Not really, no. I actually felt like we had enough to cover most any design even before Fairy was added, and I tend to prefer parsimony in these things. The only thing I felt could be missing was something along the lines of a ‘Holy’ type, and Fairy is probably close enough to cover most designs that would fall within that. If anything I feel like the game would survive with fewer types, not more (do we really need Ground and Normal?).
Tag: QandA
So I’m making my own fake Pokemon region, Unotos, and in it I’ve got gremlin Pokemon. I know I want them to be Fairy-type, but what should be the secondary type (if any)? I mean, Dark seems apropos, but Flying is closer to the gremlins’ origins but not in the “correct” way. Maybe a Fairy/Dark line with an ability that makes their moves super effective against Flying and Steel-types as gremlins in folklore sabotaged aircraft? I respect your opinion immensely and would love your advice on this. :)
I like the idea; it’s a good excuse to have a Fairy Pokémon on the more malicious side. I agree that Fairy/Flying isn’t quite right because gremlins don’t (I think) actually fly in spite of being traditionally associated with aircraft, and Fairy/Dark seems to make the most sense immediately – but then hey, who says your gremlin Pokémon can’t have wings after evolving (or just be able to learn Fly)? I think that would also make a great deal of sense, and be a good way of playing with the basic concept. As for beating Steel-types, what jumps to my mind would be a “Sabotage” attack – Fairy-type (physical?) but super-effective against Steel Pokémon in the same way as Aurorus’ Freeze Dry beats Water-types. As for an ability… Technician seems like the logical choice (bonus points if Sabotage has 60 power and can get a Technician boost).
What is Stockholm syndrome and how is it applied here?
I assume by “here” you mean here?
Stockholm Syndrome is a term used to describe the phenomenon of coming to empathise with one’s captor in a kidnapping or hostage situation. Sometimes victims in such situations, after talking to their captors and learning their stories, start to view them as being not entirely bad people, and may begin to cooperate with them or even take action after being rescued to ensure that their captors are treated leniently. Actual psychological research into the phenomenon is a little thin on the ground (since, for obvious reasons, you can’t really conduct experiments), but it’s a common trope in modern fiction.
In the context of Pokémon, the principle is relevant to questions of the underlying morality of Pokémon training – to wit, is the ‘friendship’ conventionally displayed between Pokémon and trainer really just a manifestation of this irrational tendency to bond with one’s captor?
Did you hear that Charizard and Greninja were recently released as fighters for the new Smash Bros? I mean, they’re awesome, but would it’d have killed them to add a grass starter as well?
I know the franchise only by reputation, but I have seen the trailer in question. I feel like Grass-types get left out of these things not so much because of any sort of systematic prejudice as because most of them are neither particularly iconic (like Pikachu and Jigglypuff) nor particularly badass (like Lucario and Greninja), which is unfortunate, but kind of understandable. Still, I feel like Grovyle would fit right in…
You’ve mentioned in the past that Grass is one of the weakest types. What would you do to change that? For example, what weaknesses and strengths would you change, or how would you alter certain attacks?
Grass… kinda gets a raw deal, yeah. Just purely in terms of the number of other types it’s strong/weak against, it’s one of the games’ worst… which is kind of a sore spot for me, since it’s also my favourite. Most types are defensively vulnerable to two or three others; a few are vulnerable to only one, and Ice (which also kinda got shafted, I think mainly because Generations 1 and 2 had no pure Ice-types) is vulnerable to four. Grass is vulnerable to five: Flying, Ice, Fire, Bug and Poison. Only one other type has that many defensive weaknesses – ironically, that would be Rock (vulnerable to Fighting, Steel, Ground, Grass and Water). Rock, though, gets to enjoy being one of the game’s better offensive types – Rock is the only type other than Ground to be strong against a greater number of types than it is weak against, offensively. Grass, not so much – Grass attacks are weak against seven different types (Grass, Flying, Bug, Fire, Dragon, Poison and Steel), which until X and Y was more than any other – and that changed not because Grass’s situation improved, but because the next-worst-off type, Bug, gained a new disadvantage against Fairy-types. They’re strong against three (Rock, Ground and Water), which is sort of average, really.
Grass does, admittedly, have a decent number of resistances – four of them (Water, Electric, Ground and Grass itself), while many types only have two or three, but it doesn’t really stand out in that regard – Water, Rock and Dragon also have four, as do Ghost, Fairy and Flying if you count their immunities (which, y’know, are kind of better), Poison has five, Fire has six, and Steel blows them all out of the water with eleven. It has to be said that counting types can only go so far – Dragon, for instance, was hands-down the best attacking type of the fourth and fifth generations, despite being strong against only one type (itself), because it had nearly perfect neutral coverage, resisted only by Steel. The problem, though, is that where types like Dragon and Rock lose out in one respect but do very well in another, Grass kinda loses everywhere. Grass-types are, admittedly, also immune to Leech Seed and, as of X and Y, powder attacks (the important ones being Stun Spore, Sleep Powder and Spore) – so basically they’re really good at blocking other Grass-types. That seems to be the niche Game Freak has in mind for them here. I mean… not that those immunities aren’t useful, but they’re also kind of a slap in the face.
So, when I put it like that, it seems like the obvious thing to do is strip out some of those damned weaknesses (the attacks, I think, are fine as they are – Solarbeam could maybe use some work, because at the moment it’s kind of a gimmick and only viable on dedicated sun-abuse teams, but I’m not sure how to change it). Let’s start with Flying. Why does Flying beat Grass? I’ve seen element-based systems before where Plant/Forest is actually strong against Wind/Sky, birds can help plants through pollination (analogy with the Grass-Water relationship), and it’s scientific fact that plants bolster hillsides against erosion by the wind. I say make Grass-types resist Flying attacks, and Grass attacks neutral to Flying-types. Make Flying-types strong against Water instead; the smug pricks deserve it. We can probably get away with removing Steel’s resistance to Grass too, since Steel has too many damn resistances anyway. In flavour terms that’s not as solid, because there’s precedent for Metal-beats-Wood in the Chinese Wu Xing cycles, but the fact is, there are probably ways to justify having Steel resist everything, so I think a little more restraint is in order when dealing with that type. Those things won’t make Grass an amazing type, but it’ll certainly make it not suck!
Bug could use some help too, but I’ve been babbling long enough…
Ever thought of giving Kid Icarus: Uprising a try? It may only be loosely based on Greek Myth, but it’s got enough references, along with an engaging plot with interesting characters and hilariously witty dialogue, to make anyone smile. Though some of the jokes that refer to the old NES title may fly over your head (no pun intended), and it takes a bit of time to get used to the control style, I’m still sure you’d be in for a fun time.
Not really a good time for me to be picking up new games at the moment, sorry.
Are you considering doing a review specifically on mega-evolving (digivolving) pokemon? Your opinion on them is something I crave since re-reading your analysis on various starter pokemon.
Thinking about it. After the Kalos Pokédex. I suppose I would want to talk about what Mega Evolution does for each Pokémon that receives it (in some cases: not as much as you’d think), as well as what the change in appearance seems to signify about that Pokémon. What else? I’m not sure how much I could usefully say about them, but we’ll see.
Are you a fan of the sci fi genre? Heinlein, Haldeman, Adams, Bear etc.? Or do you prefer fantasy, i.e. Tolkien?
Well, I always know where my towel is, though none of the other names on that list have ever been big ones for me. To be honest, I haven’t had much time for reading fiction lately. I have so much work-related reading to do (which is interesting, don’t get me wrong, but tiring), much of it in Latin or French, that picking up another book at the end of the day just makes me feel “oh, god, why?” which is a shame, because there are a lot of books out there I want to read (in particular I’ve always meant to read more Terry Pratchett, because the two or three of his that I have read were great). I did find time a couple of weeks ago, however, for The Princess Bride, which is a very different experience in book form to the subsequent movie adaptation, and which I wholeheartedly recommend. I have a kind of cold, standoffish relationship with Tolkien because I read The Hobbit as a child, loved it, and then attempted to read The Fellowship of the Ring, which I think was just too old for me at the time, because I got about a hundred pages in, realised that nothing had actually happened yet, put it down, and never returned to it (this was all before the movies, of course).
EDIT: Oh, and I also count myself among the legions of people desperately hoping that George D-Bag Martin doesn’t die before he finishes murdering every character in A Song of Ice and Fire.
Since you recently discussed the new Fairy type and briefly talked about the defining factors of other Pokémon types in doing so, I’ve been wondering about your opinions on a couple of types. I have my own of course, but your thoughts are always so interesting. First, what do you make of the Flying type, specifically the fact that it exists almost solely as half of a dual typing (with the exception of one legendary)? And second, what do you think are the defining attributes of the Normal type?
Flying is weird, because it seems like it can consist of either being a bird or having the ability to fly – not necessarily both (see: Dodrio, Scyther). In addition to the fact that there’s only one straight Flying-type (and even that in generation five), it might also be important that Flying is almost never the first of two types; there’s no functional distinction at all, but which element gets put first often seems to say something about which one is considered more important to the design (e.g. Water/Rock – Relicanth and Corsola – vs. Rock/Water – Kabutops and Omastar). Noibat and Noivern, only just introduced with X and Y, are the only Pokémon to put Flying first. What’s more, wind powers – which we now associate with Flying-types, and which are Tornadus’ main feature – originally seem to have been connected with Normal, not Flying, because Gust was a Normal-type attack in Red and Blue, while Whirlwind and Razor Wind, the other wind attacks that existed in the original game, still are Normal. I think what all this adds up to is that Flying wasn’t originally considered a type, as such – it acts more like a trait or ability that certain Pokémon possess, which makes sense when you think about it, because that’s what flight is (Dodrio is explained by the fact that, as we know from Missingno., the type was originally called “Bird,” not “Flying”). Tornadus shows that Game Freak’s conception of what the type means has changed significantly since Pokémon began, but some things about this game resist change. Charizard, then, isn’t so much “a Fire/Flying-type” as “a Fire-type who can fly,” while Pidgeot – and this is important when we move into the next half of your question – isn’t “a Normal/Flying-type,” but “a Normal-type who can fly.”
Now, Normal-types. They rely primarily on attacks of pure bodily strength, but without the complex motions and training that allow Fighting-types to overpower them hand-to-hand. As such, they also find it difficult to harm the rigid, reinforced hides of Rock- and Steel-types, and cannot inflict any harm at all on the insubstantial Ghost-types. However, being more aware than most Pokémon of the limitations of physical reality also makes them distant from the world of ghosts and spirits, rendering them invulnerable to harm from that direction. So, what do I think are the defining attributes of the Normal-type?
None. It doesn’t have any.
Normal is the “everything else” type, where we find Pokémon who have powers that either relate to none of the other elements (like Pigeotto’s wind powers, Jigglypuff’s song, or Chansey’s healing abilities), or that encompass all of them (like Ditto’s transformation skill). This becomes difficult when we confront dual-typed Normal Pokémon… but other than Normal/Flying-types, whom we’ve discussed already, how many of those are there in the first three generations? I count only Girafarig, who is something of a special case because his design focuses on his bifurcated nature; his front half has the more cerebral temperament associated with Psychic-types, while his back half is animalistic and has no special powers. It’s not until Bibarel in generation four, then Sawsbuck and Meloetta in five, that this really starts to change, and only now, with the introduction of Diggersby, Heliolisk and Pyroar, and the retyping of Jigglypuff, that non-Flying Normal dual-types have become a significant element of Pokémon’s diversity. What this says about those Pokémon, I think, is that their elemental powers are comparatively less developed than in the case of other Ground-, Electric-, Fire- or Fairy-types, and that they rely as much or more on their non-elemental abilities (sound-related powers are still unaligned, for instance – hence Jigglypuff, Meloetta and Pyroar, who has a sound-based signature move, Noble Roar). It was difficult to give Normal-types abilities related to types other than Flying for a long time because the thing that made them Normal-types was their lack of any such abilities. It’s only fairly recently that they’ve been able to reconcile this with their desire to use a greater variety of Normal dual-types.
How would you say will you go to prom with me in Greek?
Well, off the top of my head I can’t think of anything that would really be equivalent to a ‘prom’ in the ancient Greek world (or even the concept of dating, for that matter), but I guess you could just call it, like, the Dionysia or something; that’s probably as close as you can get. In which case, something like:
ἆρα βούλει μετ᾽ἐμοῦ πρός την Διονύσιαν ἰέναι;
ara boulei met’emou pros ten Dionysian ienai?
(N.B. if you’re writing this out, standard Greek orthography uses a semicolon for a question mark.)
