How do they know that Arcanine is fire type for example?
>>59273070Inb4 Sabor says that a Pokémon is made of [INSERT ELEMENT]
>>59273070Probably through shared physical traits. Like Fire types naturally having the ability to produce fire while all other mons with fire moves do so through other methods
>>59273078Who?
>>59273070Based on weaknesses.
They'd have to have some way to categorize the health first, the amount of damage a pokemon is able to endure until it involuntarily shrinks down. It may be correlated to quantifying life force or aura of a pokemon which is probably a recent invention. After that it was just trial and error. They must have wanted to give moves only one type so that they didn't become unnecessarily convoluted. Then they deduced that moves primarily have 18 types based purely on their nature and they affect different pokemon in different ways. Moves that were used as a baseline initially would be normal types, with neutral damage to almost everything. Some outliers were accounted for by introducing Ghost (no-effect) types and Steel(half-damage) types. The base damage was also calculated by testing them on a "pure" Normal type Pokemon. Them being a baseline is what makes them so common in all regions. After that they sort of built up on the types of both moves and pokemon, by comparing them to that baseline. This human oversight is what allows new types to be introduced, along with modifications/updates to type-matchup tables.tl;dr, it's a convention that human scientists came up with, kind of like biological nomenclature. I realize that Arceus and its plates kind of fuck this theory up along with a bunch of shit from gen 9 but whatever it's a theory I'm satisfied with
>>59273070You’re thinking of pokemon types as being some specific tangible trait - that’s not the case. Rather they’re polyphyletic groups made by humans out of convenience - and they’re actually based around moves instead of pokemon. If a Pokemon is entirely immune to thunderbolt but is hurt extremely badly by bubblebeam and icy wind - guess what? We’ll call that a ground type. And all other ground types are the same - just handy categorizations we assign to pokemon based on how they react to moves. The moves themselves are quantifiable techniques, independent from the pokemon - flamethrower from a Mewtwo and flamethrower from a charmelepn are both fire type because flamethrower deals fire damage. And while there are the occasional exceptions (Pixilate for example and abilities like it) those are the exception to the norm and can be researched and identified
>>59273070Ground types are made of groundFire types are made of fire etc
> "You're thinking of X... Rather Y"> Standard LLM myth-vs-fact framing device. It's a structural crutch used to initiate an explanation.> > The sterile hedging> "...those are the exception to the norm and can be researched and identified." Massive tell. LLMs are hardcoded to avoid absolutes and append caveats. A human arguing on an imageboard just says "except for abilities like Pixilate." Nobody ends a casual debate with a disclaimer about researching exceptions.> > Tautological over-explanation> "...flamethrower deals fire damage." AI generates tokens based on semantic weights, resulting in redundant explanations. If someone is dropping niche taxonomy terms like "polyphyletic," they assume the audience knows what Flamethrower does.> > Database-style rule construction> Pulling specific moves like "bubblebeam and icy wind" to prove a broad conceptual point about Ground types reads like an AI querying a type-matchup table to build a localized rule.> The whole thing is tonal whiplash. It jumps from forced casual confrontation to niche biology, over-explains basic game mechanics, and caps it off with a sterile, non-committal safety disclaimer.
>>59273329Tf?
It likely has to do with some type of energetic trait they specifically share and give off that can be measured, or some type of organ. For instance Arcanine may have a flame sac or something in it's throat and only fire types have them. Also it'd be easy to tell based on their own weaknesses how to categorize them. Just have them get hit by an attack.
They hit it with water and dirt. If it dies is fire.
>>59273467Could be a rock type tho. Who can say for sure?
59273300Brown
>>59273493rocks don't die to rocks thoughsome types are obvious exceptions to the rule but if they just add rocks to the equation and it dies then it's an obvious fire type.the real question of this thread though should be how the ordering of dual types is ascertained because that feels more random than what types pokemon even get in the first place
>>59273070Their equivalent of genesI have a suspicion Pokemon aren't really composed the same way we are due to being able to go into poke ballsThis also explains a lot of other stuff about the game but that's for my YouTube video
>>59273520Rocks die to dirt.
>>59273539dirt isn't all rocks. i said rocks don't die to rocks, not that rocks don't die to dirt.you aren't going to insinuate that mud for example is exactly the same as rocks, anon, are you?
>>59273231"Shrinking down" is the faggiest faggot meme I've ever heard from you spics
>>59273588It wasn't my intention to meme. If you want me to call it something else I will comply
>>59273588Isn't shrinking canon?
>>59273493BEHOLD! A rock type!
Wasn't there an anime episode in early gen 2 where some scientists tried to find out if Sudowoodo was Grass type or Rock type?
Depends on a lot of factors. For instance, lets use Pikachu. We can easily look at it with the Pokedex and classify such things, height, weight, color, it's some type of mammal/mouse, etc. How do we figure out it's type? Well it is weak to Ground, and nothing else. So that means it has to be Poison, Rock, Electric, Fire, or Steel. Well given that it has resistance to Electricity and Wind, it's likely Electric type. Lets take Clefairy having Fairy added to it. Likely Clefairy in universe was always weak to Fire for instance and they couldn't figure out why until they started classifying it and seeing it more in nature, same with Steel/Dark. Also multiverses exist, so that's easily written away. Now for dual type, it's harder, lets take Spiritomb. Well it's an amorphous intangible entity, so it's likely more ghost-like than dark. So it's ordering is probably done more on the egg-body type rather than just solely it's resistances. For other's it's harder, for instance, Gliscor, it's Ground/Flying, but clearly it's a Bat with Wings, so likely it might be just what they saw first or some type of reading they get from them as well. Could just be random too and doesn't really matter. A real life example is a whale, you wouldn't call it a Fish just because it's in the Water.
>>59274128Going even further, lets take some further examples. Charmander and Charmeleon are Fire Types, but Charizard is Fire/Flying. Notice how an evolution it gains it as the second type. Scyther: Bug/Flying->Scizor: Bug/Steel, again notice how the steel replaces the Flying. And since we're on Scyther, Flying is his second because despite having Wings, it can't fly. Steelix however is different, Onix is Rock/Ground and Steelix because Steel/Ground, why is that. Could be that Rock-Steel have some sort of connection like Water-Ice and its classified that way, could be because Steelix is more primarily Steel than Ground. Dual types are likely a random, but sometimes logical reasoning for why they are ordered the way they are. Could look at Venonat/Skorupi as well both are Bug/Poison, lets say they had a baby Pokemon, likely it'd be Bug for Venonat and Poison for Skorupi, why? Well Skorupi learns Poison Sting at Lv. 1 and Venonat doesn't learn a damaging Poison move until Lv. 41. So they might classify baby Pokemon that way to differentiate them and to continue explaining the primary typing is the one that typically gets replaced.
