'T' games are dumb. Unrealistic and aren't entertaining.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top