>>57500228>>57494086I've been revising my writing process, actually. I use a modified system where each Pokemon has max EVs and each Nature boost (because let's be honest, both of those things are only limited for gameplay reasons), and I use the damage calculator that way. I then add up the damage for each attack based on low rolls. When the Pokemon reaches a point that it cannot possibly survive an attack, I will have it faint, except in rare "toughed it out" plot armor moments where I need to keep a Pokemon alive. I have a vague sense of where I want to go with each battle I write, so really I just have to make the math fit the narrative. No calculations are ever shown in writing and mentions of stats are sparse so as to prevent it from feeling too LITRPGish.
The issue is that I am starting to lose faith in this system because reviewing my damage calculations sheets makes me realize that the way that I write battles would be statistically improbable as everyone is consistently getting low rolls. As much as I hate to admit it, it looks like in order to create the most believable fights, I am going to have to start doing some hard math. I am currently reviewing Black Blaze's battle sequence to see if I can make it more believable while still keeping the outline of what I had planned for it. Some options available to me are
>Alternate between the lowest and highest rolls for each attack so that it kind of averages out in a layman's sense (easiest option, but not the most mathematically accurate)>Only ever use the actual average roll, which would essentially remove "rolls" entirely and just make it singular fixed damage numbers for attacks (this would be a pain in the ass as while it's basic division it would be tedious to do this for every single attack)>Going hardcore game mechanics and just using RNG to determine damage output, and try to make my writing fit that (Not ideal)>Just do what I'm doing now and hope nobody feels like the battles are dragged out 