• A new LGBTQ+ forum is now being trialed and there have been changes made to the Support and Advice forum. To read more about these updates, click here.
  • Hey Trainers! Be sure to check out Corsola Beach, our newest section on the forums, in partnership with our friends at Corsola Cove! At the Beach, you can discuss the competitive side of the games, post your favorite Pokemon memes, and connect with other Pokemon creators!
  • Due to the recent changes with Twitter's API, it is no longer possible for Bulbagarden forum users to login via their Twitter account. If you signed up to Bulbagarden via Twitter and do not have another way to login, please contact us here with your Twitter username so that we can get you sorted.

The Fairy Type and Alterations to Type Chart

Is the Fairy-type OP?


  • Total voters
    59
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

I really really hope we interpret the Smash footage in a wrong way and the new type isn't SE on Ice. This would be the death of the type defensively. And if the type is really Fairy, it wouldn't even make much sense.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

- Fairy will be a new type weak to Poison and Steel, immune to Dragon, super effective against Dragon, Dark, and Fighting, and Fire and Psychic-type Pokemon take half damage from it.
- Sylveon is Fairy-type. Some older Pokemon will be reclassified to Fairy, such as Mawile (Steel/Fairy).

Please tell me this is fake.

I have a felling it might be real. Gamefreak was been extremely quiet about sylveon's type. Hell, they haven't even revealed the types of the legendaries yet.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Right now, my beef with Fairy is its supposed strength against Ice and being immune and super effective against Dragon.

Fairy>Ice, no matter how hard I try to comprehend it, makes no sense to me. It's like giving Ice another weakness just for the hell of it. I know Ice is supposed to be a literal "glass cannon" type, but this is getting silly.

The second part bothers me too. Fairy should either be immune to Dragon or super effective against it, not both. I'm not into competitive anything, but that just screams OP to me.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Does dark really need to be knocked town a peg I mean it share both types it super effective against with ghost. I just don't see the need is that immunity to psychic that big a deal cause two strength two weaknesses sounds fair compared to Ground's five strength 3 weaknesses. It's only profit is that immunity and psychic's have access to focus blast. I mean it's the only thing besides ghost that beats ghost but I don't see how that's dark's fault.

I think Ghost should get another weakness. It only has two weaknesses (including itself) while it has 2 Immunities and 2 advantages. Just having 2 immunities, more than any other type, gives me enough reason to add one weakness. Especially in the case of Ghost/Dark pokemon that lack weaknesses.

Also, why give Ice yet another weakness instead? Ice is becoming a punching bag, along with Grass.

The second part bothers me too. Fairy should either be immune to Dragon or super effective against it, not both. I'm not into competitive anything, but that just screams OP to me.

Would be no different than Dark and Psychic. And Dragon is plenty strong enough of a type all around that it could handle a little more opposition.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Not always. Ghost, Bug & Dragon are based on creatures, for example. Besides, there are lots of reasons why Light wouldn't work as a type in the literal sense (match up, treading on the other types' feet, etc.). Light could only work as an English name for Love, the current strongest new type competitor atm, like how Dark is "Evil-type" in Japan.
Thematically, both Psychic and Fighting have a claim to be the "light" type, since they're the antithesis of Dark in different ways.

I don't think we'd see Love renamed as Light in English, though; we haven't had that kind of intentional alteration in a long while, and the translators are a lot more literal than they used to be (if only because changing stuff creates more problems down the road, such as with Comet Punch).

I guess, but I think those types are more litteral then a per say "pair type" or whatever. I just think they are more seprate then they are connected to the Dark Type. It's not like the whole Rock-Ground-Steel thing Game Freak has goin' on.

Maybe, but you got to remember these Types might go hand in hand, so maybe Game Freak will translate it so it'll make sence to younger players. I think that I would have thought that a "Love" or "Evil" Type is definitally more weird and non-sencical then a Light or Dark Type.

Comet Punch is a move, so I think it's a different deal there.

Honestly, if this fairy thing does end up true, I'd rather it be called "Fae" or something similar. It still means fairy, and the younger ones who play the game wouldn't instantly think "little girls with wings!"

I don't think it would be "Fae" I don't even know what a Fae is, and I don't think any 6 year olds (no offence) would know either. It is sorta Game Freak's target demographic mostly, right? I think Game Freak would at least translate the new Type (whatever the freakin' freak it is) so that little little kids would understand it, you know?

This is directed toward everyone.
Purple Dinosaurs
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

If I were designing a Light type based on actual light, I'd do it a bit differently from GameFreak. I once posted the hypothetical rundown on PokéCommunity:

Offensive

  • 2x damage to Dark [obviously!], Ghost [undead hate sunlight]
  • 1/2 damage to Electric [makes sparks brighter], Fire [a light source in its own right], Ice [translucent/reflective], Light [most types resist themselves; no reason to make this like Dragon!], Steel [most metals reflect], Water [reflective/translucent]
  • Zero damage to Grass [light is good for plants and keeps them alive]
  • Normal damage to all other types

Defensive

  • 2x damage from Grass [plants are made to absorb light], Dark [light and darkness cancel each other out]
  • 1/2 damage from Electric, Fire [both are potential light sources]
  • Zero damage from Ghost [that undead vulnerability keeps their attacks from working]
  • Normal damage from all other types


Granted, the movepool for the new type would be pretty small--and mostly involve beam-shooting moves that got transferred from other types (although ExtremeSpeed could work as a Light move, too). The number of Pokémon that got retyped would also be small: how many glowing Pokémon get their light from something other than fire or electricity? ;-) However, the hardest part would be designing new, single-typed Light species; I can imagine a spotlight or TV form for Rotom, but beyond that I get stuck.


It's probably this kind of design problem that led Game Freak to discard Light as a potential type, and look for a more metaphorical balance to Darkness/Evil. Nothing in the revealed Gen VI Pokémon suggests a Light type, either (except for Xerneas' iridescent horns). However, Sylveon's design suggests that her new type will be either Fairy or Love--and the former has more movepool potential, considering the many sides of fairy-like beings in world folklore.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

I think it is very likely that if the Fairy-type comes to be, it will be called simply Fairy in the English-release, with a longshot for maybe Sprite or Pixie. I know the pokemon smash skit made it seem like fairy-type (or whatever Sylveon ends up being) is super-effective against ice, but I'm still holding out that the 'breaking ice' thing was similar to her using nunchucks, a personal hobby of the character, rather than an indication of type effectiveness. Not because of anything that has to do with rumors, but because the thought of something else super-effective against ice makes me want to cry. The only way I could allow it is if Ice's type match up gets changed substantially and it looses a few weaknesses. It ought to take 1/2 damage from water and normal damage from rock, IMO.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Honestly, if this fairy thing does end up true, I'd rather it be called "Fae" or something similar. It still means fairy, and the younger ones who play the game wouldn't instantly think "little girls with wings!"

I don't think it would be "Fae" I don't even know what a Fae is, and I don't think any 6 year olds (no offence) would know either. It is sorta Game Freak's target demographic mostly, right? I think Game Freak would at least translate the new Type (whatever the freakin' freak it is) so that little little kids would understand it, you know?

This is directed toward everyone.
Purple Dinosaurs
Shortened form of faerie.

Then again, that's just my own little personal problem where I can't help but think fairy = typical, Disney-esque ones and faerie = spirits, youkai, etc.

I know they mean the exact same thing, though. Noir's suggestion of "sprite" or "pixie" fits better.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

I want that damn dragon immunity just for the pure outrage when a Fairy/Dragon pops up. You just know GF is gonna go and do something so out there. I mean come on, imagine a Pokemon that not only takes damage from Ice like its nothing to counter dragon's weakness, but also can wreck up dragons with a snap of its fingers. ​I can't bloody wait.

Oh and a new type makes sense with Helioptile's typing. Why? Well if all the base normal Pokemon are getting upgraded, it makes sense if they start using normal type as a secondary type for base Pokemon, with it leaving later on for a secondary typing. Makes evolution seem much more like the stages of maturity they really are.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Yeah, but Sableye's like 80% likely to get an evolution soon, so whatevs.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

I just hope fairy is weak to fighting and dark.
Hm.. I actually like both of these types, but I won't mind if Fairy is SE to Fighting. As for Dark, don't give the type more weakness, please. Also, Fairy being SE to Dark will give the idea that Fairy Pokémon are like... Disney fairies or something xD "Look, the fairies of good and light are strong against the dark beings of evil". Lame. lol
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

@Reila

It should be noted that despite a possibility of Fairies > Dark it doesn't automatically mean that Dark will be typically "evil". I rather like the recent rumor which portrays the legends in a sort of life/death cycle, meaning Yveltal's and the dark type's relationship with the possible fairy type is a symbiotic one, or more akin to Yin/Yang. The faes have the advantage over dark because nature renews itself and all that jazz, rather than them being holy.

This is all trivial to me though, because like Mitchman I am really more interested in that Dragon immunity :p I really wish that part was at least real even if the other parts are not. (Dragon is my favorite typing btw, but it needs to be taken down a peg)
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

The faes have the advantage over dark because nature renews itself and all that jazz, rather than them being holy.

That is an interesting possibility and I really like the bold part.

Also, I don't think it is trivial, because I like the types more for their concepts than for their usefulness, but that is just me.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

I've seen everyone harp on the name, too. I don't think that should matter, it's the image conveyed that matters more. Then again, from what people have been saying, they'll hate on it regardless of what it's called.
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Typical Pokemon fanbase response-- "Game Freak never innovates!" *GF does something new* "What are they doing?! They're changing things too much!" *Fanboys buy game anyway* "Oh wow! This new feature is awesome!" *Repeat as needed...*
 
Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

@Reila

It should be noted that despite a possibility of Fairies > Dark it doesn't automatically mean that Dark will be typically "evil".

Well the dark type is called the evil type in japanese, so if it was, it would make perfect sense.
 
Please note: The thread is from 8 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom