How much do you adhere to the game?

[Jukain]

I know a place where everyone religiously believes the pokemon world is nothing more than what it is in the main series games, all the mechanics and flavor text included. So how much do you think is plausible to be how the pokemon world really works? I personally think all the battle related mechanics are all that should matter, save for everything being turn based, I don't think that is how it really works. Unlike these people, I don't think the dex is the word of God. Then again, I don't think ANYTHING the dex says is believable. It's kinda debatable whether the Sinnoh myths are really myths or truth, but I think there is some truth to them. I also think the breeding system is a giant farce, and there is no way that certain pokes would mate. (though I do recognize it as necessary to make the game interesting) I also refuse to believe Nidorina and Nidoqueen can't mate. (I think the same thing about the legends, too, unless they live in another plane of existence such as Arceus and its children) The evo methods I usually don't touch, except for the matter that I don't think trade evos should exist, and all item related evos in that regard should just use the item or an otherwise more natural method. (except for Porygon, it evolving by being reprogrammed by discs is okay by me )I'm okay with all other evo methods, although some could be retconned ,but I'm not too picky about that. The pokemon world is obviously bigger and more complex than it is in the games, and I think it should be said it does have rooms for more mature ideas.

What are your ideas, though? Is pokemon nothing more than a game to you? Or is there a whole world to be filled?

 

[coolcatkim22]

Eh, some of it I take for word, some I don't. The dexs I think are sometimes exaggerated, and it includes myths in there so that makes it less reliable. As for mechanica, well, even the game doesn't follow it's own rules all the time and they're constantly changing as well. Then you got the different continuities between games, the mangas, the anime with the movies, and everything else kinds of makes it a mess. I just try to make up my own rules as everybody else does.
As for what my own rules are that gets a little bit complicated as this is a huge series so there's a lot to go over. I'll just say, I believe legendaries can breed (the game never says they can't breed just that eggs are never found) just not at the daycare, animals exist in the Pokemon world, artificial Pokemon can only be made by utilizing Pokemon DNA, most of the myths are wrong or exaggerations of certains events and Mew is the ancestor of all Pokemon.

 

[Helioptile]

With all the (according to dex entries) rampaging Pokemon, you'd think we would run out of terrain by now.

 

[Jukain]

Then you got the different continuities between games, the mangas, the anime with the movies, and everything else kinds of makes it a mess. I just try to make up my own rules as everybody else does.

I made the argument with these people that all the different media had to be approved at some point, so they are all acceptable interpretations of pokemon, but the thing with this is, there are few things in which the various iterations of pokemon have in common. They are largely as different as night and day. I will agree that crossing canons will just result in confusion, and when speaking of one canon, stick to what is true in that canon. I also agree that since this is true, then pokemon is open to interpretation and any one of them or none of them are true. The people I spoke to, however, insist that since the main series spawned all the others, then it is the one true canon. I think this idea is balderdash, all canons have to be equal. I do not blame them since apparently the games are all they care about, but I do not believe the game qualifies as a world since it's too restricted. Even if it can technically be a world, it would suck since you might as well just be playing the game. (or perhaps that's their point, and pretending such things is equally balderdash to them)

 

[Zexy]

Well, it's Gameverse, Animeverse and Magnaverses. Each one is what it is, though each one can keep things from the other as long as they don't conflict with Canon.

 

[That Guy]

As far as I'm concerned, the different Pokémon media, their canons and their continuities, would spawn several entirely different worlds, and I happen to prefer the Gameverse, if only because it's more familiar to me. And as for the matter of the Gospel According To Pokédex...well, you can't take it all literally, right? It is, in most games, being filled in by a 10-year-old, after all. There's bound to be some exaggeration.

 

[Jukain]

That's another question, and I'm unsure if it's related. I clearly have my own views of what the pokemon world would be like, but it doesn't totally follow ANY canon. Then again, these people convinced me that the anime is so inconsistent that it doesn't count. I would've otherwise said I follow that one the closest, but it's clear that I'm not a purist on the matter, preferring for moves and junk to behave as they do in the games, and also for the type alignments to actually mean something. (this is not to say that I don't think the moves have some flexibility as to how they would be performed in an actual world) I also defy a common theme to all official depictions in that I portray pokemon in a more serious light. I employ more depth to characters and there are greater things at stake. This is why I loved being a fanfic writer. I also blended in some MD-ish elements, like pokemon having villages and junk, but I don't think I made it be made of actual structures, but living in caves or dens or maybe having a primitive dwelling made from natural materials. The question is "Is it pokemon I really like?" Am I really a fan for detracting the more simplistic elements? Am I really delusional for trying to explain things that will never officially be explained? Be that as it may, I must insist on it making sense, because if I were to treat the elements of the game to the letter as being the ONLY explanation, I would run into too many inconsistencies for me to accept it. You are free to believe such things if you wish, but I will not agree with it.

 

[MrMeowPuss]

Personally I adhere more to the anime than I would the games. One thing that I've always found strange is how in the games many Dragon types and other types have a greater speed stat than Dragonite yet he is meant to be so fast he can fly around the world in only 16 hours. I guess if they made him that fast in the games it would give him an unfair advantage so that's why it is the way it is. To me Pokemon in the anime are all fairly equal and it's more about the trainer, that's why Pokemon seem to be a lot more tough when they're wild yet once caught they seem more weaker and this is because of the trainer more than the actually poke. I very much prefer how the Pokemon world works in the Anime and I find the games make the Pokemon world seem less complex. Sorry if I have gone off topic

 

[Jukain]

The thing about the anime is that it can change it's own rules on a dime depending on what outcome they need. One could be convinced the type alignments don't exist and skill means nothing. If it were not for this, I would favor the anime myself since it is the most fleshed out version of the poke-world, although not even it is perfect. I'm told the manga has a similar setup and is more consistent with the type alignments and all character development is retained. The problem I have with the manga is that it's too sensationalized. Too much violence, the females are too sexualized, and apparently you can battle to the death. Not to mention legends mean just about as much as they do in the games: that being almost nothing, anyone can get one. I hold nothing against anyone that likes this, it's just not my thing. I also apologize if it sounds like I am arguing with everyone, that was not my intent. I just wanted to clear up my reasoning.

 

[MrMeowPuss]

The thing about the anime is that it can change it's own rules on a dime depending on what outcome they need. One could be convinced the type alignments don't exist and skill means nothing. If it were not for this, I would favor the anime myself since it is the most fleshed out version of the poke-world, although not even it is perfect. I'm told the manga has a similar setup and is more consistent with the type alignments and all character development is retained. The problem I have with the manga is that it's too sensationalized. Too much violence, the females are too sexualized, and apparently you can battle to the death. Not to mention legends mean just about as much as they do in the games: that being almost nothing, anyone can get one. I hold nothing against anyone that likes this, it's just not my thing. I also apologize if it sounds like I am arguing with everyone, that was not my intent. I just wanted to clear up my reasoning.

I actually do agree with your point that the Anime change things when they want to, I found it funny how in the Lily Of The Valley conference Tobias had so many legendaries. Lugia is also meant to be genderless yet in the Johto adventures there was a Lugia with a baby Lugia which shows they do breed.

I personally like the anime entree simply because of how much more broad it is. I like how in the Anime you can use your surroundings to modify your attacks and use them as a defensive tactic. I also like the top 16 compared to the elite four of the games so I like to follow the anime World more than the game world

 

[Jukain]

The legends are at the center of a tremendous debate that I almost don't want to touch. Essentially it depends on the subject at hand: how much do you follow the games? In most other media, though, the legends are mostly ambiguous, they could be either gender. (for the ones that don't already have one) I know why this limitation exists in the games, but it's otherwise plausible that the legends are just rare, or otherwise live in the most remote regions in the world. The only reason I can think of for them not to be able to reproduce is if you think they are all immortal, and thus don't need to reproduce. I was led to believe that anything that lives in the material world is limited in it's lifespan, legend or not. The only pokemon I believe to be immortal are Arceus and it's children. If you think otherwise, okay. I have no problem with legends being able to breed, but I know the issues associated with it. It's largely open to interpretation. As for trainers having legends, I think such a thing should have limits, like only the strongest trainers can do it. The way the manga puts it, you could catch a legend by accident and it means nothing. I find it completely plausible Tobias is just a strong trainer, and it was just bad luck that he happened to be there. (I know this is not the real reason, but it's the best I can do in universe) The other instances, it was the Frontier Brains, and they were outright said to be strong. Also notice how none of these legends are of a particularly high importance. They're not like Kyogre or Lugia or Reshiram, or even any of the Mew-like legends. I think it's plausible a human can control them, but they would have to be at the absolute top of their skill to achieve it. All the other legends are too strong for a human to even dream of controlling. There is no medium in which I've seen that it hasn't been true the legends do indeed have the abilities described in their legends. The only reason I can see of legends not being treated as something outside of our scope is that they don't really have that kind of power, and are just extremely strong pokemon. There is reason to think this, but the logic doesn't match what I know.

 

[TheCableGuy]

The one thing that you have to understand about the games: THEY AREN'T CANON!

The games are only digital representations of the Pokemon Universe.
What occurs in the games are dependent on/Limited by the Video game's programming.
The Games only take the story and uses the video game to "showcase" a very rough idea of what the Pokemon Universe is.
(It's like taking a game like Grand Theft Auto and saying it's a true representation of our world.)

As for Legendaries:
The Problem with calling something a "Legendary Pokemon" is that the definition of "Legendary" seams to get lost on most people.
Indeed, the term Legendary seams to be more often attributed to Pokemon just because of it's perceived Power: that they are somehow Magically different the "Normal" Pokemon.
Actually, Legendary Pokemon are classified as "Legendary" when their existence is more Myth then Documented Fact.
Why they are called "Legendary" is because they are only known of by stories and by trace remnants of Civilizations Lost to Antiquity.


The Truth is, there's very little actual difference between "Legendaries" and any other Pokemon.
They are not "Immortal" in it's Literal sense. While some may be significantly Older then other Pokemon;
Well Hidden, far from the prying eyes of Humans; others are living free and probably reproducing normally in their own corner of the world.

It's Logical to assume they have Genders (except for those created without Genders.)
(on a side note: Life is funny in that it'll always find a way. Even a Genderless Pokemon can find a way to Reproduce.)
We don't know how Pokemon Reproduce. Even a Legendary Pokemon can reproduce. How they do it though, we may never know.

 

[Jukain]

I asked about breeding before, it's perhaps the most polarized of pokemon theory. The consensus reached was that it's like trying to explain a chicken laying an egg to a child. True, they know the egg laying part and that chicks hatch from them, but they don't know why or how chicks hatch from eggs. They don't question it. Unfortunately, for pokemon, there isn't even the indication they DO lay eggs. There are only two conclusions one can make; the egg spontaneously comes into being, or the pokemon undergo some kind of mating process. Since pokemon are based off so many things, I cannot pin a single means of sexual reproduction on them, but I'd rather think it depends on what it's based on. I could make the same argument and say breeding is also nothing more than a game mechanic made to make it more fun and varied, because I can find no other logic for these things to work the way they do. No other official thing has explained it or attempted to explain it because of the nature of the franchise. (it's for kids, blah blah blah) Plenty of things do say Pokemon experience love, but it's been left pretty open to interpretation.

One can say that I am foolish to even question the nature of a kids' franchise at all, that because it's all fantasy, I have to take what it says at face value because to do otherwise would be to completely reject the world in it's entirety. I realized this upon nearly deconstructing everything that is a game mechanic in favor of a more realistic interpretation. I then soul searched if there was ANYTHING left I could discredit. That is when I landed on the one thing I would not touch: the battle mechanics. To me, there is no way to counter this because to do so would be a fatal error. It would cause anarchy and destroy everything that pokemon is to me. This is how I realized this must be how the group that started all of this thinks of everything that the game says. If I can't reject this, then why do I reject the rest of it? The type alignments don't make sense either. This is one aspect that is the same across all versions of the poke-world. Even the spinoffs. Even though the anime breaks it for it's own gratification, the type alignments do still exist. The only thing that I know that doesn't follow the rules is the TCG, and that is due to it's own differing structure. Everything else can be different, but the battle rules remain, and I guess that's why it's so important to me, it's an immutable law. Everything has to follow it, no matter what it is. I also had an alternate explanation that there is a limit of where a fantasy can bend the rules, and this is it. Nothing has solid rules on how elemental powers work. Everything I know has different rules for it. It's pure fantasy, and thus, we have to trust this is how it works for this world. Everything else has at least some grounding in reality.

 

[TheCableGuy]

I asked about breeding before, it's perhaps the most polarized of pokemon theory. The consensus reached was that it's like trying to explain a chicken laying an egg to a child. True, they know the egg laying part and that chicks hatch from them, but they don't know why or how chicks hatch from eggs. They don't question it. Unfortunately, for pokemon, there isn't even the indication they DO lay eggs. There are only two conclusions one can make; the egg spontaneously comes into being, or the pokemon undergo some kind of mating process. Since pokemon are based off so many things, I cannot pin a single means of sexual reproduction on them, but I'd rather think it depends on what it's based on. I could make the same argument and say breeding is also nothing more than a game mechanic made to make it more fun and varied, because I can find no other logic for these things to work the way they do. No other official thing has explained it or attempted to explain it because of the nature of the franchise. (it's for kids, blah blah blah) Plenty of things do say Pokemon experience love, but it's been left pretty open to interpretation.

Think of it this way.
The method in which Pokemon reproduce is much like how old TV shows never showed Bathrooms.
We know that it's integral to our daily lives and we know they must exist
but, for the purpose of telling the story, it's never been that important to show them.

Funny how our concept of and desire for "realism" in our Fantasy drives us to obsess over the finer details....

One can say that I am foolish to even question the nature of a kids' franchise at all, that because it's all fantasy, I have to take what it says at face value because to do otherwise would be to completely reject the world in it's entirety. I realized this upon nearly deconstructing everything that is a game mechanic in favor of a more realistic interpretation. I then soul searched if there was ANYTHING left I could discredit. That is when I landed on the one thing I would not touch: the battle mechanics. To me, there is no way to counter this because to do so would be a fatal error. It would cause anarchy and destroy everything that pokemon is to me. This is how I realized this must be how the group that started all of this thinks of everything that the game says. If I can't reject this, then why do I reject the rest of it? The type alignments don't make sense either. This is one aspect that is the same across all versions of the poke-world. Even the spinoffs. Even though the anime breaks it for it's own gratification, the type alignments do still exist. The only thing that I know that doesn't follow the rules is the TCG, and that is due to it's own differing structure. Everything else can be different, but the battle rules remain, and I guess that's why it's so important to me, it's an immutable law. Everything has to follow it, no matter what it is. I also had an alternate explanation that there is a limit of where a fantasy can bend the rules, and this is it. Nothing has solid rules on how elemental powers work. Everything I know has different rules for it. It's pure fantasy, and thus, we have to trust this is how it works for this world. Everything else has at least some grounding in reality.

One note: Strict adherence to "immutable" game mechanics is a sure-fire way to reveal how easily they crumble under scrutiny.
Game mechanics are only as "immutable" as the game's limitations allow.
For that very reason, I disregard the game mechanics in their entirety as any basis of canon.

 

[MrMeowPuss]

It would not surprise me if the eggs just popped out considering Pokemon don't seem to go toilet so besides from their mouths I don't know where the eggs would pop out. Although them just popping out sounds stupid, this is a fictional world were people can 'blast off' for miles and land without being killed! LOL.

I think we all make the mistake that we love Pokemon too much and look into it more than we're meant to, it is targeted towards kids and isn't as complex as we make it. I think I will always adhere to the anime over the games due to the fact the gameplay of the games isn't as complex as the battles and world of the anime which I prefer.

 

[Jukain]

For that very reason, I disregard the game mechanics in their entirety as any basis of canon.

Even the type alignments? Are you sure about that? Well, then we would have to determine if the type alignments by themselves are a game mechanic. It is indeed a large part of how the game works, but does the fact that it's a game limit it in some way, as it does the other aspects? The only way I can think it does has to do with the fact that the types had to be suitably balanced in order for the game to be fair. Then again, it is common for systems that have elements for those elements to be balanced. True, this isn't as equal as a lot of those other systems are, but at least none of the types have more of a chance to win than the others. It's kinda double-edged. It could both be just a game mechanic, or it could be a plausible part of the world.

For breeding, it had to be that way for the game to be varied and easier to play; the dex, I see as being little more than a completion list; and of course, the size of the world and how people behave are also a limitation of the game. There being a gradual increase in difficulty is also a function of the game. (true, there is a such thing as different leagues, but that is not how the game is structured) Pokeballs, I've determined to be a matter of personal preference, but is there any real need for us to use them? It could be construed as part of Pokemon's premise: pocket monsters. If you believe the anime, pokemon weren't always known as pokemon. Movie 12 called them "magical creatures". I will not deny the convenience of the pokeball, but I just don't find it very reasonable to treat pokemon like this unless they agreed to it. Of course, this is assuming another debate, and that is if pokemon are sentient or not, and it's a very confused issue. The dex says many things, and it mostly depends on the species itself, but everything else mostly portrays every pokemon as capable of the same reasoning we have. Don't worry, I'm not going to turn into N, as people that keep pokemon in pokeballs are capable of the same kind of bonds that they would have otherwise. This is why I say it's a matter of personal preference. Finally, for the evo methods, most of them are plausible no matter what, it's just trade evos I find to be a part of the construct of the game solely.

 

[TheCableGuy]

For that very reason, I disregard the game mechanics in their entirety as any basis of canon.

Even the type alignments? Are you sure about that? Well, then we would have to determine if the type alignments by themselves are a game mechanic.

"Type alignments" in the game are only one of many digital representation of type relationships of the Pokemon World.
The Type system existing in the game is a shallow and imperfect expression of that relationship.
The true relationship between types is far more complex then can be portrayed by a limited programming.

Finally, for the evo methods, most of them are plausible no matter what, it's just trade evos I find to be a part of the construct of the game solely.

I look at Trade Based Evolutions as a form of "Evolutionary Adaptation."
For many Trade Based Evolutions (such as Machamp, Alakazam, Golem)
They can evolve normally without the use of the trade machines
but require intense training that few trainers are capable of providing for them
but I hypothesize that what the Trade Machine does is spirs the Evolutionary process in these Pokemon.

For Pokemon such as Steelix and Scizor, They also evolve normally but I believe the process to be long and involved
But the Trade Machine, again, accelerates the process and provokes Evolution.
I can imagine that Onix can normally evolve into Steelix after prolonged exposure to Mineral Deposits
and that combined with the Effort it takes to dig in the Deepest caves and under high pressure would spir their Evolution.
Scizor though, I might believe is a completely Trade dependent Evolutionary Adaptation,
in that Scyther would not normally be exposed to Minerals to adapt to them naturally.

But in the case of Accelgor and Escavalier,
Whose evolution is completely dependent on the Trade Machines,
is a perfect example of Evolutionary Adaptation in that
that only came about as a result of the introduction of Electronically Trading.

But, simple to say, that the Video game Evolutions is a simplistic way of modeling the evolution of in the Pokemon world.
Perfect example of how the Video Game drops the ball when getting it right is the case of Slowpoke.
We all know that Slowpoke needs a Shellder to evolve, either for Slowbro or Slowking but the game ignores that detail.
They could of ret-conned it when they applied the in-party requirement for Remoraid to evolve Mantyke to Mantine,
But once again, they dropped the ball. Now we just have to use our Imaginations and Pretend we took our Slowpoke fishing.

 

[Jukain]

Oh, I've thought of all that, I should've made it more clear. It's just trading to cause those evos that I don't find to be true. Their existence, I'm okay with. I've also thought that the trade evos could have come into being through being altered by humans in some way. One could call what we do with vitamins to be a form of genetic alteration, and when done enough, the pokemon adapt by evolving to these new conditions. I prefer to think that these evos are still natural, and they are possible without human interference. It just takes more effort. There are only two spinoffs were it could be said trade evos exist naturally, though: Ranger and Pokepark. Even though MD is a world inhabited solely by pokemon, they still use the same evo methods, just that a Link Cable item is substituted for trading. I still find this method to be artificial. Conquest causes these evos by having the pokemon face another trained pokemon. This could still count as human interference, but it does seem to indicate that the presence of humans and their training of pokemon by itself caused the pokes to evolve further, although it was still sort of a natural process.

Anyway, I'm surprised you think this way about the type alignments. I find it to be similar to the kind of people who think the alignments as they are have to be reworked. While I would have no problem with this, should it happen (I highly doubt it), if I were to apply what I know of relationships between what the types represent, I think it would become imbalanced, and I would even become confused as to what qualifies as a valid type. For instance, common thinking would lump Rock and Ground together as a single element, although this idea also tends to lump in the likes of Grass and Steel as well. I would then become confused as to which prevailing philosophy is in play: Western or Eastern. They have different ways of looking at it. Some of the types aren't even elemental energies at all, they're just random. (Bug, Normal, Fighting, and Dragon. This excludes thinking of Fighting as Chi energy, which should be a mix of energies and not just one) Ghost is considered by some to be it's own force, but it's rare this sort of thing is seen. Dark is a common theme, but it is often seen countered by another force which I will not mention. To say Dark is that is sort of misnomer, since it takes on more of the qualities of another interpretation of Dark, which is often a standalone power. You might be able to work all this out, but I sure can't. I'm curious as to how you think it works when this system is even used by the anime, but they tend to ignore it for their own ends. Unless that is your point and the alignments effectively more a suggestion than an actual fact. They can be overcome with effort. I do not think this way myself. I prefer for pokemon to overcome their limitations by strategy and resourcefulness rather than the Power of Friendship.

 

[TheCableGuy]

I'm curious as to how you think it works when this system is even used by the anime, but they tend to ignore it for their own ends. Unless that is your point and the alignments effectively more a suggestion than an actual fact. They can be overcome with effort. I do not think this way myself. I prefer for pokemon to overcome their limitations by strategy and resourcefulness rather than the Power of Friendship.

Nothing so Pretentious. In fact, I tend to think of Type relationships to be more "Subtle" on the effects and damage of an attack.
Take moves in the game. They're represented by move strengths (power), attack, defensive values, Special attack and Special Defense values.
None of which means anything in reality. All the stat values are for is solely for the benefit of the RPG nature of a video Game.

This holds true for "Elemental Types" of moves as well. Both in the Game as well as in the Pokemon World,
the Types are loosely based expressions of real world interactions of Qualities of what each of those "elements" represent:
Water extinguishes Fire
Fire burns Grass
Grass absorbs Water
Etc.. (but we all know this)
(Not that the game doesn't take a few liberties in what it considers logical
but it's more in the sake of Simplicity rather then for Accuracy. )

But, I disagree with the way that the games define Pokemon BY their respective types,
and either making a battle solely determined by its Elemental Advantages/Disadvantages (x0 x2 x4 Damage)
and their mathematically calculated stats, to the point that it becomes nothing more then a Numbers-games.

See, the way that I see the Pokemon World is that a Pokemon's Elemental typing is less influential on the resulting damage calculations, at least Mathematically.
This is what I mean by elemental typing having only "subtle" influences on resulting damage, rather then magnifying the damage of a single move.
This is more often what we see in the Anime, where Pokemon "Levels" are non-existent and Pokemon stats are less Number-based,
resulting in far more random outcomes in your average battle (not to mention numerous variables that the games do not even take into account.)

 

[Jukain]

I see the stats as sort of a representation of the species' capabilities. True, in reality, they would be referred to as other qualities, such a strength (attack), endurance (defense), and agility (speed). The two special stats, I could still count as one's proficiency with whatever form of energy (special attack), and the ability to resist such attacks (special defense). Normally, however, I would agree with the original singular Special stat in that I find one's ability with magic to be equivalent to how much one can resist it. Anyway, these qualities would still effect how well one can battle and even use their attacks. I may not agree, however, that the capabilities of the various pokemon are what the game describes them to be. I will agree with some of them, like Hippowdon having a lot of Defense. Some of them do seem quite exaggerated, though, like how in the world does Shuckle have the highest of both defs of all pokemon? HP is another iteration of endurance, though I would be able to greatly question this, as we know that creatures don't just "faint". I am not a violent person by nature, so I am fine with it being just a simple KO. Even wild animals have better sense than to have most of their contests be to the death. I know that a lot of animals will kill over even something as trivial as you looked them funny. I will just say it's an extreme case for pokemon. Anyway, how well a pokemon can use it's moves can still be defined by these features. For the most part, though, I do agree with you in that most pokemon can be made into decent fighters given the time and effort to do so, effectively making all of this moot. I think what I'm trying to say is that I still follow that some pokemon are naturally more talented at certain things than others. They can be made to be more equal than what the game represents, though. I'd even say they could stand a chance against the lowest tier of legends (essentially the trios/musketeer quartet). There is at least one thing I can say the type alignments don't work as the game describes it does, and that is for things like Fire types being able to swim in water. They obviously do not apply in this case, but yet they do in battle. I do not have an effective explanation for this. I am aware of elemental associations not being the truth in a lot of cases. Water doesn't necessarily always extinguish Fire. Water does not always conduct Electricity. Here's the thing: all fantasy elemental webs I know are like this, not just pokemon. It's been in countless other things, too. And I'm pretty sure they weren't games, either. As for defining pokemon by their type, then that is not the way I see pokemon. It may be the way the anime sees it a lot of times, and perhaps some other spinoffs, too, but I prefer to define pokemon by their ENTIRE movepool, not just what they get STAB off of. If you were talking about STAB, then I will accept that as since it's an inherent power they possess, naturally they will be better at it than the other types. However, if you ever looked at a pokemon's movepool, you will realize that indeed pokemon are capable of more than what natural proficiencies they have. I will even further my natural/artificial thing and say that a pokemon does naturally have access to EVERYTHING in it's movepool, learned, TM/HM, egg move, or otherwise. I think it takes special circumstances or special training to get these abilities to surface, though. Just like I think pokemon can reach their trade evos naturally, I think they can eventually become proficient enough to learn these abilities. It doesn't work exactly as it does in the games, but there is some element of it. Also like the anime used to do, I think a pokemon can use these moves at random. As long as they learned it at some time, they can use it. I do tend to treat it as if I am playing the game, though, in that I tend to replace moves with a stronger one of the same type when it happens. I find this to be logical as a sort of "you're getting better with that element" sort of deal. I know that most things tend to put more than one move of the same element on a pokemon. I do disagree with this, and I do think it's to make it simple for the kids. If we are waiting for the franchise to stop doing that, we will all die before that happens, because it will never happen. This is why I like writing fanfiction, so I can treat pokemon in a more sensible manner. If rejecting that is rejecting pokemon, then I guess I reject it. I will not stop looking at it like this, though. I also think that a physics thing should happen when attacks collide, like the more powerful one overrides the other and what comes out is the difference. If the same power, then they cancel each other out. This can only exist in real time, though. I guess I should've explained that when I accepted the battle mechanics that I only accept certain parts of the battle mechanics.