• Forum Moderator applications are now open! If you're interested in joining an active team of moderators for one of the biggest Pokémon forums on the internet, click here for info.

How effective is Freeze Dry against dual types

It would be normally effective against a secondary type that resists Ice, since the supereffective and resistance cancel each other out. It would do x4 if the secondary type is also weak to Ice.
 
No, it would not be super-effective on Pokemon like Volcanion. It uses the properties of a normal Ice Type attack like Ice Beam + being super effective on Water Types. So if the Pokemon is normally weak to Ice, like Venusaur, it'll be super effective, if the Pokemon is Pure Water Type like Brionne, it'll be super effective, if the Pokemon is Water Type and a Type that resists Ice like Empoleon, it'll be normally effective, and if the Pokemon is Water Type and a Type that's weak to Ice like Kingdra, it'll be 4x
 
Would Freeze Dry still be supereffective against a Water type Pokemon with a secondary type that also resists Ice, like Volcanion or Empoleon?
No. Freeze Dry only cares about the Ice resistance that the WATER type gives to a Pokémon, not the Ice resistance given by any other type. So on Pokémon that are Water + insert some other type that resists ice, Freeze Dry would deal neutral damage.

And would Freeze Dry be 4x effective against a Pokemon with a secondary type that is weak to Ice, like Mantine or Ludicolo?
Yes, actually!

Basically, think of Freeze Dry's type effectiveness like this.
Use Freeze Dry.
Is the opponent water type? (If no, then ignore the secondary effect and act like a normal Ice type move.)
If yes, Is the opponent dual type? (If no, then it's super effective).
If yes, check the opponent's other type. How does that interact with ice? (If the secondary type is neutral to ice, then 2x effective. If it's a type that resists ice, it's normally effective. If it's a type that's also weak to ice, it's 4x effective.)

I'd put this in a chart if I had the skill to.
 
Please note: The thread is from 7 months ago.
Please take the age of this thread into consideration in writing your reply. Depending on what exactly you wanted to say, you may want to consider if it would be better to post a new thread instead.
Back
Top Bottom