I've been thinking about how different kinds of pokemon

>>33204624
Also, feel free to tell me I'm a faggot and some Pokemon should move categories, but also realize I'm not saying you can't think Shellder is cute, or that Poliwhirl isn't cool, or whatever. I was just organizing them due to what I perceived as their primary appeal, and what the designers wanted them to convey.

Personally, I think Hitmonlee is really silly looking, but I recognize that he's probably supposed to be badass like Hitmonlee.

>>33204624
I like gamefreaks original idea that you could train your pokemon in any category with pokeblocks and moves. Made it feel more like raising an individual

>>33204624
Beauty = Waifu

>>33204639
>I think Hitmonlee is really silly looking, but I recognize that he's probably supposed to be badass like Hitmonlee
Really makes you think

>>33204624
>genwun only
kys

>>33204735
well I just started there, I'm gonna work my way up. But I wanted some feedback about if the categories are even valid.

>>33204680
yeah, this will fill up with gen 7 especially.

File: pokemon appeals.png (1MB, 1880x1000px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1880x1000px

updated with gen 2, I'm even less confident in Tough being its own category now.

I'm thinking Goofy (Muk, Weepinbel, Quagsire) and Weird (Metapod, Starmie, Foretress) instead of Tough and Clever would make more sense.

>>33204624
On gen III Clever was called Smart, the rest retained their names, I don't think GF will add more categories since the ribbon fiasco
Gen V
zero ribbons
Gen VI
On this gen the ribbons return, but you can now only win one ribbon per category instead of four & the older contest & battle ribbons were compressed on two ribbons, but it would be nice to get more categories

>>33204924
Keep Tough. Goleduck, Nidos, Onix, Hitmons, Croconaw, Feralgiatr, Donphan should all be tough.

File: pokemon appeals.png (2MB, 3162x874px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3162x874px

>>33205120
I did it like this, but seeing as how Cool is the largest category, maybe keeping Tough and making it 6 categories would be best, after all.

But why Golduck in Tough? Dude is smooth and slick, that's got Cool written all over it.

>>33204624
Funny. I was recently discussing this exact same concept with my girlfriend. I think you're right. To a degree, anyway.

I don't think pokemon fit cleanly into the categories, but rather fit partially into some. Mewtwo, for instance, would be Cool and Clever. Dragonite would be Cute and Tough. Gyarados Cool and Tough, etc..

Also, I think there should be an "Odd/Mysterious" category. Clever kinda, sort fits it, but it doesn't capture the bizarre nature of Exeggutor or the UB's for instance. There's definitely "tropes" that Pokemon fit into, though. In the favorites threads, you'll often see people who tend to like really masculine Pokemon, or cute Fairies, or whatever. You see consistency a lot.

>>33205315
yes, that's what I'm talking about. "Mysterious" sounds like a better name than "Weird" like I was using.

I started thinking about this because I'm mostly into the badass Pokemon, so Gen 7 felt kinda weak to me. But I was talking to a friend who really likes the derpy, silly pokemon, and Alola is full of those, so he thought it was a great gen.

As for fitting into multiple categories, that's a good point, maybe the best way to represent this would be a venn diagram or something?

>>33205379
>I started thinking about this because I'm mostly into the badass Pokemon, so Gen 7 felt kinda weak to me

Weird. Me too. I'm a total edgelord who loves Mewtwo, Megazard X and what not, so Gen 7 was a bit "meh" for me.

Also yeah, a venn diagram might be best. Would be kind of a pain in the ass to do. Alternatively, you could list Pokemon, along with what category they fall into. Go by dex number or something, like:

Bulbsaur: Cute
Ivysaur: Cool
Venusaur: Cool, Tough

That might also be a pain in the dick, though. Not sure what suits your fancy.