If Pokemon could have another type, what would it be?

[Aviano]

The only reason gyarados wasn't part dragon in R/B/Y is because he'd be unstopable.

Hahaha. As if gamefreak cared about game balance back then. They made Psychic overpowered didn't they?

 

[Shiny Legendary Hunter]

Fine, I won't add a third.
This thread is pointless then.

 

[Typhlosion_Hunter_Mark]

Get rid of Gyarados's flying type.

Add dark or dragon type (or both) at Sceptile.

 

[Affirmative]

Fine, I won't add a third.
This thread is pointless then.

What makes you say that?

Anyway...

Volbeat and Illumise should be part Electric (hence their names).

 

[awesomedude59]

Another thing. The fourth generation was shitty enough. I don't intend on ever buying D/P. They don't need another generation of crappy, ill-named, retarded looking Pokemon.

true that

but yah thats a sucky idea

 

[mangaeyes]

Serpent is a synonym for snake. Serpent in mythology.
Dragons

 

[Shiny Legendary Hunter]

What makes you say that?

Anyway...

Volbeat and Illumise should be part Electric (hence their names).

I say that because 90% of the people posting on this thread are bashing my ideas.

 

[Vycksta]

Get rid of Gyarados's flying type.

No. *smites with myth*

 

[PDL]

Hahaha. As if gamefreak cared about game balance back then. They made Psychic overpowered didn't they?

They did rectify it in Gold and Silver didn't they?

But yeah, they designed Gyarados to be super strong, but not ridiculously overpowered, hence it's typing.

Anyway, most of the ideas here suck.

 

[Mr. Mudkip]

Uh... camerupt rock fire ground. 6x weakness to the most common type XD

 

[Frozen_Lightning]

Charizard and Gyarodos should lose FLYING and gain DRAGON
Milotic should get either ICE/DRAGON
and there should be a GLASS and LIGHT type

 

[Big bang theology]

No. *smites with myth*

Hm, lemme ask you a few questions

First off, why is salamence dragon type? Its name is a combination of salamander+menace. A salamander=X=dragon. Salamanders are amphibians, and if anything it should be water type, so why dragon? Also, its under belly gives more of a turtlish look, so saying that it looks like a dragon wouldn't work that well either.

Also Garchomp. Its a landshark. So where the hell did dragon type come from? Its a shark living on the land, and sharks are fish, not dragons, but fish, so dragon type is a little misplaced isn't it?

.....Honestly I don't take this to seriously, I just want to see what your response is =)

 

[mangaeyes]

I say that because 90% of the people posting on this thread are bashing my ideas.

We aren't 'bashing' your ideas we are having our opinion. Did you really think a third type would go down well here?

Charizard and Gyarodos should lose FLYING and gain DRAGON
Milotic should get either ICE/DRAGON
and there should be a GLASS and LIGHT type

Oh my god. Lmao- glass type? No. If Nintendo/Gamefreak choose to add new types (which I doubt they will) it will be light and sound due to popular opinion.

 

[Azure Wolf]

Hm, lemme ask you a few questions

First off, why is salamence dragon type? Its name is a combination of salamander+menace. A salamander=X=dragon. Salamanders are amphibians, and if anything it should be water type, so why dragon? Also, its under belly gives more of a turtlish look, so saying that it looks like a dragon wouldn't work that well either.

Also Garchomp. Its a landshark. So where the hell did dragon type come from? Its a shark living on the land, and sharks are fish, not dragons, but fish, so dragon type is a little misplaced isn't it?

.....Honestly I don't take this to seriously, I just want to see what your response is =)

You honestly think 'dragon' means the Dragonite looking ones don't you? There are tonnes of different forms of dragons, Garchomp and Salamence have dragon features and/or are descendants. Another thing is that Salamanders are reptiles and so are dragons. Pokemon are supposed to be mixed up freaks anyway.

 

[Mumage]

I think instead of duel-typing, they should merge two types together for a designated pokemon into one.

For example: Heatran is a Fire/Steel type pokemon so that would mean in my case that it should be: Fire + Steel = Magma type.

So another example Water + Ice = Glacier type.

Maybe it sounds stupid, but it may be something Pokemon might come up with in the future.. XD

 

[Dark Arceus]

I think instead of duel-typing, they should merge two types together for a designated pokemon into one.

For example: Heatran is a Fire/Steel type pokemon so that would mean in my case that it should be: Fire + Steel = Magma type.

So another example Water + Ice = Glacier type.

Maybe it sounds stupid, but it may be something Pokemon might come up with in the future.. XD

I like the idea although surely it'd be more like Camerupt: Fire and Ground= Magma, or Tentacruel: Water+Poison=Sewage? Jk.

 

[Vycksta]

Hm, lemme ask you a few questions

First off, why is salamence dragon type? Its name is a combination of salamander+menace. A salamander=X=dragon. Salamanders are amphibians, and if anything it should be water type, so why dragon? Also, its under belly gives more of a turtlish look, so saying that it looks like a dragon wouldn't work that well either.

Also Garchomp. Its a landshark. So where the hell did dragon type come from? Its a shark living on the land, and sharks are fish, not dragons, but fish, so dragon type is a little misplaced isn't it?

.....Honestly I don't take this to seriously, I just want to see what your response is =)

Salamence was an error. The name should have been for Flygon and in turn, Flygon's name for Salamence. Your "argument" is void. Garchomp is not based on mythological circumstances, where things are not always how they appear.

Now let me bore and pwn the fuck out of you.

Gyarados's legend starts off with a weak and pathetic carp, which Magikarp is based on. This carp was desperate to prove his worth and did one day by somehow scaling a waterfall. This was watched by the Gods, who turned the carp into a flying serpent as a reward. Not a flying Dragon or even something dragonic. A flying serpent... which Gyarados is modelled on.

Voila. Now for the FAQ.

So where are Gyarados's Flying attacks?
ON YOUR HEAD. *eye roll* Actually, the reason behind Gyarados's lack of flying attacks is down to the myth again. The serpent somehow went insane and decided to destroy cities with his new found power, travelling under bodies of water as a way of being unnoticed by the Gods. He may have seldom used his flying powers, but he still had them. Hence the Water/Flying Gyarados and also hence why his movepool is full of moves like Hyper Beam instead.

But surely it can learn Aerial Ace?
Aerial Ace is actually modelled on a Japanese sword fighting techinque that involves speed and agility, not brute strength. This is why the likes of Sneasel and Dugtrio can learn the move and not Gyarados.

So how come Misdreavus can learn Aerial Ace when it shares the same base speed as Gyarados?
Cause Misdreavus was based on the banshee, screeching ghosts with a feminine appearance who were capable of holding and throwing items with no question. As Aerial Ace is modelled on the already mentioned techinque, which obviously requires a sword that needs to be held, Misdreavus is capable of learning Aerial Ace. The serpent which Gyarados was based on could not hold an item in any way.

But why does Gyarados look like a Dragon?
He crashed into a wall while blasting a Blaziken. *ends sarcasm* He may look like a Dragon to you, but to China and Japan serpents in mythological legends may have varied in appearance but were always legless. Gyarados has no legs, so he is a serpent to those two countries. Considering Japan is the country of Pokemon's origin...

So why is this Pokemon in the Dragon breeding group?
Why is Milotic, who is also a serpent?

How about we make Gyarados Water/Dragon with the Levitate ability so it sticks with the myth?
See the answer to the question two above this one.

Dammit! Why does this myth have to exist?
Cause like it or not, mythology is about even if you decide to ignore its existance. It's made Pokemon like Sneasel and Weavile, Drowzee and Hypno, Girafarig, Arceus and Misdreavus.

Besides, let's say that Gyarados was not based on this myth. If he was made into a Water/Dragon type, he would be the most overused Pokemon of the first generation... considering the only weakness of a Water/Dragon type is Dragon itself and the only Dragon move back then was the set 40 damage Dragon Rage. He would have been more broken than Charizard and we all know how much that Pokemon has a hatebase.

Will you ever quit being a mythology freak?
No, so ha.

... and the funny thing is. I never get tired of arguing about this. I also never get bored of people going OMG SHUT UP!!!!!11111111 cause it only makes me want to defend Gyarados more.

 

[Aviano]

They did rectify it in Gold and Silver didn't they?

RBY =/= GSC

Which is so painfully obivous you should be ashamed that I have to tell you this.

 

[PDL]

RBY =/= GSC

Which is so painfully obivous you should be ashamed that I have to tell you this.

Ashamed? Ashamed?!

Did it ever occur to you that it was accidental that the type was overpowered back then? they didn't really know the game was going to be that popular.

I don't appriciate the "holier then thou" attitude at all, so I ask you to get off your high horse.

 

[digitel_anime_fan]

Vycksta - Not that I disagree with most of your argument (That Gyarados is based off of a myth about a flying serpent, and thereby not a dragon), but you said one thing that bugged me:

If Dragon's must have legs, then Dratini/Dragonair can't possibly be dragons. And yet they are two of the very few pure dragon types.

Like I said, not disagreeing with the fact that Gyarados isn't a dragon...just that little bit.