What are you talking about? That wasn't my point whatsoever. I said that they wouldn't show a Pokemon dying to an attack, so it gets knocked out instead. Same way Necrozma can nuke a rattata or something and it only faints. If something knocks out a Pokemon it shouldnt be used for scaling or resistances.
What's there to prove? Fire attacks are treated like any other elemental attack, and the amount that a Pokemon withstands it depends on their durability.
which is outright wrong, because if they can live through it and not die then it means they get limited resistance. Necrozma nuking a rattata can only happen in game where it can be either a rattata or a lvl 100 Zoroark, meanwhile i am talking about an actual instance where a pokemon got frozen and lived to tell the tale. Pokemon dying to AZ doesn't exist in this verse as it has never shown to be that way. If it doesn't exist then it can't be used to disprove them having a limited resistance.
...i deadass don't understand how you're failing to understand something as basic as this.
They are explicitly, and consistently, shown and stated to have weaknesses.
If there is an average amount of damage to take, and you take more than that, you got a weakness. If you take less, you got a resistance. If you shake off status conditions, you got healing or purification.
In the real world, and in 'verses where elemental attacks aren't affected by durability, yes.
Right, show me the rule or whatever that prevents pokemon from gaining resistance by equating the damage they can take to their durability
I showed a scan of Pikachu and a Sceptile not dying when hit by Sheer Cold , so you definitely didn't finish reading the OP. And can you prove that Pokemon being able to survive sheer cold is game mechanics?
What does affection have to do with anything? And who said its a normal occurence to snap out of it? Not every human has the ability to even think when their mind is completely altered to the point where they are forced to attack themselves
Send scans that a pokemon's normal durability affects how much damage they take from heat, I'll wait
Sure. Do you want from the Manga, Anime, core games, or spinoff games? 'cause what you requested is the entire franchise!
heat bypasses durability. Your argument is invalid.
It is shown not to in Pokemon, 100% of the time. YOUR argument is invalid.
it is, fire always melts rocks and even mountains, YOUR argument is invalid
It isn't like every single Pokemon is more durable than rocks or anything like that.
Same with electricity. However, exceptions are made, when it is explicitly shown that heat = ap, like in Pokemon.
That would be a stretch. There is no evidence that levels increase resistance, and it is implied they don't.
They take less damage because they take less damage from the force of the attack. Flamethrower has both force and heat. There is evidence heat in Pokemon acts like heat, it evaporates or melts stuff. There is no evidence that simply having more blunt force durability can help against heat, electricity or cold
Well, levels don't mean anything for status, including, of all things, burn, so there's definitely something there to say resistance to heat isn't increased, since the Pokémon literally isn't any harder to (inflict a) burn (upon).
Except, again, the ENTIRE FRANCHISE. Every single Pokemon battle involving heat, electricity, or cold. Your whole point that fire can melt a rock, but not a Pokemon, is moot, since Pokemon have MUCH HIGHER durability than a rock. A Hitmonchan should be very capable of shattering the same rock with a single punch. A punch that would barely make a Blastoise budge. Additionally, if heat in Pokemon acted the way it did in the real world, Fire Blast would be an impossible move, as it takes, and holds, a shape impossible for heat to hold. Heat in Pokemon also only very rarely rises upwards, something natural for real heat to do, and there have even been cases of fire in Pokemon being physically held back, which directly contradicts how fire, and by extension heat, works in the real world. Even using the excuse of there being force behind Fire moves, every part of the Fire Blast that Charizard isn't directly touching would have continued forward. You need to understand that having a few things in common =/= working exactly as, especially when consistently, and repeatedly, shown not to work exactly as.
Defense and Special Defense are both durability. HP is survivability. And their argument would grant Parasect resistance to heat, Swanna resistance to electricity, ect.
This, so far, is the only argument I've seen in this thread that, by any stretch of the imagination, would grant any sort of resistance.
Are you actually saying that heat in Pokemon doesn't negate durability now? Charizard has NPI like any Pokemon, so him interacting with fire blast is irrelavant, you need proof that heat doesn't rise up, and how does defying 1 thing about fire mean heat doesn't negate durability anymore? There are Pokemon that take no damage from the force of a fire attack, but get burnt or charred fully
Yes. Because it consistently doesn't.
Fire Blast keeping the shape of the Japanese symbol for "Fire", for more than an instant. Moves like Flamethrower moving in a straight line rather than curving upwards. Need I keep going?
It doesn't. Durability affecting the vast majority of Fire type moves means that heat doesn't negate durability. My point there was that the only things heat and fire in Pokemon have in common with the real world is that they can ignite and melt stuff, and they are hot.
Yeah, it's almost like the force of the move is only a fraction of the move's effectiveness, and the fire is much more important, isn't it?
almost all fire in fiction does this.
Durability will effect fire manip no matter what. a flamethrower will always do less damage to someone who is 6-C compared to someone who is High 7-A
Correct. Pretty much no fiction has perfectly accurate fire.
That's literally what I've been saying this whole time.
You were using it as an argument against it being normal fire, from what I read
fire still negates dura to an extent regardless of the fact that higher dura means you take less damage from it.
I used it as an argument against being like real world fire.
Not enough to warrant a resistance, especially not for types that are weak to Fire, like Ice, Grass, Bug, and Steel.
Can you post some scans of fire not negating durability? Naming specific events would also help. You're right that defensive stats are essentially durability, but with special defense resistance is still a possible factor. Keep in mind it opposes attacks that would normally ignore durability, for example psychic attacks like confusion. However, with secondary effects like burn and freeze ignoring that special defense stat while not ignoring typing and being preventable with abilities and moves like safeguard, it seems as if Pokémon resist some but not all effects of other Pokémon attacks. So I guess we have to find evidence for each one resisted and work out which are resisted and which are not.
A lot of what you said is game mechanics mixed with genuine arguments. I'll see what I can dig up of Pokemon with a weakness to Fire type moves tanking said moves, as that would be the best evidence that the tanking came from durability rather than resistance. In the meantime, I don't really know what Special Defense is, since it isn't a resistance, as it doesn't affect type effectiveness. But it's also not a conventional durability, since it does affect stuff like mindhax. This is only a guess, and I have no way to prove it, but I assume it to be a separate durability specifically for elemental attacks.
im trying to get limited resistance to heat not based on burn but based on the fact that pokemon tank something that melts mountains
That sounds a lot more like Durability than anything. This wiki itself treats Heat Manipulation(Temperature Manipulation) entirely separately from Fire Manipulation.(Dunno how it works, really)
Magma Plume and Heatwave are all affected by durability. That's what a Pokemon's Defense and Special Defense are for.
Flamethrower is the move described to melt mountains though. Besides, that is only from ONE exceptionally strong Charizard, in a spinoff.
durability against something that can melt something while ignoring durability is resistance to heat manipulation
I mean sure, but where has it been shown in Pokemon that any fire type moves ignore durability with heat? Physics are played with fast and loose in Pokemon. Heck, Heat manipulation like you says it's supposed to work doesn't even work like that on this Wiki.
