I feel like adding Object as a body, changing Cosmic to an element, then adding Sound and Technology as styles would be the best route putting it at 30 types
Reptile type should be called herp type, considering herpetology is the study of reptiles and amphibians, and herps are a term used to refer to the two classes of animals. It's less explicit, but then again, arthro isn't too much of a well known term either.
I feel like using scientific names is just out of sync with the rest. Scale instead of Herp, and then Bug is fine. Then maybe Marine instead of Fish? Its fine if there are some ambiguities.
I don't think so, not if the game was properly designed around it. If you think of just like, "here are 27 types, go learn all their match-ups," yeah, that would be pretty overwhelming. But the same could be said about 18 types, too, if you're totally unfamiliar with Pokémon. The reason we didn't get overwhelmed when we first played the game (whichever game was our first) is that they all do a good job of introducing you to different types little by little. Plus, with the modern mechanic of telling you whether a move is super effective or not as long as you've battled that Pokémon once before, that level of uncertainty is removed almost entirely.
@@ivanbackfromthecardshop8093 true, but you learn once you notice the relations same as everything though. New player should not be taken in account and* will learn and in a way pokemon is rock Paper scissors if simpelfied it's not that hard
I feel like the Body types could be left as Egg Groups and instead of being types, the groups could just be made more explicit on the status screen (perhaps instead of the vague and unhelpful Categories we have now, the Category would display the egg group, i.e. Arthro/Fairy for a fey-inspired bug pokemon like Ribombee?). That way, pokemon only have one or two types like normal, and they could be based entirely off your 9 elements (give or take a few). Then, the "style" could be something akin to Move Properties, like moves that cause Poison or moves that Drain health. I haven't thought too deeply on this but I think it would simplify this system a lot and cut out some of what I personally see as redundancy in it. Regardless, you did a great job reworking the system and this is totally a thing I've done in my free time before, but not on this scale.
I always thought the properties of a move (or Power) are beside the types used. There's damage and target and drain properties, but none of these are specific to a type I do agree with egg types being open in a game rather than hidden mechanics.
I feel like making all mammalian Pokémon beast type would feel somewhat weird for some. I can’t imagine the word beast being used to describe Pokémon like mr mime and dedenne.
I think you could make an argument for both Mr. Mime and Dedenne being the "Fairy" body type. Though, I don't really see a problem with Dedenne being called a "Beast," it honestly makes sense to me. It's only weird for the humanoid ones, imo.
Dedenne makes sense as a beast, the term beast is used to refer to animals can refer to any animal (even small ones and pets) that is not a human, and more commonly refers to four-legged ones, Dedenne is a quadruped so yeah that makes sense. Though I'm not sure if a lot of humanoid pokémon would really fit into most categories, Mr. Mime probably fits into fairy, but what about, say, the Machoke line? They look kind of reptilian so maybe reptile fits even if they're way more humanlike, or what about a Pokémon like Alakazam? Looks pretty humanoid but I don't think it fits into anything, or something like Sawk and Throh, or the Timburr line, the Forces of Nature, etc. Maybe a humanoid body type could work since there are a lot of pokémon like these
@@door-chan the definition of beast says especially large or dangerous though. It’s a term I’ve mainly heard used for horses and donkeys, AKA beasts of burden, and large carnivores like bears. Calling a mouse a beast is a HUGE stretch though.
I think my biggest criticism of this approach is that it misunderstands one of the strengths of the existing pokemon types - Versatility. If Flying can mean bird attributes, wind powers, or aerial attacks, that means tons of possibilities for pokemon and moves. If you make types more specific then Wind type moves will all just be variations of Gust with different numbers and secondary effects.
I really like that system! Bonus: it also seems a lot more like how Professors would categorize the Pokemon. But really, no Sound Type? Would it be included in Air?
Yeah I think most sound moves would be considered at least party Air moves. After all, what is sound besides air pressure waves? At least for us terrestrial, non-aquatic folk.
Nick den Toom yes but no. Most sound based Pokémon’s like Noivern and loudred specifically are themed around sound. And yet in regular Pokémon they fall under normal. Having a sound based typing isn’t that too wild
Personally I love this system even though in practise it would be very very unpractical cause you really can’t do all the math in your head. Also dealing with moves might be more complicated cause differentiating between Acquatic, Water and Fish moves would either leave fish with almost no moves whatsoever or create a lot of arbitrary distinction that would be kinda confusing to understand
@@Lvl1.Sentry I think maybe it’s related to how fairy is weak to poison and steel, two man-made things which in fairy tales tend to hurt magical creatures (like werewolves and maleficent with steel). So maybe since fire can be man-made, fairy can’t do effective damage against it?
@@jfecaz True, not to mention that a fairy/steel type pokemon would be so overpowered. Because they would only be weak to ground types, just like electric types.
I'd love a typing system like this in a game for more experienced players, it will always be a kids game but it's initial/older fanbase deserves something specific to them for all the years of loyalty.
I don't know why I thought you were going yo simplify the type system rather than make it drastically more complicated. I already have to stop and determine jow effective my single type move hits a dual type pokemon, and flying press confused me enough on its own. If I have to constantly think about the type matchup of my martial fire attack on an ice mineral bird than I'm just gonna get exhausted. Also, I have friends that already get confused with ground, rock, and steel. Throwing in more redundant types like Aquatic Water Fish (AND the variations you get mixing just those three distinct types) just kind of make intuiting this system a complete mess
I did consider an Anthro type at one point, since there is an egg group specifically for Human-Like Pokémon! But it was one f the first to go when I was trying to condense things.
I admire the effort and to a certain degree I really like it. Like it’s a good idea to add the body type category and it fixes the problem that the normal typings had which was being all over the place. But a problem arises on how specific you want to be and how vague do you want to be. Like as people have pointed out some are kind of redundant and some might be needed like a sound type. Although I do enjoy the explanations of typings for each example you gave.
I think the main issue with these types is that "Making the game more difficult" isnt always a good thing since they still want kids to be able to progress and have fun with the game. And I'm not saying that a little challenge isnt a bad thing (when I was a kid I had lots of fun coming up with strategies to defeat others) but if we do this we need to understand that its not only for older people who understand it.
You're definitely right that the current types don't make sense. In thinking about what direction I'd take Pokemon, I keep coming back to the possibility of merging Rock, Ground, and Steel, but then if I'm doing that, I might as well merge Psychic and Fairy into Magic, and then I might as well remove Bug or Dark or Dragon...
Why Psychic (or Psi) and Fairy? Those are very different types, one doubling for mental element and Psi affinity moves like Calm Mind or Psychic with Fairy encompassing Faerie creatures and their onomancy, that seems like a lot to have as one type. A mental move like Rest would be Magic type. That's bizarre. To sleep is to cast Magic. That would be annoying if a mass anti-Magic wave or CounterMagic could force everyone to be an insomniac.
The main issue with merging Rock and Ground, at least from a balance standpoint, is that they do a lot of opposites in terms of match-ups. Rock is super effective against Flying; Ground does no damage at all to Flying. A Rock/Flying or Rock/Water is weak to Electric, while replacing Rock with Ground makes them completely immune. Etc, etc. The only thing really the same function-wise is that they are both weak to Water and Grass. And if they were to be merged, into, say, the Earth type, then what would be the logic behind its type match-ups? For Rock, the types it is super-effective against are ones that would be conceptually beaten by throwing a big enough boulder at. While for Ground, it is moreso super-effective against things that would be beaten by the ground splitting beneath them. For Earth, there isn't really a go-to concept for it. What would its match-up be vs Flying, Bug, or Fighting, for example.
Oh wait! Okay, yeah, this was initially a bit confusing. I thought you meant that each Pokémon must all always be exactly 3 types and based on the way you presented it, I thought that it was always only one from each of the three categories.
No, not necessarily! At least one Body type, but the other two type slots can be from any category, OR be empty. So you might have a pure Beast type (maybe like a Persian), but not something that is pure Lightning or pure Aerial (since they need at least one Body type).
wow, just finding this now (possibly again? but I'm sure I would have remembered watching this before), and I'm sure you won't see this very late reply to a 2 year-old video... but this is concept almost perfectly fits with a concept for a Pokemon reimagining! I've never been a huge fan of how inconsistent the types always have been and knew I wanted to try something new with them so they'd be far more intuitive from a gameplay, and character design perspective, and splitting it 3 ways between the physical form of the creature, it's elemental affinity, and it's attack style is genius and very inspiring! That aside, I do think 3 separate charts is a little too many to assign to the creatures themselves - especially if it's possible for a creature to have multiple types in a category; like, I could easily see a griffon-inspired Pokemon being classed as beast and bird, or a jellyfish falling under "fish" and "formless", Pokemon with multiple elemental powers like either Kyurem fusion would have to be assigned both "ice" and "fire"/"lightning", and then for something like Scizzor where its a quick, winged bug with steel armour that has a very physical, "martial" fighting style... it'd be a nightmare to try and pigeon-hole into just 3 types. My proposed solution is to allow for dual-type combinations with the body type and elements, and because the last category "styles" almost entirely revolves around how the Pokemon attacks, I'd reserve that category to further break down moves from just physical, special and status. Very nicely presented and well-thought out concept though!
This definitely seems like something that would be complex and make for more challenging gameplay and I do think that’s good but to be honest I have trouble keeping the tape match up straight in my head already so this would give me more of a headache but it’s definitely very interesting and I appreciate how much work this must’ve taken
Nowadays we do have the battle interface tell you whether a move is effective or not, at least after you've battled that Pokémon once before. I assume that helps you? It would be very useful for a complex system like this.
You know, there are 2 reasons I like your channel. 1st, you speak well and explain your points well... second, which is kinda weird... but you are the Poke'tuber whose opinions and views clash with my own the most. Kinda funny really. But honestly, I am glad that you aren't in charge. This is making Pokemon fit way more into the scientific category than the sort of balance it is between magic and science. That said, for the concept of immunity, I think Pokemon did that for game simplicity rather than the Pokemon being outright immune... probably more like a super resistance.
I don't think I would actually implement this if I was just, like, game director. To make a change like this, from the ground up, it would be a huge decision, with major strategic implications for the entire franchise. It would have to come from Ishihara-san himself.
This is kinda a cool way to reboot it! Honestly some fanmade types I've had might fit in, like: Alpine (Refers to mountain-dwelling Pokemon, might go for Style) Plasma (Refers to either blood or cytoplasm, also to a unstable combination of fire and electricity, might be Element) :> Feel free to correct me; I know my 61 types aren't perfect enough in anyone else's eyes
61?! And I was worried about being too specific with my 27 :) More types could definitely fit into this framework, but at some point it becomes so granular that it's exceptionally tough to balance.
@@UmbreonLibris Yeah, I do have 61 types; now with a new one (62nd) being Urban; refering to domesticated Pokemon that are used to living in the modern cities people live in; might go for Pokemon like Stoutland or Scrafty or some other Unovan species :P (Might go for Style like Alpine)
@@NdzNdzNdz Although most types I have made aren't created for the system UmbreonLibris talks about in the video, I'll be glad to show some of my examples! ^^ (these are taken/inspired from other existing fangames, and/or from existing official types) -Hunter (referring to Pokemon that have some semblance to weaponry and/or the meaning of predatory creatures) -Grease (referring to Pokemon that has semblance to viscous liquids other than water) -Prehistoric (referring to Pokemon that have lived a long, long time ago; examples include the Fossil Pokemon) -Spectrum (referring to Pokemon that have semblance of using coloring/art and the like as an element) There are also cases where a type may be a pure combination of 2 or 3 types (rarely more), which I call "Compounded Types". Examples are mentioned below; (let's face it, I made these because I occasionally make Pokemon that fit for more than 2 types lol) -Arcane (a combination of Psychic and Magic, another fanmade type) -Plasma (mentioned in my original comment) -Depth (a combination of Dark and Water, referring to deep-sea-esque Pokemon) -Static (a combination of Electric and Ghost) -Psyburn (a combination of Psychic and Fire) my ideas sound stupid ngl xD
@@cometcal7387 no they’re actually really interesting. Could you explain examples for each type? The only issue I see with so many types is the lack of pokemon for each type. I personally call Grease “slime” and hunter “Primal”
I feel like this was born out of the need to deconstruct the type system because of the inconsistencies. But Pokémon already has a built-in system to deconstruct typing, the physical and special split. The body and style types are physical while the elemental types are special. Body types may be the inherently hardest type to provide intuitive type matchups. By providing three typings, you increase the amount of permutations that don't help a 6 year old kid understand the game, and feels like you're making a system designed purely for those that want a complicated technical system in the first place, which from a business standpoint may be unprofitable.
As a VGC player... I don't like this XD If this was, like, a game only focused on its main campaign... then yes, sure. But this would create too many unbalances for PVP. Not to mention it would totally scare newcomers... And competitive-pokemon already does that XD
Later, you should do a compilation of each gens Pokémon to see every Pokémon’s type in your new type system. What type would play rough be? I also feel like arthro and reptile should be resistant and super effective against psycic
Some match-ups are flimsier for the sake of balancing, and that one could have gone either way, but I was thinking of various bugs that feed on or parasitize mammals, like mosquitoes.
@@UmbreonLibris But that's more a Style type. A Parasite or Parasitic style, supereffective against all the animal types, Plant and Formless (cause it includes mollusks) but resisted by Mineral, Fairy and Vitality. It is weak to itself (hyperparasites), and Vitality (medicines and doctors curing people of Parasites), and that it receives healing as Vitality dmg, with the duo exception of items and HP healing gained from Parasite Style moves (I dunno why taking properties of a move like healing and making them their own Types restrictedly separate from other moves but if I'm adding to a headcanon type chart, might as well imitate). Pokèmon who would be Parasitic style would be Parasect. Only the evolved version though, the prior evolution can just be Poison style for it's toxic fumes from it's mushroom back. Though I wouldn't say Slowking would be Parasite Style type, as they're more symbiotic than parasitic and that would mean removing their Mental Style. Parasite Style is bit, tricky. It wipes the floor with most of the Body types but has a major weakness to Vitality type healing, making it a bad pair for a Vitality Type or Vitality type using Monsters, not to mention how exploitable taking dmg but taking supereffective dmg from healing moves can be.
This is a really interesting take, it's quite similar to a type system I have been trying to work on with different categories types can fall into, albeit the tiered type system is certainly different. The fact that every pokemon would have a body type is interesting since that guarantees every pokemon will have at least one of those 9 types which helps when trying to study all the type combinations. I do see a few issues with the type system, namely coming from making teams, as 27 types is a lot types to take into account both defensively and offensively as you want to make sure your team can account for each one of them, at least on a primary type basis. The tiered system also makes this a bit more complicated as doing mental math with tiers can be a bit complex compared to just doing multiplication or division with 2. The other main issue would be with the ballance between physical and special moves, as body types seems like they would lend themselves more to physical attacks while elements would be special more often, so trying to make sure each pokemon has good STAB options that match their highest offensive type can also prove difficult, so MANY new attacks would need to be added to ensure this isn't an issue. Overall great, just wanted to share areas of potential weakness I found.
I don't think the need for new attacks is a weakness! Just something that would have to be considered for anyone actually making a game like this. And on the point about mental math, I agree there. But I also think it would encourage people to be more intuitive about choosing which moves to use, which might be interesting.
8:33 Libris: " they called me a mad man " lol, you out did yourself Armor/Beast/Light is what I am going with, I know all the elemental fangs including Poison
This would make for an interesting Pokémon-esque fangame, and if someone can make a fully fleshed monster catching/battling game surrounding this type system, I'd definitely play it.
It's actually a good thing that a normal ass bird pokémon is instantly slightly associated with the wind element and moves like gust. I want to have to think about how my little pidgey has to flap their wings to swirl up a violent gust. I like your system, but not for pokemon.
i think Gamefreak should stick to actual elements because putting animal species in the mix is very confusing like Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Dark, Light, Grass, Ice, Steel, Electric, Gravity, Psychic, Poison, Sound, Crystal, Healing, Nuclear and Magnetism
triple types and 27 types is something you might be able to learn, but moves with 2 types is waaaay too complicated. we only have 1 so far(Flying Press) and, of the top of my head, I couldn't tell you what it's super-effective against or resisted.
Personally I think Pokemon is actually *too* complex and could be condensed. I would make a list of: Air, Cosmic, Earth, Electric, Fighting, Fire, Ice, Metal, Mystic, Neutral, Shadow, Sound, Water, Wood And then those special breeding groups simply have trends in design or exclusive moves, or even some abilities that synergise with others (i.e, a Swarming ability that buffs all bugs). One way to mix things up is that some Pokemon could have the same twice type, like a "Max Fire" type to raise STAB to ×2, and weakness and resistance moving to ×3 and /3. I think the depth should come from diverse available resources rather than more complexity.
I really like this idea, but I would execute it differently. I would make the body and element be the type of actual Pokemon, and make the combat style be the move types. Then assign Pokemon types to the move types like Fish and Water getting STAB on Aquatic moves (so a Water Fish would get further increased bonus damage), but also make some types have less efficiency using specific moves like Fairy being weaker when using Cheat moves. My worry is whether or not this wouldn't make things a bit too simple, but with proper game design balanced around it I think it would work
Something I thought of was traits. I'd make Flying a trait instead of a type. And these traits can add some additional abilities. flying which is ground immunity and a stab bonus to winged moves, Aura gives stab to all beam or orb launching moves, Deity can add overpowered things(for arceus etc), Cosmic grants levitate and stab to psychic moves if not psychic type, Hard Body for rock and steel types that will grant some resistance to fighting moves, full immunity to normal and winged moves. Idk there's some kinks to work out, I hate flying as a type because it's forced the typing on some like Noctowl should be psychic, gyarados should be dragon and so on.
4:43 you could use a different Lexicon to sound cooler or describe it better Bird > Aerial Fairy > Mystic Fish > Aquatic Formless > Phantom Plant > Rooted
Ok, so in my opinion this would be really cool to learn. Imagine instead of being just “oh, this Pokémon is X type, therefore it has a crap matchup against certain other Pokémon” you would have to really learn about each team member’s types as you play through the game with them and learn by experience to introduce a skill element to pokemon
Not sure I'm 100% on board with your concept as a whole, but I LOVE the idea of the type of creature they are effecting how they are effected by other types. And I like that it would make breeding easier to understand. Though since a whale is a mammal(like beast I presume) and not a fish...would that still make Wailord and Skitty compatible??? And your types kinda reminded me of Yu-Gi-Oh types which I thought was funny.
@@UmbreonLibris Ah so the ridiculous meme persists! Hurrah! haha I haven't been into the card game in years, but to my recollection, each monster card has two or three types, the third describing the effect and the other two describing attributes. Like, there's an element and a descriptor. Elements there's Light, Dark, Fire, Water, Wind, and Earth and I think that's it? There's too many of the other types to list all of them off the top of my head, but there's Spellcasters, Warriors, Beast-Warriors (which are generally anthro), Beasts, Fish, Sea Serpents, Machines, Reptiles, Dragons, Fairies, Thunder, and that's all I can remember.
This tickles my brain. It pretty perfectly covers all pokemon, but I wonder about Gyarados. Some variation of: Fish/reptile, water/arcane/wind, aquatic/aerial.
The one change I would make to this system is to have the type hierarchy linked directly to the type category. For example, the primary type would always be the body-based type, as the Pokémon is made of that material or has that body structure. That would at least make it less confusing to find out or memorize how important a type's advantages and disadvantages are. Using the example above, it would be a lot easier to remember that the weaknesses of a body-based type are very important, as any attack that uses a body-based type's weakness will do significantly more damage than a move that uses weaknesses of the other two type categories. It would also make it easier to remember and explain why certain Pokémon might have a blank space in certain type categories. It would be easier to conclude that Pokémon which uses a lot of physical moves but doesn't have access to many or any magical moves actually has a blank in its element type, while a more feral Pokémon may have a blank on its style type. Obviously, that would make it very hard to explain why a Pokémon may have a blank in its body type but that could actually be one of the restrictions, in which all Pokémon must have a body type, no matter what other types they have or not.
“would it make sense for a tertiary type that still keeps you floating above the ground to prevent the ground shaking from hurting you at all?” I mean, yeah? imho
Nintendo won't ever take the risk of chaning the type system so drastically. This is actually quite well put together and organized. It might make most sense if you create your own IP in order to implement your ideas.
They just need to change Bug one last time- Make it STRONG against Fairy, and then EVERY TYPE is just a but balanced, and Bugs are a bit more viable than they used to be...
the 27 types stuff would actually be fun because it would take time to get used to which would be the fun part and the addition of each one having their own unique abilities would be cool as heck
Honestly, I'd play this. Sounds both challenging and fun, especially if you take it in the direction Pokemon did with the types being mainly found around the appropriate gyms to either fight them or catch that type, like with Lt. Surge having the Diglett cave outside his town.
Libris, this is hands down my favorite reworking of the type chart. Maybe a few more types that I would have, but I just cannot argue with the underlying structure. Having the prinary, seconday, and tertiary order matter is pure genius. Also, yes, resistances are as dumb as a butt.
I also did a redesign of Pokemon types, but my plan was instead to reduce types into STAB, and instead give each Pokemon specific weaknesses and resistances, albeit ones following themes based on their design and STAB moves. The types I started off with were: -Default -Heat -Water -Vegetable (arguably the only common term that includes both plants and mushrooms,) -Electric -Cold -Wind -Toxic -Sea -Bird -Bug -Rock -Soil -Metal -Sound -Light -Martial (Great minds think alike!) -Shadow -Ascended (My term for psychic/cosmic stuff, as I feel like there isn't too much of a difference between the two) -Crude -Fairy -God-Draco -Variety And I kept on adding types for moves with multiple "types", such as splitting all physical attacks into blunt, cut, and spike attacks, and even more stuff, such as smoke and airborne moves, the latter similar to what you had. I also warped the breeding system into an actual phylogenetic tree of life, but in hindsight I should've just changed the groups into better categories that make more sense.
Not gonna lie a Pokémon Legends gamr featuring an entirely different type system as it's main gimmick because people back then haven't figured out types yet would be awesome
I certainly think this is an interesting system! If I could make one change, it would be that each type only interacts with other types from its same category. For example: in your current system, every "Body" type should logically be susceptible to Fire (with arguable exclusion of "Mineral"); Fire incinerates all types of flesh. Similarly, many magical abilities would easily dominate many physical body types. However, if the categories are separated for type interactions, then we have the ability for a dragon's innate magic (Arcana) to resist Fire rather than be susceptible to it simply because it's a Reptile. (The same argument could be made for fighting styles.) Some types might need to be shuffled for this (I would argue "Fairy" would take the place of "Light" in elemental types and "Amphibian" or "Humanshape" be added to body types). This differentiation would make type relationships easier to learn (each type only interacts with 8 others instead of 26) while maintaining a good amount of depth and tremendous variability. (Unrelated nitpick: if "Reptile" is going to be a catch-all which includes dragons and amphibians, the change from Bug to "Arthro" by comparison seems very pedantic.)
I definitely considered having the types only interact with other types of the same category, but there were too many match-ups that made sense across categories-in particular with Armour being resistant to a whole bunch of types of offense. But perhaps with some further refining it could work better. I would have used a different term for Reptile if there was one that made sense. Arthropod is everything with an exoskeleton, so that's perfect to include insects, arachnids and crustaceans. But no such term exists for reptiles and amphibians; although herpetology is the study of both reptiles and amphibians, "herpetos" or something like that isn't used by itself.
@@UmbreonLibris Would you mind if I made a response video to this? I've had similar ideas floating around in my head for a while, so I'd like to take the conversation further.
A lot of type resist Grass, but Grass is one of the few that is super effective on Water and it resist Ground and spore moves. it may not be the best one, but he's far from the worst 3.
Arcana, or ‘Arcane’, describes things that are ancient, unknown, and/or mysterious in origin/nature, which not only describes Dragons, it also describes extinct and alien Pokémon, certain legendary/mythical Pokémon, and many Fairy/Formless type Pokémon as well Just throwing that out there..
I prefer it the way it works BUT this is a fun idea, it sucks types like Bug, Grass and Ice are uhh not good, and need to be made better first before introducing any new typing. But dang with this list you could try making your own fan game!
I think I have enough ideas to make my own Pokémon competitor, haha. But I do not have the time or the resources to pursue something like that in earnest!
I personally think they should just add a Sound-type. It's pitiful that the MYTHICAL Meloetta has to stay Normal-type because the type hasn't been added yet.
At first I tought this might be a bit complicated for beginners but honestly now I think this could be superior to the current Types if we're talking about how much sense they make but also how equal types are with one another.
Having double type moves would be a nightmare even now. Like imagine a grass water type move hitting a ground rock type mon with 16x super effective damage
Love this!!!!! The third layer of depth makes the mind wander on what certain moves would become more viable with secondary types that add to or reduce overall damage. Really good stuff. IF I had to choose a gripe, some of the names are a little off, but I'm sure you went through a found the best ones you could because I can't honestly think of any replacement names.
@@UmbreonLibris None that I particularly disliked, but some other options for certain ones could be- Artho = Critter Fish = Marine Plant = Flora Arcana = Mana Cheat = Sly Vitality = Cure/Care Those were the only ones I thought could be named better, but again, your list makes a lot of sense already and this is me looking to nitpick and does not reflect that I dislike it at all. Super great work, dude!
I like this idea but I would probably shorten it to two groups of 10, one for body and the other for style/element. I would also either drop the tiered typing or have it so that body to body and style to style weaknesses do x2 while body to style and style to body do x1.5, though i would more than likely just keep the normal system just dumping the immunity like you said. Off the top of my head my list for the 2 groups would be Body: Anthro (or Humanlike), Beast, Bird, Bug, Fairy, Formless, Grass, Mechanical, Scale, and Rock. And Style: Fire, Water, Poison (taking grasses place as the third in the starter triangle), Ice, Electric, Psychic, Martial, Wind, Shadow, and Ancient (combining things like dragon and cosmic, being the main style for the pseudo-legendary). I kept some of the old type names as they felt more evocative and less literal in some cases, making the broad application fit better. I also realize this isn't a perfect list as it's missing styles for things like earth, sound, and dark/cheat but maybe you could have more styles than bodies as this was just me trying to keep the two groups even at groups of ten as a nice round number.
This is great and all when youe in the battle screen and you can see what your and your opponent's types are and what moves are effective against what, but it would be a REAL hassle to keep track of them to build a team around it, especially when there is 50% more types and each Pokemon can have 3 types.
This is incredibly similar to a Pokémon-esque type chart I made a few years back for an indie Pokémon-inspired tactics RPG game! We had VERY similar ideas particularly in type names and matchups, with the only main difference being I kept 0x immunities and gave every type 1 immunity for balance I really appreciate seeing this slightly different take on solving similar problems! I'm a game developer, and that indie Pokémon-esque game has been my dream game project since 2018, with the original dream/overscoped goal of being as to Pokémon Gen 3 what Stardew Valley was to GBA Harvest Moon, although it evolved into a much more complex tactics RPG design. It's been both amazing and bad seeing the Pokémon proper series games take leaps and bounds towards my original design there, with both Gen 8 and Gen 9, diminishing how "original" the game design pitch was haha... But it's still my dream indie game 😅 I haven't been able to work on it in quite a few as I've been busy with my work (a game I've been working on is getting a Super Bowl commercial, so it's going very well), but need to get back to it
@@UmbreonLibris sounds spot on to me! I love this video by the way and I've been thinking about what my favorites mons would be (not that my favorites are Jynx and Mr Mime, lol)
Nah, Egg Types not affecting battle is better, and giving Pokemon "strategy types" doesn't make sense considering move types already covers that. This is another case of someone trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, but I must admit you gave a more reasonable answer than most. Also, not liking immunities is wack.
Do we realy need a Type for Mineral and one for Earth? I proposed the best way of balancing the Rock Type would be to remove it for just a universell Earth Type who includes Rock and Ground. And the Dark Type isnt the Cheat Type its originaly translated as Evil and focuses on nocturnal Pokemon.
What I would have done is make a difference between main and secondary type, not sure about Pokemon with single type compared to primary dual type. If an attack is super effective against the secondary type only, it deals 1.5 damage. If only the secondary type resists it, it deals 0.75 damage. If an attack is super effective against the primary type but the secondary type resists it, it also deals 1.5 damage, and 0.75 damage vice versa. 1.5 attacks "seem to be quite effective.", and 0.75 attacks "seem to be less effective.", without a question mark or three dots. For example, let's say you're using Bulbasaur, and you're facing Sabrina. "Foe Alakazam used Psybeam! It seems to be quite effective." (Secondary type weakness only) Next, fighting Giovanni, "Foe Rhydon uses Fissure! It seems to be less effective." (Secondary weakness, Primary resistance) Primary weakness, Secondary immunity will be the same as primary resistance, and Primary immunity, Secondary weakness will be like a double resistance. Otherwise, immunity stays the same. While trying to nerf some OP Dual-types, Water/Ground almost exclusively benefits from this. Not only does double weakness results in triple damage now (and double resistance in a third of the damage), but some types that previously dealt regular damage, like Ice, now deal 0.75 damage. Electric now deals damage, but only 0.5 damage. Speaking of types with immunities, since Electric/Flying types now receive Ground damage, this does severely nerf one troublesome, sexy Unova gym leader.
Id like to add that arthropods and mollusks are more related to eachother then any other animals since they are both protostoms. This makes animals such as squids and snails a kind of "soft bug" as opposed to hard bugs like crabs and millipedes and such. Honestly I think the formless body type should be reserved for pokemon like ghastly and grimer, so I propose pokemon such as goodra, gastrodon, and grappaloct be lumped in with the arthropods. (From a taxonomic perspective) love ur ideas :>
6:22 Say there's not really any difference between the categories of elemental type and style type. However, it seems to me like the elemental types are geared more towards special attack, while the style types are geared more towards physical attacks. That's beautiful!
Just trying to figure out how someone could ever possibly think "lightning" sounds better than "electric" when there's less than 10 Electric types that ACTUALLY have anything to do with weather. Like. The existence of Steel Electric mons should make that kinda clear lol edit: 99% of moves are explicitly not magic...where are you getting any of this lmao
I think rock and ice could fusion itself into crystal type, then there is more "ice" types. The rock and ground types would be just ground with a few exceptions.
I think an easy way to simplify this would be to either make each category of type interact with types of the same category, or make each type category or slot play a different role in a pokemons strengths and weaknesses (ex: prim type/body determines defensive machup, second/fightstyle determines Stab, third type determines type based effects like plant mons being immune to powder moves)
That is a very top-bottom approach. You are solving the visuals, the fluffy, and the surface. But does this lead to a better game experience? I don't think so.
I know this video is extremely old but I actually find the system pretty simple, even though they are technically more types in the system by categorizing them in three separate fields (body elements and tactic) It makes approaching a lot more easier
Watching this made me think of my own way to fix the type chart and it turns it that if this is done this way than it would not only make the understanding the type chart easier but also be easy to program in. The idea of changing the type chart is simple. 1st: dual types don't combine strength and weaknesses like they do now. 2nd: if your pokemon is dual typed than when not in a battle you can freely switch them around with each other. (Example You can make a water/ground into ground/water.) Now normally that would do nothing but the next part makes being able to do that become pretty important. 3rd: when dual typed you only get half of there strength and weaknesses. By that I mean weither the type is primary or secondary dictates which half you get. that means: your primary type can ONLY give you it's strengths while the secondary type does the exact opposite and only gives you weakness/resistances. By doing that it would make damage calculation a LOT easier to do. because instead of having calculate the combined types. You only have to look at the half of the type that matters. And ironically enough by doing that you can get ALL the type combos.
Actually having specificity sorta defeats the purpose; allowing everything from acrobatics to gusts of wind to be Flying allows Pokemon to cover more types in a thematically sensible way (like Spoink getting Bounce). Pokemon should be broadly categorized to fill strategic roles, not be literally classified into their own permutation.
Feels like this can be simlified. Ie, the "tactic" category shouldn't be weak to anything, but specific types can resist/be weak to them. And maybe the "kind of creature" category can have various benefits, instead of affect effectiveness.
This would be fantastic for a spin-off Pokémon game. Spin-off games never see competitive metas based entirely off of them, and they can get away with weird gimmicks that rework how Pokémon works. You wouldn’t have to worry about competitive players - outside of a niche that would want to play with it - and it would make for a very interesting and refreshing experience, as well as having a higher skill cap if it fits the gameplay well! (Legends Arceus reworks the Pokédex, removed Pokémon breeding, reworks EVs, changes the game progression, battle mechanics, and turn order; Pokémon spin-offs CAN do things like this, but it would have to be the ONLY change they make)
I’m trying to work out if I’d like a game with this sort of typing for whatever creatures you used... and I’m not sure I’d get my head wrapped around this. Considering I’m still surprised by the strengths and weaknesses of types like poison and dark in the games.
Okay so from what I see arthropod is strong against beast due to fleas being a common pest for mammals, plants because arthropods are common predators of plants, and aquatic because some underwater arthropods are parasites for fish.
While interesting, this just further complicates things and doesn't fix any existing issues with the type chart. This would be cool in its own game though
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #1 НАЧАЛО ПУТЕШЕСТВИЯ [Новый сезон] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/380Q7gLWGvk/mqdefault.jpg)
As cool and thorough as this idea is, seeing Fish, Water, and Aquatic be three different types gave me a stroke
It works for me, but I get it, but it would help separate pokemon like oshawott from fish however so I'm in for this
guy is confusing types with egg groups
now imagine flying being separated into air type bird type and actual flying
I feel like adding Object as a body, changing Cosmic to an element, then adding Sound and Technology as styles would be the best route putting it at 30 types
uhhhhh
Yeah but technology Mons are not so many.
There klinklang, rotom and Who else?
@@NicPlayz29 as of now, all the future paradox pokemon
@@NicPlayz29 I feel like all of the artificial pokemon like mewtwo, genesect, porygon, castform, etc… would work
I might be wrong about castform though
Reptile type should be called herp type, considering herpetology is the study of reptiles and amphibians, and herps are a term used to refer to the two classes of animals. It's less explicit, but then again, arthro isn't too much of a well known term either.
Kind of like bug, cool!
I did consider that, actually! But… "Herp type"?? Sounds so ugly, it makes me think of the herpes virus xD
@@UmbreonLibris herpa derp
I feel like using scientific names is just out of sync with the rest. Scale instead of Herp, and then Bug is fine. Then maybe Marine instead of Fish? Its fine if there are some ambiguities.
@@UmbreonLibris "Who's that Pokemon?"
"It's Herpes!"
Wouldn’t a complicated type system like this be very uninviting to any newcomers though? Learning a type chart with 27 type sounds quite intimidating
I don't think so, not if the game was properly designed around it. If you think of just like, "here are 27 types, go learn all their match-ups," yeah, that would be pretty overwhelming. But the same could be said about 18 types, too, if you're totally unfamiliar with Pokémon. The reason we didn't get overwhelmed when we first played the game (whichever game was our first) is that they all do a good job of introducing you to different types little by little.
Plus, with the modern mechanic of telling you whether a move is super effective or not as long as you've battled that Pokémon once before, that level of uncertainty is removed almost entirely.
I'm pretty sure most of us at least when we were younger didn't know the full type chart either
@@ivanbackfromthecardshop8093 true, but you learn once you notice the relations same as everything though. New player should not be taken in account and* will learn and in a way pokemon is rock Paper scissors if simpelfied it's not that hard
@@ivanbackfromthecardshop8093 some of us literally learned from Ash that if you hit something hard enough type doesn't matter.lol
@@UmbreonLibris sorry but no, i have been playing pokemon all my life and dont know half the type matchups. this would just overcomplicate things
I feel like the Body types could be left as Egg Groups and instead of being types, the groups could just be made more explicit on the status screen (perhaps instead of the vague and unhelpful Categories we have now, the Category would display the egg group, i.e. Arthro/Fairy for a fey-inspired bug pokemon like Ribombee?). That way, pokemon only have one or two types like normal, and they could be based entirely off your 9 elements (give or take a few). Then, the "style" could be something akin to Move Properties, like moves that cause Poison or moves that Drain health. I haven't thought too deeply on this but I think it would simplify this system a lot and cut out some of what I personally see as redundancy in it. Regardless, you did a great job reworking the system and this is totally a thing I've done in my free time before, but not on this scale.
I always thought the properties of a move (or Power) are beside the types used.
There's damage and target and drain properties, but none of these are specific to a type
I do agree with egg types being open in a game rather than hidden mechanics.
_"Arcana, which is basically Dragon-type magic"_
Lockstin: _"Ah, I see you're a man of culture as well."_
🦀🦞🦐
This would be a sick type system to have in a spin-off game. Maybe like some kind of strategy game.
So like the reverse of what the tcg does?
yeah like a Pokémon Legends game
I'm not really a fan of this it just feels overcomplicated but you put alot of time into this so respect to you.
I'm imagining the nightmare that is this typing system in the competitive scene
I feel like making all mammalian Pokémon beast type would feel somewhat weird for some. I can’t imagine the word beast being used to describe Pokémon like mr mime and dedenne.
I think a good fix would be like "fur" for that
"Scale" for lizards
"Fin" for fishes and stuff giving some fun vaigness to work with.
@@dicorockhimself still not sure what humanoid Pokémon like mr mime, Gallade, and gardevoir would be though
I think you could make an argument for both Mr. Mime and Dedenne being the "Fairy" body type. Though, I don't really see a problem with Dedenne being called a "Beast," it honestly makes sense to me. It's only weird for the humanoid ones, imo.
Dedenne makes sense as a beast, the term beast is used to refer to animals can refer to any animal (even small ones and pets) that is not a human, and more commonly refers to four-legged ones, Dedenne is a quadruped so yeah that makes sense. Though I'm not sure if a lot of humanoid pokémon would really fit into most categories, Mr. Mime probably fits into fairy, but what about, say, the Machoke line? They look kind of reptilian so maybe reptile fits even if they're way more humanlike, or what about a Pokémon like Alakazam? Looks pretty humanoid but I don't think it fits into anything, or something like Sawk and Throh, or the Timburr line, the Forces of Nature, etc. Maybe a humanoid body type could work since there are a lot of pokémon like these
@@door-chan the definition of beast says especially large or dangerous though. It’s a term I’ve mainly heard used for horses and donkeys, AKA beasts of burden, and large carnivores like bears. Calling a mouse a beast is a HUGE stretch though.
I think my biggest criticism of this approach is that it misunderstands one of the strengths of the existing pokemon types - Versatility. If Flying can mean bird attributes, wind powers, or aerial attacks, that means tons of possibilities for pokemon and moves. If you make types more specific then Wind type moves will all just be variations of Gust with different numbers and secondary effects.
I really like that system! Bonus: it also seems a lot more like how Professors would categorize the Pokemon.
But really, no Sound Type? Would it be included in Air?
Yeah I think most sound moves would be considered at least party Air moves. After all, what is sound besides air pressure waves? At least for us terrestrial, non-aquatic folk.
tbh, if Sound type ever existed, every Pokemon needs to be Sound type, since they all make sound.
@@nickdentoom1173 But how many weaponize it? All living creatures generated heat and electricity after all
Nick den Toom yes but no. Most sound based Pokémon’s like Noivern and loudred specifically are themed around sound. And yet in regular Pokémon they fall under normal. Having a sound based typing isn’t that too wild
@@nerd_world8919 Noivern is dragon/flying...
Due to your naming conventions, I would almost call Psychic something like "Mental" "Psycho" "Will" or "Thought" instead.
I think Psychic, as an adjective, fits well alongside Martial and Aerial and such.
Personally I love this system even though in practise it would be very very unpractical cause you really can’t do all the math in your head. Also dealing with moves might be more complicated cause differentiating between Acquatic, Water and Fish moves would either leave fish with almost no moves whatsoever or create a lot of arbitrary distinction that would be kinda confusing to understand
It might be fun to randomly generate a type combination out of this system and make a Fakemon to fit it.
That's a fun idea for a future art stream!
UmbreonLibris: I'm gonna remake the whole type chart.
Me: Wait, is Fire super effective on Fairy or not?
(checks notes)
No it isn't! Not in my system and not in the official system either!
@@UmbreonLibris Never made any sense as to why fairy isn't effective against fire.
@@Lvl1.Sentry I think maybe it’s related to how fairy is weak to poison and steel, two man-made things which in fairy tales tend to hurt magical creatures (like werewolves and maleficent with steel). So maybe since fire can be man-made, fairy can’t do effective damage against it?
@@jfecaz True, not to mention that a fairy/steel type pokemon would be so overpowered. Because they would only be weak to ground types, just like electric types.
Also thank you to my friends Charon and Quent for brainstorming this type system with me!
Sorry for spamming a wall of DMs at you :)
I would have taken much longer to figure things out without it!
Also, no you're not sorry at all.
I'd love a typing system like this in a game for more experienced players, it will always be a kids game but it's initial/older fanbase deserves something specific to them for all the years of loyalty.
I don't know why I thought you were going yo simplify the type system rather than make it drastically more complicated.
I already have to stop and determine jow effective my single type move hits a dual type pokemon, and flying press confused me enough on its own. If I have to constantly think about the type matchup of my martial fire attack on an ice mineral bird than I'm just gonna get exhausted.
Also, I have friends that already get confused with ground, rock, and steel. Throwing in more redundant types like Aquatic Water Fish (AND the variations you get mixing just those three distinct types) just kind of make intuiting this system a complete mess
I thought arthro was anthro, and thought there was an entire type dedicated to human like pokemon
I did consider an Anthro type at one point, since there is an egg group specifically for Human-Like Pokémon! But it was one f the first to go when I was trying to condense things.
@@UmbreonLibris Maybe humanoid or hominid?
Gardevoir comes to mind for me for a humanoid type.
I think Gardevoir fits well enough in the Fairy body type. Others would fit in the Beast type.
extremely weird to change bug type to arthro, bug is a nonformal term that fits the role perfectly and isn't an awkward shortening of a complex word.
I admire the effort and to a certain degree I really like it. Like it’s a good idea to add the body type category and it fixes the problem that the normal typings had which was being all over the place. But a problem arises on how specific you want to be and how vague do you want to be. Like as people have pointed out some are kind of redundant and some might be needed like a sound type. Although I do enjoy the explanations of typings for each example you gave.
I think the main issue with these types is that "Making the game more difficult" isnt always a good thing since they still want kids to be able to progress and have fun with the game. And I'm not saying that a little challenge isnt a bad thing (when I was a kid I had lots of fun coming up with strategies to defeat others) but if we do this we need to understand that its not only for older people who understand it.
You're definitely right that the current types don't make sense. In thinking about what direction I'd take Pokemon, I keep coming back to the possibility of merging Rock, Ground, and Steel, but then if I'm doing that, I might as well merge Psychic and Fairy into Magic, and then I might as well remove Bug or Dark or Dragon...
Why Psychic (or Psi) and Fairy? Those are very different types, one doubling for mental element and Psi affinity moves like Calm Mind or Psychic with Fairy encompassing Faerie creatures and their onomancy, that seems like a lot to have as one type. A mental move like Rest would be Magic type. That's bizarre. To sleep is to cast Magic. That would be annoying if a mass anti-Magic wave or CounterMagic could force everyone to be an insomniac.
I'm cool with merging rock and ground, since they're a bit redundant. But I don't really want to see any other types merged.
@@maxminton7861 same
Fairy should split into magic and light
The main issue with merging Rock and Ground, at least from a balance standpoint, is that they do a lot of opposites in terms of match-ups.
Rock is super effective against Flying; Ground does no damage at all to Flying. A Rock/Flying or Rock/Water is weak to Electric, while replacing Rock with Ground makes them completely immune. Etc, etc. The only thing really the same function-wise is that they are both weak to Water and Grass.
And if they were to be merged, into, say, the Earth type, then what would be the logic behind its type match-ups? For Rock, the types it is super-effective against are ones that would be conceptually beaten by throwing a big enough boulder at. While for Ground, it is moreso super-effective against things that would be beaten by the ground splitting beneath them. For Earth, there isn't really a go-to concept for it. What would its match-up be vs Flying, Bug, or Fighting, for example.
Oh wait! Okay, yeah, this was initially a bit confusing. I thought you meant that each Pokémon must all always be exactly 3 types and based on the way you presented it, I thought that it was always only one from each of the three categories.
No, not necessarily! At least one Body type, but the other two type slots can be from any category, OR be empty. So you might have a pure Beast type (maybe like a Persian), but not something that is pure Lightning or pure Aerial (since they need at least one Body type).
wow, just finding this now (possibly again? but I'm sure I would have remembered watching this before), and I'm sure you won't see this very late reply to a 2 year-old video... but this is concept almost perfectly fits with a concept for a Pokemon reimagining! I've never been a huge fan of how inconsistent the types always have been and knew I wanted to try something new with them so they'd be far more intuitive from a gameplay, and character design perspective, and splitting it 3 ways between the physical form of the creature, it's elemental affinity, and it's attack style is genius and very inspiring!
That aside, I do think 3 separate charts is a little too many to assign to the creatures themselves - especially if it's possible for a creature to have multiple types in a category; like, I could easily see a griffon-inspired Pokemon being classed as beast and bird, or a jellyfish falling under "fish" and "formless", Pokemon with multiple elemental powers like either Kyurem fusion would have to be assigned both "ice" and "fire"/"lightning", and then for something like Scizzor where its a quick, winged bug with steel armour that has a very physical, "martial" fighting style... it'd be a nightmare to try and pigeon-hole into just 3 types.
My proposed solution is to allow for dual-type combinations with the body type and elements, and because the last category "styles" almost entirely revolves around how the Pokemon attacks, I'd reserve that category to further break down moves from just physical, special and status.
Very nicely presented and well-thought out concept though!
This definitely seems like something that would be complex and make for more challenging gameplay and I do think that’s good but to be honest I have trouble keeping the tape match up straight in my head already so this would give me more of a headache but it’s definitely very interesting and I appreciate how much work this must’ve taken
Nowadays we do have the battle interface tell you whether a move is effective or not, at least after you've battled that Pokémon once before. I assume that helps you? It would be very useful for a complex system like this.
Yeah that usually helps me out and I agree that an a system like this you pretty much need that
You know, there are 2 reasons I like your channel. 1st, you speak well and explain your points well... second, which is kinda weird... but you are the Poke'tuber whose opinions and views clash with my own the most. Kinda funny really.
But honestly, I am glad that you aren't in charge. This is making Pokemon fit way more into the scientific category than the sort of balance it is between magic and science.
That said, for the concept of immunity, I think Pokemon did that for game simplicity rather than the Pokemon being outright immune... probably more like a super resistance.
I don't think I would actually implement this if I was just, like, game director. To make a change like this, from the ground up, it would be a huge decision, with major strategic implications for the entire franchise. It would have to come from Ishihara-san himself.
Magic and science? Ya'll heard about Thaumaturgy? The system, that's science Magic (if Magic can be separate from science).
I so wanna come up with a monster fighting game using this typing system!
If you do, please let me know!! :D
This is kinda a cool way to reboot it! Honestly some fanmade types I've had might fit in, like:
Alpine (Refers to mountain-dwelling Pokemon, might go for Style)
Plasma (Refers to either blood or cytoplasm, also to a unstable combination of fire and electricity, might be Element)
:> Feel free to correct me; I know my 61 types aren't perfect enough in anyone else's eyes
61?! And I was worried about being too specific with my 27 :)
More types could definitely fit into this framework, but at some point it becomes so granular that it's exceptionally tough to balance.
@@UmbreonLibris Yeah, I do have 61 types; now with a new one (62nd) being Urban; refering to domesticated Pokemon that are used to living in the modern cities people live in; might go for Pokemon like Stoutland or Scrafty or some other Unovan species :P (Might go for Style like Alpine)
@@cometcal7387 can you say all the types you have come up with? I’m really interested
@@NdzNdzNdz Although most types I have made aren't created for the system UmbreonLibris talks about in the video, I'll be glad to show some of my examples! ^^ (these are taken/inspired from other existing fangames, and/or from existing official types)
-Hunter (referring to Pokemon that have some semblance to weaponry and/or the meaning of predatory creatures)
-Grease (referring to Pokemon that has semblance to viscous liquids other than water)
-Prehistoric (referring to Pokemon that have lived a long, long time ago; examples include the Fossil Pokemon)
-Spectrum (referring to Pokemon that have semblance of using coloring/art and the like as an element)
There are also cases where a type may be a pure combination of 2 or 3 types (rarely more), which I call "Compounded Types". Examples are mentioned below;
(let's face it, I made these because I occasionally make Pokemon that fit for more than 2 types lol)
-Arcane (a combination of Psychic and Magic, another fanmade type)
-Plasma (mentioned in my original comment)
-Depth (a combination of Dark and Water, referring to deep-sea-esque Pokemon)
-Static (a combination of Electric and Ghost)
-Psyburn (a combination of Psychic and Fire)
my ideas sound stupid ngl xD
@@cometcal7387 no they’re actually really interesting. Could you explain examples for each type? The only issue I see with so many types is the lack of pokemon for each type. I personally call Grease “slime” and hunter “Primal”
I feel like this was born out of the need to deconstruct the type system because of the inconsistencies. But Pokémon already has a built-in system to deconstruct typing, the physical and special split. The body and style types are physical while the elemental types are special.
Body types may be the inherently hardest type to provide intuitive type matchups.
By providing three typings, you increase the amount of permutations that don't help a 6 year old kid understand the game, and feels like you're making a system designed purely for those that want a complicated technical system in the first place, which from a business standpoint may be unprofitable.
As a VGC player... I don't like this XD
If this was, like, a game only focused on its main campaign... then yes, sure. But this would create too many unbalances for PVP.
Not to mention it would totally scare newcomers... And competitive-pokemon already does that XD
Later, you should do a compilation of each gens Pokémon to see every Pokémon’s type in your new type system. What type would play rough be? I also feel like arthro and reptile should be resistant and super effective against psycic
Maybe. I wasn't planning on it, but a lot of people have asked!
UmbreonLibris Btw, why is arthro good against beast?
Some match-ups are flimsier for the sake of balancing, and that one could have gone either way, but I was thinking of various bugs that feed on or parasitize mammals, like mosquitoes.
@@UmbreonLibris But that's more a Style type. A Parasite or Parasitic style, supereffective against all the animal types, Plant and Formless (cause it includes mollusks) but resisted by Mineral, Fairy and Vitality. It is weak to itself (hyperparasites), and Vitality (medicines and doctors curing people of Parasites), and that it receives healing as Vitality dmg, with the duo exception of items and HP healing gained from Parasite Style moves (I dunno why taking properties of a move like healing and making them their own Types restrictedly separate from other moves but if I'm adding to a headcanon type chart, might as well imitate).
Pokèmon who would be Parasitic style would be Parasect. Only the evolved version though, the prior evolution can just be Poison style for it's toxic fumes from it's mushroom back. Though I wouldn't say Slowking would be Parasite Style type, as they're more symbiotic than parasitic and that would mean removing their Mental Style.
Parasite Style is bit, tricky. It wipes the floor with most of the Body types but has a major weakness to Vitality type healing, making it a bad pair for a Vitality Type or Vitality type using Monsters, not to mention how exploitable taking dmg but taking supereffective dmg from healing moves can be.
Wouldn't that take 700 Million years to do since there are so many Pokemon?
This is a really interesting take, it's quite similar to a type system I have been trying to work on with different categories types can fall into, albeit the tiered type system is certainly different. The fact that every pokemon would have a body type is interesting since that guarantees every pokemon will have at least one of those 9 types which helps when trying to study all the type combinations. I do see a few issues with the type system, namely coming from making teams, as 27 types is a lot types to take into account both defensively and offensively as you want to make sure your team can account for each one of them, at least on a primary type basis. The tiered system also makes this a bit more complicated as doing mental math with tiers can be a bit complex compared to just doing multiplication or division with 2. The other main issue would be with the ballance between physical and special moves, as body types seems like they would lend themselves more to physical attacks while elements would be special more often, so trying to make sure each pokemon has good STAB options that match their highest offensive type can also prove difficult, so MANY new attacks would need to be added to ensure this isn't an issue.
Overall great, just wanted to share areas of potential weakness I found.
I don't think the need for new attacks is a weakness! Just something that would have to be considered for anyone actually making a game like this.
And on the point about mental math, I agree there. But I also think it would encourage people to be more intuitive about choosing which moves to use, which might be interesting.
@@UmbreonLibris Oh absoltely, as I said it's only an issue if it was affecting pokemon as it is.
8:33 Libris: " they called me a mad man " lol, you out did yourself
Armor/Beast/Light is what I am going with, I know all the elemental fangs including Poison
Here's how I would do it:
Normal (just...normal power)
Fire (flames, lava, sun)
Earth ( stone, sand, crystals)
Lightning (thunder, tech, plasma)
Wood (plants, poison, fruit)
Water (sea, steam, blood, ink)
Ice (snow, cold)
Void (psychic, space, time)
Wind (gas, sound, cloud)
Metal (gold, rust, magnet, weapons)
Light (sun, day, goodness)
Dark (moon, night, evilness)
Nice and simple!
So kind of like in avatar the last air bender how there are sub elements such as blood bending being in the sub category of the main water element.
This would make for an interesting Pokémon-esque fangame, and if someone can make a fully fleshed monster catching/battling game surrounding this type system, I'd definitely play it.
It's actually a good thing that a normal ass bird pokémon is instantly slightly associated with the wind element and moves like gust. I want to have to think about how my little pidgey has to flap their wings to swirl up a violent gust. I like your system, but not for pokemon.
i think Gamefreak should stick to actual elements because putting animal species in the mix is very confusing like Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Dark, Light, Grass, Ice, Steel, Electric, Gravity, Psychic, Poison, Sound, Crystal, Healing, Nuclear and Magnetism
triple types and 27 types is something you might be able to learn, but moves with 2 types is waaaay too complicated.
we only have 1 so far(Flying Press) and, of the top of my head, I couldn't tell you what it's super-effective against or resisted.
Personally I think Pokemon is actually *too* complex and could be condensed.
I would make a list of:
Air, Cosmic, Earth, Electric, Fighting, Fire, Ice, Metal, Mystic, Neutral, Shadow, Sound, Water, Wood
And then those special breeding groups simply have trends in design or exclusive moves, or even some abilities that synergise with others (i.e, a Swarming ability that buffs all bugs).
One way to mix things up is that some Pokemon could have the same twice type, like a "Max Fire" type to raise STAB to ×2, and weakness and resistance moving to ×3 and /3.
I think the depth should come from diverse available resources rather than more complexity.
I really like this idea, but I would execute it differently. I would make the body and element be the type of actual Pokemon, and make the combat style be the move types. Then assign Pokemon types to the move types like Fish and Water getting STAB on Aquatic moves (so a Water Fish would get further increased bonus damage), but also make some types have less efficiency using specific moves like Fairy being weaker when using Cheat moves. My worry is whether or not this wouldn't make things a bit too simple, but with proper game design balanced around it I think it would work
I would say "Trick" instead of "Cheat", and also add "darkness" as an elemental type. Also, missed opportunity to create the sound type
About egg groups, I still wish they were listed at least somewhere explicitly in game.
Something I thought of was traits. I'd make Flying a trait instead of a type. And these traits can add some additional abilities. flying which is ground immunity and a stab bonus to winged moves, Aura gives stab to all beam or orb launching moves, Deity can add overpowered things(for arceus etc), Cosmic grants levitate and stab to psychic moves if not psychic type, Hard Body for rock and steel types that will grant some resistance to fighting moves, full immunity to normal and winged moves. Idk there's some kinks to work out, I hate flying as a type because it's forced the typing on some like Noctowl should be psychic, gyarados should be dragon and so on.
4:43 you could use a different Lexicon to sound cooler or describe it better
Bird > Aerial
Fairy > Mystic
Fish > Aquatic
Formless > Phantom
Plant > Rooted
Ok, so in my opinion this would be really cool to learn. Imagine instead of being just “oh, this Pokémon is X type, therefore it has a crap matchup against certain other Pokémon” you would have to really learn about each team member’s types as you play through the game with them and learn by experience to introduce a skill element to pokemon
Not sure I'm 100% on board with your concept as a whole, but I LOVE the idea of the type of creature they are effecting how they are effected by other types. And I like that it would make breeding easier to understand. Though since a whale is a mammal(like beast I presume) and not a fish...would that still make Wailord and Skitty compatible???
And your types kinda reminded me of Yu-Gi-Oh types which I thought was funny.
Yep, both Wailord and Skitty would be Beast type!
I know next to nothing about Yu-Gi-Oh, so I have no idea what the similarities are, haha.
@@UmbreonLibris
Ah so the ridiculous meme persists! Hurrah! haha
I haven't been into the card game in years, but to my recollection, each monster card has two or three types, the third describing the effect and the other two describing attributes. Like, there's an element and a descriptor. Elements there's Light, Dark, Fire, Water, Wind, and Earth and I think that's it? There's too many of the other types to list all of them off the top of my head, but there's Spellcasters, Warriors, Beast-Warriors (which are generally anthro), Beasts, Fish, Sea Serpents, Machines, Reptiles, Dragons, Fairies, Thunder, and that's all I can remember.
This tickles my brain. It pretty perfectly covers all pokemon, but I wonder about Gyarados. Some variation of: Fish/reptile, water/arcane/wind, aquatic/aerial.
This is two years old but I just found it. Does this guy have any follow-up videos about these sorts of things, it's so very fascinating.
The one change I would make to this system is to have the type hierarchy linked directly to the type category. For example, the primary type would always be the body-based type, as the Pokémon is made of that material or has that body structure. That would at least make it less confusing to find out or memorize how important a type's advantages and disadvantages are. Using the example above, it would be a lot easier to remember that the weaknesses of a body-based type are very important, as any attack that uses a body-based type's weakness will do significantly more damage than a move that uses weaknesses of the other two type categories.
It would also make it easier to remember and explain why certain Pokémon might have a blank space in certain type categories. It would be easier to conclude that Pokémon which uses a lot of physical moves but doesn't have access to many or any magical moves actually has a blank in its element type, while a more feral Pokémon may have a blank on its style type.
Obviously, that would make it very hard to explain why a Pokémon may have a blank in its body type but that could actually be one of the restrictions, in which all Pokémon must have a body type, no matter what other types they have or not.
“would it make sense for a tertiary type that still keeps you floating above the ground to prevent the ground shaking from hurting you at all?” I mean, yeah? imho
Nintendo won't ever take the risk of chaning the type system so drastically.
This is actually quite well put together and organized.
It might make most sense if you create your own IP in order to implement your ideas.
They just need to change Bug one last time-
Make it STRONG against Fairy, and then EVERY TYPE is just a but balanced, and Bugs are a bit more viable than they used to be...
the 27 types stuff would actually be fun because it would take time to get used to which would be the fun part and the addition of each one having their own unique abilities would be cool as heck
Honestly, I'd play this. Sounds both challenging and fun, especially if you take it in the direction Pokemon did with the types being mainly found around the appropriate gyms to either fight them or catch that type, like with Lt. Surge having the Diglett cave outside his town.
Libris, this is hands down my favorite reworking of the type chart. Maybe a few more types that I would have, but I just cannot argue with the underlying structure. Having the prinary, seconday, and tertiary order matter is pure genius. Also, yes, resistances are as dumb as a butt.
I also did a redesign of Pokemon types, but my plan was instead to reduce types into STAB, and instead give each Pokemon specific weaknesses and resistances, albeit ones following themes based on their design and STAB moves. The types I started off with were:
-Default
-Heat
-Water
-Vegetable (arguably the only common term that includes both plants and mushrooms,)
-Electric
-Cold
-Wind
-Toxic
-Sea
-Bird
-Bug
-Rock
-Soil
-Metal
-Sound
-Light
-Martial (Great minds think alike!)
-Shadow
-Ascended (My term for psychic/cosmic stuff, as I feel like there isn't too much of a difference between the two)
-Crude
-Fairy
-God-Draco
-Variety
And I kept on adding types for moves with multiple "types", such as splitting all physical attacks into blunt, cut, and spike attacks, and even more stuff, such as smoke and airborne moves, the latter similar to what you had. I also warped the breeding system into an actual phylogenetic tree of life, but in hindsight I should've just changed the groups into better categories that make more sense.
Not gonna lie a Pokémon Legends gamr featuring an entirely different type system as it's main gimmick because people back then haven't figured out types yet would be awesome
I certainly think this is an interesting system! If I could make one change, it would be that each type only interacts with other types from its same category.
For example: in your current system, every "Body" type should logically be susceptible to Fire (with arguable exclusion of "Mineral"); Fire incinerates all types of flesh. Similarly, many magical abilities would easily dominate many physical body types.
However, if the categories are separated for type interactions, then we have the ability for a dragon's innate magic (Arcana) to resist Fire rather than be susceptible to it simply because it's a Reptile.
(The same argument could be made for fighting styles.)
Some types might need to be shuffled for this (I would argue "Fairy" would take the place of "Light" in elemental types and "Amphibian" or "Humanshape" be added to body types).
This differentiation would make type relationships easier to learn (each type only interacts with 8 others instead of 26) while maintaining a good amount of depth and tremendous variability.
(Unrelated nitpick: if "Reptile" is going to be a catch-all which includes dragons and amphibians, the change from Bug to "Arthro" by comparison seems very pedantic.)
I definitely considered having the types only interact with other types of the same category, but there were too many match-ups that made sense across categories-in particular with Armour being resistant to a whole bunch of types of offense. But perhaps with some further refining it could work better.
I would have used a different term for Reptile if there was one that made sense. Arthropod is everything with an exoskeleton, so that's perfect to include insects, arachnids and crustaceans. But no such term exists for reptiles and amphibians; although herpetology is the study of both reptiles and amphibians, "herpetos" or something like that isn't used by itself.
@@UmbreonLibris Would you mind if I made a response video to this? I've had similar ideas floating around in my head for a while, so I'd like to take the conversation further.
Please do!
I think that this system would need a grass type equivalent for the same category as fire and ice are
A lot of type resist Grass, but Grass is one of the few that is super effective on Water and it resist Ground and spore moves. it may not be the best one, but he's far from the worst 3.
Arcana, or ‘Arcane’, describes things that are ancient, unknown, and/or mysterious in origin/nature, which not only describes Dragons, it also describes extinct and alien Pokémon, certain legendary/mythical Pokémon, and many Fairy/Formless type Pokémon as well
Just throwing that out there..
I prefer it the way it works BUT this is a fun idea, it sucks types like Bug, Grass and Ice are uhh not good, and need to be made better first before introducing any new typing. But dang with this list you could try making your own fan game!
I think I have enough ideas to make my own Pokémon competitor, haha. But I do not have the time or the resources to pursue something like that in earnest!
I personally think they should just add a Sound-type. It's pitiful that the MYTHICAL Meloetta has to stay Normal-type because the type hasn't been added yet.
At first I tought this might be a bit complicated for beginners but honestly now I think this could be superior to the current Types if we're talking about how much sense they make but also how equal types are with one another.
27 pokemon types, while also dividing up into groups? HELL F*CKING YES!!! Although, how dare you not add snakes?! 30 years dungeon!!
Having double type moves would be a nightmare even now. Like imagine a grass water type move hitting a ground rock type mon with 16x super effective damage
Love this!!!!! The third layer of depth makes the mind wander on what certain moves would become more viable with secondary types that add to or reduce overall damage. Really good stuff. IF I had to choose a gripe, some of the names are a little off, but I'm sure you went through a found the best ones you could because I can't honestly think of any replacement names.
Yeah there are a few names that I went back and forth on! Which ones did you not like?
@@UmbreonLibris
None that I particularly disliked, but some other options for certain ones could be-
Artho = Critter
Fish = Marine
Plant = Flora
Arcana = Mana
Cheat = Sly
Vitality = Cure/Care
Those were the only ones I thought could be named better, but again, your list makes a lot of sense already and this is me looking to nitpick and does not reflect that I dislike it at all. Super great work, dude!
I like this idea but I would probably shorten it to two groups of 10, one for body and the other for style/element. I would also either drop the tiered typing or have it so that body to body and style to style weaknesses do x2 while body to style and style to body do x1.5, though i would more than likely just keep the normal system just dumping the immunity like you said. Off the top of my head my list for the 2 groups would be Body: Anthro (or Humanlike), Beast, Bird, Bug, Fairy, Formless, Grass, Mechanical, Scale, and Rock. And Style: Fire, Water, Poison (taking grasses place as the third in the starter triangle), Ice, Electric, Psychic, Martial, Wind, Shadow, and Ancient (combining things like dragon and cosmic, being the main style for the pseudo-legendary). I kept some of the old type names as they felt more evocative and less literal in some cases, making the broad application fit better. I also realize this isn't a perfect list as it's missing styles for things like earth, sound, and dark/cheat but maybe you could have more styles than bodies as this was just me trying to keep the two groups even at groups of ten as a nice round number.
Three groups of nine was also me trying to keep things even, haha.
This is great and all when youe in the battle screen and you can see what your and your opponent's types are and what moves are effective against what, but it would be a REAL hassle to keep track of them to build a team around it, especially when there is 50% more types and each Pokemon can have 3 types.
This is incredibly similar to a Pokémon-esque type chart I made a few years back for an indie Pokémon-inspired tactics RPG game! We had VERY similar ideas particularly in type names and matchups, with the only main difference being I kept 0x immunities and gave every type 1 immunity for balance
I really appreciate seeing this slightly different take on solving similar problems!
I'm a game developer, and that indie Pokémon-esque game has been my dream game project since 2018, with the original dream/overscoped goal of being as to Pokémon Gen 3 what Stardew Valley was to GBA Harvest Moon, although it evolved into a much more complex tactics RPG design. It's been both amazing and bad seeing the Pokémon proper series games take leaps and bounds towards my original design there, with both Gen 8 and Gen 9, diminishing how "original" the game design pitch was haha... But it's still my dream indie game 😅
I haven't been able to work on it in quite a few as I've been busy with my work (a game I've been working on is getting a Super Bowl commercial, so it's going very well), but need to get back to it
If/when I do get back to it, I'd love to send some builds your way for your feedback, if you were interested!
What types would humanoid pokemon like Jynx and Mr Mime have, besides the obvious ones? Beast or Fairy?
Either one, or even both, depending on the Pokémon! I think Jynx and Mr Mime would both be Fairy, but something like Conkeldurr would be Beast.
@@UmbreonLibris sounds spot on to me! I love this video by the way and I've been thinking about what my favorites mons would be (not that my favorites are Jynx and Mr Mime, lol)
Nah, Egg Types not affecting battle is better, and giving Pokemon "strategy types" doesn't make sense considering move types already covers that. This is another case of someone trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist, but I must admit you gave a more reasonable answer than most. Also, not liking immunities is wack.
Do we realy need a Type for Mineral and one for Earth? I proposed the best way of balancing the Rock Type would be to remove it for just a universell Earth Type who includes Rock and Ground. And the Dark Type isnt the Cheat Type its originaly translated as Evil and focuses on nocturnal Pokemon.
What I would have done is make a difference between main and secondary type, not sure about Pokemon with single type compared to primary dual type.
If an attack is super effective against the secondary type only, it deals 1.5 damage. If only the secondary type resists it, it deals 0.75 damage.
If an attack is super effective against the primary type but the secondary type resists it, it also deals 1.5 damage, and 0.75 damage vice versa.
1.5 attacks "seem to be quite effective.", and 0.75 attacks "seem to be less effective.", without a question mark or three dots.
For example, let's say you're using Bulbasaur, and you're facing Sabrina.
"Foe Alakazam used Psybeam! It seems to be quite effective." (Secondary type weakness only)
Next, fighting Giovanni, "Foe Rhydon uses Fissure! It seems to be less effective." (Secondary weakness, Primary resistance)
Primary weakness, Secondary immunity will be the same as primary resistance, and Primary immunity, Secondary weakness will be like a double resistance. Otherwise, immunity stays the same.
While trying to nerf some OP Dual-types, Water/Ground almost exclusively benefits from this. Not only does double weakness results in triple damage now (and double resistance in a third of the damage), but some types that previously dealt regular damage, like Ice, now deal 0.75 damage. Electric now deals damage, but only 0.5 damage. Speaking of types with immunities, since Electric/Flying types now receive Ground damage, this does severely nerf one troublesome, sexy Unova gym leader.
Man thats great, congratulations for the idea
This is the type system I've been slowly building up for my fantasy mon game.
Id like to add that arthropods and mollusks are more related to eachother then any other animals since they are both protostoms. This makes animals such as squids and snails a kind of "soft bug" as opposed to hard bugs like crabs and millipedes and such. Honestly I think the formless body type should be reserved for pokemon like ghastly and grimer, so I propose pokemon such as goodra, gastrodon, and grappaloct be lumped in with the arthropods. (From a taxonomic perspective) love ur ideas :>
6:22
Say there's not really any difference between the categories of elemental type and style type.
However, it seems to me like the elemental types are geared more towards special attack, while the style types are geared more towards physical attacks.
That's beautiful!
Just trying to figure out how someone could ever possibly think "lightning" sounds better than "electric" when there's less than 10 Electric types that ACTUALLY have anything to do with weather. Like. The existence of Steel Electric mons should make that kinda clear lol
edit: 99% of moves are explicitly not magic...where are you getting any of this lmao
I think rock and ice could fusion itself into crystal type, then there is more "ice" types. The rock and ground types would be just ground with a few exceptions.
I think an easy way to simplify this would be to either make each category of type interact with types of the same category, or make each type category or slot play a different role in a pokemons strengths and weaknesses (ex: prim type/body determines defensive machup, second/fightstyle determines Stab, third type determines type based effects like plant mons being immune to powder moves)
That is a very top-bottom approach. You are solving the visuals, the fluffy, and the surface. But does this lead to a better game experience? I don't think so.
I really like this idea! If something like this would happen, it would probably be in a big pokemon reboot. I doubt it would but its a neat concept
I know this video is extremely old but I actually find the system pretty simple, even though they are technically more types in the system by categorizing them in three separate fields (body elements and tactic) It makes approaching a lot more easier
Some of this types almost go back to the Special / Physichal moves split from the older games
Watching this made me think of my own way to fix the type chart and it turns it that if this is done this way than it would not only make the understanding the type chart easier but also be easy to program in.
The idea of changing the type chart is simple.
1st: dual types don't combine strength and weaknesses like they do now.
2nd: if your pokemon is dual typed than when not in a battle you can freely switch them around with each other. (Example You can make a water/ground into ground/water.) Now normally that would do nothing but the next part makes being able to do that become pretty important.
3rd: when dual typed you only get half of there strength and weaknesses. By that I mean weither the type is primary or secondary dictates which half you get. that means: your primary type can ONLY give you it's strengths while the secondary type does the exact opposite and only gives you weakness/resistances. By doing that it would make damage calculation a LOT easier to do. because instead of having calculate the combined types. You only have to look at the half of the type that matters.
And ironically enough by doing that you can get ALL the type combos.
Actually having specificity sorta defeats the purpose; allowing everything from acrobatics to gusts of wind to be Flying allows Pokemon to cover more types in a thematically sensible way (like Spoink getting Bounce). Pokemon should be broadly categorized to fill strategic roles, not be literally classified into their own permutation.
This thing with types being a spectrum, it would be neat being able to to train certain types like EV's.
Immunities can work as -1 -0.5 or -0.333…. Depending on placement
This is actually pretty cool. It wouldn't be so hard to memorize by having the 3 categories
this sounds very interesting to me. would love if there was a basic rom hack or something that explored this
Feels like this can be simlified. Ie, the "tactic" category shouldn't be weak to anything, but specific types can resist/be weak to them. And maybe the "kind of creature" category can have various benefits, instead of affect effectiveness.
This would be fantastic for a spin-off Pokémon game. Spin-off games never see competitive metas based entirely off of them, and they can get away with weird gimmicks that rework how Pokémon works. You wouldn’t have to worry about competitive players - outside of a niche that would want to play with it - and it would make for a very interesting and refreshing experience, as well as having a higher skill cap if it fits the gameplay well!
(Legends Arceus reworks the Pokédex, removed Pokémon breeding, reworks EVs, changes the game progression, battle mechanics, and turn order; Pokémon spin-offs CAN do things like this, but it would have to be the ONLY change they make)
I’m trying to work out if I’d like a game with this sort of typing for whatever creatures you used... and I’m not sure I’d get my head wrapped around this. Considering I’m still surprised by the strengths and weaknesses of types like poison and dark in the games.
That's why you rely on the battle interface telling which moves are super effective or not!
Okay so from what I see arthropod is strong against beast due to fleas being a common pest for mammals, plants because arthropods are common predators of plants, and aquatic because some underwater arthropods are parasites for fish.
I just find it hilarious that there is still no sound type after almost doubling the number of types
While interesting, this just further complicates things and doesn't fix any existing issues with the type chart. This would be cool in its own game though
Your type concept of types is very interesting and inspiring.