I cant be the only one who thinks that 'roothoot' fits

>>26240580
sure it is, I can see Litten turning into a fire rock and Popplio turning into a dolphin too :^)

>>26240580
Owlgate is going to start all over again, thanks for pointing that out faggot.

>>26240580
And it begins

>>26240580
You're an idiot. That is all there is to it.

>>26240633
/thread
Roothoot & co. are fake. Just stop.

>>26240580
I was thinking that too.

>someone sees early Rowlet once
>draws what they remember of it
>the beak on Rowlet even looks like it has an open mouth rather than a two coloured beak

It's strange alright

>>26240580
I've noticed they decided to change the color of Roothoot's head and the shape of its beak since Rowlet got revealed.

Also it completely abandons the bow tie and apple motif in exchange for boring leaf wings. Odd design choice.

>>26240633
Yeah I get that argument but who said that they were starters? They may as well be regular pokémon.

How does a cat turn into Pupitar with legs?

>>26240580
the tie rowlet is wearing is missing on roothoot. I'd be really mad if they got rid of the bowtie gimmick.

>>26240738
Who said they were pokemon?

OP here. I don't think it is the second stage but I think its an interesting coincidence to say the least. Also remember >>26240736 that we have only seen 'concept art' of roothoot.

>>26240687
>Still in denial after being BTFO
You gotta grant it to them, denialfags are surely persistent.

>>26240816
Where was it implied that it was concept art?

File: owlfag.png (1MB, 1768x894px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1768x894px

>>26240899
You're the one in denial by not accepting that Roothoot is fake.
Just let it go.

>>26240580
I get what you are saying, but think about it : If you come up with a grass owl pokémon,everything you may draw seems to fit Rowlet's evo line.

>>26240738
>who said that they were starters?
don't even try this argument retard
whoever drew them obviously intended to make them look like starters, even making them a trio

File: sun-moon-fakes3.jpg (27KB, 433x327px) Image search: [Google]

27KB, 433x327px

>>26240920
I'd say the picture speaks for itself.
>>26240994
Yeah I guess you're right. But still its a little odd to be so close to even get the colors right. And before the name trademaks too

Its too short and it's literally "its colors spread". Too unremarkable to be a second evo. They usually look like the first stage as teenagers

>>26240580

Roothoot looks like Rowlet if the person who drew it was only given an extremely vague description of Rowlet and/or saw a picture of it from across the room at a weird angle. I'm chalking it up to complete coincidence.

>>26240580
I mean, it could have *some* resemblance to it, although the fake one looks too simple to become its 1st evolution.

>>26240580
I imagine the guy who made it was trying remember it from memory or was given outdated artwork.

>>26241062
Yeah but there were kids in the trailer who must have seen it. So the vague description theory works there.

>>26240580
Well of course the colors look similar when you edit roothoot to have the same colors.

Pokemon, especially starter Pokemon, use a fairly limited color palette. Rowlet couldn't have been any other colors.

Well logically, I just don't see why the beak would be diminished. And opinion-wise I was ok with Roothoot but now it's more of an obvious barn owl, I want it to be that throughout, and those tufts on Roothoot look like the beginnings of a tawny owl

>>26240580
If "roothoot" didn't have such a disgusting face I could see it being real. It doesn't have a beak, it's eyes are bigger than anime grills', and it's facial expression is just cringeworthy. Leaf-wings would be cool tho.

File: Nawittenz.jpg (62KB, 634x498px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 634x498px

>>26240639
Nawittenz.

>>26241316
>Rowlet couldn't have been any other colors.
Uh, yes it could have. This is a pretty weak argument. The odds are zero that roothoot was anything but a lucky guess but the colors were a part of that, and not an inevitable match like beign an owl was.

>>26240580
I don't think it is, but it could have been an early concept art. Doubt it though.

>>26241314

If it was described to them by a kid I would think it would have looked more like the actual thing, IE: an owl shaped like a ball.

The guy who drew Roothoot was just a lucky guesser.

>>26241492
Maybe it was drawn by a kid then drawn again by a better artist?

>>26240580
Roothoot would have been a first stage Pokemon if it was legit. Every grass starter to date has a plant incorporated into its design that grows as the Pokemon evolves. Roothoot doesn't have any plant on its body. Rowlett's leaf bow tie will grow into something bigger for its evolutions.

>>26240580
It is possible roothoot will be evolution of rowlet, but well i think they kinda change his look

>>26241585
Its chestplant grows and encompasses its wings.

Hell, that's an argument *for* Roothoot.

>>26241585
It looks like a second stage to me. Stay away from the fucking patterns. GF could be doing something different this gen and we wouldn't know

>>26240580
Eyes and mouth throw it off.

>>26241774
Mouth maybe, But look at piplup and prinplup. torchic and combusken. It's expected the eyes change.

But why the other two pieces of shit that appeared with Roothoot ended up being something totally diferent?
Did I miss any discussion about it?

>>26241546
>better

>We never said that picture was real, we just said the starter was an owl!
>Hillary Clinton has never been against gay marriage!
Thank God for off-site archives.

>>26241870
There is no answer.

File: image.jpg (57KB, 600x358px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 600x358px

They were debunked sure, but it IS a grass/flying owl with the same color scheme. Give them that at least. Owlfags not BTFO in my book. Let's see if Mothman makes it.

>>26241870
Roothoot showed up by itself. The other two showed up later with the anon revealing claiming he was the same anon.

>>26240720

That seems to be the best explanation. Like somebody saw sketches of these Pokemon from across the room, and decided to redraw them. Even the fire thing who is a cat and not some kind of stone creature is probably the result of a very quick and blurry glance, due to its ears and colors.

>>26242648
The fire thing was the second reply or so in the original thread.

>>26240580
>Different eyes

>>26240580
Roothoot could just have been rowlet's early concept art that ended up getting leaked, that's my bet.

>>26242794

>Even the fire thing who is a cat and not some kind of stone creature is probably the result of a very quick and blurry glance, due to its ears and colors.

You are absolutely delusional.

>>26242869
What do you mean?

File: image.jpg (21KB, 279x251px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 279x251px

Mfw owlfags not BTFO

>>26242502
It was never about the starter being an owl. It was about the starter being THAT specific owl.

Owlfags are real silent now. It must suck being so gullible.

The fake leaks were easy since the trademarked names indicated what animals they were basically so of course they're close