Entei, Raikou and Suicune - What were they before?

[Clefable]

So, we all know the story GSC presented us with. Brass Tower is set on fire, burns down, three pokemon inside die.

Ho-Oh comes along, does his godly stuff, and the pokemon are ressurected with the power of the north wind, thunderstorms, and volcanoes. Suicune, Raikou and Entei, respectivley.

But what were they before they died? They were obviously not born the way they look now, they were gifted with powers from Ho-Oh. So exactly what were they? Were they a new species? Or sentrets? Or ewoks? Or what?

This has bugged more for a long time. I really don't think they were exactly like they are now, godliness and everything. But I can't think what they'd be.


And why would they be in Lugia's tower?

 

[Envoy]

Personally, I like that they keep it vague. It gives a bit of mystery and intrigue to the story...a little more depth if you will.

However, the most prominent and accepted theory is that, before they died, they were Vaporeon, Jolteon and Flareon respectively

 

[Aladar]

Personally, I like that they keep it vague. It gives a bit of mystery and intrigue to the story...a little more depth if you will.

However, the most prominent and accepted theory is that, before they died, they were Vaporeon, Jolteon and Flareon respectively

This...

Or some unnown species...or maybe extinct.

 

[Mijzelffan]

or just themselves as normal types. That sounds the most logical to me. They died, and when they got resurrected they sort of evolved to their current forms.

 

[Nt '95 trainer]

Personally, I like that they keep it vague. It gives a bit of mystery and intrigue to the story...a little more depth if you will.

However, the most prominent and accepted theory is that, before they died, they were Vaporeon, Jolteon and Flareon respectively

*Agree bumb* seems right.

 

[papi17]

most likely vaporeon, jolteon, flareon

 

[$aturn¥oshi]

I figure they were simply three unique species of Pokémon that no longer exist.

 

[7tx]

Vaporeon, Jolteon and Flareon would make sense being 'related' and of correct typing, but I like the idea of them being unique species that have since disappeared.
Although what about that thing that an Entei is born whenever a volcano erupts?
Idk if this is a dex entry or whatever but it was on the 'pedia

 

[Clefable]

Hmm. I thought a volcano erupted every time it roared?

With the Flareon/Jolteon/Vaporeon theory, I can see how a Jolteon and Vaporeon could eventually end up as Raikou and Suicune, but I can't see Flareon becoing Entei =z

 

[Yucel]

Personally, I like that they keep it vague. It gives a bit of mystery and intrigue to the story...a little more depth if you will.

However, the most prominent and accepted theory is that, before they died, they were Vaporeon, Jolteon and Flareon respectively

That seems likely but does that mean that new legendaries resurrected from the other eevelutions will be released?

 

[Clefable]

No. Unless any other pokemon die in the presence of Ho-oh.

 

[Mijzelffan]

That seems likely but does that mean that new legendaries resurrected from the other eevelutions will be released?

Dude, you obviously don't get it. That whole vaporeon, jolteon, flareon theory is Fanon, made by the fans, it didn't really happen that way. Nobody knows the real story behind and thus speculate, that story we just heard thus isn't real.

 

[Envoy]

I did say it was the most accepted theory, that means that it's not proven.

Personally, I like to think that a Rattata, Meowth and Sentret died in the fire and were resurrected as the legendary beasts.

I know it doesn't make much sense, but that's why I like it that they keep it vague

 

[Glitchtastic]

Ummm...They might be somehow related to the legendary birds of Kanto

 

[SmearglePaints]

The in-game text states that Ho-Oh resurrected "three nameless POKéMON". This suggests they weren't classified by the Pokemon community at large, and most likely were something we've never seen before.

 

[Envoy]

The in-game text states that Ho-Oh resurrected "three nameless POKéMON". This suggests they weren't classified by the Pokemon community at large, and most likely were something we've never seen before.

Or that no one ever found out which Pokemon were the ones that died in the fire. Nameless=/=unclassified. It just means they don't know their names. It could easily have been any Pokemon, weather it currently exists or not. The term "Nameless" doesn't give us much more than that.

 

[SmearglePaints]

Or that no one ever found out which Pokemon were the ones that died in the fire. Nameless=/=unclassified. It just means they don't know their names. It could easily have been any Pokemon, weather it currently exists or not. The term "Nameless" doesn't give us much more than that.

To take "nameless" and make "unnamed" is pretty illogical thinking. Are you honestly suggesting that by "nameless", the in-game text meant that the three Pokemon simply didn't have nicknames? Because that's the only other way "nameless" can be interpreted.

A simple analysis, as well as an in-depth one, suggests they were "nameless" in the sense that they weren't classified. There was no name for them, at all.

 

[Clefable]

No, he means nobody knows what pokemon died in the fire. It could have been three psyduck, but the legend says "nameless" because it doesn't know what species of pokemon were in there, only that three died in there =\

 

[SmearglePaints]

No, he means nobody knows what pokemon died in the fire. It could have been three psyduck, but the legend says "nameless" because it doesn't know what species of pokemon were in there, only that three died in there =\

If that was the case, then the writer of said legend would have written "three unknown Pokemon" or a similar-meaning synonym. Words have exact meanings, and we have to consider what words were used. "Nameless" has an exact connotation, and from the context we have to assume that the three Pokemon were unclassified is what was meant.

 

[Envoy]

If that was the case, then the writer of said legend would have written "three unknown Pokemon" or a similar-meaning synonym. Words have exact meanings, and we have to consider what words were used. "Nameless" has an exact connotation, and from the context we have to assume that the three Pokemon were unclassified is what was meant.

First off, you're arguing semantics. Don't you think that's grasping at straws in and of itself?

Secondly, were was this text you found? If it was located in-game in GSC, keep in mind that two more Generations have been added since then. That's over 200 more Pokemon that have been created that didn't exist by the time that text was written.

So, lets assume for a second that you're right and that "Nameless" means they weren't classified yet, why can't they be classified now? Maybe it was three Zigzagoon that died and became the dogs. We don't know, and likely never will know.

So, to say that the specied have never been classified, even after 200+ new creatures have, implies that the creatures will never be classified. Which means they could be just about anything, anyone, anywhere. This would mean that your argument has two conclusions: either it's flawed, or the text is obsolete.