314
edits
Talk:Type: Difference between revisions
→"Typeless"
| Line 1,138: | Line 1,138: | ||
::::As for Roost, our article says it becomes ???-type in Gen IV (and Normal-type starting Gen V, in which ??? has been removed entirely), not typeless. And as far as I know, there has never been STAB for ???. My personal suggestion for why they didn't make Roost users truely "typeless" (but Normal-type) is that that's actually more work, and they didn't care. [[User:Nescientist|Nescientist]] ([[User talk:Nescientist|talk]]) 14:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC) | ::::As for Roost, our article says it becomes ???-type in Gen IV (and Normal-type starting Gen V, in which ??? has been removed entirely), not typeless. And as far as I know, there has never been STAB for ???. My personal suggestion for why they didn't make Roost users truely "typeless" (but Normal-type) is that that's actually more work, and they didn't care. [[User:Nescientist|Nescientist]] ([[User talk:Nescientist|talk]]) 14:29, 19 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
::::: Apologies, it's actually the {{t|???}} article that states "In Generation IV, if a pure Flying-type Pokémon uses Roost, it becomes typeless[citation needed] until the end of the turn, effectively behaving as if it were ???-type. ". So there's a bit of inconsistency on the site then that can only be resolved by looking at the code. I'd be interested to see what happens to colour change Kecleon when hit with typeless RD, I'd be happy to try that with someone over wifi when Bank is released [[User:Jmvb|JMVB - I don't what to put here.]] ([[User talk:Jmvb|talk]]) 15:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC) | ::::: Apologies, it's actually the {{t|???}} article that states "In Generation IV, if a pure Flying-type Pokémon uses Roost, it becomes typeless[citation needed] until the end of the turn, effectively behaving as if it were ???-type. ". So there's a bit of inconsistency on the site then that can only be resolved by looking at the code. I'd be interested to see what happens to colour change Kecleon when hit with typeless RD, I'd be happy to try that with someone over wifi when Bank is released [[User:Jmvb|JMVB - I don't what to put here.]] ([[User talk:Jmvb|talk]]) 15:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC) | ||
:::::: In regards to whether damage can have a type, I think it is probably useful to think of it as if it can, since moves like Judgment or Hidden Power are normal-type, but the damage they deal is affected by type matchups as if it was a different type. I think it's just a matter of how you choose to think about it, more than anything else. I think the wording of the page was clearer when it used the idea of damage being typeless, but that's just my thoughts on the matter. [[User:Xolroc|Xolroc]] ([[User talk:Xolroc|talk]]) 22:12, 19 December 2016 (UTC) | |||