Skip to content

Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald #1457

Closed
Closed
Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald#1457

Description

@notblisy
notblisy
opened on Mar 26, 2026

In Emerald and FRLG, the API currently reports these Pokemon as available to capture in Altering Cave:

  • Aipom
  • Houndour
  • Mareep
  • Pineco
  • Shuckle
  • Smeargle
  • Stantler
  • Teddiursa
  • Zubat

However, only Zubat is ever in this location in both games.

This is because in the games code, there was a planned event distribution that would change which Pokemon can appear. See Pret: PokeFirered

It is functional, being that I could change the value to get these Pokemon to spawn, but only with glitches or hacks to change the value in VAR_ALTERING_CAVE_WILD_SET.

I would think presenting this data as true doesn't make sense considering the events were never available, so all except zubat should be removed. Thoughts?

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions

      , 'i'); if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) { // Add copy buttons to all 
       blocks
(function() {
function addCopyButtons() {
document.querySelectorAll('pre code').forEach(function(codeBlock) {
if (codeBlock.parentElement.hasAttribute('data-copy-added')) return;
codeBlock.parentElement.setAttribute('data-copy-added', 'true');
var btn = document.createElement('button');
btn.textContent = 'Copy';
btn.style.cssText = 'position:absolute;top:4px;right:4px;padding:2px 8px;font-size:11px;background:#4ecdc4;border:none;border-radius:4px;color:#1a1a2e;cursor:pointer;opacity:0.7;transition:opacity 0.2s;';
btn.onmouseover = function() { this.style.opacity = '1'; };
btn.onmouseout = function() { this.style.opacity = '0.7'; };
btn.onclick = function() {
navigator.clipboard.writeText(codeBlock.textContent).then(function() {
btn.textContent = 'Copied!';
setTimeout(function() { btn.textContent = 'Copy'; }, 1500);
});
};
codeBlock.parentElement.style.position = 'relative';
codeBlock.parentElement.appendChild(btn);
});
}
addCopyButtons();
// Re-run on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(addCopyButtons);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Add Copy Buttons to Code Blocks]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "github.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "github\\.com" + '
Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald · Issue #1457 · PokeAPI/pokeapi · GitHub
      Skip to content
      Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald #1457
      Closed
      Closed
      Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald#1457
      Description
      @notblisy
      notblisy
      opened on Mar 26, 2026
      In Emerald and FRLG, the API currently reports these Pokemon as available to capture in Altering Cave:
      • Aipom
      • Houndour
      • Mareep
      • Pineco
      • Shuckle
      • Smeargle
      • Stantler
      • Teddiursa
      • Zubat
      However, only Zubat is ever in this location in both games.
      This is because in the games code, there was a planned event distribution that would change which Pokemon can appear. See Pret: PokeFirered
      It is functional, being that I could change the value to get these Pokemon to spawn, but only with glitches or hacks to change the value in VAR_ALTERING_CAVE_WILD_SET.
      I would think presenting this data as true doesn't make sense considering the events were never available, so all except zubat should be removed. Thoughts?
      Metadata
      Metadata
      Assignees
      No one assigned
        Labels
        No labels
        No labels
        Type
        No type
        Projects
        No projects
          Milestone
          No milestone
          Relationships
          None yet
          Development
          No branches or pull requests
          Issue actions
          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Force GitHub README to respect dark mode
(function() {
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '
.markdown-body {
color-scheme: dark light;
}
.markdown-body pre { background: #161b22 !important; }
.markdown-body code { background: rgba(110, 118, 129, 0.4) !important; }
.markdown-body table th, .markdown-body table td { border-color: #30363d !important; }
.markdown-body img { background: #0d1117; }
.markdown-body blockquote { border-left-color: #8b949e; }
.markdown-body hr { border-color: #30363d; }
';
document.head.appendChild(style);
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:GitHub Dark Mode README Fix]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald · Issue #1457 · PokeAPI/pokeapi · GitHub
          Skip to content
          Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald #1457
          Closed
          Closed
          Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald#1457
          Description
          @notblisy
          notblisy
          opened on Mar 26, 2026
          In Emerald and FRLG, the API currently reports these Pokemon as available to capture in Altering Cave:
          • Aipom
          • Houndour
          • Mareep
          • Pineco
          • Shuckle
          • Smeargle
          • Stantler
          • Teddiursa
          • Zubat
          However, only Zubat is ever in this location in both games.
          This is because in the games code, there was a planned event distribution that would change which Pokemon can appear. See Pret: PokeFirered
          It is functional, being that I could change the value to get these Pokemon to spawn, but only with glitches or hacks to change the value in VAR_ALTERING_CAVE_WILD_SET.
          I would think presenting this data as true doesn't make sense considering the events were never available, so all except zubat should be removed. Thoughts?
          Metadata
          Metadata
          Assignees
          No one assigned
            Labels
            No labels
            No labels
            Type
            No type
            Projects
            No projects
              Milestone
              No milestone
              Relationships
              None yet
              Development
              No branches or pull requests
              Issue actions
              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Highlight search terms from Google/DuckDuckGo/Bing referrer
(function() {
var ref = document.referrer;
var terms = [];
if (ref.includes('google.com') || ref.includes('duckduckgo.com') || ref.includes('bing.com')) {
var url = new URL(ref);
var q = url.searchParams.get('q') || url.searchParams.get('p');
if (q) {
terms = q.split(/\s+/).filter(function(t) { return t.length > 2; });
}
}
if (terms.length === 0) return;
var style = document.createElement('style');
style.textContent = '.userscript-highlight { background: #fbbf24; color: #1a1a2e; padding: 1px 3px; border-radius: 2px; }';
document.head.appendChild(style);
function highlight(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 3) { // text node
var text = node.textContent;
var found = false;
terms.forEach(function(term) {
var regex = new RegExp('(' + term.replace(/[.*+?^${}()|[\]\\]/g, '\\') + ')', 'gi');
if (regex.test(text)) {
found = true;
var frag = document.createDocumentFragment();
var parts = text.split(regex);
parts.forEach(function(part, i) {
if (i % 2 === 0) {
frag.appendChild(document.createTextNode(part));
} else {
var span = document.createElement('span');
span.className = 'userscript-highlight';
span.textContent = part;
frag.appendChild(span);
}
});
node.parentNode.replaceChild(frag, node);
}
});
} else if (node.nodeType === 1 && node.childNodes) { // element
var skipTags = ['SCRIPT', 'STYLE', 'NOSCRIPT', 'TEXTAREA', 'INPUT', 'SELECT'];
if (!skipTags.includes(node.tagName)) {
Array.from(node.childNodes).forEach(highlight);
}
}
}
highlight(document.body);
// Re-highlight on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1 || node.nodeType === 3) highlight(node);
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Highlight Search Terms]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald · Issue #1457 · PokeAPI/pokeapi · GitHub
              Skip to content
              Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald #1457
              Closed
              Closed
              Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald#1457
              Description
              @notblisy
              notblisy
              opened on Mar 26, 2026
              In Emerald and FRLG, the API currently reports these Pokemon as available to capture in Altering Cave:
              • Aipom
              • Houndour
              • Mareep
              • Pineco
              • Shuckle
              • Smeargle
              • Stantler
              • Teddiursa
              • Zubat
              However, only Zubat is ever in this location in both games.
              This is because in the games code, there was a planned event distribution that would change which Pokemon can appear. See Pret: PokeFirered
              It is functional, being that I could change the value to get these Pokemon to spawn, but only with glitches or hacks to change the value in VAR_ALTERING_CAVE_WILD_SET.
              I would think presenting this data as true doesn't make sense considering the events were never available, so all except zubat should be removed. Thoughts?
              Metadata
              Metadata
              Assignees
              No one assigned
                Labels
                No labels
                No labels
                Type
                No type
                Projects
                No projects
                  Milestone
                  No milestone
                  Relationships
                  None yet
                  Development
                  No branches or pull requests
                  Issue actions
                  
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Strip utm_, fbclid, gclid, etc. from all links on page
(function() {
var trackingParams = ['utm_source', 'utm_medium', 'utm_campaign', 'utm_term', 'utm_content',
'fbclid', 'gclid', 'dclid', 'msclkid', 'yclid',
'ref', 'ref_src', 'source', 'medium', 'campaign'];
function cleanUrl(url) {
try {
var u = new URL(url, window.location.origin);
var changed = false;
trackingParams.forEach(function(p) {
if (u.searchParams.has(p)) {
u.searchParams.delete(p);
changed = true;
}
});
return changed ? u.toString() : url;
} catch (e) {
return url;
}
}
function cleanLinks() {
document.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
cleanLinks();
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
mutations.forEach(function(m) {
m.addedNodes.forEach(function(node) {
if (node.nodeType === 1) {
if (node.tagName === 'A') cleanLinks();
node.querySelectorAll('a[href]').forEach(function(a) {
var clean = cleanUrl(a.href);
if (clean !== a.href) a.href = clean;
});
}
});
});
});
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Remove Tracking Parameters from Links]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "youtube.com";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + "youtube\\.com" + '
Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald · Issue #1457 · PokeAPI/pokeapi · GitHub
                  Skip to content
                  Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald #1457
                  Closed
                  Closed
                  Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald#1457
                  Description
                  @notblisy
                  notblisy
                  opened on Mar 26, 2026
                  In Emerald and FRLG, the API currently reports these Pokemon as available to capture in Altering Cave:
                  • Aipom
                  • Houndour
                  • Mareep
                  • Pineco
                  • Shuckle
                  • Smeargle
                  • Stantler
                  • Teddiursa
                  • Zubat
                  However, only Zubat is ever in this location in both games.
                  This is because in the games code, there was a planned event distribution that would change which Pokemon can appear. See Pret: PokeFirered
                  It is functional, being that I could change the value to get these Pokemon to spawn, but only with glitches or hacks to change the value in VAR_ALTERING_CAVE_WILD_SET.
                  I would think presenting this data as true doesn't make sense considering the events were never available, so all except zubat should be removed. Thoughts?
                  Metadata
                  Metadata
                  Assignees
                  No one assigned
                    Labels
                    No labels
                    No labels
                    Type
                    No type
                    Projects
                    No projects
                      Milestone
                      No milestone
                      Relationships
                      None yet
                      Development
                      No branches or pull requests
                      Issue actions
                      
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Auto-enable theater mode on YouTube
(function() {
function tryTheater() {
var btn = document.querySelector('button[aria-label="Theater mode"], ytd-player #player button[title="Theater mode"]');
if (btn && !btn.classList.contains('activated')) {
btn.click();
}
}
// Try immediately
tryTheater();
// Try after navigation (SPA)
var lastUrl = location.href;
setInterval(function() {
if (location.href !== lastUrl) {
lastUrl = location.href;
setTimeout(tryTheater, 500);
}
}, 1000);
// Also try on player load
var observer = new MutationObserver(tryTheater);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:YouTube Theater Mode Default]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald · Issue #1457 · PokeAPI/pokeapi · GitHub
                      Skip to content
                      Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald #1457
                      Closed
                      Closed
                      Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald#1457
                      Description
                      @notblisy
                      notblisy
                      opened on Mar 26, 2026
                      In Emerald and FRLG, the API currently reports these Pokemon as available to capture in Altering Cave:
                      • Aipom
                      • Houndour
                      • Mareep
                      • Pineco
                      • Shuckle
                      • Smeargle
                      • Stantler
                      • Teddiursa
                      • Zubat
                      However, only Zubat is ever in this location in both games.
                      This is because in the games code, there was a planned event distribution that would change which Pokemon can appear. See Pret: PokeFirered
                      It is functional, being that I could change the value to get these Pokemon to spawn, but only with glitches or hacks to change the value in VAR_ALTERING_CAVE_WILD_SET.
                      I would think presenting this data as true doesn't make sense considering the events were never available, so all except zubat should be removed. Thoughts?
                      Metadata
                      Metadata
                      Assignees
                      No one assigned
                        Labels
                        No labels
                        No labels
                        Type
                        No type
                        Projects
                        No projects
                          Milestone
                          No milestone
                          Relationships
                          None yet
                          Development
                          No branches or pull requests
                          Issue actions
                          
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Remove or un-stick sticky/fixed headers that block content
(function() {
function unstick() {
document.querySelectorAll('header, nav, [role="banner"], .header, .navbar, .sticky, .fixed-top, [style*="position: fixed"], [style*="position:sticky"]').forEach(function(el) {
if (el.style.position === 'fixed' || el.style.position === 'sticky' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'fixed' || getComputedStyle(el).position === 'sticky') {
el.style.position = 'static';
el.style.top = 'auto';
el.style.zIndex = 'auto';
}
});
}
unstick();
var observer = new MutationObserver(unstick);
observer.observe(document.body, { childList: true, subtree: true, attributes: true, attributeFilter: ['style', 'class'] });
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Kill Sticky Headers]', __e); }
})();
(function(){
try {
var __m = "*";
var __re = new RegExp('^' + ".*" + '
Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald · Issue #1457 · PokeAPI/pokeapi · GitHub
                          Skip to content
                          Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald #1457
                          Closed
                          Closed
                          Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald#1457
                          Description
                          @notblisy
                          notblisy
                          opened on Mar 26, 2026
                          In Emerald and FRLG, the API currently reports these Pokemon as available to capture in Altering Cave:
                          • Aipom
                          • Houndour
                          • Mareep
                          • Pineco
                          • Shuckle
                          • Smeargle
                          • Stantler
                          • Teddiursa
                          • Zubat
                          However, only Zubat is ever in this location in both games.
                          This is because in the games code, there was a planned event distribution that would change which Pokemon can appear. See Pret: PokeFirered
                          It is functional, being that I could change the value to get these Pokemon to spawn, but only with glitches or hacks to change the value in VAR_ALTERING_CAVE_WILD_SET.
                          I would think presenting this data as true doesn't make sense considering the events were never available, so all except zubat should be removed. Thoughts?
                          Metadata
                          Metadata
                          Assignees
                          No one assigned
                            Labels
                            No labels
                            No labels
                            Type
                            No type
                            Projects
                            No projects
                              Milestone
                              No milestone
                              Relationships
                              None yet
                              Development
                              No branches or pull requests
                              Issue actions
                              
, 'i');
if (__m === '*' || __re.test(location.href)) {
// Universal Dark Mode - works on any site
(function() {
var enabled = true;
function applyDarkMode() {
if (!enabled) return;
// Create style element if it doesn't exist
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (!style) {
style = document.createElement('style');
style.id = 'universal-dark-mode-style';
document.head.appendChild(style);
}
// Dark mode CSS - inverts colors but preserves images/video
style.textContent = '
/* Invert everything except media */
html {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #1a1a2e !important;
}
/* Restore images, videos, iframes, canvas */
img, video, iframe, canvas, svg, picture, [style*="background-image"] {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
}
/* Preserve specific elements that should not be inverted */
.no-dark-mode, .no-dark-mode *,
[data-theme="light"], [data-theme="light"],
.ace_editor, .ace_editor *,
.CodeMirror, .CodeMirror *,
.monaco-editor, .monaco-editor *,
.markdown-body pre, .markdown-body pre *,
.highlight, .highlight *,
pre code, pre code * {
filter: none !important;
}
/* Fix common UI elements */
.modal, .popup, .dropdown-menu, .tooltip, .popover {
filter: invert(1) hue-rotate(180deg) !important;
background: #2d2d44 !important;
border-color: #444 !important;
}
/* Scrollbars */
::-webkit-scrollbar { background: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb { background: #444 !important; }
::-webkit-scrollbar-thumb:hover { background: #555 !important; }
/* Selection */
::selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
::-moz-selection { background: #4ecdc4 !important; color: #1a1a2e !important; }
';
}
function removeDarkMode() {
var style = document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style');
if (style) style.remove();
}
// Toggle with Alt+Shift+D
document.addEventListener('keydown', function(e) {
if (e.altKey && e.shiftKey && e.key === 'D') {
e.preventDefault();
enabled = !enabled;
if (enabled) {
applyDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Enabled');
} else {
removeDarkMode();
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Disabled');
}
}
});
// Apply on load
applyDarkMode();
// Re-apply on dynamic content
var observer = new MutationObserver(function(mutations) {
if (enabled && !document.getElementById('universal-dark-mode-style')) {
applyDarkMode();
}
});
observer.observe(document.head, { childList: true });
console.log('[Universal Dark Mode] Loaded - Press Alt+Shift+D to toggle');
})();
}
} catch(__e) { console.warn('[Userscript:Universal Dark Mode]', __e); }
})();
})();
Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald · Issue #1457 · PokeAPI/pokeapi · GitHub
                              Skip to content
                              Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald #1457
                              Closed
                              Closed
                              Question: Should altering cave encounters be removed from FRLG/Emerald#1457
                              Description
                              @notblisy
                              notblisy
                              opened on Mar 26, 2026
                              In Emerald and FRLG, the API currently reports these Pokemon as available to capture in Altering Cave:
                              • Aipom
                              • Houndour
                              • Mareep
                              • Pineco
                              • Shuckle
                              • Smeargle
                              • Stantler
                              • Teddiursa
                              • Zubat
                              However, only Zubat is ever in this location in both games.
                              This is because in the games code, there was a planned event distribution that would change which Pokemon can appear. See Pret: PokeFirered
                              It is functional, being that I could change the value to get these Pokemon to spawn, but only with glitches or hacks to change the value in VAR_ALTERING_CAVE_WILD_SET.
                              I would think presenting this data as true doesn't make sense considering the events were never available, so all except zubat should be removed. Thoughts?
                              Metadata
                              Metadata
                              Assignees
                              No one assigned
                                Labels
                                No labels
                                No labels
                                Type
                                No type
                                Projects
                                No projects
                                  Milestone
                                  No milestone
                                  Relationships
                                  None yet
                                  Development
                                  No branches or pull requests
                                  Issue actions