Posted under Tags
create implication alolan_exeggutor -> exeggutor
create implication alolan_vulpix -> vulpix
create implication alolan_ninetales -> ninetales
create implication alolan_sandshrew -> sandshrew
create implication alolan_sandslash -> sandslash
They're the same pokemon just in an alternate form
EDIT: The bulk update request #837 (forum #117842) has been rejected by @Type-kun.
Updated by DanbooruBot
Rather than separate character tags for the Alolan variants, we could also create an alolan_form tag, similar to how we use remodel_(kantai_collection). Then we wouldn't need to create additional tags and implications for future Alolan forms.
CodeKyuubi said:
and these are just the same pokemon with a modified appearance
You could say the same thing about mega evolutions, which are only temporary compared to these variants that are permanent.
I'd say wait and see how the game itself handles the classification before we make any hasty decisions.
Considering the addition of more alolan pokemon, I guess this would be the best thing to do
Blue_Trident said:
Rather than separate character tags for the Alolan variants, we could also create an alolan_form tag, similar to how we use remodel_(kantai_collection). Then we wouldn't need to create additional tags and implications for future Alolan forms.
post #2483200
Because of the artist commentary, wouldn't it be better to create a new tag alola_form?
And while we're at this: Should this post be tagged with pokemon_sm at all?
Ok, since we know now what these things are, I give this a big -1.
These Pokémon have an own PokéDex entry and have different stats (while all values together are the same sum, but the stats are contributed differently).
Some do evolve differently than their Kanto forms, like Meowth to Persian.
But most importantly, they look completely different and have different types (see: Marowack (Ground) <-> Alolan Marowack (Ghost/Fire)
So it is not just a different form like Shaymin, but these forms are permanently different and therefore the Alola forms are completely new Pokémon in my eyes although they are based of older Pokémon.
Actually, I have doubts that Alolan forms should even be tagged as their normal forms, let alone the implications. The reason is that it becomes impossible to search for Alolan form pokemon meeting its normal form counterpart. On the other hand, if they are not tagged like that, then searching for normal form would not return Alolans, and we already have the same problem with characters' animal forms and cosplays.
Either way, someone else will have to make judgment on this one, and whether alolan_form should apply instead, because to be honest I have almost no idea about the franchise.
Well, you can always ask me :3.
So what do we have here?
Alola Pokémon share the same PokéDex number as the normal non-alola forms. But besides of that, that's all for the similarities. They even have a seperate PokéDex entry for each Pokémon, see Exeggcutor on Serebii: http://www.serebii.net/pokedex-sm/103.shtml ("Flavor text").
Then we have the physical differences. Alola Exeggcutor is a giant palm tree, while Exeggcutor is a fat palm tree :3. The types are also different (Grass/Psychic) <-> (Grass/Dragon).
So I'd leave those two Pokémon alone and wouldn't want to let one implicate the other.
I also saw a tag alola form. I think there is also an option that let you search with those two tags and the result will be that you can see both.
Type-kun said:
Not enough discussion and traction, gonna reject this one. Resubmit if you think it's still valid.
Well, I guess my stance is fairly solid on this one. Rejection is fine.
There is the alola_form tag so if you want to have a Sandshrew withut its icy spikes then that's the way to go...If you want to see both then it's a sandshrew alola_form search which includes both.
The bulk update request #837 (forum #117842) has been rejected by @Type-kun.
