Thoughts?

>>30821731
>Gamefaqs

Ok I knew GameFAQ were retarded, but not on THIS level.

>>30821731
yes, they're a lower tier of legends like UBs, Type:Null/Sivally, trios from past gens, etc
>pokedex entries are green and sparkle
>pokedex entries for higher tier of legends like box legends are yellow and sparkle

Nah man, they're route 1 shitmon

Is this a meme at this point or are people dumb?

File: IMG_0810-475x475-1.jpg (34KB, 475x475px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 475x475px

>>30821774
This
/Thread

File: 110d2lgjpg.gif (3MB, 424x240px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 424x240px

Why is this question only targeted at the Tapu who are clearly legendary instead of Silvally.

>only 34% think so
What the fuck am I reading

They're legendaries, just in a different flavour

>>30821731
Dunno, I stopped caring about that stupid title long ago. Pokemon are Pokemon, if you like one then use it instead of caring about what other people think.

I thought this was the general consensus now due to 10% of the dex being legendaries or an equivalent. Which btw yes, they are technically legendaries according to lore (rotom literally shouts it at you when you catch one) but still who the fuck cares?

>>30821731
They're legendaries, a different background in the pokedex doesn't mean shit

>only one of each
>have lore
>can't breed
>classified as legendary in the dex
>typical trio/quartet
Why wouldn't they be?

>>30821799
it's what they call cognitive dissonance.
they want to be that trainer who doesn't use legendaries. but once confronted with the fact they aren't, they go through mental gymnastics to prove they are

No because you know they exist.
Every legendary sighted by common NPCs loses legendary status
there I fixed it

>>30821822
>There is only one loch ness monster

>>30821731
It's one thing to question UBs and Silvally, but you must be mentally challenged to question the Tapus.

>>30821833
Hey I found one of the retards that voted no.
Seriously, even >>30821774 explained it, you have to be brain damaged to think they aren't Legendary mons.

>>30821810
>rotom literally shouts it at you when you catch one
kek, you're right
this thread is pointless

>>30821799
Silvally/Null is just another Porygon.

Mewtwo and Genosect are legendaries due to strength and their ancient line. Silvally, while not only lacking immense power is also a literal who. It has no legend, its had no rumors, its not related directly to a legend. It's not even related to Arceus, they just slapped together some pokemon genes to try and create something that could provide a similar function. Unlike Mewtwo who is literally comprised of Mew's genes and had rumors about it, because nobody could prove if it actually existed or not.

>Of course they're not legendary. After all only fags use legendary pokemon, and there's certainly no way I'm a fag

At least that's my best guess at the kind of thinking that votes "no" on this

>>30821731
Why is this even a question in first place? Did everyone in the Pokémon Community become retarded overnight?

>>30821849
Stupidass it was a joke on how legendaries aren't reclassified when captured or "discovered"
There are many pokemon spoken of in legend, and some not confirmed to exist. Once the second one is knocked out the first isn't unique

>>30821799
>>30821868
Sivally as a legendary really does make no sense. I guess GF's reasoning is that it's a story-driven pokemon that's kinda like a miniature Mewtwo/Arceus fusion. Too bad it's incredibly underwhelming.

>>30821731
I don't have to "consider" anything. They're tagged as Legendaries within the game's code.

>>30821920
Well we don't know what exactly went into making Silvally. If he has legendary DNA on it then it could be considered legendary for the same reason Mewtwo is. As a Type:Null it's worth mentioning at least that it has Zygarde Cells in the mask

File: 1480880461723.png (382KB, 874x720px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 874x720px

>>30821901
Ok now I really need to go to sleep, I'm becoming more and more retarded the harded I try to stay awake.

>>30821868
Porygon can breed though.
That is the main characteristic ofLegendary

>>30821976
Unown

>>30821928
How is a pokemon tagged as legendary in terms of code? Honest question, I seriously don't know

>>30822028
Just because all A are B doesn't mean all B are A

>>30822028
>>30822075
I never said 'only' or 'mandatory'
There're no definitive traits that make a pokemon Legendary, I don't think all of them even have one they share.
There's Manaphy that can breed and Cosmog that can eveolve
There's whatever, Ditto that can't breed and Spinda that does not evolve

Typically Legendaries have most of:
>High stats and generally powerfull.
>Inability to breed. Often genderless too.
>Prominent role in the story.
>One per game in a fixed encounter or through an event.
>Encounted late or postgame, have a unique battle theme, a build up to the encounter
>Signature moves/abilities.
>Listed at the end of the regional dex.
>Banned or restricted in battle facilities and/or VGC.

>>30822106
I think the one common factor is that all legends have story importance or some cool little story surrounding it that some NPC or library book or whatever tells you. At least, I can't think of a single legendary that is quite literally just 'there'

>>30822145
Actually I don't know the lore behind the gen 1 birds but it's also been awhile since I've played a Kanto game

>>30822064
The code has two lists of legends named "legendaries" and "sublegends"

Legendaries are the ones that are banned in battles which includes the 670+ BSTs (minus Regi), mythicals, and the 3rd legendaries like Zygarde and Necrozma

Sublegends has the normal ~580 BST legends that aren't banned which includes Tapus, UBs and Type Null/Silvally

>>30822171
I think the guy who datamined named the lists himself because the term sublegend never appears in the game and he also made fun of the tapus' names in the pic. Nevertheless, every legendary has a sparkling pokedex so maybe that's what he was datamining? I'm not really sure what to make of the picture.

>>30822195
I think he just edited the names as a joke but the actual lists were real

>>30822145
Pretty sure most early gen legends were like this.
Pokemon that sit in their postgame dens (Heatran, Necrozma), especially of they're from a different generation don't have any story too I think.
Also Mythical Pokemon typically have absolutely no mentions in the games.

>>30822171
>The code has two lists
You've seen them then?

Banlist is a separate thing. Ingame they are typically named as 'Special Pokemon': http://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Special_Pok%C3%A9mon

>>30822246
Dataminer posted a pic of the lists

Special Pokemon aren't the exact same thing, for example right now Ash Greninja is a banned special Pokemon but it's obviously not a legendary

Leaving oficial status aside
Tapus are the very definición of what a legendary Pokémon should be.
They are refered to as guardian deities, protecting the islands since ancient times, deciding the fate of the people living there at their whim. They have the power to end wars or mess up whoever pisses them off.
We need more legendaries that actually do shit.