The Fairy Type and Alterations to Type Chart

[Dex]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Just because people have speculated in the past about things that didn't end up happening, that doesn't mean this won't happen. I'm sure every big thing that has happened was just as speculated about as things that haven't happened. I'm sure people speculated to no end about Steel and Dark Types, about whether or not there would be more eeveelutions after the original three, and about the possibility of a pokemon changing forms.

We naturally speculate. Obviously a large amount is wrong, but everything that does happen in the end is speculated about as well.

 

[Almonds]

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

People experienced in martial arts can whack a plate of steel in two only using their bodies. That, and the fact they can also break metal stuff.

 

[Meophist]

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.

I feel honoured you'd say that.

That said, the new piece of info is interesting. It doesn't quite seem real to me, but assuming it is...

It's a bit odd for Xerneas to be single-typed, but also very odd for it to be of a new type while Yveltal is not. I think this might indicate two new types.

I think I remember proposing this idea before, but there could be two new types next generation but with different purposes: One will be a Pokémon type(Fairy) and the other will be a move type(Sound). That is to say, one type will be reserved as a Pokémon type and will not be used on moves, and the other will only be used on moves and not be held by any Pokémon. This is a method for introducing more new types without expanding the type chart as much as two whole new types.

This also solves the problem of having to define a Sound-type Pokémon, as they won't exist, so there's no need to figure out what type Tympole will be, for example. I personally have trouble figuring out what sort of moves a Fairy type would have, so this method will not require any.

The reason this relates to the rumoured types of the two legendary Pokémon is because if Sound is entirely move-based, then it makes sense for Yveltal to not have the type despite representing it. It also makes it make sense why only one of the two are of a new type.

One thing I'm a bit hesitant on in terms of a Fairy type is that I can't think of any real logical type advantages and disadvantages for a theoretical Fairy type. It feels a bit too abstracted for Pokémon.

Those are my thoughts on the matter.

 

[GiraFragMich]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

It is really very simple. A supposed Fairy type should be weak to Poison (pollution of nature) Electric and Steel (technology replacing nature). It should be resistant to Water (Water gives life), Dark (good vs. evil), Grass (its environment) and maybe itself. It should be super effective on Dark (again good vs. evil), Ghost (beings of light have the advantage) and something else. Fairy-type moves should be NVE on Steel, Poison and Fire.

 

[Venator]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Since all we can do is speculate on the validity on Hiro's claim, has anyone else thought that, maybe, Game Freak may be using Hiro (maybe other leakers) as a way to rile up the fanbase and drive them further crazy?

 

[Zeb]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

NOTE: Just as a note to earlier posts regarding this: When Sylveon's type is revealed and/or a new type is confirmed to exist/not exist, there should be no gloating or mockery from anyone towards anyone else, regardless of whether they were proved right or wrong. Gloating is actually against the forum rules (which are here if you wish to read them) as it's baiting. And the last thing we all want is the baiting to turn into flaming and for the topic to suffer, as you can be sure some people will take the "joke" too far, or some people will be offended and find it rude. So, to avoid that, let's not gloat, mock, joke, or laugh at anyone when the information either way is revealed. If you guys choose to ignore this request from the staff, when we find out about the types, then it's highly likely you'll find yourself with an infraction. And this sort of behaviour applies to anything, really, not just this new type discussion.

If any of you have any questions or concerns regarding this then feel free to contact a member of the XY/VG forum staff privately, and refrain from posting them in the thread so not to derail it. This post is just a reminder of the forum's rules and not an invitation to start a discussion about this.

Apart from that, this thread has actually been having some great discussion and ideas come from it, so let's try keep it that way in the future, yeah? Thanks!

 

[Spectacular Snivy]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

If Pudding type actually existed(it IS a possibility)
Weakness:
Fire
Phsycic
_________________________(To be more)
Resistances:
Normal
Fighting
Water

 

[Porygon2z]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

There should be an Alien/E.T./Cosmic type.

 

[Akromatic]

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.

Yes, but until then, people can guess whatever they want.

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.

And you are speculating that there will be no new type and basing it on past events.
P.S. It's actually kind of fun to speculate.
Isamu Akai, I'm gonna stop replying to you here.
Here's a list of types that will probably never happen and I have no faith in happening.
Wood type
Mystic type
Life type
Another name for the Dark type that actually means darkness
Tech type
Mermaid type
Ball type
Inferno type
Irony type
Chair type
Door type
Pillow type
Night type
Day type
Cloud type
Floor type
Paper type
Fiber type
Washroom type
Sunscreen type
Volume type
Brightness type
Net type
!?!?!?____ type
Punctuation type
Back type
Indian type
Global type
Explorer type
Nature type
Air type (rename of Wind type)
Window type
Health type
Exclamation mark type
Book type
Blanket type
Comfort type
Stripe type
Laptop type
Fandom type
Moon type
Again, this is just random stuff. Most of these are just objects I see around me. These are all stupid, it's just fun. IDK how it's fun, though, and Isamu will probably point that out.
EDIT:

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.

LET US FORM A PUDDING TYPE ARMY AND CRUSH ALL WHO STAND IN OUR WAY!

 

[Proxima Centauri B]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

I actually see Mystic as a type that could actually happen, I think it's a broad thing that could encompass a lot of concepts.

 

[SirOni]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Best alternative names for a Fairy-type would be Mystic or Fae. I prefer Fae. In accordance with the mythology they would naturally be weak to Steel since iron is like poison to them. Speaking of which, probably Poison too because of their relation to the natural world. This conflict between the natural world and our own constructed society is probably why the fae were believed to be weak to iron.

People are talking about Fairy-type being super effective against Dark-type like it's some sort of replacement for Light-type speculation! This is just not right. Just take a look at the folklore and stories that portray these wily tricksters. The Fae and Dark-types have much in common.

 

[Regiruler]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Best alternative names for a Fairy-type would be Mystic or Fae. I prefer Fae. In accordance with the mythology they would naturally be weak to Steel since iron is like poison to them. Speaking of which, probably Poison too because of their relation to the natural world. This conflict between the natural world and our own constructed society is probably why the fae were believed to be weak to iron.

People are talking about Fairy-type being super effective against Dark-type like it's some sort of replacement for Light-type speculation! This is just not right. Just take a look at the folklore and stories that portray these wily tricksters. The Fae and Dark-types have much in common.

Assuming we don't get any more types other than fairy soon, this is the closest thing to a "good" type possible, depending on the interpretation. That interpretation of yours will most likely be left up to type combinations, most likely Fairy/Dark.

 

[Peppermint Phoenix]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Are all pokemon mystical and aren't all legends mythical. Again this is my problem with the new type thing. There is just no escaping this shit.

 

[El_]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Are all pokemon mystical

Maybe to us, but not inside their own universe.

aren't all legends mythical.

Actually no, some are simply much more rare or powerful, but such things do not automatically equal true "mythical" status. Are the myths simply human interpretation or actually legit is a topic that is still open.

Overall on the type, I can actually see the "Fairy type" being legit. While I don't fully trust the source, I'm not against it either. It would fit the theme of the Pokemon shown thus far, not to mention the actual region being based on France.

As for if Yveltal doesn't get the new typing... if this is a legit leak anyways. I have to admit that given its appearance and name Dark/Flying is almost a given, but the main reason for no new typing could be to contrast whatever Xerneas represents. Sort of like a dark magic vs light/arcana magic sort of thing, since Faes represent magic in a lot of series.

 

[Silktree]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

As for if Yveltal doesn't get the new typing... if this is a legit leak anyways. I have to admit that given its appearance and name Dark/Flying is almost a given, but the main reason for no new typing could be to contrast whatever Xerneas represents. Sort of like a dark magic vs light/arcana magic sort of thing, since Faes represent magic in a lot of series.

I'm bothered by the lack of symmetry. It's one thing to contrast Fairy from Dark, but what about Yveltal's secondary type and Xerneas' lack thereof? Why does Yveltal's name reference evil while Xerneas' name doesn't reference any trait (but rather just the letter X and the creature it was based on)? Even though "yvel" is hard to miss, it would make more sense if the name were just a reference to the letter Y and the animal Yveltal was based on.

There is also the question of how dark magic vs. fairy magic can be tied to genetics. The only thing that comes to mind is the speculation about Xerneas and Yveltal not being real Pokémon, but rather fairy tale creatures turned real by way of DNA engineering. That idea has some potential, but the mascots don't seem otherworldly compared to other legendaries. More mythical perhaps, but not to the point of being too good to be real.

I am not saying that any of this is necessarily unlikely to happen, but I just question the logic behind it.

 

[Peppermint Phoenix]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

aren't all legends mythical.

Actually no, some are simply much more rare or powerful, but such things do not automatically equal true "mythical" status. Are the myths simply human interpretation or actually legit is a topic that is still open.

UUM Legendary is as close to a synonym for mythical as you're going to get. The fact that they are all non breedable and non evolving in addition to those things means they are not just super rare pokemon.

 

[Jukain]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

Not to mention a number of legends HAVE demonstrated the powers which their legends describe. Also, really? A counter to dark? According to the fandom, Dark is not one of the types that need to be fixed. I call inconsistency. I'm not even going to touch it myself since I think there is nothing wrong with the type chart whatsoever, and most of people's problems are in that pokemon is inherently imbalanced. Some pokes are just more useful than others. What types they happen to be in have nothing to do with it.

 

[Stratelier]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

aren't all legends mythical.

Actually no, some are simply much more rare or powerful, but such things do not automatically equal true "mythical" status. Are the myths simply human interpretation or actually legit is a topic that is still open.

UUM Legendary is as close to a synonym for mythical as you're going to get. The fact that they are all non breedable and non evolving in addition to those things means they are not just super rare pokemon.

"Legendary" is the term for rare, non-breedable Pokemon which are typically encountered/catchable only once per save file (their non-breedable status helps enforce their rarity). Lapras and Feebas are "super-rare Pokemon", but breedable, thus not legendary.

"Mythical" is a related term (mythic pokemon are also legendary as defined above) but often seen in reference to actual in-game myths and legends, perhaps to differentiate it from the other term.

 

[Mitchman]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

As for if Yveltal doesn't get the new typing... if this is a legit leak anyways. I have to admit that given its appearance and name Dark/Flying is almost a given, but the main reason for no new typing could be to contrast whatever Xerneas represents. Sort of like a dark magic vs light/arcana magic sort of thing, since Faes represent magic in a lot of series.

I'm bothered by the lack of symmetry. It's one thing to contrast Fairy from Dark, but what about Yveltal's secondary type and Xerneas' lack thereof? Why does Yveltal's name reference evil while Xerneas' name doesn't reference any trait (but rather just the letter X and the creature it was based on)? Even though "yvel" is hard to miss, it would make more sense if the name were just a reference to the letter Y and the animal Yveltal was based on.

There is also the question of how dark magic vs. fairy magic can be tied to genetics. The only thing that comes to mind is the speculation about Xerneas and Yveltal not being real Pokémon, but rather fairy tale creatures turned real by way of DNA engineering. That idea has some potential, but the mascots don't seem otherworldly compared to other legendaries. More mythical perhaps, but not to the point of being too good to be real.

I am not saying that any of this is necessarily unlikely to happen, but I just question the logic behind it.

Thererin lies my issue with this rumor. Not the new typr-e, but the asymetrical typings. On'y pne we've had for the groupings or even thematical duos is Tornadus in the last 2 gens. Gen 3 asswankery with Groudon being the only single type will be a huge disappointment. Not to mention it would be impossible till the games come out or they tell us something to actually speculate on anything. DP? Eh okay you have steel and water so uh, time makes the diamond hard while the sea is vast.....so time and space? BW? Electricity and fire black and white....nature and technology and morals. XY? Uh fairy and dark gives us....good vs evil? But thats BW! Duality and common thematics is a key to mascots, so its qu8te puzzling for the typings to be such.

 

[Juvarra]

Re: New Type or Alterations to Type Chart?

I would have only these typings changed:
-Clefairy normal/fairy
-Clefable normal/fairy
-Gardevoir psychic/fairy
-Mismagius ghost/fairy
And for Celebi... Maybe a new form, fairy/grass?