• 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

Reddigans

New Member
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Poison: Loses effectiveness against grass. Gains effectiveness against fairy and water.
Fighting: Loses effectiveness against ice.
Ground: Loses effectiveness against steel.
Rock: Gains resistance to rock and electric.
Flying: Loses effectiveness against grass. Gains effectiveness against ground.
Steel: Gains effectiveness against fairy. Gains weakness to electric (and/or water).
Grass: Gains effectiveness against fairy. Loses ineffectiveness against steel and poison
Ice: Gains immunity to ice and resistance to water.

Poison would be able to serve a much better offense role hitting water and fairy, both of which can be common and perhaps have few other exploitable weaknesses, losing its less useful effectiveness against grass (and bug also being unneeded). Fighting and ground would be nerfed a bit, which in turn would help to bring other types into prominence (steel would become more viable against ice, bug would become more viable against grass and dark, fire becomes a bit better). Flying, by being more distinguished in its effectiveness array from fire, would become more offensively viable. Grass would be less of a butt monkey. Ice and rock would gain defensive niches.

After plugging these into the type chart & mulling it over a bit, I'm actually rather fond of these suggestions. It seems like it would do well to bring some of the lower-tier types out of the shadows. I especially like the idea of grass losing the flying/poison weakness, but that's partly because it's my favorite type~ The other part is that poison's effectiveness to grass is pretty much pointless considering that right now ice, fire, & flying are much better checks. I agree that even if poison is only effective against two types, by handing poison weakness to fairy & shifting grass' weakness over to water, poison gets both a more solid offensive boost & a little breathing room.

I'm curious as to what fairy's other battle properties are...
At the very least I'm hoping for effectiveness against ghost, rather than dark, and ineffectiveness against Ice, which would be more beneficial for ice-type pokemon as ice being super effective to fairy is really only going to benefit all of the water-types packing ice moves.
As far fairy's weaknesses go, I really just want poison/steel/grass, like what Aves suggested above. Steel & grass make plenty of sense lore-wise (I think I also suggested a weakness to grass many pages ago, aha).
 

Dog of Hellsing

He Sees You...
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
1,934
Reaction score
0
I think Spiritomb is ok as ghost/dark, since it's made of evil spirits. I do think Sableye is very faerie-like, however... but I don't think they'll change it either.
I'd make Sableye dark/faerie and Mismagius ghost/faerie.

I can see them both being retyped, but tbh I'm not expecting it to happen in the least. I'm just using them as examples for Fairy Pokemon that aren't cutesy.

@Dog of Hellsing:

We don't seem to really disagree. I also think poison would be best if super effective against two types, those being water and fairy. I feel this is enough of a push. My only issue with more offensive power than this, re: bleeder strategy, is that power balance dictates a finite number of resources to be allocated to each type. I feel as far as past, present and future designs concerning poison, the better it is at offense, the less possible it will be to push its defensive orientation. I believe it would be more effective to continue to specialize it in this area than to spread its power around in a more versatile build. This being that there is really no synergy between poison's bleeder strategy an offense orientation. Since being effective against grass functionally does little to boost poison's power, this effectiveness stands in the way of poison being pushed more defensively, for no real benefit. It's also my opinion that the particularly poor match-ups poison has now (being only good against grass, which is useless) tends to make people want to overcompensate in response. Being someone who has worked on tweaking game development before, my experience has shown that tendency. I advocate for a holistic perspective, and that means looking at both poison and grass (as well as the rest of the other types).

I don't like the idea of an entire Type being relegated to one class, because there will ALWAYS be Pokemon in a Type that excels at something other than the general idea. Like my Grass example, for instance. Grass Pokemon are excellent bleeders; Venu can take a hit and dole out massive damage after just one or two Growths, but you could also go the bleeder route with Leech Seed and other moves. Whimsi is infamous for priority Sub/Leech Seed/Encore, but it's also got a fairly decent Spe Atk and gets access to Hurricane, making it a nice check against other Grass Pokemon thanks to its decent Speed. Breloom gets Spore, Leech Seed, PoisonPowder, and other moves, but works best as a Physical sweeper thanks to things like Drain Punch.

How about Water? Cloyster and Jellicent are great at defense, but Floatzel and Feraligatr excel at Physical sweeps. For Fire, Torkoal is defensive, but Volcarona is definitely suited to deal out some hurtin'. For Steel, Ferrothorn and Bastiodon are your bulky tanks, but Scizor and Drillbur enjoy wrecking your enemy's shit.

And then there's Poison, and I can give you a fair list of Mon of this type who work better offensively than as defensive bleeders:

*Sheer Force Nidoking
*Sheer Force Nidoqueen
*Chlorophyll Venusaur
*Crobat
*Venomoth
*Muk
*Gengar
*Roserade
*Drapion
*Scolipede
*Toxicroak

Yes, Poison CAN wear down opponents using a bleeder strategy, but how is it any less viable to use them to actively tear through your foe's team? You're saying to continue to specialize defensively, but even if Poison gains several strengths, it doesn't seem right to me to force ALL Poison Pokemon to have to play defensively. Especially when you take into account that most Poison Pokemon have an offensive stat that's higher than their defensive stats, or at the very least, they have a high defensive stat AND a high offensive stat. How can you tell my that Gengar, with a base Special Attack of 130, is better suited to defensive bleeder strategy when it has 60 base HP/Def and 75 base Special Def? How is Muk anymore viable as a defensive bleeder with a Special Defense bast stat of 100 than it would be an offensive attacker with an Attack of 105? Scolipede's Attack is higher than both its defenses, as is Garbodor, Skuntank, and Toxicroak's. But despite the fact that many Poison Pokemon excel at being offensive attackers, just being the type overall is "supposed" to stall out the foe, they aren't viable to put their great Attack or Special Attack to good use?

I just honestly don't understand how Poison Pokemon shouldn't be able to be used offensively when so many of them have equal or better attacking stats than defensive ones, and especially in the cases of one like Drapion who learn moves with a wide variety of types, NOT just moves that would be used for bleeder strategies.


The problem with scary fairies is that they might overlap in the concept of ghost. I think saying fairy type will be uncreative because most of the fairies will be cute and kind, is the same thing saying that ghost types are uncreative because most of them are scary and suck your soul/life energy.
Mismagius and misdreavus might be scary fairies, but they will be paired with the ghost type, wich is typically scary and mischievous. If a fairy will be scary, i think it should be paired with ghost or dark( the evil type) .

You can only take Ghost so far from being creepy/scary thanks to the concept of ghosts to begin with. With Fairies, though, a lot of the lore around them is about them being anything from kind to cruel. To shuffle all or most Fairy Pokemon into that stereotypical "cute and nice" category is uncreative because you can do SO MUCH with that typing. In fact, if they want to go with the traditional vision of fairies, they'll make a majority of them into mischievous little bastards that are more interested in doing things for their own amusement over helping others.
 

Aves

Das wahr ist das ganzen
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
\
After plugging these into the type chart & mulling it over a bit, I'm actually rather fond of these suggestions. It seems like it would do well to bring some of the lower-tier types out of the shadows. I especially like the idea of grass losing the flying/poison weakness, but that's partly because it's my favorite type~ The other part is that poison's effectiveness to grass is pretty much pointless considering that right now ice, fire, & flying are much better checks. I agree that even if poison is only effective against two types, by handing poison weakness to fairy & shifting grass' weakness over to water, poison gets both a more solid offensive boost & a little breathing room.

I'm curious as to what fairy's other battle properties are...
At the very least I'm hoping for effectiveness against ghost, rather than dark, and ineffectiveness against Ice, which would be more beneficial for ice-type pokemon as ice being super effective to fairy is really only going to benefit all of the water-types packing ice moves.
As far fairy's weaknesses go, I really just want poison/steel/grass, like what Aves suggested above. Steel & grass make plenty of sense lore-wise (I think I also suggested a weakness to grass many pages ago, aha).

Well, I'm glad someone agrees.

I think Spiritomb is ok as ghost/dark, since it's made of evil spirits. I do think Sableye is very faerie-like, however... but I don't think they'll change it either.
I'd make Sableye dark/faerie and Mismagius ghost/faerie.

I can see them both being retyped, but tbh I'm not expecting it to happen in the least. I'm just using them as examples for Fairy Pokemon that aren't cutesy.

@Dog of Hellsing:

We don't seem to really disagree. I also think poison would be best if super effective against two types, those being water and fairy. I feel this is enough of a push. My only issue with more offensive power than this, re: bleeder strategy, is that power balance dictates a finite number of resources to be allocated to each type. I feel as far as past, present and future designs concerning poison, the better it is at offense, the less possible it will be to push its defensive orientation. I believe it would be more effective to continue to specialize it in this area than to spread its power around in a more versatile build. This being that there is really no synergy between poison's bleeder strategy an offense orientation. Since being effective against grass functionally does little to boost poison's power, this effectiveness stands in the way of poison being pushed more defensively, for no real benefit. It's also my opinion that the particularly poor match-ups poison has now (being only good against grass, which is useless) tends to make people want to overcompensate in response. Being someone who has worked on tweaking game development before, my experience has shown that tendency. I advocate for a holistic perspective, and that means looking at both poison and grass (as well as the rest of the other types).

I don't like the idea of an entire Type being relegated to one class, because there will ALWAYS be Pokemon in a Type that excels at something other than the general idea. Like my Grass example, for instance. Grass Pokemon are excellent bleeders; Venu can take a hit and dole out massive damage after just one or two Growths, but you could also go the bleeder route with Leech Seed and other moves. Whimsi is infamous for priority Sub/Leech Seed/Encore, but it's also got a fairly decent Spe Atk and gets access to Hurricane, making it a nice check against other Grass Pokemon thanks to its decent Speed. Breloom gets Spore, Leech Seed, PoisonPowder, and other moves, but works best as a Physical sweeper thanks to things like Drain Punch.

How about Water? Cloyster and Jellicent are great at defense, but Floatzel and Feraligatr excel at Physical sweeps. For Fire, Torkoal is defensive, but Volcarona is definitely suited to deal out some hurtin'. For Steel, Ferrothorn and Bastiodon are your bulky tanks, but Scizor and Drillbur enjoy wrecking your enemy's shit.

And then there's Poison, and I can give you a fair list of Mon of this type who work better offensively than as defensive bleeders:

*Sheer Force Nidoking
*Sheer Force Nidoqueen
*Chlorophyll Venusaur
*Crobat
*Venomoth
*Muk
*Gengar
*Roserade
*Drapion
*Scolipede
*Toxicroak

Yes, Poison CAN wear down opponents using a bleeder strategy, but how is it any less viable to use them to actively tear through your foe's team? You're saying to continue to specialize defensively, but even if Poison gains several strengths, it doesn't seem right to me to force ALL Poison Pokemon to have to play defensively. Especially when you take into account that most Poison Pokemon have an offensive stat that's higher than their defensive stats, or at the very least, they have a high defensive stat AND a high offensive stat. How can you tell my that Gengar, with a base Special Attack of 130, is better suited to defensive bleeder strategy when it has 60 base HP/Def and 75 base Special Def? How is Muk anymore viable as a defensive bleeder with a Special Defense bast stat of 100 than it would be an offensive attacker with an Attack of 105? Scolipede's Attack is higher than both its defenses, as is Garbodor, Skuntank, and Toxicroak's. But despite the fact that many Poison Pokemon excel at being offensive attackers, just being the type overall is "supposed" to stall out the foe, they aren't viable to put their great Attack or Special Attack to good use?

I just honestly don't understand how Poison Pokemon shouldn't be able to be used offensively when so many of them have equal or better attacking stats than defensive ones, and especially in the cases of one like Drapion who learn moves with a wide variety of types, NOT just moves that would be used for bleeder strategies.


I'm not seeing your argument. You point out how certain grass types can be used as sweepers, which has more to do with those individual pokémon's stats than anything provided by the grass type. The grass type itself by no means makes it conducive for sweeping. Let's keep the distinction between individual poison type pokémon and their stat builds, as different from the effectiveness granted by the poison type itself in general. It's not a difficult concept. Given what strategy is commonly associated with poison, what sort of type effectiveness would be the most synergistic: defensive, offensive or versatile? The answer is obviously defensive. Does that mean that poison pokémon shouldn't be able to be sweepers or have offensive potential? No, but that will be dictated by an individual case by case basis by stats, move pools, etc. Just like every other type, in terms of the general strategy which is made conducive by its type relations vis-a-vis individuals with matching or not matching stats.

To be clear, I'm not stating "poison should not be able to be offensive." It's already the case that there are individual offense oriented poison types. I'm merely speaking about what is the best type relation orientation for poison. There are a number of types besides poison which are more defense oriented. In some cases, such as steel (in addition to poison), this is problematic. That has more to do with the types the defense oriented type is able to counter, and whether there are more readily available offensive counters.
 
Last edited:

Mokoniki

chocolate chip kookie
Joined
May 4, 2013
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
2

FaerieStar

Sailor Star Chaser
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
251
Reaction score
0
"Round with not legs" is a weird concept for a faerie type. Sylveon, Flabébé and Gardevoir are not like that by any means.

I just wanted to point out that Flabébé does not have legs. :p

Well, I mean it's not "round with stub arms and feet, no visible legs".

While not exactly round bodied, Flabébé does have stub arms and a stub... foot or whatever you could describe that as. xD

I'd call it... stem, I guess? xD
 

Dog of Hellsing

He Sees You...
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
1,934
Reaction score
0
I'm not seeing your argument. You point out how certain grass types can be used as sweepers, which has more to do with those individual pokémon's stats than anything provided by the grass type.1 The grass type itself by no means makes it conducive for sweeping.2 Let's keep the distinction between individual poison type pokémon and their stat builds, as different from the effectiveness granted by the poison type itself in general.3 It's not a difficult concept. Given what strategy is commonly associated with poison, what sort of type effectiveness would be the most synergistic: defensive, offensive or versatile? The answer is obviously defensive.4 Does that mean that poison pokémon shouldn't be able to be sweepers or have offensive potential? No, but that will be dictated by an individual case by case basis by stats, move pools, etc. Just like every other type, in terms of the general strategy which is made conducive by its type relations vis-a-vis individuals with matching or not matching stats.

To be clear, I'm not stating "poison should not be able to be offensive." It's already the case that there are individual offense oriented poison types. I'm merely speaking about what is the best type relation orientation for poison. There are a number of types besides poison which are more defense oriented. In some cases, such as steel (in addition to poison), this is problematic.5 That has more to do with the types the defense oriented type is able to counter, and whether there are more readily available offensive counters.

1) That is exactly the case. A Pokemon's uses are determined by its stats and movepool, NOT its typing. You can't label an entire type as defensively-oriented when most of the Pokemon of that type are better suited to offensive use.

2) The same goes for Poison, the type itself doesn't make it relegated just to being defensive in general. Many Poison Mon have strong movepools and stats that allow them to be used offensively. I mean you can't say an entire type lean towards defensive orientation just because that type happens to learn a variety of status moves, since Grass Pokemon have a variety of status moves yet plenty of them are used for offense instead of defense.

3) But you really can't separate them like that when you're trying to argue that the Poison type in general is defensive. When you're trying to say how good a type is in general, you need to look at what its strengths, weaknesses, resistances, and immunities are compared to other types, AND you have to take into account the useability of the Pokemon in that type. Fire is a strong type because of all the powerful Pokemon it has (Charizard, Blaziken, Infernape, Volcarona, Houndoom, Arcanine, Ninetales, Typhlosion, Heat Rotom, Darmanitan, Chandelure) as well as the fact that it has a nice array of strengths and resistances. But imagine if most Fire Pokemon were sub-par like Sunny Castform. Then it wouldn't matter HOW many strengths Fire had, because most Fire Pokemon wouldn't have the stats to make use of those strengths. So to try and determine a type's usefulness without taking into account the useability of the Pokemon that make up that type to begin with is shaky at best. Since so many Poison Mon are great at being offensive, if Poison were to gain a few more viable strengths, that is all it would take to make Poison a strong offensive type. If you're trying to say it's mainly a defensive type because of its resistances/immunities...that's sorta silly. See point 5, where I'll explain it more.

4) I don't know where you're getting the idea that the primary strategy of Poison Pokemon is defensive. Here's a list of links to Smogon's BW pages on all Poison Pokemon:


Now granted, some of these Pokemon, like Roserade and Nidoqueen, have different uses depending on what tier you're playing. Both are better suited offensively in UU, but in OU they're better used as defensive stallers/support. This only actually goes to show, though, that most Poison Pokemon can be effectively used either as defensive support or offensive attackers. Looking through these various strategies, I'm not seeing defensive sets being the norm for Poison Pokemon, I'm mostly seeing offensive sets. There are also several support sets, like Amoongus, which don't really lend them to either offensive or bleeder strategies (in Amoongus' case, being a support also counts as being a wall/tank in most cases, but being a wall/tank =/= being a bleeder).

I went into PS's Smogon server and asked if Poison was more viable defensively than offensively, and was told that the only reason it's considered defensive is basically because it's pretty much useless offensively, since so many other things do what Poison does better. But if we got Fairy/Water strengths, that would make Poison much more viable (especially for on Water, since it's only weak to Grass and Electric, and since pretty much every Water Pokemon can get Ice Beam or some other Ice move, they can usually check Grass Pokemon themselves) and thus make it much more viable offensively. That being said, as Poison stands now it may be more useful defensively, but even so, most of the sets I see are built for offense. And if Poison does become SE, even just on Fairy, that can give it the boost it needs to fulfill the ability to be offensive.

5) How is Poison defensively-orientated? It has two popular weaknesses, no immunities, only one strength, Steel is immune to it, and four resistances (three of which, Grass, Bug, and Poison itself, aren't very relevant since most Pokemon outside those types don't really employ moves of those types, and Grass is weak to Poison to begin with). Resisting Fighting is nice, sure, but Rock, Ground, and Ghost resists it.

Now if Poison had, say, one or two more resistances or maybe an immunity, then I could maybe see it as being defensively-oriented. As it is, Dragon resists Grass, Water, Electric, and Fire, two of which are very popular, and it's not considered a defensive type. Water resists Water, Fire, Ice, and Steel, again two of which are popular types, but it's not really a defensive type overall. Steel, I will concede, is defensive simply because of its ridiculous number of resistances as well as its immunity to Poison, and this sort of makes up for the fact that all its weaknesses are pretty popular (it can already tank a crapload of stuff to begin with).

My point with all this is Poison has two weaknesses that are very popular and its resistances don't make up for its weaknesses like is the case with Steel. Poison has no immunities and the things that resist it are relatively common in one form or another. Three of the four types it resists aren't really common, but having a resist on Fighting isn't really impressive when most Fighting Pokemon get EQ or Dig. I just really don't see how the types resistances and such make it defensive when there are types with better resistances that aren't really defensive. One could argue that because it only has one strength which is checked better than other types, this makes it even more poor as use for offensive play, but when most of the Pokemon themselves are better suited to actively beating the snot out of the foe as opposed to stalling them out, I'm more inclined to say it's leaning more towards offensive play.

Also, I want to quickly touch on the fact that you might be saying the common use for Poison is for things like Weezing and Tentacruel because they're good tanks/stallers, and that a lot of the Pokemon more suited to offense aren't as popular just because there are things that do their job better. If that's the case, then even making Poison SE on just Fairy and Water will change that. A lot of popular Dragons get some kind of Steel move and maybe a Poison one here or there, but no Dragon Mon outside of Dialga will get STAB for Steel moves, and most of the Steel moves Dragons can learn have unreliable Accuracy (those mostly being Steel Wing and Iron Tail). Few Dragon Pokemon can get a useable Poison move (outside of Toxic, which I don't count since it doesn't has a base damage and is a status move rather than an attacking move). This means that most people will have to rely on Steel and/or Poison Pokemon to effectively shut down Fairy, if these types turn out to be SE against it. Making Water weak to Poison will, in a way, check Water Pokemon SPAMing Ice moves everywhere, and since Ice is neutral against Poison, there's a chance it might encourage people to actually start using Ice Pokemon for Ice attacks.

Either way, making Poison strong to those two types alone will give it a huge boost to playability, since Water is already a popular type and Fairy will be thanks to being a check for Dragons. This, in turn, will allow a majority of Poison Pokemon to see their full potential as offensive Mon and will change the type to offensively based. The ONLY way to keep Poison defensively based, going by how you've described it and things I'm assuming, is to either only give it one other strength, an immunity, and/or giving it more resistances. If they do that, on top of making a good number of Poison Pokemon more suited to defensive play over offensive (or even just support), then I'd definitely see Poison as being defensive and just as useful as if it were made into an offensive type.

Aaaaaand with that tl;dr, I think we've gotten WAAAAAAY off-topic with this. If you like maybe we can make a separate thread for possible Poison type interaction changes. Actually I think I'll make that thread now if it doesn't already exist. Also if I'm overlooking something I apologize, I just really don't see how Poison is being classed under defensive unless you're talking about the Pokemon that are mainly used and how THEY'RE used in competitive play. If that's the case then I can see where you're coming from about Poison being defensive.

EDIT: Okay so I misunderstood the title of the thread and thought this was mainly for discussion of the Fairy Type and changes to the Type Chart revolving around it, not general Type changes as well. Yay for not being off-topic!
 
Last edited:

Aves

Das wahr ist das ganzen
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
None of that has anything to do with what I'm actually talking about. I really don't have much of an opinion about what use individual poison typed pokémon have in the competitive arena on account of every variable beyond type relation. I am merely discussing type relations. As in, is it appropriate for poison to be effective against a lot of types, or fewer types and more resistances? That's all "offense orientation" and "defense orientation" mean in this context. None of those other considerations are relevant.
 

Dog of Hellsing

He Sees You...
Joined
Mar 11, 2010
Messages
1,934
Reaction score
0
That's addressed in several later points though. As it stands, Poison, in relation to other Types, doesn't have enough resistances to be "defensive". 3/4 of its resistances are moot, it has no immunities, is completely walled by Steel, its only strength is better checked by other Types, and it's weak to two extremely popular Types. Steel is defensive because of its huge amount of resistances, which helps even out the weakness to three popular Types, and it's immune to Poison.

I don't see why none of the other considerations are relevant. You're saying to keep Poison defensive, but in relation to other Types, it's not particularly defensive at all. Out of the 4 Types it resists, only one is really popular. If you want it to be defensive, it either needs a few more resistances, an immunity, or some of its current resistances swapped out for new, more relevant ones. But if Poison does indeed gain Fairy strength, that's not going to really change its defensive position unless it resists Fairy as well. Gaining strengths makes a Type more viable offensively, while gaining resistances/immunities makes a Type more viable defensively. Obviously the types have to matter; making Poison strong against Ice is hardly going to boost its offensive useability because Ice is so rarely used, while giving Poison Water resistance would give it a nice defensive boost (just using this as an example btw).

If Poison were to become SE on Fairy and Water, unless it also resisted those Types, its defensive use would be outclassed by the offensive abilities, especially since most Poison Pokemon are already good at attacking over stalling. Just because Poison currently has more resistances than strengths doesn't mean it's better suited to defensive orientation, especially when out of the things it resists, only Fighting is really common. Sure, you have a few good Bugs out there running around in the form of Scizor and Durant, and Grass Mon like Venu and Whimsi, but you see a lot more Fighting moves in competitive play outside of actual Fighting Pokemon than you see Poison/Bug/Grass moves outside of those respective Pokemon (some things like Energy Ball for coverage, some things like U-Turn to scout, some things like Sludge Bomb, but you don't see these as often as you see Brick Break/Focus Punch/Drain Punch/Focus Blast).
 

Aves

Das wahr ist das ganzen
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
86
Reaction score
0
A type being "defense oriented" by a pure quantitative consideration of its relations doesn't specify that it has to be an effective defensive type. That's a qualitative evaluation, one which we apply after when we consider the specific relations given with respect to the holistic system of relations. Such as to determine whether to change the relations given in a type so as to be more effective.

You're making this complicated, but this is really simple. Poison should have more resistances than things it is super effective against. The number of things that it should be super effective against ought to be 2. And the two selected ought to be such that the type has an offense application. If the defenses it has are not effective, then it should be considered to be made more effective (better defense application). I am in no way commenting whatsoever on poison out of this abstract consideration.
 

Joshawott

The Possibly Fake
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
12,017
Reaction score
193
One thing which does irk me, is how Jigglypuff is now a Normal/Fairy-type instead of just Fairy-type. Personally though, I can see these type changes happening:

Wigglytuff (Normal/Fairy) - Well, Jigglypuff is...
Clefairy (Normal/Fairy) and Clefable (Normal/Fairy) - Even Clefairy's Japanese name references pixies.
Togepi (Normal/Fairy), Togetic (Fairy/Flying) and Togekiss (Fairy/Flying).
Azumarill (Water/Fairy) - practically guaranteed.
Snubbull (Normal/Fairy) and Granbull (Normal/Fairy)
Mawile (Steel/Fairy) - Kind of confirmed by the rumours anyway.
Finneon (Water/Fairy) and Lumineon (Water/Fairy) - Possible basis on butterfly fish. Butterfly wings are often depicted as fairy wings in art.
Munna (Psychic/Fairy) and Musharna (Psychic/Fairy)
Whimsicott (Grass/Fairy) - due to Whimiscott possibly being based on the Saci.

That way, each previous generation has roughly 3-4 Pokémon that will be changed to Fairy-type, except for Gen III which has 2 (Mawile and Gardevoir) and Gen II which has 6...which actually makes up the numbers perfectly.

I'm not sure if those changes will help to make any of those Pokémon more competitively viable or not though. If we go by WPM's source and assume that the Fairy-type:
Is super effective against: Dragon, Dark and Fighting
Is not very effective against: Fire, Psychic
Is weak against: Poison and Steel
Is immune to: Dragon

If anything, that will probably reduce Whimsicott's usage if we have any useful Gen VI Poison-type Pokémon. However, Azumarill will probably get a boost from it (unless they make Poison super effective against water, which I hope they do). Musharna will most likely become even more defensive than usual and Togekiss will probably become an absolute beast (so I wouldn't be surprised if they don't change the Togepi line).
 
Last edited:

Rainbow

literal shrubbery
Joined
Apr 29, 2010
Messages
3,956
Reaction score
15
I think Liligant would fit a fairy type..maybe. Plant lady seems fairy enough.

Also, I'd like to see some Pokemon (the Clefairy line in particular) to become pure fairy. Probably won't happen, but I already find it silly Jigglypuff is still part Normal.
 

LimitCrown

New Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
583
Reaction score
0
I don't believe that Fairy-types will be immune to Dragon-types or strong against Dark-types or Fighting types.

I don't think that Togepi, when it evolves, will change from secondary Fairy to primary Fairy. I'm not sure if it can even qualify as a Fairy-type.
 

Mokoniki

chocolate chip kookie
Joined
May 4, 2013
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
2
I don't believe that Fairy-types will be immune to Dragon-types or strong against Dark-types or Fighting types.

I don't think that Togepi, when it evolves, will change from secondary Fairy to primary Fairy. I'm not sure if it can even qualify as a Fairy-type.

But what exactly defines a Fairy type though? If you were to ask me, Togepi is more qualified to be a Fairy type than Marill is.
 

LimitCrown

New Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
583
Reaction score
0
I don't believe that Fairy-types will be immune to Dragon-types or strong against Dark-types or Fighting types.

I don't think that Togepi, when it evolves, will change from secondary Fairy to primary Fairy. I'm not sure if it can even qualify as a Fairy-type.

But what exactly defines a Fairy type though? If you were to ask me, Togepi is more qualified to be a Fairy type than Marill is.

Of course, that's obvious. Marill is a strange choice to be retyped. Togepi is supposed to be a spiked ball that evolves into a chick, which evolves into a bird. It's just my opinion, though.

Fairy-types might be magic users.
 

Mokoniki

chocolate chip kookie
Joined
May 4, 2013
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
2
I don't believe that Fairy-types will be immune to Dragon-types or strong against Dark-types or Fighting types.

I don't think that Togepi, when it evolves, will change from secondary Fairy to primary Fairy. I'm not sure if it can even qualify as a Fairy-type.

But what exactly defines a Fairy type though? If you were to ask me, Togepi is more qualified to be a Fairy type than Marill is.

Of course, that's obvious. Marill is a strange choice to be retyped. Togepi is supposed to be a spiked ball that evolves into a chick, which evolves into a bird. It's just my opinion, though.

Fairy-types might be magic users.

Togepi may seem that way, but it, and by extension its evolutions, can use the happiness of others to spread more happiness. So could that qualify as magic?
 

FaerieStar

Sailor Star Chaser
Joined
Jun 18, 2013
Messages
251
Reaction score
0
I don't believe that Fairy-types will be immune to Dragon-types or strong against Dark-types or Fighting types.

I don't think that Togepi, when it evolves, will change from secondary Fairy to primary Fairy. I'm not sure if it can even qualify as a Fairy-type.

But what exactly defines a Fairy type though? If you were to ask me, Togepi is more qualified to be a Fairy type than Marill is.

Of course, that's obvious. Marill is a strange choice to be retyped. Togepi is supposed to be a spiked ball that evolves into a chick, which evolves into a bird. It's just my opinion, though.

Fairy-types might be magic users.

I think Togekiss looks very Faerie-like, with the triangle markings and the weird-looking wings and the serene grace... I agree that it doesn't make much sense to change from Normal-faerie to Faerie-flying, though. Maybe Togepi should become pure Faerie...

I think Liligant would fit a fairy type..maybe. Plant lady seems fairy enough.

Also, I'd like to see some Pokemon (the Clefairy line in particular) to become pure fairy. Probably won't happen, but I already find it silly Jigglypuff is still part Normal.

I think Bellossom also looks very faerie-like... I see some similarities with Flabébé's design in body shape, flowery head-ornaments and all. I also find weird that Jigglypuff is part normal... But GF seems to be loving part normal lately, with Helioptile and Litleo being part normal...

Blissey may become faerie too... With the healing powers and the wing-like things in her arms...
And Audino, perhaps.

I think Mismagius has a chance too... He's the Magical pokémon, and he's able to cause torment and happiness with his incantations... So ghost/faerie makes sense to me.

I don't know about the Whismur family... Exploud looks very trolly to me (tolls are kinda magical beings...) and they sure don't look very normal...
 

LimitCrown

New Member
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
583
Reaction score
0
Togepi may seem that way, but it, and by extension its evolutions, can use the happiness of others to spread more happiness. So could that qualify as magic?

Victini could qualify as magical, too, but it is classified as a Psychic/Fire type.
 

Mokoniki

chocolate chip kookie
Joined
May 4, 2013
Messages
1,129
Reaction score
2
Togepi may seem that way, but it, and by extension its evolutions, can use the happiness of others to spread more happiness. So could that qualify as magic?

Victini could qualify as magical, too, but it is classified as a Psychic/Fire type.

That is true, but it's still only the beginning. It is quite possible other Pokemon may receive a reclassification to Fairy. I hope Celebi does, because Celebi is possibly the closest looking thing to an actual fairy that there is.
 
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