@Tangent: A quick scan indicates Bellsprout, Farfetch'd, Shellder, Pinsir, Elekid (Electabuzz), Magby (Magmar), Mimey Jr (Mr. Mime) and Eevee (of course) are missing from the first gen. If anything, we seem to be missing second-gen...

And of course we'll talk in English. My bad, must have slipped thru while I was thinking of the spanish-speaking thread at Yack Fest... Many thanks!

And now for something a little different...

Flamethrower

Statistics

• Type: Fire
• Attribute: Special
• Strength (in Base Power units or BP): 95

Description

The user fires a prolonged stream of ignited gas or liquid at a single target. Has a chance of causing severe burns.

Mechanics

Flamethrower is, among many, the quintessential fire attack. Favored by trainers for its strength, range, and reliability. It starts with the Pokemon's internal Pyro-Sac, a heavily flame-retardant, bladder-like organ usually situated in the chest or abdominal cavities and controlled via a secondary diaphragm. This organ is lined with glands that produce a highly flammable oil, most often this oil is aerosolized, and ejected out of a secondary esophagus known as a "flame tunnel". The oil is then ignited by weak bio-electric organs at the back of the throat known as "spark plugs". Though in some cases the spark-plugs may be located inside the Pyro-sac itself. Other times the liquid is not aerosolized and is ignited as is, as a sort of natural Napalm. Pokemon that exhibit that type of Pyro-projection usually have larger Pyro-sacs and produce more viscous oils.

All Fire-type Pokemon have some form of internal Pyro-sac, and can learn Flamethrower. Though some more inexperienced Pokemon will need instruction in order to control the amount, and velocity, of fuel ejected in order to achieve the stream indicative of a proper Flamethrower. (Trainer's Tip: Consult the manual included in the Flamethrower Technical Machine for more details).

Despite the specialized equipment required to perform Flamethrower, a surprising amount of non-Fire types have been observed to be able to use this technique, including Pokemon like Snorlax and Gyarados. This is due to a multi-purpose organ known as an "Omni-sac" that, with proper conditioning, can mimic the function of a conventional Pyro-sac, albeit with reduced strength.

Hazards (Hazard Level: 10/10)

As with all Fire attacks, Flamethrower is classified as "extremely dangerous". Trainers should proceed with great caution when fielding Pokemon using this move. Even grazing blows can cause third-degree burns on human skin. Houndoom's Flamethrower is particularly infamous, as the Napalm like substance it fires causes severe, and more often than not, permanent nerve damage. Pokemon are generally more resistant but severe injury and accidental death via immolation is not uncommon at the hands of this move. Trainers in sanctioned matches are encouraged to train Pokemon with more intense Pyro-projection abilities not aim directly at their targets, but target the space near the target, or miss intentionally by a few feet. Anyone injured by this move should have their wounds treated by Burn Heal and be rushed to a Hospital/Pokemon Center immediately. Trainers who regularly work with Fire Pokemon and other Flamethrower users are encouraged to carry fire-retardant clothing, such as Sharpedo leather gloves, chaps, etc., on hand.

Use of this move and other fire attacks are strictly forbidden in heavily wooded areas, tightly packed urban or residential districts, and areas where flammable materials are present. There have been several, highly publicized, cases of large scale fires breaking out due to irresponsible trainers using Flamethrower and other Fire attacks. In most countries, causing fires due to mishandling Fire Pokemon is a criminal offense. Trainers can be charged with criminal negligence or, depending on the circumstances, arson and punishable by revoking their Trainer's License and a minimum of 10 years jail time.

—-

Rolling updates are in effect. This is a rather experimental entry and I'm looking for ways to improve it.

edited 11th May '11 12:33:56 PM by Neo_Crimson

I'm not sure if we need attacks for entries, as there's lots of them.

Entries on individual moves? an interesting idea. I personally wouldn't go too in detail on how the move is done, as different pokemon likely have different ways of performing the same move, at least from a mechanical standpoint. I mean, Omni-sac? ehhh...

edit: on second thought, an Omni-sac would totally make sense assuming all pokemon evolved from a common ancestor.

edited 3rd Feb '11 10:10:59 PM by Blissey1

If we assume all pokemon are very distant offshoots of mew, it makes sense for certain species to perform skills outside of their type.

I for one would like to write an entry on something like blizzard or shadow ball.

Also, assuming pokemon are an addition (a sub kingdom or separate kingdom altogether) to normal animals and not a replacement, I would like to write an entry on pokemon-animal interaction.

I'd like it better if this was a world where Pokemon replace real-life animals, and any and every referral to a real-life animal is Early-Installment Weirdness (And I feel that the remakes do their best to replicate what happened in the generation they're trying to recreate, including Cutting Off the Branches and the pokedex entries).

I'd say that Mew is not quite an ancestral Pokemon, but a highly derived one, as seen in its very complex genome. I'd say that the only things that derive from Mew are Mewtwo and Ditto. Yes Ditto, the other Pokemon that learns transform, has the same colors as Mew (BOTH variants), and has equal stats. Some sort of genetic mistake, or a prototype of Mewtwo gone wrong. But if you have the DNA of everything in your genome, you are not ancestral, you'd be actually a descendant of everything. Also, silenced DNA, and control of expresivity.

And I doubt that some legendaries, particullary those who are pretty much implied to be on par with or even above Mew (Lugia, Ho-Oh, Celebi, Jirachi, most things that are GODS...) are part of itself.

If I had to write something about Mew, I'd go ahead and said it has great extentions of junk DNA, result of fast evolution and incorporation of viral DNA to its own (hey, that also happened to us!), ending up with a Pokemon with an incredibly flexible DNA, able to adapt itself to any situation quickly and in an individual way. An specimen was caught and subject to genetic testing, and out of some experiments, 2 species arose: One with an even more powerful adaptability factor, but with its own power very lacking (Ditto, which reproduced and scaped into the wild quickly, but is still rare and not an ecological menace), and one that took a hit to its adaptability, but compensates for that with one of the most impresive battle poweress of all Pokemon (guess who? Also, scaped causing destruction at the Cinnabar Mansion, seems to dwell within the Cerulean Cave, and is unknown if it had reproduced).

I just don't get how Pokemon Geneticists can revive fossils, but lack any basic concept of the evolution of DNA.

I read that last sentence as "Pokemon Genosect can revive Fossils". But on topic, my Fanon for how Mew is the Ancestor is that it was created after Arceus had gone and made the Creation Trio and the Lake Guardians + Weather Trio who messed up the planet and Regigigas to fix it back up. Mew then filled the rest of the pokemon world with pokemon and humans shoehorned themselves in because we need an Audience Fillibuster to make a successful video game series.

Earth Is the Center of the Universe much?

Arceus created the universe, matter and spirit. Not directly life on Earth, as people tend to interpret. The first generation is HEAVILY SCIENCE BASED, giving religious connotations to Mew, well, No. Just... No.

The existance of animals other that Pokemon, I'd say it cannot be attributed to ESW. The presence of humans, as well as references to other animals, AND THE POKEMON BEING SAID TO BE SPECIES OF ANIMALS, are good enough proof for me.

By the way, the Weather Trio CREATED geography, not just wrecked it. Regigigas, as well as the Regis, are implied to be artificial creatures.

I'm with Erio on this, it just makes more sense that way.

RL animals might have existed at one time, but I'm sure that they'd be easily outcompeted and driven to extinction by Pokèmon.

I always figured the Pokedex listing Pokemon as certain species was either just Gameplay and Story Segregation or more likely an alternate name before "officially" being known as their current name. Or maybe it's the other way around, the real-life species name being a scientific name of sorts and the normal punny names being the commonplace names. To me, having both Pokemon and real-life animals just feels awkward and unlikely.

@Eriorguez Very well then. If you want your articles to be heavy on the science, then be my guest. My articles, however, will be heavy on the mythology. If you've got a bone to pick with that, I'd rather we talk over it via P Ms.

However, there is nothing we can really do about it, since the articles for both Mew and Arceus have already been created by someone else, and out of courteousness I will not edit them unless they have a grammar/spelling error or I have communicated with the original author first. I have already written the article for Kyogre, and Sullen Frog wrote the article for Groudon, which are both heavy on the mythology and religious connotations regarding them. The Regis have already been written down by Eon with Regigigas on the way, and I am in charge of the Giratina article, which will be heavy on the mythology, in-universe controversy, and behavior of Giratina.

tl;dr, be sciencey if you want, but please leave me out of it.

@Anomalocaris: I agree with you. I don't want there to be commonplace animals in the pokemon world, that just doesn't feel right.

edited 4th Feb '11 4:56:11 PM by CalamityJane

But, the thing is, that within legendaries, there are ones that are mythological, and others that are naturably explainable.

I'd lump the Kanto and Johto ones, as well as the Latis, Deoxys, Heatran, Manaphy (and drone Phione), Shaymin, Victini, the Musketeer trio/quartet, and Genesect as scientifically explainable. Maybe the Regis too, but they are the work of something and not natural creatures. The Lake Guardians, Weather and Creation Trio, maybe the Tao trio, Arceus, Jirachi, Meloetta, and Darkrai (I'm going from what I got from browsing Jane's DA, with Cresselia being created by Darkrai as a countermeasure of its powers) as 100% supernatural entities.

And out of those, they are not on an equal standing: Arceus controls existance, Dialga, Palkia and Giratina are incarnations of the basis of the universe, and Uxie, Mesprit and Azelf represent what may be called "soul". Kyogre, Groudon and Rayquaza seem to be shapers of Earth (but, Earth is not the entire universe, and there ARE extraterrestrial Pokemon). Jirachi is sort of a genie, with reality warping powers far beyond regular Pokemon (AFAIK). Meloetta seems to be the incarnation of music, while Darkrai and Cresselia are nightmares and good dreams; as well as the new moon and crescent moon. However, the anime seems to shot down that latter part; we have seen 3 different Darkrai, so I guess they'd be more akin to regular Pokemon and go in the other group.

Speaking of the anime, we have also seen different Mews. And, being the ancestor of all Pokemon, as it'd be stated on the Dex, doesn't mean it would create each individual species, or that it'd be directly created by the creator of the universe. Mew ended up appearing, and it is likely not to be an ancestor of other Pokemon. Something far more simple would be a likely candidate.

Alternatively, Pokemon developed independently from common animals due to mutations.

...

Hey, I think I got 2 birds with a single stone there...

Good job! You have successfully discovered a way to explain a lot of Legendary Pokemon in scientific terms that will surely aide you and anyone else wanting to go for the scientifically explainable pokemon to write their articles. You've posed a great argument and I even agree with you on certain points. You've also managed to remind and convince me that just because Mew is the ancestor of pokemon does not mean it has to have manually created the pokemon. I'm also liking the compromise you made up of Pokemon and RL animals being one and the same via realistic evolution.

However, since I am far more interested in pokemon that actually have legends tied to them and the stories they tell, my articles will be focused on the mythology (if any), the fairy tales, and the behavior and interactions of the pokemon. If I need any help with the biological nitty-gritty to help my article conform to standards, I will gladly ask for your help, because you know a lot more about this stuff than I do.

I am dead serious.

edited 4th Feb '11 6:44:14 PM by CalamityJane

... Hey, I wanted an argument! :P

Nah, feels fine by me. I made a separation, within legendaries, of those that have a biological explanation (even with the myths behind them, AND the supernatural powers all Pokemon have), and those which are bona-fide deities, with NO biology behind them.

I also feel a bit awkward with the Spiritomb article, it looks too much like an animal, and that particular species is more deserving of mentions of myths.

And yeah, interactions, behaviours, lore... is fine. We have animals, (animated) plants, (animated, one kangaroo-like) fungii, symbiotic/parasitoid combos, robots, ghosts, garbage bags/piles of gunk... Yup.

And the existance of the later groups is why, from a scientifical standout, I tend to see Mew's ancestral condition as a bit of weird. The guy is cleary an animal, it is a bit hard to see how it'd end up becoming A GARBAGE BAG. Remoraid to Octillery can be explained with a weird larval stadium, but, garbage bags...

Intelligent mold? Well, let's wait a month for those.

The problem with Mew, is that, if it is the ancestor of all Pokemon (or the thing that resembles said ancestor the most), what happens to real animals? If Pokemon independently arise from normal animals which develop superpowers, what happens to Mew?

The manga stating that all Pokemon are different expressions of the same genetic code (in the same way your liver and your brain are different expressions of the same genetic code) adds a bit of a headache more, because, well, robotic magnetic units, last time I checked, lack DNA. All organic Pokemon maybe, but then, why are Geodude, Magnemite and Porygon considered Pokemon?

I'd have to stop thinking about this, it's 4 AM over here, I have 2 exams this Monday, and I am wasting a bit of my time. Time to apply the MST3K Mantra...

Sorry to nitpick, but

I also feel a bit awkward with the Spiritomb article, it looks too much like an animal, and that particular species is more deserving of mentions of myths.

In what way does my Spiritomb article come off as describing an animal of some sort? If anything, it's describing an unexplained and potentially hazardous phenomenom, or how to summon and bind a demon to your will. Further, there's lore; there's both a hypothetical, supernatural origin for the creature, as well as an urban legend which may contain a kernel of truth.

edited 4th Feb '11 7:15:00 PM by SullenFrog

@ regular animals in the pokeverse

I've always thought that unless we have a pokemon version of a real life animal, or a pokemon that fulfill a similar ecological niche as that animal, than that animal exists. For instance, there are no cows, there are only Miltank. However, I don't think there are any plankton pokemon, so the pokeverse probably has real world plankton.

in essence, yes, pokemon would out-compete real world animals, so animals only exists in niches that don't already have pokemon filling them.

In what way does my Spiritomb article come off as describing an animal of some sort? If anything, it's describing an unexplained and potentially hazardous phenomenom, or how to summon and bind a demon to your will. Further, there's lore; there's both a hypothetical, supernatural origin for the creature, as well as an urban legend which may contain a kernel of truth.

Sorry then, I was going by memory back then, and had read Spiritomb just after Unown, so, I think I misjudged it. Sorry.

I think with the way that I handle the articles, I should stick to writing about Legendaries or pokemon that have no logical explanation whatsoever and are just there. I'm a total Sci-Fi geek, but I always want to put fun above the rest and for me, myths being integrated into a logical and scientifically explainable universe (even a universe where the science is different) is one of the funnest things I can think of.

Are plankton animals or simpler organisms? I forgot. If the latter, then yeah, I figure non-animals such as nonsapient plants, fungi, bacteria, etc. are not different from ours too much.

edited 4th Feb '11 9:06:13 PM by Anomalocaris20

Aw man, I personally apologize if I peeved anyone with my edit to Absol. I didn't see the notice to NOT edit the subpages till I scrolled all the way down *facepalm* I based most of my idea on Absol social interactions being similar to lions (I got it from the reference to "prides" earlier in the articles). I feel like I did a good job with the info available, but if anyone has a problem with how I handled it to go ahead and zap it if they feel the urge.

You did do a good job, though I wish you had contacted me first. In addition, while in the past they behaved somewhat like lions, today Absol are closer to mountain lions/pumas/cougars in behaviour and temperament; hence why I have them as mountain-dwelling ambush predators.

I am guilty of modifying an already-launched page before, but that was only to fix some heinous grammar and spelling issues with the Scyther Line article.

I was looking through the wiki, and noticed we have a Staryu line page, though I didn't remember seeing one. Sure enough, it's not listed on the index here in the thread.

Is that an error with our indexing here or something else?