Anonymous asks:

do you have a crush on a pokemon character? and if you don’t, who’s the most fitting to have a crush on? (i know this is weird but meh whatevs) p.s. i’ve been shipping you with silver huehue

…you’re right, this is weird.

Anyway, the first answer is no, and the second is that I’m… not really sure what you mean by “most fitting”?  Like… I guess someone who is roughly your age, for starters?  And, uh… has a good moral character?  Hell, I don’t know; it’s not my job to tell people who they can and can’t write erotic fan fiction about.

Anonymous asks:

Do you think there are any similarities between the creations of Pokémon like Claydol and Golett, and Pokémon like Porygon? To me the former always seem to have been created by, I dunno, psychic Pokémagic and the latter via science/technology… but then Golett’s Pokédex entry states it was created by “ancient science” and, come to think of it, does magic even exist in the Pokémon world? And what about Castform? Do you think creating a Pokémon is a long-standing tradition in the Pokémon world?

Mmm, but what is technology and what is magic?  If the forces we call ‘magic’ work according to rules that are observable and knowable, then magic can be approached scientifically, and one’s knowledge of how to use it is a form of technology, in exactly the same way as our knowledge of how to extract electrical energy from the wind and tides is “technology.”  If ghosts, spirits, psychic powers and souls are real things in the Pokémon world, and can have tangible effects on the physical universe, then you can observe them, formulate scientific theories about them, and create technology that interacts with them.  “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic,” says Arthur C. Clarke’s famous dictum, or to put it another way, ‘magic’ is what we call technology we don’t understand, and I suspect the writers behind Pokémon would incline to a similar idea if you were to press them.  “Ancient science” here perhaps means that the people who created Golett knew how to construct vessels that could contain a soul after death and allow it to interact more easily with the physical world, and to me that’s a sort of technology – just one that’s wholly beyond the Pokémon world’s modern civilisations.  When they talk about creating Pokémon, they tend to see it as something new, experimental, something they’re just playing with in its earliest stages, but maybe some of those experiments were inspired by ancient stories, and pushed forward by scientists who had exactly this kind of opinion about ‘magic.’

Anonymous asks:

Good news, I found an explanation for Pawniard and Bisharp! Pawniard is an ashigaru, a japanese foot soldier that serves under a samurai characterized by their rounded helmets, while Bisharp is the samurai itself. It would explain why Bisharp are described as commanding armies of them. The chess puns in the English names are probably just an attempt to localize them, but it does make some sense since pawns can be promoted into bishops. What do you think?

Well, there is a chess pun in the Japanese too, because Pawniard’s Japanese name references the word for a game piece (koma), so it still seems likely to me that they were influenced by the appearance of pawns in European chess.  But it does make a lot of sense – maybe someone at Game Freak thought that pawns in Shogi could be imagined as ashigaru, and then made a connection with the shape of European pawns?

Anonymous asks:

What do you think of Pokemon obviously designed to be sexualized like Lopunny? I think it’s really creepy myself, and can’t stand playing with them in Pokemon amie because they keep giving me giggles, hip shakes, hair/ear flips, and generally acting like they’re trying to flirt with me. Not to mention in their first sprites, their elbows were deliberatly placed to make it look like they have breasts. It’s really screwed up, and feels like a desperate attempt to pander to “adult” demographics.

To be honest it’s not something that’s ever bothered me a great deal.  I mean, I think it’s silly, and doesn’t make for interesting designs, but I’ve never had the kind of visceral discomfort with it that you seem to.  Nor do I quite see what you mean about Lopunny’s fourth-generation sprites, although I suppose they could be taken that way.  I will say it seems like a very odd choice to me, given the ‘family-friendly’ image that Nintendo has always tried to cultivate, and Game Freak’s obvious discomfort with saying anything explicit about how ‘breeding’ works.  The disconnect leads me to suspect that there’s some level of cultural nuance here that that the Western audience just isn’t quite getting, and I don’t really know enough about the Japanese to probe the matter any further.

Anonymous asks:

I was re-reading your old Unova entries, and your one on Scraggy and Scrafty really annoys me. What is it about modern subcultures that make them inherently worse than mythology or biology? And besides, Scraggy and Scrafty are based on various features real life reptiles have, just viewed under an anthropmorphic lens. You complain it breaks your suspension of disbelief to see it so clearly based off human concepts, but never clarify why seeing human icons such as thunderbolts and letters don’t.

Point of clarification first: “complained,” not “complain;” this was almost four and a half years ago and honestly I’m not sure it reflects my current views terribly well nor am I motivated to spend a lot of time defending it, but since you ask…

Continue reading “Anonymous asks:”

vikingboybilly asks:

I think the problem with hail is that it gives benefits ONLY to ice types, whereas the other weathers splash around benefits to electric, grass, ground and steel types. Any ideas to give other types advantages in hail?

It doesn’t even benefit Ice-types, really, so much as not disadvantage them… that is, unless they have Blizzard, Ice Body or Snow Cloak.  I sort of think it would make sense to add something analogous to Sandstorm’s bonus for Rock-types and say that Hail gives Ice-types +50% physical defence.  It’s hard to think of anything that makes thematic sense with Hail as a benefit for types other than Ice, though, which is probably why Game Freak has never done it.  You might be able to come up with something that makes sense for Water-types, I suppose, but they already have bonuses from rain, so screw them.  You could, however, make the penalties more severe for some types in particular – defence penalties for Rock and Steel, for instance, on the grounds that rapid cooling makes materials more brittle, which would add more to Hail’s ability to wear opponents down.  Or perhaps Hail could do more damage to Pokémon that are weak to Ice attacks, which gives a bit more variance to how teams with different compositions are affected by it.  At the moment the only real way to build a Hail team is to put several Ice-types on it, but if there are some Pokémon who are weakened significantly more than most by Hail, there will be others who are in a position to take advantage of that.

Anonymous asks:

Murkrow and Honchkrow vs. Misdreavous and Mismagius, purely on a design/concept level.

Well, I guess I would say that I think Misdreavus and Mismagius seem to hold together in a more coherent fashion.  With Murkrow and Honchkrow there seems to be this weird disconnect, where Murkrow is all about witchcraft, superstition and misfortune, but then Honchkrow is… like, a mob boss for some reason?  I can kind of see links there, don’t get me wrong – the Mafia are Italian, and Italians are a superstitious lot; Honchkrow apparently gets called “the Summoner of Night” for his role in leading groups of Murkrow, which sounds a lot more like a name you’d give to the master of a coven of witches than to a Mafia Don; Murkrow steals and hoards shiny things, so an association with criminality isn’t out of the question.  But there just isn’t anything there, for me, that ties it all together.  Honchkrow is just… odd, as an evolution from Murkrow.  On the other hand, that same mix of different influences kind of makes them more interesting Pokémon to me than Misdreavus and Mismagius, somehow.  There’s stuff about Murkrow and Honchkrow that demands explanation in a way that isn’t the case for Misdreavus and Mismagius; you can imagine weird stuff about their social structures, and their existence kind of suggests some odd overlap between organised crime and superstition or witchcraft in the Pokémon world, which is the sort of curious place that makes a good starting point for telling a story.  So… “hmmmm…” is what it comes down to, more or less.

Anonymous asks:

How does Dwebble “melt holes in hard rocks with a liquid secreted from its mouth” without any acid based attacks?

…huh.

Y’know, that…

…huh.

Okay, well, I suppose my stance has to be that, If I Were In Charge, Dwebble would get Acid because it makes sense and there’s no compelling game balance reason for him not to, but given that he doesn’t… Upon closer inspection, the Pokédex never actually says “acid” or “acidic,” it just mentions a secretion from Dwebble’s mouth – so maybe it’s not an acidic solution at all, but a special enzyme in Dwebble’s saliva, designed to break down certain kinds of rock?  It’s slow-acting, ineffective against all other materials, and therefore utterly useless in combat, but important for Dwebble’s way of life.  I think that makes sense.

Anonymous asks:

What would you say are the Pokémon that best exemplify the five Contest categories?

Mmmm… tricky…

Well, beauty has to be Milotic, right?  ‘cause originally Milotic’s very evolution was tied to the beauty stat, and no other Pokémon has that kind of connection.

I reckon cleverness and toughness are probably Alakazam and Machamp respectively, since in the original games they sort of form an opposed pair of brain and brawn.

Coolness is hard because it’s something that you know when you see it but is hard to define; if you look at the moves associated with it, they tend to be either flashy, dynamic and powerful or quick and accurate, so there are kind of two aesthetics blended in there.  I think I can probably appeal to popular authority, though, and say without fear of contradiction that the coolest Pokémon of all time is Charizard.

Cuteness is downright impossible because there are so many Pokémon you quite justifiably could pick.  Also I happen to think Dunsparce is the cutest Pokémon ever but I suspect this is a minority view on my part.  I might have picked Pikachu for this because of his universal popularity, but Cosplay Pikachu firmly establishes him as being linked with all five categories.  The best I think I can do is narrow it down to two – Eevee or Togepi – because I think the concept of ‘cuteness’ implies the potential for growth, and those are both Pokémon for whom that’s a really important design element.