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

Would you like if Pokémon add a new type?

Would you like if Pokémon add a new type?

  • The type chart is perfect as it is.

    Votes: 7 13.0%
  • I would like a new type (Please say what type would you like, and if you want it's strengths/weaks).

    Votes: 17 31.5%
  • For me is the same.

    Votes: 5 9.3%
  • It was perfect without the Fairy type.

    Votes: 2 3.7%
  • It was perfect without the Dark and Steel types.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The type chart has issues, but a new type is not a solution.

    Votes: 23 42.6%

  • Total voters
    54

EternalPokéFanGirl

"Just find your warm inner place and keep walking"
Joined
Jan 9, 2021
Messages
14,068
Reaction score
11,919
Hello everyone! As you read in the title, I invite you to discuss about new types. I don't know if this also happens to you but every time a new generation is about to come out I always see rumors of new types that of course are never truth, but do we really need a new type? (I even include as an option that the chart was better without Dark and Steel types, just in case someone really likes how it was at the beginning :LOL:)

If Gamefreak gets to add a new type someday I would probably receive it with open arms, as they will surely blend it perfectly with the others. But honestly I think the type chart is perfect as it is, and I don't think much about a new type, for me is not a priority. But what do you think about? I would love to read!
 
Last edited:
While I don't think the type chart is perfect, I also don't think that adding a new type would alleviate said issues.

I've seen several suggestions for new typings, such as Sound for example, and I haven't seen one that strikes me as particularly fitting as a standalone type. So I'd probably be indifferent at best and unhappy at worst with an addition of a new type because it probably wouldn't fix my issues with the pre-existing chart and/or would seem unnecessary.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Staff
  • #4
it would be nice if they acknowledged why we haven't seen this hypothetical new Type before in-universe rather than just pretending it's always been like that.

Yes, that's another problem I didn't mention. If they ever really add a new type I hope it would also be a discovery in-universe, or at least have them say that for whatever reason this type conveniently wasn't in any of the regions we explored beforehand, though this option would be kind of forced, but it's better than what we probably would have, that it has always been there :lapras:

While I don't think the type chart is perfect, I also don't think that adding a new type would alleviate said issues.

I've seen several suggestions for new typings, such as Sound for example, and I haven't seen one that strikes me as particularly fitting as a standalone type. So I'd probably be indifferent at best and unhappy at worst with an addition of a new type because it probably wouldn't fix my issues with the pre-existing chart and/or would seem unnecessary.

Yes, maybe the word perfect is a bit exaggerated, I'll add as an option that the chart has issues but a new type is not a solution. You're welcome to change your vote if you want.

I've also seen several suggestions, and sound seems to be most popular. But I agree with you, any of these suggestions seem fitting enough.
 
Last edited:
I think the fact that they've only introduced a total of three new types over the course of a quarter-century suggests that it's not something that they take lightly, which I think is good. They add new types only when they genuinely think that such a major alteration is necessary. So if we learned that the developers were adding a new type, I'd trust their judgment. Do I personally think the current chart needs a new type? Not especially, no. I have floated previously the idea of a "Cyber" type (inspired by the Psychic type that Yu-Gi-Oh! added to its own metagame several years ago), both as a check to the Fairy type and as a gateway to an aesthetic range that the creature designers at Game Freak haven't really experimented with, but I don't think the current chart is particularly aching for a new addition. I think the amount of balance and diversity that they've achieved across 18 different elemental profiles is truly quite remarkable, but it is also very complex and daunting to new players, so I think you'd need a pretty compelling reason to add yet another element into the mix.

That said, I don't think that tweaking the existing chart is an inherently better solution, it's just one that I think should be explored before consideration about adding a new type begins, precisely because it does not threaten to make the fundamental mechanics even more labyrinthine than they already are. (Although these are also not mutually exclusive maneuvers - X & Y added the Fairy type while simultaneously removing the Steel type's resistances to Dark and Ghost.)

I would also say that you can really get some useful mileage by developing types in other ways, like how certain types have inherent immunities (like Fire-types being immune to the Burn condition), and even more of these were added in X & Y. "Sound" is more of a property of certain moves rather than a "type" unto itself, and I think that arrangement makes more sense. Furthermore, I think a lot of a type's viability also comes down to the mechanical design of specific Pokémon - for example, Avalugg never made anywhere near as much of a splash as Glastrier has, despite them both aiming for the role of "slow, physically bulky attacker" that the designers clearly had in mind as one sort of niche for the Ice type, and a lot of that is just a matter of the precise differences in each Pokémon's stat and movepool construction. Even types that might be regarded as deficient in general can prove to be very effective if put in the right hands with the right tools.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Staff
  • #7
I think the fact that they've only introduced a total of three new types over the course of a quarter-century suggests that it's not something that they take lightly, which I think is good. They add new types only when they genuinely think that such a major alteration is necessary. So if we learned that the developers were adding a new type, I'd trust their judgment. Do I personally think the current chart needs a new type? Not especially, no.

I totally agree with you, the type balance is one of the things the franchise take most care of, and while I don't actively wait for a new type, I know that if a new type ever comes it will be introduced in a good way, and I would surely be eager to use it.

In fact I agree with your whole comment, you have amazing analytical skills, it was a pleasure to read your opinion.
 
The number of types seems about right, with no truly glaring gaps in terms of species representation (maaayyyybe Porygon?), but there definitely needs to be a few adjustments in terms of interactions. With the introduction of Fairy, Bug went from being a prime contender for worst type to the undisputed champion of that title, and Rock is also a joke on the defensive end of the spectrum.

The former's very easy to resolve - swap out Fairy's resistance to Bug moves for a weakness. The latter is a slightly more complex puzzle given that Rock's weaknesses are to certain types that aren't powerhouses themselves, but I think it would be quite reasonable to swap the Steel weakness for a neutrality (given that Steel is an excellent type that performs well in the Fairy-dominated competitive scene).
 
I would like a new type but I really can't think what it could be. I guess cosmic would be an option but that would complicate things in terms of the current Pokemon that already have a cosmic/alien theme and who are already dual type and who in some cases have already had their type changed along the years.

Sometimes I think that the Poison type should be split into two types: Venom and Toxic/Pollution. I have an interest for venom so I don't like it that things like snakes are lumped together with things like factory waste (that's not to say that it isn't justified though) and if ground and rock are two separate types than maybe these two should be as well.
 
Last edited:
Although these are also not mutually exclusive maneuvers - X & Y added the Fairy type while simultaneously removing the Steel type's resistances to Dark and Ghost.
People tend to forget that Gen 2 tweaked the type chart beyond adding new types, too.

Also, I never liked Fairy resisting Bug. It felt like it was done for the sake of giving it another resistance. There was also the problem that Fairy didn't have much of an identity at first. Sylveon, Aromatisse, and Florges are all suited for basically the same role (special wall), and they slapped it onto anything cute with little rhyme or reason.
 
People tend to forget that Gen 2 tweaked the type chart beyond adding new types, too.

Also, I never liked Fairy resisting Bug. It felt like it was done for the sake of giving it another resistance. There was also the problem that Fairy didn't have much of an identity at first. Sylveon, Aromatisse, and Florges are all suited for basically the same role (special wall), and they slapped it onto anything cute with little rhyme or reason.

True.

Like you, I also don't like Bug being resisted by Fairy. I tend to assume that they made that call specifically with Gardevoir in mind. As a mono-Psychic, it was weak to Bug, Dark, and Ghost. Adding Fairy gave it additional weaknesses to Poison (which it previously had the advantage against) and Steel, while neutralizing its weaknesses to Bug and Dark.

Making such an important determination for the sake of a single Pokémon may seem really strained (and it is), but it's definitely the kind of thing I can imagine them doing, especially since Gardevoir got a Mega Evolution and was assigned as Diantha's ace in the games that introduced the Fairy type.

That said, I wouldn't be able to speak to the competitive scene, but I've never had much of an actual problem when using Bug-type Pokémon. The vast majority of them are dual-typed anyway, which gives them more options than relying solely on Bug-type STAB, at the cost of a possible quad-weakness to Rock, Flying, and/or Fire (in the cases of Bug/Fighting, Bug/Grass, Bug/Ice, Bug/Steel, Bug/Fire, and Bug/Flying - and one of those didn't even exist until this Gen).
 
There was also the problem that Fairy didn't have much of an identity at first. Sylveon, Aromatisse, and Florges are all suited for basically the same role (special wall)

I actually liked this approach - it gave a good sense of what the type was 'comfortable' in doing, with exceptions to that gameplan becoming more numerous down the line. I completely take the point on which species became Fairies, but I felt the similar stat distributions actually helped to forge an identity, rather than hinder it.

Thinking back, this was also pretty much the approach for the original type roster, too. Rock/Ground types were almost always slow and bulky (Onix is only 'fast' in comparison to the others), both Flying and Electric types are overwhelmingly fast and fragile, Grass is usually balanced with a Special bent, Bugs are generally terrible except for their Attack stat etc. It's when you dig into Gen 2 that a lot of exceptions to those rules begin to emerge - sluggish and tanky Flying and Electric types like Noctowl and Ampharos, nimble Grass types like Jumpluff and a Bug worth a defensive damn in the form of Forretress.
 
I suppose Gen 1 had a lot of similar Pokémon as well, such as a bajillion slow Grass/Poison types. I moreso meant that they blended together. I just don't find most Gen 6 Pokémon very interesting.

At least they actually showcased Fairy in its debut generation. The only Dark-type available in Johto was the atypical Umbreon, and I'll never understand why they made it a special type.
 
Not really. I'd prefer stuff like traits and specific traits doing specific things but I feel that might make the battle system too complex so I realize full well it will likely never happen.

Actually, Beast-type. Let's go.
 
I would like another type to resist Ghost. Ghost is only resisted by two types, Normal and Dark, but Dark is the only type that can threaten Ghost offensively and also switch into Ghost as well. Not to mention that certain combinations like Ghost/Fighting and Ghost/Fairy is unresisted coverage, making Pokémon like Marshadow a terrifying offensive threat thanks to literally unresisted STAB, as well as Mimikyu to BattleSpotSingles, one of the reasons it’s so terrifying and dominant is because Ghost/Fairy is unresisted coverage as well as disguise being a free focus sash.
 
Please note: The thread is from 2 years ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom