You know what? This is the wrong usage of Logical Weakness after all. As it starting with type advantage with more obvious reasoning (like Fire being weak to Water), it got to the point where explanation for all other type advantages are shoehorned in.
So therefore, unless there is an in-universe explanation of why one type is good/bad against another, it's Not This Trope.
Pokemon Trainer
I was thinking—would there be any objections to adding a folder to talk about Legendaries? I know it's not a "type", but the "Legendary" classification of Pokemon warrants troping as much as any type does and there isn't a broad enough section besides this one to put that under.
Hide / Show Replies
I'd oppose it because everything else on this page is a type, and the "legendary" classification would overlap with the Pokémon entries far more than them.
I think we should pause the cutting of this page until the discussion gets resolved. It's a lot easier to add this to the cutlist later on, but this was premature.
Found a Youtube Channel with political stances you want to share? Hop on over to this page and add them. Hide / Show Replies
I'm thinking this page could use some Images, but I'm not sure what kind yet.
Hide / Show Replies
I'm half-tempted to use the energy emblems from the trading card game, but that would only give about half of the types images.
You can use the emblem thingies on Bulbapedia with the type names on them.
If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?
I just remembered that Pokémon Ranger Guardian Signs also has emblems for all of the types except for Fairy. We can just use the Fairy-energy emblem for that type.
Edited by 75.41.108.118
How about the symbol used in the English games as of X and Y, and the first primary-typed, non-legendary Pokemon of said type in Nat Dex order? Say, Pidgey, Charmander, Squirtle, Pikachu, Bulbasaur, Swinub, Mankey, Ekans, Sandshrew, Noibat, Abra, Caterpie, Geodude, Dratini, Gastly, Murkrow, Skarmory and Clefairy?
I was thinking about the pictures showing a sample of one Pokémon from each generation for each type. (So, six Pokémon per pic.) Might be too busy, but it could show a broad example of general appearances. For the Shadow type picture, a Shadow Pokémon with its aura and such would suffice.
Mmm, no Dark-type in gen I bar Mega Gyarados, but I guess it could work...
Okay, been a while since anyone updated this- but I was thinking we could pick one Pokemon from each type (At least for now) that strongly represents the type. (In particular, I was thinking a list of mostly Gen I Pokemon, and Shadow Lugia for the Shadow Pokemon). With the exception of the last one, I think we could just use the Ken Sugimori art. Aside from that, the best I think we can do is find fan art depicting each type.
The Unknown
Is there a trope that would apply to Flying-types ignoring target placement in Triples? At first I thought My Rules Are Not Your Rules, but that only applies to AI vs. Player situations.
If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with? Hide / Show Replies
I don't know, but Lost And Found might. Good luck!
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over public relations, for Nature cannot be fooled." - Richard Feynman
I'm Sad Frogerson.
Should we add Shadow-type, ???-type or any of the glitch types? I know they're not official types, but I think they could still apply for some tropes.
Hide / Show Replies
Shadow type would work, since it's official (even if only in 2 spin-offs), but ??? only applied to one move (which was retconned anyway) and glitch type(s) were not intended for use in game, so no on those.
If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?
Should there be a section for shared tropes? Or would that be too redundant?
Edited by 75.147.69.169
The Unknown
We just had a MASSIVE cleanup on the character pages for Pokemon concerning stuff like the metagame (which belongs on YMMV/Smogon), so can we PLEASE keep that consistent?
If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with? Hide / Show Replies
I would like to argue that the metagame exists beyond Smogon, but I agree that this page should be used for the in-universe attributes of each type. I think that all the stuff relating to how each type works in a metagame sense like the weather trivia is a little distracting.
While I agree with you about the metagame existing beyond Smogon, the problem was that 1.) it was causing an Edit War (especially over Mons like Charizard) and 2.) they are still Audience Reaction/Fandom Reaction Tropes and do not belong on these pages. Also, the cleanup stemmed from an Ask The Tropers discussion and was (from what I gather) approved by the site moderators, so we can't really argue anyway (not that I want to, since I admit I was part of the problem and have been doing some cleanup myself to make up for it).
Edited by 76.90.17.49 If a tree falls in the forest and nobody remembers it, who else will you have ice cream with?
Does Logical Weakness really apply to each of the Elememtal Types? Each of their entries are made up of speculations of why they have a type effectiveness on another type. Those speculations come from us, not from official materials.
Also, does Super Mode really apply to each of the Elememtal Types when it's really a list of individual Pokémon that can mega-evolve?
Edited by Kindle4Light Hide / Show Replies