Rock > Ice?!??!!

[hopeandjoy]

Fighting beats Dark because Fighting is all about martial arts and Dark is all about dirty tricks. The more noble fighters win, you see.

All of Psychic's weaknesses (except Steel) are psychological stuff. (Fear of Bug(s), Dark moves being under handed, Ghosts being freaky.)

I really started getting into Pokémon in R/S (mostly because I had just learned to read during GSC), and I learned the chart partly through experimentation, commonsense, and the type chart in my game guide.

Of course, as I only trained my starter without grinding, it was all for naught.

 

[Connoiseusse Burgundy]

All of Psychic's weaknesses (except Steel) are psychological stuff. (Fear of Bug(s), Dark moves being under handed, Ghosts being freaky.)

I always interpreted it as Psychic's weaknesses all being common fears.

 

[Zero Moment]

All of Psychic's weaknesses (except Steel)

Psychic.... isn't weak to Steel?

 

[ultraviolet]

These are my headcanon explanations.

Bug > Dark: Many insects are nocturnal and are thus more active in the dark.

I thought that too at first, but many insects aren't. there are lots of ~all kinds~ of animals that are nocturnal, not just insects. idk my headcanon is 'because parasites maybe???' but even then that's pretty silly.

All of Psychic's weaknesses (except Steel) are psychological stuff. (Fear of Bug(s), Dark moves being under handed, Ghosts being freaky.)

psychic isn't weak to steel, steel resists psychic.

uv, they're not the ~same thing~. Rocks are thinks you chuck at birds and bugs, and Ground is the thing we walk on, unless you are Charlie Sheen and all the drugs you take causes you to walk on air.

... what the hell do you think the ground is made from? o.o sand is variable depending on where you get it from, but it's commonly broken down rocks and shell fragments at beaches; volcanic sand is made... from broken down rocks and minerals; dirt is broken down rocks and organic matter. 'the thing we walk on', or the lithosphere, is made from rock. Groudon, who represents the lithosphere, is a ground-type. Conceptually, the two types are muddled. I get they're not the exact same thing, but they're similar enough that it seems odd to separate them conceptually. Most ground type pokemon are based on different types of sand based on what biome you find it in (desert, muddy lakes, 'underground'), and initially there weren't any pure rock types. It kinda feels like they added ground or rock as an afterthought to build up the type chart. I can get the difference between water and ice as types, because the difference between water and ice in cultural consciousness is pretty massive. They do different things for us and have different associated legends. Rock and ground are more or less grouped together, unless you're talking gemstones, which is oddly only used as a motif in pokemon pretty occasionally (and then you have lots of pokemon that do have gemstones on them, like sableye and golduck and persian, but aren't rock or ground types).
I mean it seems like it would be way more consistent to just chuck them all together into an 'earth' type or something, but whatever.

edit: even the fossils are inconsistent; all fossil pokemon are rock-types, despite the fact that Aerodactyl, while generated from a fossil, is not actually generated from a rock. It's regenerated from Old Amber, which is suggested to have a blood-sucking insect inside containing Aerodactyl DNA, a la Jurassic Park. Idk if this was an oversight by Game Freak, or if prehistoric = rock in the pokemon world (which doesn't make any sense). And then all the fossils pokemon are primarily rock type and have a secondary type (like rock/flying for archen), except for tirtourga/carracosta, which are water/rock.

 

[Blastoise Fortooate]

Dark pokémon are defined by their underhanded/dishonorable tactics. Bug pokémon have a psychology and definition of honor that differs greatly from other creatures' (it's basically 'help people maybe' vs 'PROTECT THE HIVE', respectively) that Dark pokémon just can't quite deal with as well.

Of course, again, my personal running theory is that pokémon and pokémon attacks all have a personal energy field that interacts with each other Type of energy field in a unique, arbitrary manner. Thus, a sandshrew's Ground type aura would impede an Electric move entirely, a Flamethrower cuts through a Grass type's aura like butter and thus do extra damage, etc.

 

[Aisling]

Granted, there are a couple of uncommon resistances I still look up to be absolutely sure (Poison against Ghost, etc.)

If it ever comes up in conversation (or any of the type relationships between psychic, ghost, and poison), I always say "It's because they're purple" and everybody always just nods

 

[sv_01]

I think I've understood Steel's resistance to Dragon.
-Dragons partly attack your emotions with their awesomeness. Steel-types tend to be robots or dinosaurs, which aren't too emotional.
-It can also be mythology versus science, imagination against cold reality, and stuff. Dragons are ancient, metal is generally high-tech.
-And also knights.
So basically the dragon sees a brave warrior in shining armor, the Steel-type sees a large reptile, and this is the result.
Ghost and Dark have the problem that Steel-types aren't too easy to creep out, and the resistance to Psychic is there because robots have an entirely different mind. And again, magic vs science. (No reference to Homestuck! That was Dark vs. Psychic, because deep sea glowies should be Dark!)

As for Poison and Ghost, how are you supposed to poison a ghost?

Back to Rock and Ice: Well, ice is fragile. Explains Steel and Fighting as well.

 

[ultraviolet]

If it ever comes up in conversation (or any of the type relationships between psychic, ghost, and poison), I always say "It's because they're purple" and everybody always just nods

I love everything about this

 

[1. Luftballon]

the ghost/bug/poison things that can get confusing

unfortunately bug is not purple so I can't just

is bug/poison mutual resistance ... no, wait, bug nve poison and poison neu bug, right. eh bug and poison terrible coverage anyway and have no useful accurate moves and are only maybe useful as a secondary stab coverage move next to water which pretty much means water/poison because nothing useful water/bug. feh. that's silly.

 

[sv_01]

I think Bug is not very effective against Poison about for the same reason as Grass is. And ghosts just aren't physical enough.

Bug and Fighting are mutual resistance... Maybe because they are so different.

 

[DarkAura]

... what the hell do you think the ground is made from? o.o sand is variable depending on where you get it from, but it's commonly broken down rocks and shell fragments at beaches; volcanic sand is made... from broken down rocks and minerals; dirt is broken down rocks and organic matter. 'the thing we walk on', or the lithosphere, is made from rock. Groudon, who represents the lithosphere, is a ground-type. Conceptually, the two types are muddled. I get they're not the exact same thing, but they're similar enough that it seems odd to separate them conceptually. Most ground type pokemon are based on different types of sand based on what biome you find it in (desert, muddy lakes, 'underground'), and initially there weren't any pure rock types. It kinda feels like they added ground or rock as an afterthought to build up the type chart. I can get the difference between water and ice as types, because the difference between water and ice in cultural consciousness is pretty massive. They do different things for us and have different associated legends. Rock and ground are more or less grouped together, unless you're talking gemstones, which is oddly only used as a motif in pokemon pretty occasionally (and then you have lots of pokemon that do have gemstones on them, like sableye and golduck and persian, but aren't rock or ground types).
I mean it seems like it would be way more consistent to just chuck them all together into an 'earth' type or something, but whatever.

...That's like saying everything's the same because they originated from the same place. While they may have been the same at one point, they both became two different things.


Anyway I was just wondering, would a Steel/Dragon type have no weaknesses?

 

[Superbird]

Dragon/Steel is weak to Ground and fighting.

As for actual no-weakness type combinations,

The only possible type combination without a weakness is Dark/Ghost (technically, using Foresight will negate Ghost's immunities and thus make Fighting super effective, but under normal circumstances it has no weakness). Meanwhile, there are several one-weakness type combinations: pure Normal (weak to Fighting), pure Electric (weak to Ground), Normal/Ghost (weak to Dark), Water/Ground (doubly weak to Grass), Water/Dragon (weak to Dragon), Poison/Dark (weak to Ground), Psychic/Dark (doubly weak to Bug) and Bug/Steel (doubly weak to Fire). Interestingly, we have abilities that provide functional immunities to both Ground (Levitate), Fire (Flash Fire) and Grass (Sap Sipper), making Electric, Poison/Dark, Bug/Steel and Water/Ground Pokémon with no weaknesses possible (although Poison/Dark is also subject to the same loophole as Dark/Ghost, namely its weakness to Psychic under Miracle Eye, and the abilites Mold Breaker, Turboblaze and Teravolt will negate all three abilities, as well as the move Gravity negating Levitate). In the fifth generation we finally got such a Pokémon, the Levitating Electric eel family of Tynamo, Eelektrik and Eelektross.

 

[ultraviolet]

...That's like saying everything's the same because they originated from the same place. While they may have been the same at one point, they both became two different things.

that's not at all what I'm saying; note that I said that water/ice doesn't bother me even though they are literally the same thing. They have different cultural associations and legends from each other and therefore more things to make pokemon creatures out of. Ground and rock don't do this! Ground and rock are really muddled and inconsistent with each other and that's why I question whether they were separate types initially. I even said 'I get they're not the exact same thing'!

I made an example of rocks and the ground being the same thing because how you defined them makes no sense ('the thing we walk on' or, 'the ground', is made from rock. that's why it's called the lithosphere). I mean, even in the common consciousness they're kinda muddled - wikipedia gives you a couple of pages for 'ground', the first of which is 'the earth's surface (which redirects to lithosphere), and then soil. I'm also finding it hard to find different references in mythology between rock and the ground! I mean the easiest examples I can think of off the top of my head are golems, which are commonly thought of as being made from clay or mud (i.e., ground) - not necessarily the case (wiki says 'inanimate matter') - but then you have Regirock (which is a rock-type) and Golem (a rock/ground type).

also way to ignore most of what I said and just reply to the first thing. that's kinda rude.

 

[sovram]

...That's like saying everything's the same because they originated from the same place. While they may have been the same at one point, they both became two different things.

but they are like, literally the same thing, almost analogous to how water is the same thing as ice! if you take a rock and break it in half, is it now somehow a different thing? like, sure, it's broken, but what else would you call it besides "part of a rock"? it's still rock and still has the same characteristics: melting point would be similar (might take less time because there is less material but idk), hardness, minerals contained, &c.

so while we have different words for what we think of as rock and what we think of as "ground" (sand, soil, &c.), they are, with the exception of organic matter mixed in, made of the exact same stuff and so should behave extremely similarly -- i don't think even the addition of organic matter should do much, at least not in the sense of pokemon type match-ups.

~why are we arguing about this~

 

[sv_01]

The difference is that rock is hard. You don't break windows by throwing mud or sand on them.

 

[Vipera Magnifica]

After playing the games for so long, I just accept the fact that ground somehow beats steel without questioning it.

 

[Adriane]

After playing the games for so long, I just accept the fact that ground somehow beats steel without questioning it.

I would imagine the same way it beats Rock. More importantly, Steel needs some weaknesses.

 

[sovram]

The difference is that rock is hard. You don't break windows by throwing mud or sand on them.

sand is still hard -- i established that it's made out of the exact same material as rock, and so should retain the same properties -- but it's just that rock is rigid as opposed to sand which is slightly more fluid (not the right word at all, but i can't think of what else to call it). you can still break things -- maybe windows, i've never broken a window with a rock and i can't imagine it's actually very easy -- with clumps of sand or dirt; at the very least i know clumps of sand or dirt can hurt, if they're well clumped. should we really distinguish rock and ground based on rigidity??

anyway, uv has an excellent point about there not being any pure rock types. if moves are distinguished between rock and ground solely on how rigid the type of material we're talking about is, isn't that ... just really stupid? why couldn't there be earth-type moves that use rocks and moves that use dirt? i think it's just a silly, arbitrary distinction.

water and ice makes some sense, even though they are the same substance, because of the phase change. ice is weak to fire because the temperature will force a phase change, okay. why isn't water weak to fire for the same reason? water can put out fires but i don't think it's because it's water because can't you do the same thing with sand or other things? i don't think ice > flying makes a whole lot of sense either!

POKEMON METAPHYSICS

 

[Superbird]

I think 'ground' mainly refers to the manipulation of the ground and power drawn directly from the earth, while 'rock' refers to physical attacks using dense rocks and boulders.

 

[Adriane]

anyway, uv has an excellent point about there not being any pure rock types. if moves are distinguished between rock and ground solely on how rigid the type of material we're talking about is, isn't that ... just really stupid? why couldn't there be earth-type moves that use rocks and moves that use dirt? i think it's just a silly, arbitrary distinction.

I used to think that, and then the Roggenrola line happened.