Discussion Characters / PokemonGenerationIIIFamilies

We have agreed upon refraining from using Game-Breaker on those pages, so we just use Purposefully Overpowered for stuff with insane stats. And having a stat total 10 points short of Mewtwo IS tailor made for Purposed Overpowerness. Things like Blaziken or Excadrill became Game Breakers not by stats alone, while normal-form Kyurem is Purposefully Overpowered but not to the point of being a game breaker. Adding it back in, seeing Magikarp Power still applies in spades, and in my judgement, with the arguments I've been providing, Slaking's stats qualify for Purposefully Overpowered, as I've justified my point of view.

Actually, we just use Purposefully Overpowered to things forbidden in Battle Tower, official tournaments, etc.- because it proves intention.

Slaking and Regigigas have the same stat total as thigs forbidden in those things, but aren't included in the Ban Lists due to their abilities. I am sure that the numbers prove intention, to be honest, it just requires 30 seconds of thinking about it. That Citation Needed policy is just because of you acting like this was The Other Wiki, while we are at that.

The rule used in the Purposefully Overpowered page is "if it's justified, it's done on purpose.".

I would object if it were listed as Purposefully Overpowered, but the context is clearly referring to how it would be without its drawback. Obviously it's not an example, but the pothole isn't claiming that it's an example, it's pointing out that it has the same base stats as Uber-tier legendaries that are Purposefully Overpowered, which seems like a valid usage to me.

I'm with Eriorguez here. I say go ahead and replace it.

Without the drawback, it continues being a non-justified example. It implies that the only thing that it needs to be an example is the lack of the drawback.

It is justified, having tailor-made stats that total to an equivalent of that of the oh so very overpowered version mascots. It is the sole case of a Com Mon having a stat total 10 points short of freaking Mewtwo, and I say that stat total alone is enough proof, seeing it is usually kept for super legendaries.

The problem is not the trope, it is you failing to understand it. A 670 BST IS Purposefully Overpowered in this series pretty much by definition, as we have that thing called deductive reasoning and understand the choices Game Freak does. It is justified, I don't see how you can't understand that. You are going all Obstructive Bureaucrat with this, to be honest:

-BST range of the fully evolved Pokemon of Petalburg Woods excluiding the Slakoth line: 385-460. -Average BST of all fully evolved Normal types: 470

It just takes to put 2 and 2 together. I just don't know why it is such a big deal to use a trope in a freaking description, with basis in simple reasoning.

Of the Justified Trope page: "A justified trope is one in which, in its common usage, runs counter to the normal laws of logic and probability but in a particular instance has a concrete reason for applying to the story. In other words, a trope is "justified" if it is required by other pre-existing elements in the story — otherwise the explanation is a Hand Wave."

We've handled. Those Wacky Nazis. For Dropped A Bridget On Him, I've moved the example off the page since we don't have the details needed to work out what it is an example of:

• Dropped A Bridget On Him: Kirlia and Gardevoir have a decidedly female appearance... and have an equal chance to be either gender. Oh, and you know your semi-rival Wally? Yeah, his is male. Be very afraid.

So the character looks female, but their gender is random. (Determined by chance later in the game?) Another character is a rival — and there is a faint implication that Wally might attracted to Kirlia and/or Gardevoir: but the required details are not given.

For this trope to apply Kirlia and Gardevoir would have to be transexuals and/or overt cross dressers in-world and Wally would have to have a hard time coping with his attraction to them.

(It could be Viewer Gender Confusion, but that's more the show provides one set of cues and the viewer interprets the cues as a gender but it's really another gender all along. Here the gender is apparently random each time.)

I am not saying that one Expy have that be one Suspiciously Similar Substitute . I am saying, however, that one Expy has to be Suspiciously Similar(until if is not one Substitute)

"Short for "Exported Character", an Expy is a character from one series who seems very similar to a character in another, older series (Or even the same). A few minor traits — such as age and name — may change, but there's no doubt that they are almost one and the same. Often seen in different works by the same writer(s) or production team." This is the first paragraph of Expy

"This can simply be the tendency of writers to prefer certain characterizations for important characters (or knowing which ones are most marketable/popular), or the influence of the design process. Or on the other hand, it may just be a bad attempt to try to revive a character that the writer liked, but nobody else did and had to get rid of it. When by a different author, it may be a Homage to the original creator and/or character. In the negative sense, an expy can be seen as a just a bloated, gimmicky version of a perfectly serviceable past character. In a positive sense, it can refer to an "upgrade" of a two-dimensional or otherwise limited character to one more appreciably complex."

This is the second paragraph.

Jumping to the fifth paragraph: "When the character appears in the same show as the previous character, he's often a Suspiciously Similar Substitute." This makes sense reading the Suspiciously Similar Substitute description. Quoting the laconic version: "Replacement character is almost exactly like their predecessor."

"Have that be" is not a valid construction, I cannot debate with somebody whose words I cannot understand. You are not a native English speaker, are you?

Really, i am Brazilian(:. Ok, i already corrected my post above. The correct mode is "has to be", right?

Ah, yeah, got it. (sorry if I am a bit dense today, New Year's Day tends to be an odd day :P)

Misdreavus and Shuppet share the fact that they are Ghost-type emotion eaters, but that's pretty much it, as the role played in the games were vastly different, and Gastly is a better parallel in function for both Shuppet and Duskull, just like Sentret/Zigzagoon/Bidoof/Minezumi are Rattata expies, or Feebas is a Magikarp one. Shuppet is not a substitute for Misdreavus because it is not a Bonus Dungeon Pokemon, but a cemtery-haunting ghost. Koromori is a Zubat Expy, but not similar at all in battle, apart from being fast, so not Suspiciously Similar, yet it can still be understood as a Zubat expy.

Hope that was understandable, as I said, bad day. :P

Ok. I agree that Shuppet not counts as "substitute"-can delete Suspiciously Similarsubstitute. In compensation, if Shuppett and Duskull really are expies of Ghastly they count as "suspiciously similar" and being substitutes...

Edit:Plusle and Minun are expys of Pikachu. I do not understand very much about the gameplay and do not know if they are so similar gameplay wise, but they definitively count as "suspiciously similar".

No problem for me, I'll just add a mention about the differences in battle performance, and it is just fine.

Thanks. Good night:)

Well-continuing the discussion- i noted recently one thing. Misdreavus is one cemetary pokemon in Diamond/Pearl and Banette is not one cemetary pokemon in Diamond/Pearl. This changes something?

Nothing at all, in DP Misdreavus acts as a counterpart of Murkrow.

And they also appear in Lost Tower...OK. Thanks.

By the way, the edits you made just made the page look far blander. I wonder what is wrong with saying that you'll be looking at Shedinja's back if you use it and potholing it to Fridge Horror. Removing that doesn't make the page any better, keeping it gives it a TV Tropes feel.

And I don't get why the competitive scene doesn't deserve to be represented. By-the-Book Cop taken a bit to an obnoxius level much?

I not guessed that this is one reference to their type, only that Badass Normal is to persons without super powers. I not guess that any pokemon qualifies. Zangooze, in special, only can fight in equal ground to said snake thanks to their immunity to poison. You want that i substitute this by Badass?

Slaking is a ground sloth/gorilla that is on par with the gods that created the land and sea, and the golem that moved the continents arround. I would say that its superpowers are relatively nonexistant in comparation. A Badass Abnormal subindex works quite well, adding it.

For Zangoose, fights in equal grounds to Seviper always, and has advantages in terms of speed and attack, despite not being able to learn anything that isn't Normal moves or similar, while Seviper learns Flamethrower, Earthquake and such other moves.

Mentions of subjectives in explanations are allowed? Well, i put the question in the Ymmv discussion page. In either case, thanks by the work. Thanks to this, i not needed delete subjectives by one good time.