1. We have moved to a new forum system. All your posts and data should have transferred over. Welcome, to the new Serebii Forums. Details here
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
    Dismiss Notice
  3. If you're still waiting for the e-mail, be sure to check your junk/spam e-mail folders
    Dismiss Notice

Do you think that some pokemon types are unnecessary?

Discussion in 'Poképolls' started by ThaVega, Jan 22, 2013.

?

Would you change typing chart?

  1. Yes

    34 vote(s)
    21.3%
  2. No

    126 vote(s)
    78.8%
  1. ThaVega

    ThaVega Born to be brave

    I don't know if anyone has thought about it, but I think that pokemon types could have been categorized much better. For instance, we have ground and rock type pokemon which are basically the same and maybe should have been one type. Also I don't get the fighting type pokemon. I mean, every pokemon belongs to kind of an element or certain quality which is affected by genes. Learning martial arts maybe shouldn't have been a type. I also think there shouldn't be ghost type, but ghost and dark type should be one type.

    Ever thought about different categorization of types and what are your ideas?
     
  2. Unredemption

    Unredemption Well-Known Member

    I don't think Rock and Ground types are exactly the same, though they may be similar. Rock type attacks usually involve active use of boulders and the like (Stone Edge, Rock Slide, etc.), while Ground type attacks merely involve the ground in some way (Earthquake, Dig, etc.).

    As for Fighting type - do you think a normal human being would be as proficient as a black belt in martial arts? Of course not. In the same logic, while Pokemon are able to harness physical power (Physical moves), they are unable to do so specifically in the way of martial arts. With regards to genes, I could also argue that the genes would provide certain Pokemon with more muscles and physical prowess. Hence, Machoke would obviously be more "buff" than Mr. Mime and hence could utilise Fighting moves more effectively.

    I also beg to differ that Ghost and Dark are the same. Ghosts are, well, dead beings that come back to life. Darkness, on the other hand, is the lack of light or possibly "evil" or even "dark energy". Not all ghosts are evil and dark, and certainly not all evil things are ghosts.

    Going by your logic, I could also group Water and Ice under the same type - after all, Ice IS Water in solid form.

    Just my ten cents.
     
  3. Nyarlathotep

    Nyarlathotep Eldritch Abomination

    No, I don't.

    Ghost is totally different from Dark. Rock and Ground are far from being the same, etc.
     
  4. carboncopy

    carboncopy (-) (-) (-) (-)

    These types may sound different, but, they have gone different directions in the game and they have very different types. We need all these types.
     
  5. Raiin

    Raiin Johto Boy

    No, Rock and ground have to completely different uses. Try hitting Charizard with a EQ... Then try hitting him with a stone edge... Big difference. Fighting types are one of my favorites and I really can't see where your coming from. Ghost types resist to fighting and Dark types are weak to it. Plus the different moves. not every type has to be wildly different from one another.
     
  6. Ditto B1tch

    Ditto B1tch Well-Known Member

    No, all the types have their role. Even that some of them have similar resistances and advantages, that doesn't make they become unnecessary.

    I think the opposite. In the large universe of Pokemons it should exist much more types than 17. Though I don't wanna any new type to be introduced, here are some I have already imagined:

    light type
    spacial type
    crystal type
    love type
    arachnid type
    mystic type
    robot type
    bird type
    dino type
    mud type

    Whist it may make sense in Pokemon universe, in-game it should be too complicated adpating to new types, so I like the current type chart and prefer it stays that way.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2013
  7. Sealotic

    Sealotic Well-Known Member

    light type - Normal/Psychic
    spacial type - Reminds me of Spacial rend
    crystal type - Steel
    love type - Normal, because of Charm, Attract etc.
    arachnid type - Bug
    mystic type - ...
    robot type - Steel/Electric
    bird type - Flying type
    dino type - Ground ?
    mud type - Ground, yeah.

    Like you, I don't want any type to be add. The one you imagined are too much similar to what we already have and some of them are species, not types.
     
  8. Nyarlathotep

    Nyarlathotep Eldritch Abomination

    No, it shouldn't. We don't even know how large the Pokémon is to begin with.
    By the way:

    Light = Psychic.
    Spacial = It could work, but it is not needed.
    Crystal = Rock. Say hi to Gigalith.
    Arachnid = Bug. It doesn't matter if arachnids aren't bugs in real life, in the Pokéverse they are all the same.
    Mystic = Psychic + Ghost.
    Robot = Steel.
    Bird = Flying.
    Mud = Ground.

    Love... Seriously, wtf?
    Dino... Again, seriously, wtf?
     
  9. Ditto B1tch

    Ditto B1tch Well-Known Member

    I was quite clear when I said that I just imagined then occasionally and that I don't wanna any new type to be introduced. Below is how I imagined each of them in my mind:

    light type - dark counterpart. Super effective on dark and weak to dark in the meantime (like ghosts and dragons). It could be the type of many Pokemons associated with purity and goodness.

    spacial type - first or secondary type of many Pokemons from space (Jirachi, Deoxys, for example). Or alien type...

    crystal type - share similaires with ice and rock type. (Cryogonal as ice/crystal or purely crystal type, Gigalith as rock/crystal type).

    love type - could be the type of many Pokemons associated with love (Luvdisc as water/love), sensuality (Jinx as Ice/Love type) or happiness (Chansey's line).

    arachnid type - For instance, Ariados, Spinarak, Skorupi would become arachnic/poison type. Arachnid is super effective on bug, as arachnids eat bugs. Galvantula/Joltik would become Arachnid/Electric

    mystic type - exclusive to Unown. Totally neutral (no weakness, no resistances, no imunnities and causes normal damage against all the other type). Then Unown wouldn't worry to cover weakness, as currently it cannot cover its weakness to dark, ghost and bug foes. It could be also the type of Arceus, a God normally wouldn't have any weakness (being normal type gives him disadvantage to fighting type).

    robot type - for Pokemons that are in fact robot (Metagross) or artificial (Porygon).

    bird type - bird for every pokemon that is really a bird, and flying for the ones that can fly. Then, Pidgeotto was going to be Bird/Flying and Doduo purely bird type.

    dino type - maybe this was indeed unnecessary. It could be a secondary type for fossils instead rock type. Humm, it could be renamed as fossil type.

    mud type - Pokemons that are related to both land and aquatic enviroments. Share similarities with ground and water type.

    Hey guys, don't take this list so seriously. I just imagined them at an early age, like many of you have already imagined several things. I just shared that with you for entertainment. The series doesn't need new types.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2013
  10. ven?

    ven? Kanto Region Champ

    I don't think we have enough types.
     
  11. OrcaCity

    OrcaCity Expert Killer Whale

    I don't think any types need to be removed. I'm always open to introducing new types, though. I don't have anything in mind, nor am I advocating it, but I just wouldn't have a problem.
     
  12. ParaChomp

    ParaChomp be your own guru

    If you present me with a good handful of types then to an extent, yes. Just look at Fire Emblem: sword, axe, spear; each resisting the one that are weak to their attacks.
     
  13. Mefista

    Mefista I hate fujoshi

    The only type I consider obsolete is Ice, so in my pokeverse it's a "pseudotype"
    , like made-up by me Love (pretty much a yiff joke type...),Pain (Hell guardians-special pokemon,catcheable in one place where Hellgates are located) and Cluster (one of those "cosmic" types,consist of creatures that weren't pokemon in the beginning and all are marked by certain stars)
    {/UNNESESSARY INFO}
     
  14. IndigoAir

    IndigoAir Myth Hunter

    Eh. I kind of do dislike that rock/ground are two separate types. Yes one is useless against flying and one is super effective (and I think ice is good against rock and weak to ground or vise versa) but I think for them to have made that distinction in the first place is silly.

    Also why is there a bug type. (This has probably been addressed by someone already but I don't have time to read the whole topic at present). There's no bird type (no, NOT flying because no all flying Pokemon are birds) there's no mammal type, no fish type. There is a grass type though, but I think that makes much more sense (I have my reasons, I just can't really explain it). Though I think it should have been called "plant" not grass. The only one I can think of that resembles actual grass is Oddish's leaves. But obviously Oddish itself is more like a radish or something. But I digress.

    Edit: Oh, and dragon types too. Yeah, they're wicked but.. half them aren't even dragons. So it's not a literal type. And from an elemental perspective I just have no idea what it's supposed to be at all.
     
  15. Raiin

    Raiin Johto Boy


    I think you are taking the typings way to literal. I mean take flying type for example. It includes birds, as well as bats, some dragons, some bugs, among others, so we don't really need a bird type. It's just the way things are categorized with out making it to complex. I like the types how they are.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2013
  16. Jaguartail

    Jaguartail Well-Known Member

    I'm not the happiest with the matchups (normal moves should be super effective against a couple types, for instance.), the number of types is fine.
     
  17. I'm perfectly fine with the types we have already, and I don't think they need to add any on. Especially a Light type, I swear I will hurt someone if they make a Light type. WE DON'T NEED A LIGHT TYPE. WE HAVE PSYCHIC TYPE FOR THAT.
     
    Last edited: Jan 22, 2013
  18. Plus side down side

    Plus side down side Lass Trainer

    I agree! The type chart is really good right now, and if anything, we should beef up the types that need it instead of neglecting them just to add a new type.
     
  19. Lucario95

    Lucario95 Behold The Aura!

    The types have been so good, we don't need something new, It had working well, I wouldn't mess up.
     
  20. penguinofhonor

    penguinofhonor Bay Watcher

    I wouldn't change it now, but if Pokemon started over completely from scratch then they could probably remove a couple types. Ice, Ghost, and Rock would probably be the easiest.

    The bug type could probably be next. It works differently than all the other types. We don't have a dog type that Arcanine, Mightyena, and Houndour are, so why do all the bugs get a type?
     

Share This Page