- Joined
- May 5, 2019
- Messages
- 756
- Reaction score
- 303
Steel II.
It's steel.
but better.
It's steel.
but better.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Not in my opinion. Ghost is considered undead. And also Ghosts can't actually kill people. They just scare themDoesn't Ghost fit that niche pretty well already?
Lots of depictions of ghosts show them capable of harming/killing the living, including Pokemon. See...And also Ghosts can't actually kill people. They just scare them
It licks with its gaseous tongue to steal the victim's life force. It lurks in darkness for prey.
Cofagrigus's Y entry:It strikes at humans from total darkness. Those licked by its cold tongue grow weaker with each passing day until they die.
Palossand's Moon entry:Grave robbers who mistake them for real coffins and get too close end up trapped inside their bodies.
Mimikyu's Ultra Sun entry:Buried beneath the castle are masses of dried-up bones from those whose vitality it has drained.
Although it's a quiet, lonely Pokémon, if you try to look at what's under its rag, it will become agitated and resist violently.
Death
If it's just about what can kill you, though, there's already plenty of Pokemon that can do that, through burning, drowning, poison, etc. Usually when I see a death element in a game, it's tied to undead creatures.Not in my opinion. Ghost is considered undead. And also Ghosts can't actually kill people. They just scare them
Is that a pun I see there?Tech Types are weak to Ghost, Bug, and Dragon type attacks.
Is that a pun I see there?
Hey Lanstar what's your favorite type on my list besides tech
None of them - as they all either:
1. Overlap too much with the existing types
2. Have too few existing Pokemon that could reasonably become those types,
3. Have too narrow an amount of attacks that actually utilizes those types compared to the other types, or
4. Can't have distinct-type effectivenes charts that both make sense and develop the meta in a worthwhile manner
Types are so fundemental to the gameplay that there must be a very good reason for adding a new type. I don't think we should add types for the sake of adding them - Instead, we should ask whether a new type would actually fix a problem in the gameplay, as opposed to just adding unneeded complexity. Just being "kewl" doesn't cut it!
Take the Fairy Type introduced in Gen. IV. It was a clear example of a 'good' type to add in the game because:
1. It didn't overlap any existing type that much - It actually felt 'missing' from the game in some manner.
2. There were plenty of existing pokemon that could be described as a 'Fairy', whether it be a primary or secondary type,
3. Has a broad enough scope to base plenty of attacks off of it, despite Game Freak limiting its development, and
4. Its match-up chart makes plenty of sense, while patching the meta quite a lot - It made Dragon and Dark Pokemon less OP and also made Poison and Steel moves worth using.
Tech type is the only one I could see passing these 4 requirements:
1. It doesn't overlap existing types too much: It might feel in common with some existing types, but it does feel like its own thing.
2. As I listed, plenty of existing Pokemon could have that type - Many psychic types feel more "Tech" than "Psychic" to me.
3. It might take some creativity, but Tech type attacks could be made possible. Unfortunately, this is the weakest area in the typing, as such moves would overlap a lot with existing Electric, Normal, Steel and Psychic type attacks.
4. It can have a distinct match-up chart that could make sense, and even help the meta find more use for Dragon and Bug attacks - All while making Steel, Fairy, and Normal Types less restrictive defensively.
This is something I have always wondered, and I feel like they might have been the same type at one point, but later got separated.A new type? I've always thought there were too many already. Instead, I'd combine Rock and Ground into Earth-type, because the difference is just so minuscule that it's sheer semantics to me.
Not really. Ghost is more paranormal phenomena, while Dark is focused on foul play.Would probably also combine Ghost and Dark because there is considerable overlap between them as well. Maybe call it Sinister-type.