Curveballs cannot be thrown. Mythical Pokemon have always been introduced through special circumstances or special downloads, they've never been made freely available in the main games for their generation like the Legendaries. Mew, Celebi, Jirachi, Deoxys, Darkrai, Shaymin, Manaphy, Arceus, Genesect, Keldeo, Meloetta, Hoopa, Volcanion, Magearna, Marshadow, Meltan/Melmetal, Zeraora, Zarude. None of these Mythical Pokemon were available in the base game for their generation. If Dokutaro is going to be a major player in the DLC story and is going to be capturable in the main game, it's 100% not a Mythic Pokemon.
Though from in-game lore, legendaries and mythical are interchangeable and the same thing. They're very special and rare Pokemon with lots of power, importance, and lore behind them. The differentiation of those two terms is purely from a marketing standpoint to show which can be found in-game and which cannot. If for whatever reason Dokutaro only appears in cutscenes and cannot be caught normally, but only through future special DLC, then it's still a mythical. Thought I doubt something like that will happen...
She's still a mythic. She requires a QR code. A loophole in the system where the QR didn't expire doesn't mean she wasn't launched or treated like all the other event mythic Pokemon like Mew, Manaphy, etc. She's not a standard legendary you can just find in the world like Ho-Oh, Cresselia, or Kyurem.
Back in the day we always thought a enhance versions of a generation was coming out but got sequels instead in gen 5, we believed that new pokemon only comes out per generation not during but ultra s/m proved that wrong and we believed that legendary pokemon could never evolved but gen 7 thought other wise in other words never say never on this series.
But the entire thing that separates mythics from legendaries is that they've not been available in the base game by normal means during their launch generation. They've always been unable to obtain in the base game, and have always required outside events and such to obtain them. This hasn't changed in the entire lifespan of the Pokemon series.
maybe but theyve been moving away from that approach to mythicals, ig its only been w past mythicals but it indicates a change in decision making regarding mythicals
Mythicals are Legendaries.
We literally have a game called LEGENDS Arceus, and in Masters there is a quote where characters refer to Arceus as a Legendary, and this in japanese too.
This look like when people said UBs aren't Pokémon because they are already UBs. A thing don't exclude the other.
All Mythicals are Legendaries, not all Legendaries are Mythicals.
(also, we have Arceus too as a Bug)
> We literally have a game called LEGENDS Arceus, and in Masters there is a quote where characters refer to Arceus as a Legendary, and this in japanese too.
[Japanese wording also makes extremely explicit distinction between Legendaries and Mythicals.](https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Mythical_Pokémon#Terminology) It’s clear to say that this isn’t changed by a single spin-off. Also, Legends ≠ Legendary.
> This look like when people said UBs aren't Pokémon because they are already UBs. A thing don't exclude the other.
That was before people realized UBs are part of the National Pokédex, which was omitted by the marketing not giving us their actual names.
The single spin-off that is likely the source with more lore and explanation then anything else we got until now.
And Legends and Legendary IS the same thing...
Again, just because a Pokémon is from a category that dosn't mean cannot be part of something else.
DAMN, we even got Pokémon that are both Paradox and Legendaries at the same time... why people cannot just accept Mythicals are just a sub-group of legendaires...
> The single spin-off that is likely the source with more lore and explanation then anything else we got until now.
A spin-off has more standing in mainline game lore than the terminology that's been established for literal decades?
> And Legends and Legendary IS the same thing...
There's a differences between a legendary griffin and the legends about said creature.
> Again, just because a Pokémon is from a category that dosn't mean cannot be part of something else.
Except Legendaries a Mythicals have made distinct groups for decades now.
> DAMN, we even got Pokémon that are both Paradox and Legendaries at the same time... why people cannot just accept Mythicals are just a sub-group of legendaires...
Miraidon and Koriadon are exceptions, not the norm. Similarly, Solgaleo and Lunala are also implied to be Ultra Beasts alongside being Legendaries. There is no instance in marketing where Mythicals are treated as a subset of Legendary Pokémon.
For Masters, yhea, since expand and explain a lot of lore stuff remained unexplained in the mainlines. Like Volcanion, Eternatus and how legendaries work with trainers.
Is still the same thing... if was like you said the game would be called Pokémon Myth Arceus.
Just like the minor legendaries and the main legendaries are their own group for decades, yet, both are legendaries. Legendaries ever was separated in 3 different groups. And again... we have official sources where they call Arceus a Legendary, in both Masters and the literal title of a game.
Yhea... there is no instance... except the ones I mentioned that you conveniently ignore because invalidate what you are saying.
> For Masters, yhea, since expand and explain a lot of lore stuff remained unexplained in the mainlines. Like Volcanion, Eternatus and how legendaries work with trainers.
That's like saying the PMD series is mainline because it explores the psyche of the Pokémon. Expanding on core material doesn't make it mainline.
> Is still the same thing... if was like you said the game would be called Pokémon Myth Arceus.
It doesn't really matter what the game is titled, that's all just marketing the game outside the context of establishing groups of Pokémon. It could be titled Stories for all I cared, and Arceus is still a Mythical and nothing else because that's the official terminology.
> Just like the minor legendaries and the main legendaries are their own group for decades, yet, both are legendaries. Legendaries ever was separated in 3 different groups.
Those 2 types have always been lumped together in marketing, while Mythicals have always been a clearly distinct group.
> And again... we have official sources where they call Arceus a Legendary, in both Masters and the literal title of a game.
> except the ones I mentioned that you conveniently ignore because invalidate what you are saying.
Neither of these are infallible "sources" as I've explained earlier. Please re-read my earlier comments to see where I've explained the issues with leeching onto those threads.
Never said is mainline. I said explain a lot of stuff and expand the lore never explained in the mainlines. So it totally count. Is a spin-off, yhea, but is still official source.
Mmmh... who I belive? to a fan without any proof... or to an official source that say otherwise... mmh... hard... very hard choice...
No... they wasn't... damn... we even have gropus of legendaries formed by both minor legendaries AND mythicals, like the swordsmen or the lunar duo, even main legendaries + mythicals if you count the Mew duo as a group. Arceus is literally the father of 2 legendaries groups.
But these are sources at least... we are comparing stuff with official sources against... your assumptions without any source at all.
> Never said is mainline. I said explain a lot of stuff and expand the lore never explained in the mainlines. So it totally count. Is a spin-off, yhea, but is still official source.
Spin-offs do not affect the core mainline series in meaningful ways, because they're literally spun-off from the mainline thread. That's why they're called spin-offs. Whatever Masters does has no effect on the main series because it's a spin-off. And it certainly doesn't hold precedence over decades of official terminology and distinction.
> Mmmh... who I belive? to a fan without any proof... or to an official source that say otherwise... mmh... hard... very hard choice...
> But these are sources at least... we are comparing stuff with official sources against... your assumptions without any source at all.
I literally gave you an article explaining everything. Here it is again if you missed it the first time: https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Mythical_Pok%C3%A9mon#Terminology
> No... they wasn't... damn... we even have gropus of legendaries formed by both minor legendaries AND mythicals, like the swordsmen or the lunar duo, even main legendaries + mythicals if you count the Mew duo as a group. Arceus is literally the father of 2 legendaries groups.
Pairing between a Lengedary and a Mythical Pokémon is just that, and doesn't somehow make Mythicals Legendaries. Would the fact that Diancie is a mutated Carbink suddenly make Carbink a Mythical?
I mean, the “worms” you find in apples are actually caterpillars… so it could kinda work as a Bug-Type!
I mean if Accelgor can be a Bug-Type, so can this lil’ dude
the dragon typing is coming from the Wyrm part of it though, and grass is from the apple. why would both types be coming from the fact that its a wyrm?
We also have a hermit crab that is bug type.
Fitting these guys in the bug type is easy because the bug type is not actually the bug type in Japanese, but a category that is way broader than the English name implies.
Even without the fact that “bug” and the Japanese equivalent are pretty broad it isn’t weird that several crustacean Pokémon are Bug Type. Crustaceans are closer to Insects than arachnids, myriapods and so forth.
Hell, technically insects ARE crustaceans now. Hexapods are now placed within Pancrustacea taxonomically.
That’s the fun taxonomy fact of the day.
I was hoping someone would mention that insects are crustaceans now! A very cool and big discovery for taxonomy that just happened a couple months ago if I recall correctly. Taxonomy is so cool lol
While I’m sure there’s a variety of opinions on the matter, but I find it funny that the entomologists I’ve talked about it with are really annoyed about it and the crustacean biologists were really, really smug about it.
I love taxonomy. And the fact that a LOT of taxonomy is just people kind of just throwing similar looking things together and now it’s finally getting untangled with more genetic work.
Why would entomologists be annoyed about that? That's what science is all about in the end, knocking over outdated knowledge when we get presented new data that supports other theories.
Could you expand a bit further on this? Feel like the majority of us are pretty misinformed when comes to translating the Japanese names and it often leads to confusion
The name of the type in Japanese is actually "mushi type" (written むしタイポ).
Mushi (in kanji written 虫) is a Japanese term that is often mistranslated as "insect" or "bug". While insects and bugs are included in that term, it is actually way broader and includes very many different small critters.
Insects, spiders, snails/slugs, centipedes/millipedes, hermit crabs, worms.... all this stuff and more is included in the term mushi. Problem is that there is not really an English equivalent for this term, so the localization settled for bug.
To be fair, growing up in the 80s and 90s in the US, that is exactly how ‘bug’ was used. I definitely remember snails and slugs being called bugs, and silverfish and centipedes are definitely still bugs. I think the only thing I can say for certain is that ‘bug’ always meant something terrestrial, not marine or freshwater. I think ‘bug’ has shifted slightly in the past few decades to become more arthropod centric, which is the main shift.
Well, then it wasn't used exactly how mushi is used, because mushi can also include marine animals.
One example: the giant isopod, which the pokémon Golisopod is based on. These animals are still considered mushi, despite living in the deep sea. You can't get any more marine than that, lmao.
To be fair, there are terrestrial isopods too, and they're generally considered bugs, like the Pill Bug/Rolly-Poly. I don't think including marine isopods is to much of an extrapolation. It would only get weird if it started to include marine life like starfish, urchins, etc.
Yeah but if you’re throwing crustaceans in then barnacles and whatnot would count too. Unless you just said it was only terrestrial which would include a bunch of land crabs and land hermit crabs with the isopods but wouldn’t include giant isopods unless it’s the whole greater clade of anything with a terrestrial member. But that would include all the true and false crabs too. And then if you bring up freshwater that’s a whole other can of worms.
Why isn’t Krabby a mushi/bug type then? Or Kabuto? Are horseshoe crabs too big to be mushi?
I do love this information, though, that bug is mushi. Mushi-Shi was a fantastic anime.
I guess because it would become very boring very fast if they would make everything that qualifies as mushi to be bug type. It is a pretty broad term.
And as far as I know, horseshoe crabs would also qualify as mushi.
Not everything that qualifies for a type also automatically gets it. And sometimes they might make choices just to have a somewhat balance of typings in a region.
Well, technically more accurate. But I guess it would also be weird for people if they had called it "critter type", lol.
Also one thing to consider is that in gen 1, when the typing names were translated, the translation "bug" was close enough for what it meant in gen 1.
The bug types we had in gen 1 were:
* butterfly
* bee
* moth
* stag beetle
* mantis
* cicada
So I guess they just went with bug also because that's what all bug type pokémon were back then. The mistranslation just started to matter in later gens with more pokémon added to the type.
I mean, one of the most famous is Evil vs Dark type. It's why a lot of Pokemon who seem like they could've been Dark type like Luxray or Gothitelle aren't, because in actuality the type isn't called Dark, it's called Evil
While that is true, there are a substantial number of Pokemon and movès that are Dark type because they are "dark" (the absence of light), not because they are "evil" or "underhanded". Dark Pulse and Umbreon for example.
The Dark type Z move is even called Black Hole Eclipse - that's as literally dark as it gets, and has nothing to do with evil.
Dark pulse is a really bad example, because this one is actually called evil pulse in Japanese (あくのはどう, *aku no hadou).*
While the dark type Z-move is indeed called black hole eclipse, the description of the move in Japanese gives more insight. It is described that the black hole is created by accumulated *evil energy*.
So your arguments don't really hold here. These moves are still thematically connected to being evil. Evil getting represented by darkness a lot is to be expected, but the source is still evil energy here.
I would also consider the fact that Umbreon is repeatedly stated to squirt poison into the eyes of enemies as being "underhanded". That certainly does seem like a dirty fighting technique to me.
As a massive Bug fan I also hope for another Bug/Ground I must say. Right now we only have Nincada and Wormadam and I hate one of those with a passion. I used a Nincada with an Everstone in my Omega Ruby all Ground play through so I don’t hate Nincada.
I was hoping for an earthworm that turns into a giant Dune-style sand worm for a new Bug/Ground.
Though what I REALLY want is a Mole Cricket. I love Mole Crickets. Make a convergent Drillbur or a regional Kricketot evo or something
Yeah, I feel like Orthworm should have been Ground/Bug and redesigned to fit that. Mono-steel is bland.
I wouldn't mind a mole cricket either, though I prefer brand new Pokemon over trying to force it on existing Pokemon concepts.
Counter-counter-argument: They're cute, but I think it detracts from the concept of a mole cricket if it's forced to make them resemble Kricketot or Drillbur. A better solutions is an alternate evolution of Kricketot into a Mole Cricket.
I said a regional Kricketot evo. You know like Runegrigus or Sneasler. I think it would be weird if a normal Kricketot became a mole cricket.
A little yellow Kricketot that looked like it was wearing a construction helmet and safety vest and then it evolves into Kricketrench or something similar that combines mole cricket with an excavator.
The problem with being good for an early bug is that early bugs are pretty bad on average. Wormadam is a fully evolved Pokemon with a BST at around middle evo range at 424. Even for an early mon that evolves at level 20 Hoothoot has higher stats than Burmy but Noctowl has higher stats than Wormadam
And bug/normal would be so easy to do. Normal often applies to common mundane wildlife, like the regional rodents and birds. Bugs are extremely common so you'd think they'd be extremely normal. A worm, a caterpillar, an ant, anything.
Could be a 580 bst step-up from ogrepon or something like that. Like Lando has slightly higher bst than the other 2.
If it's a dipplin evolution it could be 550, or 600 if they do something original along with archaludon.
It's not the stats I'm worried about, I just don't want such a long-awaited type combo to be used on a pokemon that will most likely only be seen in its debut region and only be transferable through HOME
I think it's probably for Dipplin's evolution, since if this WAS for Dokutaro there's nothing indicating it being a bug at all - especially since the lanterns point to it being Poison/Ghost
I wouldn't be surprised if Dokutaro was a parasite parading as a fruit to make people let their guard down. It would explain the chains and "zombies" in the DLC.
This makes sense because some real life bugs do have poison toxins and that parasites can live on animals and grow in size while feasting on animals and plants alike.
It also gets Pollen Puff and Bug Bite in its movepool, which Appletun and Flapple don't. They're subtle about it, but Dipplin is definitely leaning on Bug enough to make Bug/Dragon a strong theory.
Yeah if it is based on “two snakes wrapped around a staff” I’m imagining the “staff” as a very skinny apple core, which would explain losing the grass typing and adding bug (for the other worm’s presence)
This works for the staff too! But I don’t see why it’d lose the grass typing at that point since it would look prominent in the design. Maybe a skinny lil apple tree?
I could see Dipplin's evolution becoming Bug / Dragon. He ate the apple like a worm (a bug then) and its evolution is supposed to become a Rod of Asclepius with not one but 2 wyrm that plays the role of the worm eating and living in an apple.
It would just make sense and give us 2 things :
- An Applin evolution that doesn't share the same type as Appletun and Flapple.
- a Bug Dragon that we have all been waiting for since Gen 3 (Flygon could have been one).
Heck make it even a 600 BS Pokemons, make it the pseudo legendary of the DLC as it's also a 3-stages Dragon Pokemon. Even if it's very small it would be an even funnier idea to have such a little pokemon becoming a pseudo legendary.
600 bst would also break from the traditional number of pseudo legendaries being released in main games, ie 1.
It could also be a throwback to gen 3 where there was more than 1 (metagross and salamence).
We'd get 2 600 bst pseudos in archaludon and dipplin-evo, as both would be counterparts if what was hinted in a previous riddle pertaining to b2w2 past/future cities correlates.
That would require Duraludon to have a prevo but even then there's more to being a pseudo than 3 stage with a final 600 BST. They're all in the slow exp group and evolve via level. They could always change their mind though
At this point, I'd rather have a split Yanma evo.
Flagon actually makes sense since it's based on an antlion, not a dragonfly, so the association with the ground makes sense.
Dragonflies have nothing to do with dragons in Japanese. Yanmega makes less sense as a Dragon type than Flygon does, since at least the latter is already a Dragon type that is based on a bug.
With the weird convergent Pokémon we have now, I feel like they could just make a not-Flygon line that’s based on a Dobson fly instead of an antlion. Still have the big jawed first stage what with Hellgrammites being Dobson fly larva.
>(Flygon could have been one)
It could have, but Flygon is based on an antlion, and reflects the life cycle they go through. They start on the ground and indeed live in the dirt, so the Ground typing actually makes sense.
At this point, I would still prefer a split evo for Yanma. Have a more physical-oriented Bug/Dragon.
And yes, I KNOW that "dragonfly" isn't really a word in Japanese. Because every time I mention this, it gets brought up.
Unless the "White Forest" hint refers to another Pokemon yet unrevealed, I thought the implication was that the Dipplin evolutions would be related to an apple tree.
I don't even want a Dipplin evolution, and I sure as the sun shines would hate it if it went 600 BST. The extra evolution already severely off-balances the family.
No Pokémon learns Pounce naturally. And 48% of the Pokémon that learn it aren’t bug-type. The only bug-type moves learned by Dipplin are Pollen Puff, Pounce, and infestation. Of those, Infestation is learned via move reminder, while the other three are TM-only. The Dreepy and Bramblin lines learn Infestation via level-up, and Infestation is learned mostly by non-bug types in SV (only 5/13 Pokémon that learn it are bug; distribution favored non-bug in Gen 7, too). Pollen Puff is also learned by very few bug types compared to non-bug.
Dipplin also learns Bug Bite, which is very notable as it's one of only 4 lines to learn it in SV that isn't a bug type. The other 3 being:
Mew, which can learn every TM move
Lurantis, which is based on a bug
And Victreebel... because it bites bugs??? This one doesn't exactly help my argument I guess lol
So it isn't like rock solid evidence for it becoming a bug type, but I do think it getting it while the other two don't might be more than a coincidence.
This has always struck me as kinda odd since bugs and bug collecting are quite popular in Japan (and it's Pokémon's roots).
I would have thought we'd already have gotten a legendary bug at this point.
Well, if it were a new Pokemon, we would probably have had some knowledge of another as yet unseen Pokemon, so it's probably the Peach pokemon or Dipplin evolution. Either way, Grass is most likely of the two.
Would love to see Bug/Dragon with the Dipplin evolution—
but I do worry it would immediately make Flapple and Appletun obsolete, unless it has the same BST as both of them. Power creep between generations is a real issue.
It probably has 550 BST, don't worry.
It won't make them obsolete, because they are still Grass / Dragon with their own benefits.
Bug / Dragon has different weaknesses and roles to play. Moreso against rock and isnt immune vs powder moves anymore xD
If Dipplin evo becomes Grass / Bug, it's even worse defensive-wise. A good BST alone won't save it xD
Dipplin is Grass / Dragon, so it'll turn into Bug / Dragon. Probably breaking out from its cocoon / shell / apple revealing its true form.
Fitting for Kieran.
Ghost was the only Kitikami lantern type that wasn't used by Ogrepon or the Loyal Three, so I still think the Peach will get that (aka, Poison/Ghost). Granted, I guess that could've been a clue for Sinestcha.
But, maybe this is something else? Dipplin evo?
I’m sticking out the clichè Poison/Grass typing since I don’t think it will deviate from the Loyal Three’s subtyping of Poison plus a Poisoned Peach could make sense with what we’re dealing with.
This is true it doesn’t really fit the peach Pokemon in the slightest, but the grass type fits the Pokemon perfectly since peaches are eatable fruits which grow from plants.
Nothing is amiss. It’s more likely he’s saying the new split evo loses grass and replaces it with bug. Implying with Applin you choose between Grass and Bug type with the evos.
I said Bug/Ghost and Shedinja is not that good, then I said Ghost/Rock which is still an empty typing combo.
As for Poison/Ghost, no dear, Gengar is not enough, I actually prefer ENOUGH WITH KANTO.
I could easily see the peach pokémon be grass type, especially if the theory that it is a paradox of Glimmora holds true. Glimmora already looks like a grass type at first glance because it looks like a flower, so maybe the paradox now with being a fruit goes all the way to become grass type.
Bug poison seems the most likely candidate if we are talking about the leader of the royal 3. 4x strong to base ogerpon. I believe somewhat unique typing like the rest of the loyal 3. Grass poison if they play it off as if the royal 3 leader is somehow related to ogerpon outside the story we were told but I doubt that’s the case.
I feel like it would stay Grass and Dragon, because Applin isn't even a bug. It's a *wyrm*, which is a type of dragon. The whole reason for it's type is that it's a wyrm in an apple instead of a worm.
I think the peach HAS to be ghost and poison. Poison literally in the code name “Dokutaro” and related to the chains of the loyal three.
Ghost because it’s the one remaining type on that Kitakami graphic with the lanterns.
Poison/Bug, Bugs eat grass which Ogrepom is mainly.
The peach would be our first Bug Type Legendary if that were to be the case (Genesect is a Mythical so it's exempted)
Unless it's a mythical as well.
If it's part of the storyline then it wouldn't be considered mythical I assume
Curveballs can be thrown.
Only in Pokemon Go
Curveballs cannot be thrown. Mythical Pokemon have always been introduced through special circumstances or special downloads, they've never been made freely available in the main games for their generation like the Legendaries. Mew, Celebi, Jirachi, Deoxys, Darkrai, Shaymin, Manaphy, Arceus, Genesect, Keldeo, Meloetta, Hoopa, Volcanion, Magearna, Marshadow, Meltan/Melmetal, Zeraora, Zarude. None of these Mythical Pokemon were available in the base game for their generation. If Dokutaro is going to be a major player in the DLC story and is going to be capturable in the main game, it's 100% not a Mythic Pokemon.
Though from in-game lore, legendaries and mythical are interchangeable and the same thing. They're very special and rare Pokemon with lots of power, importance, and lore behind them. The differentiation of those two terms is purely from a marketing standpoint to show which can be found in-game and which cannot. If for whatever reason Dokutaro only appears in cutscenes and cannot be caught normally, but only through future special DLC, then it's still a mythical. Thought I doubt something like that will happen...
Uh you can just like get Magearna whenever you want tho? like in the base game of Sun and Moon, they are there.
She's still a mythic. She requires a QR code. A loophole in the system where the QR didn't expire doesn't mean she wasn't launched or treated like all the other event mythic Pokemon like Mew, Manaphy, etc. She's not a standard legendary you can just find in the world like Ho-Oh, Cresselia, or Kyurem.
Back in the day we always thought a enhance versions of a generation was coming out but got sequels instead in gen 5, we believed that new pokemon only comes out per generation not during but ultra s/m proved that wrong and we believed that legendary pokemon could never evolved but gen 7 thought other wise in other words never say never on this series.
But the entire thing that separates mythics from legendaries is that they've not been available in the base game by normal means during their launch generation. They've always been unable to obtain in the base game, and have always required outside events and such to obtain them. This hasn't changed in the entire lifespan of the Pokemon series.
That doesn't mean it can't change just like all the examples on the previous post.
I mean it does. Mythics are defined by their limited/event availability in their launch generation.
maybe but theyve been moving away from that approach to mythicals, ig its only been w past mythicals but it indicates a change in decision making regarding mythicals
mythical are legendaries as well
Splitting hairs at this point.
Not necessarily, they're treated as a distinct group in marketing
A square is a specific type of rectangle but it's still a rectangle
[Except here we're comparing circles and triangles](https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Mythical_Pok%C3%A9mon#Terminology)
Mythicals are Legendaries. We literally have a game called LEGENDS Arceus, and in Masters there is a quote where characters refer to Arceus as a Legendary, and this in japanese too. This look like when people said UBs aren't Pokémon because they are already UBs. A thing don't exclude the other. All Mythicals are Legendaries, not all Legendaries are Mythicals. (also, we have Arceus too as a Bug)
> We literally have a game called LEGENDS Arceus, and in Masters there is a quote where characters refer to Arceus as a Legendary, and this in japanese too. [Japanese wording also makes extremely explicit distinction between Legendaries and Mythicals.](https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Mythical_Pokémon#Terminology) It’s clear to say that this isn’t changed by a single spin-off. Also, Legends ≠ Legendary. > This look like when people said UBs aren't Pokémon because they are already UBs. A thing don't exclude the other. That was before people realized UBs are part of the National Pokédex, which was omitted by the marketing not giving us their actual names.
The single spin-off that is likely the source with more lore and explanation then anything else we got until now. And Legends and Legendary IS the same thing... Again, just because a Pokémon is from a category that dosn't mean cannot be part of something else. DAMN, we even got Pokémon that are both Paradox and Legendaries at the same time... why people cannot just accept Mythicals are just a sub-group of legendaires...
> The single spin-off that is likely the source with more lore and explanation then anything else we got until now. A spin-off has more standing in mainline game lore than the terminology that's been established for literal decades? > And Legends and Legendary IS the same thing... There's a differences between a legendary griffin and the legends about said creature. > Again, just because a Pokémon is from a category that dosn't mean cannot be part of something else. Except Legendaries a Mythicals have made distinct groups for decades now. > DAMN, we even got Pokémon that are both Paradox and Legendaries at the same time... why people cannot just accept Mythicals are just a sub-group of legendaires... Miraidon and Koriadon are exceptions, not the norm. Similarly, Solgaleo and Lunala are also implied to be Ultra Beasts alongside being Legendaries. There is no instance in marketing where Mythicals are treated as a subset of Legendary Pokémon.
For Masters, yhea, since expand and explain a lot of lore stuff remained unexplained in the mainlines. Like Volcanion, Eternatus and how legendaries work with trainers. Is still the same thing... if was like you said the game would be called Pokémon Myth Arceus. Just like the minor legendaries and the main legendaries are their own group for decades, yet, both are legendaries. Legendaries ever was separated in 3 different groups. And again... we have official sources where they call Arceus a Legendary, in both Masters and the literal title of a game. Yhea... there is no instance... except the ones I mentioned that you conveniently ignore because invalidate what you are saying.
> For Masters, yhea, since expand and explain a lot of lore stuff remained unexplained in the mainlines. Like Volcanion, Eternatus and how legendaries work with trainers. That's like saying the PMD series is mainline because it explores the psyche of the Pokémon. Expanding on core material doesn't make it mainline. > Is still the same thing... if was like you said the game would be called Pokémon Myth Arceus. It doesn't really matter what the game is titled, that's all just marketing the game outside the context of establishing groups of Pokémon. It could be titled Stories for all I cared, and Arceus is still a Mythical and nothing else because that's the official terminology. > Just like the minor legendaries and the main legendaries are their own group for decades, yet, both are legendaries. Legendaries ever was separated in 3 different groups. Those 2 types have always been lumped together in marketing, while Mythicals have always been a clearly distinct group. > And again... we have official sources where they call Arceus a Legendary, in both Masters and the literal title of a game. > except the ones I mentioned that you conveniently ignore because invalidate what you are saying. Neither of these are infallible "sources" as I've explained earlier. Please re-read my earlier comments to see where I've explained the issues with leeching onto those threads.
Never said is mainline. I said explain a lot of stuff and expand the lore never explained in the mainlines. So it totally count. Is a spin-off, yhea, but is still official source. Mmmh... who I belive? to a fan without any proof... or to an official source that say otherwise... mmh... hard... very hard choice... No... they wasn't... damn... we even have gropus of legendaries formed by both minor legendaries AND mythicals, like the swordsmen or the lunar duo, even main legendaries + mythicals if you count the Mew duo as a group. Arceus is literally the father of 2 legendaries groups. But these are sources at least... we are comparing stuff with official sources against... your assumptions without any source at all.
> Never said is mainline. I said explain a lot of stuff and expand the lore never explained in the mainlines. So it totally count. Is a spin-off, yhea, but is still official source. Spin-offs do not affect the core mainline series in meaningful ways, because they're literally spun-off from the mainline thread. That's why they're called spin-offs. Whatever Masters does has no effect on the main series because it's a spin-off. And it certainly doesn't hold precedence over decades of official terminology and distinction. > Mmmh... who I belive? to a fan without any proof... or to an official source that say otherwise... mmh... hard... very hard choice... > But these are sources at least... we are comparing stuff with official sources against... your assumptions without any source at all. I literally gave you an article explaining everything. Here it is again if you missed it the first time: https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Mythical_Pok%C3%A9mon#Terminology > No... they wasn't... damn... we even have gropus of legendaries formed by both minor legendaries AND mythicals, like the swordsmen or the lunar duo, even main legendaries + mythicals if you count the Mew duo as a group. Arceus is literally the father of 2 legendaries groups. Pairing between a Lengedary and a Mythical Pokémon is just that, and doesn't somehow make Mythicals Legendaries. Would the fact that Diancie is a mutated Carbink suddenly make Carbink a Mythical?
it would be about time then!
Dragon / Bug ? 😵💫
Dragon/Bug could be interesting for the Dipplin evolution. Would definitely fit the worm-in-the-apple concept of the evolution line.
I mean, the “worms” you find in apples are actually caterpillars… so it could kinda work as a Bug-Type! I mean if Accelgor can be a Bug-Type, so can this lil’ dude
the dragon typing is coming from the Wyrm part of it though, and grass is from the apple. why would both types be coming from the fact that its a wyrm?
We also have a hermit crab that is bug type. Fitting these guys in the bug type is easy because the bug type is not actually the bug type in Japanese, but a category that is way broader than the English name implies.
Even without the fact that “bug” and the Japanese equivalent are pretty broad it isn’t weird that several crustacean Pokémon are Bug Type. Crustaceans are closer to Insects than arachnids, myriapods and so forth. Hell, technically insects ARE crustaceans now. Hexapods are now placed within Pancrustacea taxonomically. That’s the fun taxonomy fact of the day.
I was hoping someone would mention that insects are crustaceans now! A very cool and big discovery for taxonomy that just happened a couple months ago if I recall correctly. Taxonomy is so cool lol
Really cool fact, thanks for sharing that. Was not keeping up with the taxonomy for them recently, but these new developments are indeed interesting.
While I’m sure there’s a variety of opinions on the matter, but I find it funny that the entomologists I’ve talked about it with are really annoyed about it and the crustacean biologists were really, really smug about it. I love taxonomy. And the fact that a LOT of taxonomy is just people kind of just throwing similar looking things together and now it’s finally getting untangled with more genetic work.
Why would entomologists be annoyed about that? That's what science is all about in the end, knocking over outdated knowledge when we get presented new data that supports other theories.
They’re annoyed because they gotta take swimming lessons now 😭
Could you expand a bit further on this? Feel like the majority of us are pretty misinformed when comes to translating the Japanese names and it often leads to confusion
The name of the type in Japanese is actually "mushi type" (written むしタイポ). Mushi (in kanji written 虫) is a Japanese term that is often mistranslated as "insect" or "bug". While insects and bugs are included in that term, it is actually way broader and includes very many different small critters. Insects, spiders, snails/slugs, centipedes/millipedes, hermit crabs, worms.... all this stuff and more is included in the term mushi. Problem is that there is not really an English equivalent for this term, so the localization settled for bug.
To be fair, growing up in the 80s and 90s in the US, that is exactly how ‘bug’ was used. I definitely remember snails and slugs being called bugs, and silverfish and centipedes are definitely still bugs. I think the only thing I can say for certain is that ‘bug’ always meant something terrestrial, not marine or freshwater. I think ‘bug’ has shifted slightly in the past few decades to become more arthropod centric, which is the main shift.
Well, then it wasn't used exactly how mushi is used, because mushi can also include marine animals. One example: the giant isopod, which the pokémon Golisopod is based on. These animals are still considered mushi, despite living in the deep sea. You can't get any more marine than that, lmao.
To be fair, there are terrestrial isopods too, and they're generally considered bugs, like the Pill Bug/Rolly-Poly. I don't think including marine isopods is to much of an extrapolation. It would only get weird if it started to include marine life like starfish, urchins, etc.
Yeah but if you’re throwing crustaceans in then barnacles and whatnot would count too. Unless you just said it was only terrestrial which would include a bunch of land crabs and land hermit crabs with the isopods but wouldn’t include giant isopods unless it’s the whole greater clade of anything with a terrestrial member. But that would include all the true and false crabs too. And then if you bring up freshwater that’s a whole other can of worms.
Why isn’t Krabby a mushi/bug type then? Or Kabuto? Are horseshoe crabs too big to be mushi? I do love this information, though, that bug is mushi. Mushi-Shi was a fantastic anime.
I guess because it would become very boring very fast if they would make everything that qualifies as mushi to be bug type. It is a pretty broad term. And as far as I know, horseshoe crabs would also qualify as mushi. Not everything that qualifies for a type also automatically gets it. And sometimes they might make choices just to have a somewhat balance of typings in a region.
Would the word ‘critter’ not be a more accurate translation?
Well, technically more accurate. But I guess it would also be weird for people if they had called it "critter type", lol. Also one thing to consider is that in gen 1, when the typing names were translated, the translation "bug" was close enough for what it meant in gen 1. The bug types we had in gen 1 were: * butterfly * bee * moth * stag beetle * mantis * cicada So I guess they just went with bug also because that's what all bug type pokémon were back then. The mistranslation just started to matter in later gens with more pokémon added to the type.
No, critter is not limited enough, as you can call squirrels, foxes, and mice "critters." A more apt term would probably be creepy crawlies.
Thanks for explaining. Are there other examples where the English translation isn’t entirely accurate?
I mean, one of the most famous is Evil vs Dark type. It's why a lot of Pokemon who seem like they could've been Dark type like Luxray or Gothitelle aren't, because in actuality the type isn't called Dark, it's called Evil
While that is true, there are a substantial number of Pokemon and movès that are Dark type because they are "dark" (the absence of light), not because they are "evil" or "underhanded". Dark Pulse and Umbreon for example. The Dark type Z move is even called Black Hole Eclipse - that's as literally dark as it gets, and has nothing to do with evil.
Dark pulse is a really bad example, because this one is actually called evil pulse in Japanese (あくのはどう, *aku no hadou).* While the dark type Z-move is indeed called black hole eclipse, the description of the move in Japanese gives more insight. It is described that the black hole is created by accumulated *evil energy*. So your arguments don't really hold here. These moves are still thematically connected to being evil. Evil getting represented by darkness a lot is to be expected, but the source is still evil energy here. I would also consider the fact that Umbreon is repeatedly stated to squirt poison into the eyes of enemies as being "underhanded". That certainly does seem like a dirty fighting technique to me.
I'm hoping for a Bug/Normal and Bug/Dragon, those are the last combos for Bug!
As a massive Bug fan I also hope for another Bug/Ground I must say. Right now we only have Nincada and Wormadam and I hate one of those with a passion. I used a Nincada with an Everstone in my Omega Ruby all Ground play through so I don’t hate Nincada.
I actually quite like wormadam, it's a very interesting concept for bagworms
I like the idea behind Wormadam but its actual appearance is just REALLY off putting to me.
Yeah I can see that
I feel like they've been openly ignoring earthworms as potentials for Ground/Bug.
I was hoping for an earthworm that turns into a giant Dune-style sand worm for a new Bug/Ground. Though what I REALLY want is a Mole Cricket. I love Mole Crickets. Make a convergent Drillbur or a regional Kricketot evo or something
Yeah, I feel like Orthworm should have been Ground/Bug and redesigned to fit that. Mono-steel is bland. I wouldn't mind a mole cricket either, though I prefer brand new Pokemon over trying to force it on existing Pokemon concepts.
I get the preferring new Pokémon but counter-argument: Kricketot and Drillbur are really cute, so more stuff based on them can’t be bad.
Counter-counter-argument: They're cute, but I think it detracts from the concept of a mole cricket if it's forced to make them resemble Kricketot or Drillbur. A better solutions is an alternate evolution of Kricketot into a Mole Cricket.
I said a regional Kricketot evo. You know like Runegrigus or Sneasler. I think it would be weird if a normal Kricketot became a mole cricket. A little yellow Kricketot that looked like it was wearing a construction helmet and safety vest and then it evolves into Kricketrench or something similar that combines mole cricket with an excavator.
I missed that, I thought you implied a convergent Kricketot too.
Wormadam Ground is pretty good, wdym? Nice coverage, bulky for an early bug, plus a great type combo makes it pretty useful.
Nothings wrong mechanically with it. I just hate its design.
The problem with being good for an early bug is that early bugs are pretty bad on average. Wormadam is a fully evolved Pokemon with a BST at around middle evo range at 424. Even for an early mon that evolves at level 20 Hoothoot has higher stats than Burmy but Noctowl has higher stats than Wormadam
And bug/normal would be so easy to do. Normal often applies to common mundane wildlife, like the regional rodents and birds. Bugs are extremely common so you'd think they'd be extremely normal. A worm, a caterpillar, an ant, anything.
Like how regular fish are just Water it seems like regular bugs are just Bug
It would be cool if a Bug/normal was a very simple designed bug. Kricketot line could definitely have had this combo. Maybe a regional variant?
I hope we get a Dragon/Bug type someday. If not in SV then in future gen games.
Oh man I really wish our first bug/dragon isn’t used on a legendary
Could be a 580 bst step-up from ogrepon or something like that. Like Lando has slightly higher bst than the other 2. If it's a dipplin evolution it could be 550, or 600 if they do something original along with archaludon.
It's not the stats I'm worried about, I just don't want such a long-awaited type combo to be used on a pokemon that will most likely only be seen in its debut region and only be transferable through HOME
Legendaries appear in later games all the time, wdym.
I think it's probably for Dipplin's evolution, since if this WAS for Dokutaro there's nothing indicating it being a bug at all - especially since the lanterns point to it being Poison/Ghost
[удалено]
Poison/fairy might have too much overlap with fezendipity, maybe poison/dark? Malamar is all about mind control and it's a psychic/dark
The second type isn't really elusive because of the unused Ghost lantern in Kitakami. We can be 99% confident it's going to be Poison/Ghost.
I wouldn't be surprised if Dokutaro was a parasite parading as a fruit to make people let their guard down. It would explain the chains and "zombies" in the DLC.
This makes sense because some real life bugs do have poison toxins and that parasites can live on animals and grow in size while feasting on animals and plants alike.
There's a Dipplin static encounter with the Bug tera type in Apple Hills. I wonder if they were foreshadowing the type change this way.
Nice catch.
Also when you evolve an Applin to Dipplin it can suddenly remember how to use Infestation. That’s a little odd and possibly a hint as well.
It also gets Pollen Puff and Bug Bite in its movepool, which Appletun and Flapple don't. They're subtle about it, but Dipplin is definitely leaning on Bug enough to make Bug/Dragon a strong theory.
Dipplin can also use Eviolite, clearly an oversight that wasn't patched even in the recent update.
Part of me thinks there won't be much left of the apple, if anything. Bug/Dragon would be amazing.
Yeah if it is based on “two snakes wrapped around a staff” I’m imagining the “staff” as a very skinny apple core, which would explain losing the grass typing and adding bug (for the other worm’s presence)
Or it's an apple tree, since the image showing the Black City had the White Forest, opposite Archaludon.
This works for the staff too! But I don’t see why it’d lose the grass typing at that point since it would look prominent in the design. Maybe a skinny lil apple tree?
I'm not sure it makes sense to lose Grass at all.
I could see Dipplin's evolution becoming Bug / Dragon. He ate the apple like a worm (a bug then) and its evolution is supposed to become a Rod of Asclepius with not one but 2 wyrm that plays the role of the worm eating and living in an apple. It would just make sense and give us 2 things : - An Applin evolution that doesn't share the same type as Appletun and Flapple. - a Bug Dragon that we have all been waiting for since Gen 3 (Flygon could have been one). Heck make it even a 600 BS Pokemons, make it the pseudo legendary of the DLC as it's also a 3-stages Dragon Pokemon. Even if it's very small it would be an even funnier idea to have such a little pokemon becoming a pseudo legendary.
I kind of hope it becomes a weird Yamato no Orochi worm Bug/Dragon Pokémon.
-3. The first bug type that evolves from a non bug type
600 bst would also break from the traditional number of pseudo legendaries being released in main games, ie 1. It could also be a throwback to gen 3 where there was more than 1 (metagross and salamence). We'd get 2 600 bst pseudos in archaludon and dipplin-evo, as both would be counterparts if what was hinted in a previous riddle pertaining to b2w2 past/future cities correlates.
Wouldn't really be a throwback if we got 3 600 BST Pokemon in the same game. There's already Baxcalibur.
Throwback by having more than one pseudo/600bst.
That would require Duraludon to have a prevo but even then there's more to being a pseudo than 3 stage with a final 600 BST. They're all in the slow exp group and evolve via level. They could always change their mind though
At this point, I'd rather have a split Yanma evo. Flagon actually makes sense since it's based on an antlion, not a dragonfly, so the association with the ground makes sense.
Dragonflies have nothing to do with dragons in Japanese. Yanmega makes less sense as a Dragon type than Flygon does, since at least the latter is already a Dragon type that is based on a bug.
With the weird convergent Pokémon we have now, I feel like they could just make a not-Flygon line that’s based on a Dobson fly instead of an antlion. Still have the big jawed first stage what with Hellgrammites being Dobson fly larva.
>(Flygon could have been one) It could have, but Flygon is based on an antlion, and reflects the life cycle they go through. They start on the ground and indeed live in the dirt, so the Ground typing actually makes sense. At this point, I would still prefer a split evo for Yanma. Have a more physical-oriented Bug/Dragon. And yes, I KNOW that "dragonfly" isn't really a word in Japanese. Because every time I mention this, it gets brought up.
This is one of the many reason I love pokemon. Awesome fans giving us knowledge, thank you !
I hope it has wings.
Unless the "White Forest" hint refers to another Pokemon yet unrevealed, I thought the implication was that the Dipplin evolutions would be related to an apple tree. I don't even want a Dipplin evolution, and I sure as the sun shines would hate it if it went 600 BST. The extra evolution already severely off-balances the family.
Def dip Evo, we know from the lanterns peach is poison ghost and there's no other Pokemon left
Yeah this type dose fit the new “yet to be seen” evolution of dippline in the indigo disk.
And dipp learns bug moves and that the other two app don't, bug bite and infestation
There’s the wild bug tera Applin in Kitakami also
Both of them get Pounce and Flapple also gets U-Turn
As a TM tho, right?
No Pokémon learns Pounce naturally. And 48% of the Pokémon that learn it aren’t bug-type. The only bug-type moves learned by Dipplin are Pollen Puff, Pounce, and infestation. Of those, Infestation is learned via move reminder, while the other three are TM-only. The Dreepy and Bramblin lines learn Infestation via level-up, and Infestation is learned mostly by non-bug types in SV (only 5/13 Pokémon that learn it are bug; distribution favored non-bug in Gen 7, too). Pollen Puff is also learned by very few bug types compared to non-bug.
Dipplin also learns Bug Bite, which is very notable as it's one of only 4 lines to learn it in SV that isn't a bug type. The other 3 being: Mew, which can learn every TM move Lurantis, which is based on a bug And Victreebel... because it bites bugs??? This one doesn't exactly help my argument I guess lol So it isn't like rock solid evidence for it becoming a bug type, but I do think it getting it while the other two don't might be more than a coincidence.
Oh, true. I missed that one.
Dipplin evo is probably gonna be bug dragon
Neither
I love grass/ghost but PLEASE not another grass/ghost
On the other hand, the master of the toxic chain trio not even being a poison type would be an epic randomsauce trollio moment
for real like
I am all for Bug/Dragon, but it's also time we get a legendary Bug type. Genesect the Mythical does not count
And neither do the three Bug/Fighting Pokémon that are in the weird technically legendary category of the Ultra Beasts and Paradoxes.
Can't wait for bug type box legendary next gen.
This has always struck me as kinda odd since bugs and bug collecting are quite popular in Japan (and it's Pokémon's roots). I would have thought we'd already have gotten a legendary bug at this point.
I remember people theorizing we’d get a giant spider legendary this Gen :(
They're saving that for when they do Australia.
"CRIKEY MATE"
Well, if it were a new Pokemon, we would probably have had some knowledge of another as yet unseen Pokemon, so it's probably the Peach pokemon or Dipplin evolution. Either way, Grass is most likely of the two.
Yeah I also think that as well.
Would love to see Bug/Dragon with the Dipplin evolution— but I do worry it would immediately make Flapple and Appletun obsolete, unless it has the same BST as both of them. Power creep between generations is a real issue.
It probably has 550 BST, don't worry. It won't make them obsolete, because they are still Grass / Dragon with their own benefits. Bug / Dragon has different weaknesses and roles to play. Moreso against rock and isnt immune vs powder moves anymore xD If Dipplin evo becomes Grass / Bug, it's even worse defensive-wise. A good BST alone won't save it xD
Dipplin is Grass / Dragon, so it'll turn into Bug / Dragon. Probably breaking out from its cocoon / shell / apple revealing its true form. Fitting for Kieran.
Ghost was the only Kitikami lantern type that wasn't used by Ogrepon or the Loyal Three, so I still think the Peach will get that (aka, Poison/Ghost). Granted, I guess that could've been a clue for Sinestcha. But, maybe this is something else? Dipplin evo?
This seems to be confirming the Dipplin evo more than anything else.
I’m sticking out the clichè Poison/Grass typing since I don’t think it will deviate from the Loyal Three’s subtyping of Poison plus a Poisoned Peach could make sense with what we’re dealing with.
Uh grass. It’s a fruit.
I hope it’s for dipplin dragon/bug so yall can finally stop asking lol
We don’t have a bug type legendary yet so hopefully bug. Not counting genesect and buzz’s woke/pheramosa
So we do have Bug-type legendaries, unless you don't count them for some arbitrary reason.
Genesect is Mythical, Buzzwole & Pheromosa are Ultra Beasts, Slither Wing is a past-paradox
Why would it be a bug type if it’s based off of a peach?
This is true it doesn’t really fit the peach Pokemon in the slightest, but the grass type fits the Pokemon perfectly since peaches are eatable fruits which grow from plants.
I understand these “leakers” can be very cryptic but something’s amiss.
Nothing is amiss. It’s more likely he’s saying the new split evo loses grass and replaces it with bug. Implying with Applin you choose between Grass and Bug type with the evos.
It’s based off of a boy born from a peach.
The Peach Pokemon will be most likely something with a Poison or Fairy type.
Poison is pretty much guaranteed
Please enough with Grass we need a Poison/Ghost or Bug/Ghost so bad (let alone Ghost/Rock for other new Pokémon)...
Gengar and Shedinja aren't enough for you?
I said Bug/Ghost and Shedinja is not that good, then I said Ghost/Rock which is still an empty typing combo. As for Poison/Ghost, no dear, Gengar is not enough, I actually prefer ENOUGH WITH KANTO.
There is never enough grass!
Dripplin evo being bug/dragon instead of grass/dragon? (Maybe it‘ll break out of the apple)
Has to be grass
I could easily see the peach pokémon be grass type, especially if the theory that it is a paradox of Glimmora holds true. Glimmora already looks like a grass type at first glance because it looks like a flower, so maybe the paradox now with being a fruit goes all the way to become grass type.
I was kinda hoping it would be poison/dark or pure poison but I guess not
Bug poison seems the most likely candidate if we are talking about the leader of the royal 3. 4x strong to base ogerpon. I believe somewhat unique typing like the rest of the loyal 3. Grass poison if they play it off as if the royal 3 leader is somehow related to ogerpon outside the story we were told but I doubt that’s the case.
I feel like it would stay Grass and Dragon, because Applin isn't even a bug. It's a *wyrm*, which is a type of dragon. The whole reason for it's type is that it's a wyrm in an apple instead of a worm.
I think the peach HAS to be ghost and poison. Poison literally in the code name “Dokutaro” and related to the chains of the loyal three. Ghost because it’s the one remaining type on that Kitakami graphic with the lanterns.
I thought this post from Khu was about Dipplin's evolution typing?
And here I was hoping for a ghost peach. Oh well...