• This forum is strictly intended to be used by members of the VS Battles wiki. Please only register if you have an autoconfirmed account there, as otherwise your registration will be rejected. If you have already registered once, do not do so again, and contact Antvasima if you encounter any problems.

    For instructions regarding the exact procedure to sign up to this forum, please click here.
  • We need Patreon donations for this forum to have all of its running costs financially secured.

    Community members who help us out will receive badges that give them several different benefits, including the removal of all advertisements in this forum, but donations from non-members are also extremely appreciated.

    Please click here for further information, or here to directly visit our Patreon donations page.
  • Please click here for information about a large petition to help children in need.

A new approach to Pokémon Canon

Just having "unique" things, isn't the same as "anything from there isn't valid". The unique things aren't valid, the things that don't contradict that are valid. In fact, Masuda even said "The fact that Pokémon speak their own names in the anime is a point where the anime and the games are different".

Masuda said "basically it’s the same place. Looking at it as a parallel world, or in some select spots being a parallel world might be more accurate.". The "different worlds" are basically the same world (The same setting) with some select spots being something like a "parallel world", points where they differ. Just having "unique elements" isn't enough to say "everything there is unique and shouldn't scale". Both the anime and manga Adventure have a lot of "unique elements", but also a lot of things that works perfectly for the game. For those things, they could (And by what the staff says, they should) scale.

Also, don't know where you got that was the interview that I was using. In fact, I'm not talking about the movie itself, but by the game, an interview with Hiroyuki Jinnai, not with someone from the movie staff. In fact, you seem to ignore the fact that in the interviews that I'm using (again, from the game staff), they made clear that even the uniqueness from the Detective Pikachu story, still had to be within the limitation of the Pokémon world, and that is why they needed to explain how the Pikachu of the game could talk with the main human character.

Of course isn't the common thing, but still is valid in the world. You are right to assume that "Pikachu being able to talk with X character" isn't something that should be in a generic Pikachu profile, because is something unique that needed a explanation for that, exactly because it's unique. But something done by a random Pokémon, without anything unique there, that is something that could still be scaled, because if there's no explanation to say "it's different from the others", then it's assumed to be something that still follows the setting.

Pikachu talking, huge Torterra or even things done by Pokémon infected with R, shouldn't scale to the average Pokémon. However, what Psyduck did is something that follows it setting, so it's assumed to be a faithful representation of what Psyduck can do within that condition, and isn't special like, it needed to drink a special formula to become more powerful.

Also, about the "different world" thing, is something that we need to take in consideration the multiple meanings of the word.

Of course being parallel worlds is also a valid use (After all, it would be rare for anything in the Pokémon world to be taking place in the same universe). However in other cases, it's also referring to just the other regions of the Pokémon world. In the interview with Junnai, he said that the events of the game takes place in a world that is different from the one of the core series, but there are references to the world of the core series to make the player feel that the two are connected (Those being references to the other regions and events from the other games and even anime). In fact even the interviews for the core series has mentions of "different world" or "world of X game", but not as literal parallel universes as we use, but just as a reference to a new story, region or even for being a sequel. In the case with Detective Pikachu, is clear that the intention is it being a "different region from the ones of the core series, that developed its culture and social structure in a way very different from the core series". Is no different from how the Pokémon Ranger series works being in its own regions, that are very different from the core series, but still just regions "far, far away from the region of the core games".

And the movie interviews, lots of them were about how it takes place in a "different world", but as a "different region". Even the interview that you linked is how it's the same universe, just a different said of it. In fact, lots of other interviews are how it's the same world, but just a region far away from the others from the games/anime that it has its own rules, but still the same world.

Even if they were just a "parallel universe that has none of the other regions or characters", it's still bound by the setting rules of how Pokémon works. The whole point of the Detective Pikachu and Magikarp Jump interviews was exactly to show how that was the normal thing for Pokémon, everyone expects to be the same "Pokémon world" and how the Pokémon Company makes everything that can be done to be sure that is what is happening with any spin-off/tie-in product.
 
I think you're reading waaaay into my statement, your fourth paragraph basically covers what I was thinking, but thanks for responding.
 
This will bring rather interesting discussions later on in regards to feats, I feel.

But for now, very well researched and compiled. A job well done indeed, Ex.
 
I feel like that aside from some criticisms on the subject, I feel the majority of people agree with this CRT. If there's any unaddressed concerns about the Pokémon canon, I would suggest they say something now. Otherwise, I suppose this can be pushed through and applied.
 
I think that everyone is fine with the basic concept of the thread, so I think it's time to discuss how the new approach shall be used for the profiles, as with the characters themselves and scaling.

Characters
First about individual human characters, this is yours Ash, Red, Brock and so on. As I made clear in this thread, the new approach does not affect how the continuity in Pokémon works (At least outside of simple "influence"). So, each variation of a character from each work shall be considered its own "individual character" and get its own profile, or at least different keys for the different iterations of the character.

The way that the profiles are handled right now seems to be inconsistent with that, as far as I know. For example, various Ash/Red have different profiles for their different iterations. Other characters also have different profiles for their different iterations, but some still simply have different keys for versions of the character from different timelines. Of course Pokémon is a bit different from other franchises, since it can't really be said that any work is in total continuity with any previous work, with even the main game series being more about different timelines that follows the same archetype

The way that the profiles are separated right now is fine. Of course there are some things to be considered, such as the facts that the multiple iterations of a character do influence each other (A character in Adventures might change it's personality to be more similar to that of the games/anime for example), so some changes can happen in the future. Other times another media can show aspects of a single media that isn't shown in itself, such as that the flashbacks of "Giratina and the Sky Warrior" are stated to be "six years ago" in the manga (And the concept artwork) while the movie itself has no mention of the timeframe, so somethings can be assumed from another media, but I don't think that any of that will influence our profiles in any way.
Pokémon Species Profile

From the Pokémon page, our species profiles are based on "composite versions of that species of Pokémon across all canon mediums", but "The only exceptions to this are Pokémon that are individual enough to warrant a profile separate from their species" and finally "All of our Pokémon species profiles assume the Pokémon is wild, Level 100 with perfect EVs and IVs, and know every possible move and skill without being trained."

As usual, even with the new acceptance of canon, I don't think that anything needs to change. Specific Pokémon that have far different moves and power level from their species are still not going to scale the Species Profiles even with new works being accepted as "canon". For example, Torterra (Species) isn't going to get "Dia-Mach-One-and-Only Razor Leaf" move because Tru used this move in Pokémon Adventures.

The only thing that can be considered to scale to the species profiles are things done by Wild Pokémon that aren't considered beyond the standard in the series. The best would be the other works complementing what is said in a Pokédex profile. If one day we see Lavitar eating a mountain, Pupitar destroying one and the earthquakes that Tyranitar can do in a media, this would be an example of something that could easily be scaled between media, since it's nothing more than giving context to something that we already know is true.

The same with how the Pokémon moves do as a whole. Things like their overall power isn't going to scale between species, and it's possible that a specific Pokémon might have, for example, a flame tower that far surpasses what other members of its own species can do. But there are some moves that aren't clear on what they do in the Core Series, for example, Future Sight. However the manga and anime does shows the move and it's, sometimes, explained as really being a move that can travel across time and attack the enemy in the future.

So in the case of how moves works, the other media can be scaled as explaining what the moves can do.

So, other than explaining what moves can do and sometimes being used as evidence for feats that we know are true in a series, nothing else is going to be scaled across the series.

There are other topics that could be discussed, such as lore, but they are the same thing from the "Characters" and "Species, but for other things. If is consistent, we can assume it scales, if it isn't, then it'something unique, and so on. But I don't think anything will be that important to our profiles.
 
So in the case of how moves works, the other media can be scaled as explaining what the moves can do.

So, other than explaining what moves can do and sometimes being used as evidence for feats that we know are true in a series, nothing else is going to be scaled across the series.
What if the move versions contradict each other in medias like Darkrai's Dark Void (or how was called its peculiar move)?
 
What if the move versions contradict each other in medias like Darkrai's Dark Void (or how was called its peculiar move)?
That is something hard to say and should be case-by-case. If is something like "this one move that appears always as the same is most media is used in a different way in this one alternate continuity", then that is only going to be valid for that story. But this is a bit hard to decide for some moves, that have different versions even in the same continuity.

Although I don't think that Darkrai's Dark Void was used in any different way in the movie, the move puts the enemy to sleep and then is given a nightmare due to Darkrai's Bad Dreams ability. It's in fact a very consistent use of the move across all of its appearances and the movie explains exactly how the move works in-game. Don't know why you used that as an example.
 
That is something hard to say and should be case-by-case. If is something like "this one move that appears always as the same is most media is used in a different way in this one alternate continuity", then that is only going to be valid for that story. But this is a bit hard to decide for some moves, that have different versions even in the same continuity.

Although I don't think that Darkrai's Dark Void was used in any different way in the movie, the move puts the enemy to sleep and then is given a nightmare due to Darkrai's Bad Dreams ability. It's in fact a very consistent use of the move across all of its appearances and the movie explains exactly how the move works in-game. Don't know why you used that as an example.
Because in the games, Darkrai opens a sort of void below the pokémon, while in the movie he launches dark spheres. That's the thing he is referring to that is different.
 
Don't know why you used that as an example.
In games is a black hole which appears under the opponents and sucks them in, to then leave them asleep in the original position. In anime instead it shoots spheres which put the ones who they hit asleep.
 
Because in the games, Darkrai opens a sort of void below the pokémon, while in the movie he launches dark spheres. That's the thing he is referring to that is different.
I thought that he was talking about the effects. The way that the move is launched differs sometimes even in the very core games, in recent games it does uses a sphere and launches it at the opponent (Although in the game it phases through the ground). In fact even during the time of D/P/Pt in Battle Revolution the move did have a "launches something at the opponent animation". Some moves simply changes animations across series and works while renaming the same effect. I never thought that someone would ask about different "uses" instead of effects, but still is the same concept.

No in-universe explanation for that. Maybe it's the same thing that can be used in different ways, maybe not. But some moves do seem to act differently, but there's no clear answer to that (In fact I never thought that someone would ask about that).

How we would answer that ? I don't thought of an answer because I didn't thought it mattered. But should still be the same... I think (Simply assuming that the same move can be used in different ways seems to be the better answer here).
 
It really doesn't matter much, but people like to argue over it in vs threads. AoE sleep manip vs a projectile that can be dodged and all.

And yeah, I agree that simply the move can be used in different ways. This is outright shown to be the case in both anime (Ash's Pikachu electricity barrier, for example) and manga.
 
I don't really have much thought on the characters (humans btw) as I pretty much agree with what Ex already laid out, but I do think that different keys would be better than just whole pages.

Because to a similar vein of how wild Pokemon get every eventuality of what they, as a species and not specifically unique members know, why shouldn't the protagonists who are also "generalized" and not specific? To me it looks kind of pointless to say a game protagonist on one page gets a team with one of the starters, then on another page gets a team with this starter, and so on.

Keys should be easier to handle this problem with the humans, and those who aren't unique variations of course. Like Ash or Adventures / Pokemon Origins Red.
 
I don't really have much thought on the characters (humans btw) as I pretty much agree with what Ex already laid out, but I do think that different keys would be better than just whole pages.

Because to a similar vein of how wild Pokemon get every eventuality of what they, as a species and not specifically unique members know, why shouldn't the protagonists who are also "generalized" and not specific? To me it looks kind of pointless to say a game protagonist on one page gets a team with one of the starters, then on another page gets a team with this starter, and so on.

Keys should be easier to handle this problem with the humans, and those who aren't unique variations of course. Like Ash or Adventures / Pokemon Origins Red.
That is basically what I think. If one shall get a key or a different profile might be dependent on how different the variations are and how much keys there are. That I think is open to decision for the ones that makes the profiles.
 
I don't think I ever got a straight answer for this. WHEN Masters EX stuff gets added to the wiki, should they be added to our current profiles since they're clearly meant to be the same characters, or should they be separated into a different one just like our two Po profiles?
 
I don't think I ever got a straight answer for this. WHEN Masters EX stuff gets added to the wiki, should they be added to our current profiles since they're clearly meant to be the same characters, or should they be separated into a different one just like our two Po profiles?
That depend on the amount of information.

The characters aren't necessarily the same (As they never are in Pokémon). But even when we are dealing with literal versions of different universes, some are still in the same profile. Cyrus is a good example, our current profile includes not only the one from the D/P games, but also Pt and the US/UM games, all from different universes. Yet the one from Masters is also from a different universe from the one that Masters takes place. I think that Masters does not add enough information for most characters than a new Core Game, and if is supposed to really be taken place in the world of the characters of the games (That by itself is already a multiverse), then a key for "Masters" should be enough.

Yet I don't think that different keys of different profiles have any different meaning other than being in a different page or not. So isn't really a question that I can answer as it does not deal with the setting/worldview, that is the thing that I know of. People who works on the profiles themselves might know the better way to do that.
 
So whats the current status on this?


Im just curious as this has been open for a while now. Has it been accepted? I been gone for a bit.
 
I ended up using a lot of my time reading the manga and playing games for the future revision that I'm playing, so I ended up forgetting to bump this thread.

I assume that most of the users accepted this, even more considering my last reply about what would be used. If this is accepted we should update the Pokémon page changing the link to the new blog. Maybe adding something new to the rules about how that should be managed with examples of what can or can not be accepted is a good idea in order to stop unreasonable attempts to update the pages.

Or maybe I should just add the examples to the blog and put something like "(You can read the blog for examples of what can or can not be used in our species profiles)" in the page.
 
I ended up using a lot of my time reading the manga and playing games for the future revision that I'm playing, so I ended up forgetting to bump this thread.

I assume that most of the users accepted this, even more considering my last reply about what would be used. If this is accepted we should update the Pokémon page changing the link to the new blog. Maybe adding something new to the rules about how that should be managed with examples of what can or can not be accepted is a good idea in order to stop unreasonable attempts to update the pages.

Or maybe I should just add the examples to the blog and put something like "(You can read the blog for examples of what can or can not be used in our species profiles)" in the page.
So PMD canon again? Yessa
 
So PMD canon again? Yessa
As canon as other Pokémon products ? Yes, but still that doesn't mean that everything from the PMD series can be used for the Pocket Monsters series. I would say that mostly things that are explanations, or examples, of things that are vague from the main series are the ones that are the most valid to be used.

Yet new feats are complicated on their own (As feats aren't really "setting things"), as not even the main series is consistent with them. Of course things like Outliers are still a thing even in a franchise where everything is canon, so if something from the PMD series, or any spin-off, far outclasses everything from the main series, it shouldn't be used even if it does not contradict the setting (Some people might not know this, but being canon isn't the same as having no outliers for our proposes).

But I think that PMD is canon enough as an example of Uxie erasing memories, don't know about Charizard melting mountains
 
@Executor_N0

So what are the conclusions here so far, and should we notify all staff members who are interested in Pokémon?
 
@Executor_N0

So what are the conclusions here so far, and should we notify all staff members who are interested in Pokémon?
It seems that the changes are mostly accepted and from this future threads will analyze each addition from secondary works in a case-by-case way. I would like to put some examples of what is accepted and what isn't accepted so future thread don't end up bringing unreasonable upgrades or downgrades. I'll try to write a suggestion still today and wait to see what the other members think of them.
 
I finally got time to write the examples on the blog.

The notes on the Pokémon page, currently are:
  • All of our Pokémon species profiles are composite versions of that species of Pokémon across all canon mediums, including the games, the anime, the manga, the Trading Card Game and spin-off games. Their power and abilities should reflect this. The only exceptions to this are Pokémon that are individual enough to warrant a profile separate from their species, such as Ash's Pikachu.
  • All of our Pokémon species profiles assume the Pokémon is wild, Level 100 with perfect EVs and IVs, and know every possible move and skill without being trained.

And they are perfectly fine, we could simply change the link for the new blog and it would be good enough. However I know that the biggest problem with the changes that I’m suggesting is due to the possibility of unreasonable upgrades, or downgrades, based on the wrong assumption that “everything is canon”. So just to be sure I would like to add the following into the first note: Due to the contradictory nature of Pokémon across not only the multiple media, but as well in a single canon, it's suggested to read the examples and explanations that are in the blog of things that can and can't be accepted for the cross-scaling.

And this is what I added to the blog

As it's clear that due to the large amount of content that Pokémon has with all of its spin-offs, the way that the profiles uses things from the multiple media is going to be decided on a case by case basis. The "Pocket Monster" games are still considered the main source of information, and direct contradictions to the "Pocket Monster" series is enough for an information to not be used in a composite way, and should be exclusive to the material that originated the contradictory information (The information can still be considered an outlier within its own work and then is unusable in any way).

Bellow are sme examples of feats and iformation shouldn't be used between the different media:
*Things that clearly contradict the established world without any explanation for why that happens (Such as Cressleia being called an [ Ice-type Pokémon in Pokémon 4Koma]);
*Moves, Abilities or power in general that only happened in specific circumstances such as a member of a species receiving special training to get a move that it normally wouldn’t have or simply was born with more power than usual (Such as the [ Riolu that can use Aura Sphere] or [ Torterra’s Razor Leaf Diamond Special Mach One-and-Only]);
*Things that have been clarified as being exclusive to certain worlds or characters (Such as [ Mewtwo’s Psywave from Pokémon Adventures having different effects] due to Mewtwo’s high psychic power or the [ Pokémon from the anime and other media saying their own names] being explained as not being the case for the world of the Games);
*The above also includes backstory for specific characters, specially the human characters (Red's backstory is completely different from Ash's backstory, the same with Adventures' Ruby with Game/Anime May).

However even considering the above examples, there are counterexamples of contradictory things being officially used even when that makes no sense or simply inconsistency as big as the ones showed before:
*Some Pokémon do have their types changes into other types, especially when it's a new type that was recently introduced. This ends up causing major contradictions with the world, since a Normal-type Pokémon as Clefairy that was weak to Fight-type moves is now a Fairy-type and is resistant against Fight-type moves. The same happened with Pokémon that got the Steel-type on the Second Generation, such as Magnemite, that previously weren't weak against fire and now are. Although it isn't excepted to see a type change due to other media, it's important to notice that even the games aren't really very consistent;
*The movelist of various Pokémon isn't constant and some Pokémon learn moves at different levels in some games, or even entirely different moves. In fact even in a single game [https://bulbapedia.bulbagarden.net/wiki/Game_move_errors is possible to have in-game Pokémon with moves the the player's Pokémon couldn't access];
*Sometimes the personality, or even backstory, of the characters are changed, or "expanded", and includes events from other media. [https://www.pokemon.com/us/pokemon-...ies-pokemon-masters-the-pokemon-tcg-and-more/ Brock's character was changed in Pokémon Yellow/Let's Go/Masters] in order to include its characteristics from the anime into the game series. And Mewtwo's personality, and Backstory from the Adventures manga was changed in order to be consistent with the personality and backstory from the "Mewtwo Strikes Back!" movie. The games' backstory was also changed in order to be consistent with the movie backstory.

As it can be noticed from the notes above, it isn't very clear what can be or not considered consistent in Pokémon multimedia. As the series moves on it's possible that even more changes are going to happen and include things that some might consider "incompatible". For the proposal of this blog, that is to determinate the "canon" of Pokémon, it was necessary to establish some rules in order to turn Pokémon into a work that can properly be analyzed across its multiple media while respecting the creative intent of having all of the works being part of the same general "Pokémon world".

However the rules themselves aren't absolute, as the franchise itself has almost no hard rules on what can be used or not between the various media. Of course we can't simply say "everything is valid", because even with the franchise being inconsistent, there are some rules and themes that at least are tried to be recognized as true while other aren't, it's just that the franchise is open to changes over time. So the examples above can be taken in consideration of what shouldn't be valid for scaling between works.

Also, the following examples might help to understand the kind of feats, statements and events as a whole that can be considered as valid for scaling across the media.
*Complementary information that has its origin in the core series. Things like what the Gameplay Mechanics really looks like in the world and their explanations, use of things only stated in the Pokédex, a visual and explanation of what a move really does and so on. This includes Generic events and rules of the world, such as "Lucario and The Mystery of Mew" showing more of the past of the Pokémon world, something that was confirmed in the X/Y games.
*Feats can be used if they aren't contradictory and aren't exclusive to a version that is clearly very different in relation to a common one. It's possible for some Pokémon to display feats beyond the common for it species, but still might be usable for scaling to other Pokémon such as its own evolutions or even stronger ones.


If anyone wants to suggest other rules and examples, go ahead. If everyone is fine, then we can do the change in link and add the extra line and this can be closed.

Sorry for the delays, I did my best with the time that I had (I might to go to another city today, so it's possible that It'll take some time to reply here again before I can access my smartphone)
 
Just a side-question:

I noticed that the following power and abilities page had been created some days ago:


Is it acceptable to keep, or should it be deleted, and all links to it removed?
 
There were several threads about it which apparently never came to a conclusion despite some discussions and disagreement going on but it seems that Sean just went over and made the page anyway. I also lost track of them overtime, but I see on the page some of the things against which I argued the most and I still disagree with, such as mid regeneration, resistance to acid and some more.
 
Okay. Would you be willing to delete the page and remove all links to it then?
 
Done.

Also, I want to add that, on top of the old general threads not having been finished, a CRT should have been made to add it to the profiles and we still need to decide how to handle the whole canon thing in relation to how we implement them in the profiles and everything, as the physiology page uses multiple sources, like side games and so on.
 
Thank you for helping out.

My apologies about derailing. You can return to discussing the main topic now.
 
Done.
Also, I want to add that, on top of the old general threads not having been finished, a CRT should have been made to add it to the profiles and we still need to decide how to handle the whole canon thing in relation to how we implement them in the profiles and everything, as the physiology page uses multiple sources, like side games and so on.
The biggest problem that I could find was the use of old magazines and English books that are the most likely to not be used (Just like old English dub). Most of them would fit as at least "outdated information" or simply "was never usable to being with". Maybe I should add why such things shouldn't be used in the blog as well.
 
Back
Top