• 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.
  • Pronoun field selections have been updated! To ensure they show up correctly, please reselect your preferred option(s) in the Account details page. Click here for more information.

The Fairy Type and Alterations to Type Chart

Is the Fairy-type OP?


  • Total voters
    59

Anser

New Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2012
Messages
810
Reaction score
25
I would bet that Flabébé is going to evolve into something that is Fairy/Grass.
 

Dex

"Ruthless Cinnamon Roll!"
Joined
Feb 15, 2013
Messages
340
Reaction score
9
I think it could go either way:

- It could merge with the flower
- It could lose the flower

Heck, it may even not evolve. It already sounds like it could be a gimmick with different flower colors.
 

NoirGrimoir

Girl with the Ghosts
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
1,170
I think it's unlikely to lose the flower, considering it says, "it stays with it's flower all its life." It could not evolve though, I give it a 50% chance of having no evolution at all, and a 75% of only having one evolution if it does have one.
 

Bikini Miltank

A magical girl, transforming very slowly
Joined
Nov 8, 2007
Messages
2,588
Reaction score
15
Its name definitely implies evolution; many gimmick Pokémon don't evolve, but some do, such as Deerling. If it does evolve I suspect it will keep the flower one way or another, so that the gimmick carries over.
 

NoirGrimoir

Girl with the Ghosts
Joined
Dec 11, 2012
Messages
2,437
Reaction score
1,170
Yeah, Flabebe = Flower + Baby. Maybe it has a "Flower Child" or "Flower Adult" evolution.
 

eva

New Member
Joined
May 15, 2013
Messages
61
Reaction score
0
While I haven't read the whole 2000 posts in the thread, I wish the new fairy type would be weak to normal, so normal can have something super effective.
Or maybe normal is weak to fairy and fairy weak to normal...




..... Unlikely, I know.
 

SUP3RN0VA

DR4G0N K1NG
Joined
Aug 27, 2010
Messages
2,214
Reaction score
1,266
While I haven't read the whole 2000 posts in the thread, I wish the new fairy type would be weak to normal, so normal can have something super effective.
Or maybe normal is weak to fairy and fairy weak to normal...




..... Unlikely, I know.

I too find it unlikely, as the Normal type isn't suppose to be super effective against anything.
 

Kree

Imperial Accuser
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
173
Reaction score
0
Is Fairy the official English name or just the Japanese name, like "Evil" for the Dark-type?
 

FaerieStar

Sailor Star Chaser
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
251
Reaction score
0
Is Fairy the official English name or just the Japanese name, like "Evil" for the Dark-type?
Now that you mention names in other languages, it is literally フェアリー (fearii/fairy) in Japanese, instead the term Yōsei. In other languages, it's also literally fairy (hada, fée). However, in Italian, it's called Folletto, which I think is a type of creature similar to a imp/elf thing. They don't use "fata", which would mean something closer to fairy/hada/fée. (If you are Italian or have a nice level of Italian, feel free to correct me). I think this might be related to the direction they want to go with the fairy type. Maybe they won't limit the fairies to the Tinkerbell-like concept after all?

About the Fairy vs Dark thing... I think it's not safe to assume Gardevoir was lvl 50, since there's a battle with Noivern 80 vs Chespin 50 in the same video. Since it's GF we're talking about, they could have deliberately chosen to make it seem like Fairy is not SE against Dark. They love to keep us wondering.
 

Infinity Mk-II

From Leyend to Myth
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,410
Reaction score
4
Its name definitely implies evolution; many gimmick Pokémon don't evolve, but some do, such as Deerling. If it does evolve I suspect it will keep the flower one way or another, so that the gimmick carries over.
On that matter, I find the species name (at least as shown on Bulbapedia) potentially telling of the direction it'll take and implication of evolution:
It's the "Single Flower Pokémon". Of course, species names hardly mean anything, but that it specifically names it after carrying one flower makes me think it is going to evolve into something that doesn't carry one flower, or something to that extent.
 

Juvarra

New Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
39
Reaction score
0
However, in Italian, it's called Folletto, which I think is a type of creature similar to a imp/elf thing. They don't use "fata", which would mean something closer to fairy/hada/fée. (If you are Italian or have a nice level of Italian, feel free to correct me). I think this might be related to the direction they want to go with the fairy type. Maybe they won't limit the fairies to the Tinkerbell-like concept after all?

Yeah, it's something between pixie and imp, a mischievous creature which loses the feminine attributes of fairies.
 

Green Zubat

Have a pancake.
Joined
Apr 12, 2010
Messages
1,603
Reaction score
0
On a personal note, if it would give Meganium a niche that could finally garner some respect from players, I'd be all for it, though I am apprehensive about the potential 4x Poison weakness.

If Fairy weakness is confirmed, I wish they would just take off Grass weakness to Poison then. Plants are not particularly more susceptible to toxins than we are, or bugs, or other animals. Instead, they are capable of filtering a variety of poisons and polluting components. For me, the argument of herbicides just doesn't stick. And in terms of game, if Poison SE a type that counters Dragon, it would be more widespread and we should have all 5 threats to Grass all around. I think it's too much, as there are very strong types with 1 ou 2 weakness only.

Grass could probably do with some tinkering, but I really don't think removing its weakness to Poison is the way to go from a strategic POV--Poison needs all the help it can get. As for the conceptual consideration of Poison's strengths, see below.

I'm not sure what to do about the Grass problem, but I notice that it is resisted by a lot of types--perhaps removing some of those could be a start. Maybe it could even resist Fairy, which could make sense, if Fairy is nature related (would basically be the same as Grass' resistance to itself).

Herbicides and pollution = Grass weakness to Poison, which makes perfect sense to me. Bug needs to be weak to Poison again, thanks to the HUGE prevalence of pesticides in the world that kill not only their target pest, but many beneficial insects as well. Not only that, but Grass is currently the only strength Poison has. If Fairy DOES turn out to be weak to Poison, I'd be happy with them removing Grass's weakness and instead making Water weak to Poison instead, even though it seems silly to remove Grass's weakness to start with.

Lol, but that’s just the point, mate – plants are not susceptible to poison and pollution. On the contrary, they are widely employed as biological filters for absorbing and neutralising a number of venomous industrial residues. The idea only makes “perfect sense” because people tend to encore one appealing opinion and taking it as true before looking up further evidence.

I beg to differ. The term "poison" is relative, referring to any substance that causes injurious effects to a living organism when taken in. As far as I'm aware, there is no plant able to take in any and all substances with absolutely no ill effects, and as such, plants are suceptible to poison.

No ad autoritatem intended but, since that is exactly what I work with, I’d say the idea of removing Grass weakness to Poison is not silly at all.

If you don't intend to rely on appeal to authority, then don't do it.

Rather, vegetation makes the best and sustainable manner of mending a broken environment - they clear up soil, water and air by absorbing and recycling several components otherwise toxic to other beings. A quick survey on the Web can show you data from Nasa’s research on filtering plants, many of which are garden plants and some are even edible. Too, planting green belts close to industrial zones is a well know strategy used in urbanism to contain air and sonorous pollution and improve the quality of the air.
And have you ever heard of what they used to absorb radioactivity released after Chernobyl disaster? Yes, Sunflowers! They had a rate of 95% of radioactive impact reduced by planting sunflowers.
As for herbicides, you should know how problematic it is for agrobusiness, for they have to keep changing chemicals because plants – with their huge genomes – adapt too quickly to the poison, to the point of them having to find another ways of controlling weeds such as mutualistic insects or allelopathy, when plants produce themselves chemicals that prevent competitive herbs from growing.

When one talks about pollution, what first comes to mind is a densely industrial area with no vegetation, but that’s just a cause and effect mistake, when plants are actually a sustainable manner of combating pollution and toxins.

I think you're over complicating things. The fact of the matter is, Poison is based on poison (obv.), that is, again, a substance that causes injurious effects to living things when taken in. As no living being has the ability to process any substance without injury (or rather, any living thing can be poisoned by something), it makes sense that Poison is strong to types that embody living things. As Grass & Bug both satisfy this requirement, it's understandable that they would be (or were) weak to Poison.

That said, Bug has lost its weakness to Poison, which could be explained through resistance, and this could also be applied as a reason to remove Grass' weakness. However, a valid counterargument to this is that Grass is the type most closely associated with nature, and so embodies the very essence of life. Therefore, it still makes sense that Grass would still be weak to Poison (even though Bug is not*), which ends life. This argument could also be used to explain why Fairy would be weak to Poison, as fairies are also associated with nature. Furthermore, I don't see why Poison needs to lose another weakness, given how offensively weak it already is.

*Personally, though, I would prefer Bug's weakness to Poison to be reinstated, partly to buff Poison, but also just because it makes sense, as per the above discussion.



In-game speaking, I told exactly what you said – Grass weakness should be removed if Fairy weakness to it is confirmed.

See above.

But this could be either Poison or Flying. 5 weaknesses are too much at any rate. And I don’t think Poison needs to have so many SE because of its playstyle, they could be Fairy and something else, but not Bug, which far from needs another weakness.

Why? You can't derive an "ought" from an "is". That is to say, just because something has a precedent, doesn't make it right, and I don't see how it's right for Poison to be forever relegated to a defensive position. In fact, I think it's rather sad. Though I think it's fair for some types to be preferentially offensive or defensive, every type should be at least usable either way.


What do you people think of the other, say, fairies becoming Fairy-type?
Every game release a legendary with 600 BS that is very fairy-like - Mew, Celebi, Jirachi, Manaphy, Victini, not to mention the lake trio.

Do you think any of them will change typing?
I don't think Celebi, Jirachi Victini Psychich type makes much sense and could well change to Fairy.

I could easily see those three (and maybe even the others, plus Meloetta, perhaps) gaining the Fairy type, with the possible exception of Victini, which could be Psychic for other reasons (idk). In particular, I think Celebi may become Grass/Fairy, Jirachi Steel/Fairy, and Meloetta Normal/Fairy (in Aria forme; still Normal/Fighting for Pirouette).
 
Last edited:

Shiny Celebi

AI Fae
Joined
May 14, 2010
Messages
29,843
Reaction score
2,755
Pronouns
she_they
Guys, this is getting a little off topic now, discussing another user's post formatting is not what this thread is for, can we please go back to discussing the Fairy type and other changes to the type chart? Thank you.
 

Lofty

More fab than Sylveon.
Joined
Dec 1, 2012
Messages
357
Reaction score
31
Poison would get a huge buff in Gen VI if it was supereffective against Grass, Bug, Water, AND Fairy. IMO, it should only be SE against three types, so I disagree that it should be SE to Bug again.

As for Fairy, I have a few ideas for relationships with other types. Of course, as we already know, Fairy is SE against Dragon. However, I think it's SE against two other types: Psychic is the first. Both types are heavily inspired by magic, Fairy for ancient and medieval, and Psychic for modern. The Psychic-type, similarly to the Fighting-type, most likely needs needs focus and discipline in order to become stronger and deliver attacks, while the Fairy-type may not necessarily need to concentrate as much. Such concentration could be disrupted by the mischief and trickery of the Fairy-type. For the same reason, Fairy may be SE against Fighting.

I think Fairy will unfortunately have an abundance of weaknesses, like Grass, Rock, and Ice. One such weakness is the Poison-type. Fairies are living creatures, and though some are capable of healing, toxins mixed with magic may or may not speed up the poisoning process. I don't really have a reason for the others, but the others I predict are Ghost, Electric, and Rock.

As for resistances, I think Fairy will resist itself, Dragon, Fighting, and maybe Psychic.

Fairy may be resisted by Grass (fairies commonly make their homes in forests, so their magic sometimes protects the forests in which they live, making Grass be almost unaffected by other magic, which can come from the same fairies who protect it), Poison, Steel, Ghost, and Rock.
 
Please note: The thread is from 7 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.
Top Bottom