The Fairy Type and Alterations to Type Chart

[SUP3RN0VA]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Apparently the person responsible for the Gen 5 Pokedex leak is hinting at the possibility of a Fairy type, and claims he will start talking in a few hours.

While I doubt his ability to know this stuff because Nintendo went nuts over the aforementioned incident and should have fired him, it's probably worth at least keeping an eye on.

He's apparently going to draw (like how he drew leaked Gen V Pokemon) one of the New Pokemon too.

From what I'm reading though, he already was going on about how dead certain he was on it being flying, so if he does go through with this, I would take it with the hugest pinch of salt. Not saying that I don't believe a new type will happen, just that from him I wouldn't take anything at face value. If he's not lying though, I can see it happening. I mean if they're aiming a worldwide release this time, 6 months ahead sounds reasonable, compared to how the sprites he had for BW were used in the Spanish branch to create Spanish names(which is why the whole debacle made cease and desist orders be released for all the fan sites, as it was a huge breach of security iirc)

Also @Venator;
I don't want to sound smug, but tone it down. The "every gen a new type is speculated" reason is good, but not in our case. As I said I don't mean to be smug, but its another thing for the masses to speculate it, and its an entirely different thing for people like me, Silktree, and others to speculate on it.(I'm naming us two cause we're like 2 of the 6 or so seniors expecting it and my senior mind can't remember the others ) We wouldn't, or at least based on previous speculation discussions created by us, be jumping on the new type bandwagon if we didn't have enough evidence to back our cause. And for me especially, again sorry for being smug, I tend to hit the target when it comes to speculation and release periods. Not saying my word is the word of god, but god damn it when I say we're due for X or we're due for Y I'm usually on the mark. I don't expect me to be off either when I say Sylveon will be a new type, and I won't start being wrong here. One day I will be, but that day won't be this one.

If you're saying there will definitely be a new type this generation, then you are wrong. Even if a new type is announced, claiming right now, that there is absolutely no chance of a new type not happening, makes you incorrect, as there is a chance. There is no definite yet, and whoever believes there is, is wrong. Everything is nothing except speculation at this point, and nobody here is able to claim to KNOW if a new type is happening or not.

I am personally hoping for no new type, especially fairy type. I do not want to see Pokemon being retconned this far into the series, and if they'd introduced a fairy type, they'll have to atleast retcon Clefairy, considering its species is literally 'fairy pokemon.' I suppose it would be easy for GameFreak to add fairy to clefairy as a secondary type, however, I am hoping no previous Pokemon will be having any type changes. I've went 5 generations (four for magnemite and magneton) without any Pokemon changing types or receiving a second type, and I do not want to see that start happening.

However, if GameFreak were to add a new type, I hope they announce it sooner rather than later, to give this new type more of an opportunity to grow on me before the games are released.

 

[Blockhead Pippi]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Oh god. Fairy typing.... How would that work exactly? I've already questioned how a Light or Sound typing could possibly work, and I'm unsure about a Fairy typing as well. And while a Fairy typing would certainly fit with Sylveon's naming trend and appearance, I don't see how else it would fit it.

If there is going to be such a typing, I hope they don't retcon the Clefairy line or any other Pokemon into having that type. They certainly don't need it. Normal type is fine as it is for representing those Pokemon. Then again, that's all I've ever been saying. "Certainly don't need this or that", and in the end we still got a new Eeveeution, and still got a Mewtwo forme. Suppose then that this is the generation where I stick my foot into my mouth... I still don't want to see a new typing though.

Edit: Just a clarification here. I don't believe in this supposed typing, I'm just questioning.

 

[Venator]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

So your defense is patterns in FANDOM. That is perfectly strong evidence.

Actually, I do consider that strong circumstantial evidence. Fandom assumptions hold very little to no credibility when the fandom consistently interprets the available facts wrong.

Why should anyone trust yet another belief in a new type when the same arguments have been used in the past, and have been consistently wrong?

Hey, remember that pattern when there would be two main series games, a remake, and a third version? Remember when there would always be two Eeveelutions every even-numbered generation? Remember when the Elite Four would always be in a set pattern? Remember when every region was Japanese? Remember those days?

Oh, those patterns? Okay.

I really dunno if I would classify them as tradition, but eh.

Just because they weren't added then doesn't mean they can't be added now.

And there is a chance that they will. I have tried not to say anything regarding the certainty of whether or not a new type will be added, but I have made it explicit that I consider the chances of such a thing happening, with arguments for it centered in pure speculation, are pretty low compared to the alternative.

Honestly, I won't be surprised if there isn't a new type. It doesn't really overhaul the type system like everyone says it is to me, but that's probably just because I don't have a lot of time to play, so I can't really get into the games. I haven't even finished Black 2 yet. It would be a rather big change for the strategic part of the games, and it's not really something you can ignore, like character customization.

I agree with you in that it won't really overhaul the type system (But, if ~five less-useful types changed, that would be a big overhaul), though I disagree with the thought that one new type will be a big change to the strategic game, and that, unless it becomes an incredibly prominent typing, it will, for all intents and purposes, be pretty easy to ignore.

But you can't just assume that there will not be a new type and think everyone else who does is a moron.

I have a very good feeling that there won't be one, and I don't think that quoting myself some time in the future, as a joke, is assuming that everyone who thinks that there is a chance for a new type is a moron.

Maybe the people who think that there will definitely be a new type.

 

[Stratelier]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Allegedly there will be a "fairy" type after all, with the Clefairy family switched over to it.

Allegedly.

 

[Akromatic]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Actually, I do consider that strong circumstantial evidence. Fandom assumptions hold very little to no credibility when the fandom consistently interprets the available facts wrong.
Why should anyone trust yet another belief in a new type when the same arguments have been used in the past, and have been consistently wrong?.

Patterns can be broken and credibility can be gained.

I have a very good feeling that there won't be one, and I don't think that quoting myself some time in the future, as a joke, is assuming that everyone who thinks that there is a chance for a new type is a moron.

Maybe the people who think that there will definitely be a new type.

1. Oh. Sorry.
2. People who think one or the other will definitely happen are morons.

 

[Stratelier]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

2. People who think one or the other will definitely happen are morons.

Your options are mutually exclusive; one OR the other will definitely be proven the case.

 

[Blockhead Pippi]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Patterns can be broken and credibility can be gained.

Uh, no. People cannot gain credibility from mere guessing and speculation. Let's say that I made a little guess that a Generation would have zero legendaries, and that it turned out true, breaking a long running trend in the games. Why would this give me credibility though on something that was purely based on a guess or a want?

Whether we get a new typing or not, I don't see how anyone would get credibility from that either way. Because none of us actually knows what GF is up to. What we're all saying is merely based on speculating, guesses, and wishing.

That said, should we really be using past Generations as examples for this one? No. I think the first CoroCoro that first announced XY (game announcement, and starters, AND legendaries in one issue, no other generation has released this much info in a first announcement) is enough that we shouldn't be holding expectations on what is to come and when to expect it.

 

[Familiar]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Wouldn't it have occurred to The Pokemon Company that hyping up Sylveon's type as a big mystery FOR MONTHS would fuel speculation that it's something new? Why would anyone even bother making a whole Pikachu short just to introduce the damn critter, if it was something as boring as Flying type? I don't recall Glaceon and Leafeon receiving such huge fanfare when they were revealed. The whole campaign seems to be engineered for a reason...

 

[Garren]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Man, I pretty much was a huge supporter of the Fairy Type...not saying I made it up, but I was the first one I remember seeing around here pushing for it after Sylveon popped up, check my blogs for speculation on it and such.

I also thought that only Xerneas would be Fairy, and Yveltal I believe I may have suggested Dark/Flying as a possible type.

Given that what Hiro is saying is more or less exactly what I had in mind, including Clefairy being retyped, I'm going to say he's real because, well, I wouldn't be surprised if GameFreak changed Sylveon's type from Flying to Fairy after seeing how well my speculation made sense. So, yeah, if this is true, then you're welcome for the New Type guys.

 

[BigBadButterfree]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

While I don't buy into either side of whether or not we're gonna get a new type, I just thought I'd ramble on some ideas.

Fairy type seems to be a common idea, I could see it, and wouldn't mind if a few oldies were changed.
Light, eh, I could see it too, but they'd have to deal with stuff like Lanturn, who already works super-well with Electric.
Sound, idk... People say it's already in the games, so would be easy to implement, but I'd find it just awkward.

While I really don't try to think of Sylveon as even having a type yet, so I don't become some snooty horrible person that thinks they know it all, I think I read somewhere else that the scene with Sylveon is almost "dreamy." That made me think, just for a second, has anyone speculated with a Dream type? Eh, the more I type it, the less "right" it feels. I mean, there wouldn't be as many pokemon that would need changing, probably only Munna an Musharna, maybe Drowzee and Hypno... It's an odd thought, But I'm only puttin' it out there cuz I don't recall seeing it.

Anyway, rambling done, I don't an won't care either way if there's a new type, and as I already said, I'm currently thinking of Sylveon as typeless for sanity's sake.

 

[Chronos]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

If Fairy-type is real, what would it even be super-effective against? What would it resist? I don't care either way if it's true or not; I'm more curious about how it would be implemented.

 

[Blockhead Pippi]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

If Fairy-type is real, what would it even be super-effective against? What would it resist? I don't care either way if it's true or not; I'm more curious about how it would be implemented.

This is the sort of thing I asked when I questioned the concept of Light and Sound typings. This is also something I wonder, if Fairy typing is real.

I suppose since fairies, in most tales, are supposed to be embodiments of magic, I suppose they would have some sort of connection with Psychic, Dark or Ghost types, be it advantages or disadvantages. But we already have those aforementioned types that are already connected with each other. We don't need to add another typing to get tangled up with that.

 

[GreatLiver]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Half of the type chart doesn't really make much sense. It's just accepted because it has stood that way since 2000. If Fairy's introduced, a few of the strengths and weaknesses will make sense, and a few will be weird. Nothing new there. Saying you can't really come up with where it would fit isn't so much evidence against the possibility.

 

[Blockhead Pippi]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Half of the type chart doesn't really make much sense. It's just accepted because it has stood that way since 2000. If Fairy's introduced, a few of the strengths and weaknesses will make sense, and a few will be weird. Nothing new there. Saying you can't really come up with where it would fit isn't so much evidence against the possibility.

Give me an example on weird advantages and disadvantages then.

It's not so much how weird they are, but more of a matter of what they do. But I never did suggest that being unable to think of how the typing would work would be evidence against it. I certainly don't believe Fairy typing exists. Can prove it doesn't? No, but I can believe that it doesn't exist since we don't have an actual official confirmation on it. And I can certainly question it as well. And that is all I am doing.

 

[llama555]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Half of the type chart doesn't really make much sense. It's just accepted because it has stood that way since 2000. If Fairy's introduced, a few of the strengths and weaknesses will make sense, and a few will be weird. Nothing new there. Saying you can't really come up with where it would fit isn't so much evidence against the possibility.

Give me an example on weird advantages and disadvantages then.

It's not so much how weird they are, but more of a matter of what they do. But I never did suggest that being unable to think of how the typing would work would be evidence against it. I certainly don't believe Fairy typing exists. Can prove it doesn't? No, but I can believe that it doesn't exist since we don't have an actual official confirmation on it. And I can certainly question it as well. And that is all I am doing.

Bug being super effective against psychic and dark.
Fighting being super effective against steel. Let's see someone punch steel haha
Those r just two obvious ones

 

[SUP3RN0VA]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Half of the type chart doesn't really make much sense. It's just accepted because it has stood that way since 2000. If Fairy's introduced, a few of the strengths and weaknesses will make sense, and a few will be weird. Nothing new there. Saying you can't really come up with where it would fit isn't so much evidence against the possibility.

Give me an example on weird advantages and disadvantages then.

It's not so much how weird they are, but more of a matter of what they do. But I never did suggest that being unable to think of how the typing would work would be evidence against it. I certainly don't believe Fairy typing exists. Can prove it doesn't? No, but I can believe that it doesn't exist since we don't have an actual official confirmation on it. And I can certainly question it as well. And that is all I am doing.

Bug being super effective against psychic and dark.
Fighting being super effective against steel. Let's see someone punch steel haha
Those r just two obvious ones

Bug being super effective against Psychic makes perfect sense.

Psychic has to do with the mind, therefore it's three weaknesses are three common phobias. A phobia of the dark, a phobia of ghosts, and of course, a phobia of bugs.

 

[yay4steven]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Here's my speculation for a new type:

Since the Psychic type represents the mind and the Fighting type represents the body, a new type can be added to the mix that represents emotion. I think this is possible partially due to Sylveon's reveal being on Valentine's day. For now, I'll call this type "Heart".

On attacking:

• Super Effective against:
  • Ice
  • Fighting
  • Dark
• Not very effective against:
  • Fire
  • Psychic
  • Ghost
  • Heart

Defensively:

• Weak against:
  • Ice
  • Psychic
  • Dark
• Resistant to:
  • Fire
  • Fighting
  • Heart

Since the Heart type represents emotion, Psychic type will have an advantage over it(the mind rules over emotion), but it will have an advantage over fighting(emotion rules over the body). Strong emotion can be said to have fire-like qualities in being able to melt ice, but can also be frozen in turn, both metaphorically. Likewise, Fire and Heart can't affect each other well since they represent a similar thing. Emotion is able to convert the "bad guys", but is also corruptible.

The idea with this is that Pokémon that are closely related to emotion will have this new type. A big problem with this and many similar proposed types is that this includes the Chansey line, who would be very powerful if it didn't have its Fighting type weakness. This idea will exchange its Fighting type weakness for weakness to Ice, Psychic, and Dark, which has problems in being largely special-based or not being very strong. One can make a case for Bug to be another weakness, which can help it out, although another possibility is simply allowing those three types, or at least one of the three, to get much stronger physically.

In any case, that's my idea. Thoughts?

This is the most logical, thought-provoking idea I've read so far. And I created an account with this site just so I could let you know that.

 

[V Faction]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

One of the great unspoken things about Pokemon's Type Chart is how it doesn't fall within the typical real-world mirrors or D&D elemental tropes of other games and fantasy; it has created its own library of logic.

Fire-Grass-Water? Both Rock AND Ground? Psychic-Fighting-Dark? Flying vs. Bug? No Problem!

I respect this array of Strengths/Weaknesses because they've shown how canonical it can be. For 5 generations of games, Pokemon have been created with a combination of these Types. Everything works within the context of world.

Personally, I don't care what type it is... Fairy, Magic, Light, Sound, Pudding... I'm more interested in how they plan to integrate such an idea into the existing fiction. That is what grabs my attention the most--whether or not Game Freak can pull it off.

 

[yay4steven]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

One of the great unspoken things about Pokemon's Type Chart is how it doesn't fall within the typical real-world mirrors or D&D elemental tropes of other games and fantasy; it has created its own library of logic.

Fire-Grass-Water? Both Rock AND Ground? Psychic-Fighting-Dark? Flying vs. Bug? No Problem!

I respect this array of Strengths/Weaknesses because they've shown how canonical it can be. For 5 generations of games, Pokemon have been created with a combination of these Types. Everything works within the context of world.

Personally, I don't care what type it is... Fairy, Magic, Light, Sound, Pudding... I'm more interested in how they plan to integrate such an idea into the existing fiction. That is what grabs my attention the most--whether or not Game Freak can pull it off.

I am now an advocate of the "pudding" type.

 

[Spindae2]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

If FAIRY really happens

Weak against
-Poison
-Psychic
-Normal

Strong against
-Dark
-Fighting
-Ghost