Teal said:
The TCG only has about half as many types as the games, so it's less overwhelming.
XY What new Types would you like to see in X and Y?
- Thread starter LostVoice
- Start date
The TCG only has about half as many types as the games, so it's less overwhelming.
Not at all. The TCG doesn't work with too many types. Also, percentually the impact is twice as big because there are only half as many TCG types. (One type is more % of the whole.)Bolt the Cat said:
The point was that the TCG introduced a new type too, after not introducing any new types after Dark/Steel. It sure was unexpected!
If GF wants to add a new type they can, it doesn't really matter if we think the type chart is balanced, if they want to add a new type, they will. I personally think a new type(s) would be really cool and will shake things up to a great extent.
The existing types already cover all possible bases.
The popular suggestion of robotic or electronic can already be expressed with combinations of electric, psychic and steel.
Heroic, angelic or "good" is already done just fine by other psychic types, fighting, normal, even potentially ghost (Shedinja's angel-like design, for instance)
Adding any more animal based types, like "reptile" or "fish," is just splitting hairs, there's no logical reason for it.
Geological types already cover prehistoric and archeological pokemon, with the addition of psychic for ancient mystical themes, and there's no real reason "being really old" would be a type.
Typeless might be interesting, with no strengths or weaknesses at all, though normal is close enough to that already. If they wanted to make ??? an official type I suppose they could call it Negative.
A lot of people want "zombie," which admittedly is a theme completely different from ghosts, but there's still no strong reason for zombie-like beings not to just be ghost/poison/dark combinations; parasect is already "undead," being based on fungi that kill and control insects. Garbodor is also a mass of rotten, nonliving material moving around.
Again, any combo of up to two types covers any concept you can think of perfectly.
The popular suggestion of robotic or electronic can already be expressed with combinations of electric, psychic and steel.
Heroic, angelic or "good" is already done just fine by other psychic types, fighting, normal, even potentially ghost (Shedinja's angel-like design, for instance)
Adding any more animal based types, like "reptile" or "fish," is just splitting hairs, there's no logical reason for it.
Geological types already cover prehistoric and archeological pokemon, with the addition of psychic for ancient mystical themes, and there's no real reason "being really old" would be a type.
Typeless might be interesting, with no strengths or weaknesses at all, though normal is close enough to that already. If they wanted to make ??? an official type I suppose they could call it Negative.
A lot of people want "zombie," which admittedly is a theme completely different from ghosts, but there's still no strong reason for zombie-like beings not to just be ghost/poison/dark combinations; parasect is already "undead," being based on fungi that kill and control insects. Garbodor is also a mass of rotten, nonliving material moving around.
Again, any combo of up to two types covers any concept you can think of perfectly.
Bogleech said:
I only agree with you on the robotic or electronic, "reptile" or "fish", and Geological/Ancient types (also covered by rock types). However there is a misconception that people are having about Heroic/Angelic/"good" or light. Lets start with heroic and "good". When you think of fighting it doesn't necessarily mean that they are fighting for justice. If you look at most of the fighting pokemon you would think that they are martial artist long before thinking that they were "good". look at Scraggy and Scrafty. they are dark fighting types. what are we suppose to think of them as? "good" pokemon that were corrupted? No they are suppose to be hoodlum/gangsters. Now for angelic. Angles are not ghost they are spirits. (A ghost is a personality or a piece of a personality of someone who has passed that is left behind because there is something that is keeping them here. There are many possible reasons of why they would stay behind and Spirits are different from ghosts because they are not bound to this earth. Spirits are actually the passed on personalities of a living person. Spirits will come back for a time. They can come back for many reasons, but the most common is to tell a loved one a message or to help a loved one cross over. There have been many accounts from people of a loved one coming back to warn of impending danger, or simply to just let the loved one know that they are okay and happy. There is also a belief that they will come back to comfort a loved one who is dyeing and make the transition of death a little easier on them. Most spirits will return to where they came from after they have done what they came to do.) Also ghost tend to be evil while spirits are good. And lastly light type. In JP they could just call it "good". Light is the opposite of Dark just like good is the opposite of evil. One can't exist with out the other. they are two sides of the same coin. Every single pokemon that is a pure dark type is only weak to fighting and bug (which doesn't make sense). Why is this? It is probably because GF didn't have anything else at the time so they just made it up. Dark need a weakness or else it would be to OP. Light type would make since because it is what fights for good where as dark is what fights for evil.
Yeah, I don't know where you would hear that "spirits are good" and "ghosts are evil". There's never been such a distinction at any point in our culture; a "ghost" is recognized as the spirit of a dead person walking the earth, while "spirit" is an umbrella term for supernatural entities which can include ghosts. Both "dead people" spirits and "magical" spirits have always been portrayed as either good or evil with roughly equal frequency.
"Ghost" in pokemon terminology represents all ethereal, spectral beings. That would include angelic ones; it's just a name.
And yeah, in Japan, fighting is "hero" and dark is called "evil," however, that doesn't *actually* mean they're just "good" and "bad" pokemon.
It refers to fighting style.
Fighting pokemon use disciplined martial arts or raw strength, while Dark pokemon are sneakier, more brutal tricksters. They fight low down and dirty; look at their move names. They're "dark" pokemon because they aren't afraid to use cheap shots, scare tactics, even things that come across as cheating, like getting their teammates to all gang up on the same opponent.
The two types are based on the difference between heroes and antiheroes more than heroes and villains. "Light" and "dark" superheroes can be found everywhere (Superman and Batman, Captain America and Wolverine) but are an even more popular theme in Japan, where you'll always have the shadowy, more tortured, more mysterious rogue hero, or a character of totally ambiguous alleigance, to counter the more traditional, clearly well-intentioned main good guys.
So yes, fighting and dark pokemon are distinctly intended to be the "two sides to a coin."
Also, Dark is likely weak to bug because bugs are also a wildly popular theme for "heroes" in Japan. It's pretty much a cliche in anime and manga to have a superhero based on an insect, due partly to Kamen Rider, one of their most popular action series, and also partly to the same beetle-fighting hobby that pokemon in general is partially inspired from. Thus, they probably made Dark weak to bug specifically so that a bug/fighting would be the most "heroic" pokemon of all. I'm surprised Heracross is still the only one.
"Ghost" in pokemon terminology represents all ethereal, spectral beings. That would include angelic ones; it's just a name.
And yeah, in Japan, fighting is "hero" and dark is called "evil," however, that doesn't *actually* mean they're just "good" and "bad" pokemon.
It refers to fighting style.
Fighting pokemon use disciplined martial arts or raw strength, while Dark pokemon are sneakier, more brutal tricksters. They fight low down and dirty; look at their move names. They're "dark" pokemon because they aren't afraid to use cheap shots, scare tactics, even things that come across as cheating, like getting their teammates to all gang up on the same opponent.
The two types are based on the difference between heroes and antiheroes more than heroes and villains. "Light" and "dark" superheroes can be found everywhere (Superman and Batman, Captain America and Wolverine) but are an even more popular theme in Japan, where you'll always have the shadowy, more tortured, more mysterious rogue hero, or a character of totally ambiguous alleigance, to counter the more traditional, clearly well-intentioned main good guys.
So yes, fighting and dark pokemon are distinctly intended to be the "two sides to a coin."
Also, Dark is likely weak to bug because bugs are also a wildly popular theme for "heroes" in Japan. It's pretty much a cliche in anime and manga to have a superhero based on an insect, due partly to Kamen Rider, one of their most popular action series, and also partly to the same beetle-fighting hobby that pokemon in general is partially inspired from. Thus, they probably made Dark weak to bug specifically so that a bug/fighting would be the most "heroic" pokemon of all. I'm surprised Heracross is still the only one.
Ok I understand all of that now. However I didn't say that ghost were evil and spirits were good. I said they are usually thought of as good and evil. I didn't say one was and wasn't. We can sit here and argue all day but at the end of the day if GF wants to make a new type they will and they will make it work. Again I would like a new type because it would mix things up drastically and make the game more interesting.
If they didn't give some Pokémon this generation a "type" then personally, to me at least, that'll take away the whole purpose of the "Pokémon". If it didn't have a type, it'd sorta just be 'there'. You wouldn't be able to do anything with it, tbh.
Personally, if they were to add an 18th type, I'd say either a "Light" or "Digital" type. They're the only too things that come to mind, for me.
As for the 2 legendary Pokémon that were revealed I think this...
Xerneas - Psychic/Grass
Yveltal - Dark/Flying
Personally, if they were to add an 18th type, I'd say either a "Light" or "Digital" type. They're the only too things that come to mind, for me.
As for the 2 legendary Pokémon that were revealed I think this...
Xerneas - Psychic/Grass
Yveltal - Dark/Flying
If I had to pick, I'd want to see a "parasite" type, but that's because I'm me and half my website and art expresses my love of parasitic organisms. In real life, a majority of known species - plant, animal and microbial - are parasitic, truly dominating the planet but barely represented in pokemon. They employ "mind control" and all sorts of biochemical trickery. I could see a type with lots of stat-stealing attacks, or even the ability to "attach" to other pokemon, instead of an item, with a range of effects. Weak to poison, because another strength for poison is sorely missing.
Still, parasitic themes can be covered perfectly fine by combinations of grass/poison/bug, or really any type at all. Just saying it's the only new type I'd personally like, even if it wasn't necessary.
Still, parasitic themes can be covered perfectly fine by combinations of grass/poison/bug, or really any type at all. Just saying it's the only new type I'd personally like, even if it wasn't necessary.
There shouldn't be anymore new types, but I would like to see new type combinations.
Okay a Common thing I'm seeing is where it'd be unbalanced. Sorry to say that it's already unbalanced. If you were to put every type into one, an all type I should say, your All type would still have Weakness to Rock pokemon, it's been that way since they added Steel and Dark types. No joke, you still get 2 times weakness to Rock type, due to Bug, Ice, Fire, and Flying. Where Rock only has three types resistant, Steel, Fighting, and Ground, and no Rock is not Resistant to Rock.
Honestly in my opinion, the type could use a nice even number like twenty, and not Seventeen, that way they could balance out the types completely to where it'd have equal on all factors, otherwise it'll not be balanced. Least one more type could be used to make it eighteen, and allow us to have a chance at being perfectly rounded out, least possibly rounded out. If GameFreak makes another type, and has it still neutral against rock, that wouldn't round out anything to be honest, but if there was three new one's added, lets just say...How about Light, Sound, and Cosmic for examples. Let's say Light and Sound are weak against rock, but Cosmic is immuned, that certainly would round it out a bit more, of course with those three having their own types that they are weak against, and the types that resist them.
Pokemon Trainer Dark said:
Ehm, try looking at Normal as the 'default' type.
Cause that's what it is. When something is not of any type, it is Normal.
Then you have 1+16. And the 16 can be divided into interesting groups like physical/special 8+8,
or something like this:
Add one type, and youve just ruined this awesomeness.
So just because Normal is the basic type you're going to say that awesomeness is ruined? Honestly it still doesn't count as an Even number, you could also put a type around Normal in that chart, or three types covering around Normal, to make it stay the same, One, Two, Or three types, heck, even four could be used to make that chart look the same.
Why would you need another type when the 17 cover everything? Furthermore, why would you even need a Light-type? What does that possibly cover that Psychic- / Electric-type does not? If it generates light, it should be Electric-type. If it has a more mythical feel, it should be Psychic-type. Most Electric- and Psychic-types learn Flash to prove my point.
Digital-type? You must mean Porygon. Also, Steel-type covers this. Look at Metagross and Genesect who have a very digital feel to them.
Going back to my original question, why do we need another type when the 17 cover EVERYTHING? Anything you can think of is covered by a single or combination of two types. Not only that, but this system we have now is full of balance. The only reason we got Steel- and Dark-types in Gen. 2 was to fix the problems we had with Psychic- and Fighting-types in Gen. 1. We don't have any issues with the current system (which has worked for four generations not including Gen. 6) that the Gen. 2 system had, so I have to ask again: why do we /need/ new types?
Digital-type? You must mean Porygon. Also, Steel-type covers this. Look at Metagross and Genesect who have a very digital feel to them.
Going back to my original question, why do we need another type when the 17 cover EVERYTHING? Anything you can think of is covered by a single or combination of two types. Not only that, but this system we have now is full of balance. The only reason we got Steel- and Dark-types in Gen. 2 was to fix the problems we had with Psychic- and Fighting-types in Gen. 1. We don't have any issues with the current system (which has worked for four generations not including Gen. 6) that the Gen. 2 system had, so I have to ask again: why do we /need/ new types?
I don't believe everything is covered already. But I'd rather not get any new types than get "light", "digital" or "sound". Those don't make much sense to me.
I wouldn't bother getting "wood" or "salt", though. "Salt" I feel is pretty unecessary. But "wood"... is even one of the 5 chinese elements (along with water, fire, metal and earth).
I wouldn't bother getting "wood" or "salt", though. "Salt" I feel is pretty unecessary. But "wood"... is even one of the 5 chinese elements (along with water, fire, metal and earth).