Defining a legendary PokÃƒÂ©mon

Post by **Pikachu3828** » Tue 18 Jul, 2006 5:21 pm

I was speaking to some fellow webmasters not so long ago complaining about how Ruby/Sapphire had too many legendaries. Some disagreed and I decided to list them all. In the list I included Lati*s which sparked some controversy, some saying they were not legendaries at all and some calling them semi-legendary. This sparked an interesting conversation as to just how you define a legendary PokÃ©mon; often there is no mention of "legendary" in their PokÃ©dex flavours.

This also leads on to the PokÃ©mon demi-gods (what I call the semi-legendaries, after the Greek heroes who were greater than humans but lower than the gods) such as Metagross. Why class Metagross as a demi-god? If because it is stronger than most PokÃ©mon, surely Dragonite, Tyranitar, Salamence etc must also be included in the list. If because it is one-of-a-kind, then surely we must also include Castform. It further complicates things if legendaries are defined as the one-of-a-kind PokÃƒÂ©mon as that would include the demi-gods, though they are widely regarded as not legendary.

How would you define a legendary and which PokÃ©mon, in your opinion, are legendary?

Post by **WhoKnows_WhoCares** » Tue 18 Jul, 2006 5:31 pm

In my opinion (and it is clearly that) there are two factors that decide legendary status.

The first is the 'only one' per game rule, which states that you can only get one per game and you can not catch another without trading. Since this adds pokemon like Castform and eevee to the list, the second factor is breeding. If it can not breed with anything, including ditto, then there is no chance of obtaining a second one of that pokemon without trading.

When both factors apply to a pokemon, then I class it as legendary.

Post by **Pikachu3828** » Tue 18 Jul, 2006 9:04 pm

So by your system, Lati*s are legendary?

Post by **WhoKnows_WhoCares** » Tue 18 Jul, 2006 9:36 pm

yes... i'd define the lati*s as legendarys

TaylorGS · Post by **TaylorGS** » Sun 30 Jul, 2006 5:25 am

WhoKnows_WhoCares wrote:The first is the 'only one' per game rule, which states that you can only get one per game and you can not catch another without trading. Since this adds pokemon like Castform and eevee to the list, the second factor is breeding. If it can not breed with anything, including ditto, then there is no chance of obtaining a second one of that pokemon without trading.

Mmm... My thoughts exactly. @_@;

The two only PokÃƒÂ©mon I really have considered "semi-legendaries" are Slaking and Blissey... Super high HP, and I can't get them to go down in one hit. (usually, they cause my losses in the Battle Frontier in Emerald. @_@; )

Zapdos-Knight · Post by **Zapdos-Knight** » Sun 30 Jul, 2006 2:50 pm

I agree wholeheartedly with (who knows who cares). A legendary is one of a kind and cannot breed.

Up till G/S came out, I would have also said legendaries are static on the map, but the legendary dogs changed that. It's an interesting concept, legendary pokÃƒÂ©mon...did Nintendo or gamefreak even have a role in creating this term? Or is it purely a fan made term?

I wonder...

Secreyes · Post by **Secreyes** » Wed 02 Aug, 2006 11:56 pm

WhoKnows_WhoCares wrote:In my opinion (and it is clearly that) there are two factors that decide legendary status.

The first is the 'only one' per game rule, which states that you can only get one per game and you can not catch another without trading. Since this adds pokemon like Castform and eevee to the list, the second factor is breeding. If it can not breed with anything, including ditto, then there is no chance of obtaining a second one of that pokemon without trading.

When both factors apply to a pokemon, then I class it as legendary.

Bravo, Bravo!!!

Myuuzard · Post by **Myuuzard** » Thu 03 Aug, 2006 7:23 am

I think lati@s are legendaries because they were in the movie 5.In every movies there is or are legendary pokemon as heroes.

miradapurple · Post by **miradapurple** » Sun 06 Aug, 2006 5:43 am

My classification of Legendaries:

1. They are nomally ancient
2. Normally phychic
3. don't have genders

(note: In pokemon diamond and pearl, luicaro has a gender. I noticed that yes, like Pikachu3828 said, legendaries could now have genders and perhaps luicaro is not a legendary, but say that the first one was true. that would mean that you can breed legendaires!)

Post by **WhoKnows_WhoCares** » Sun 06 Aug, 2006 3:37 pm

miradapurple wrote:My classification of Legendaries:

1. They are nomally ancient
2. Normally phychic
3. don't have genders

(note: In pokemon diamond and pearl, luicaro has a gender. I noticed that yes, like Pikachu3828 said, legendaries could now have genders and perhaps luicaro is not a legendary, but say that the first one was true. that would mean that you can breed legendaires!)

Throwing a spanner in the works, Having, or not having, a gender doesnt actually define what can and can't be bred. Strange I know, but here's some proof.

Latias/Latios and Nidoqueen have genders, yet can not breed with anything (including dito) - while Nidoran(f) can breed, it's two evolved states cannot, yet they still have genders.

Both Baltoy/Claydol and Beldum/Metang/Metagross dont have genders, but can breed (with dito only).

So as you see, having a gender doesnt mean you will be able to breed.

Oh and speaking of Baltoy/Claydol, using your 3 clasifications, it makes Baltoy/Claydol legendarys... as they're 20, 000 years old (acoding to Claydol's Saphire pokedex entry), part psychic and dont have genders.

Shrine Sprite · Post by **Shrine Sprite** » Sat 19 May, 2007 7:06 pm

I think the release of Diamond and Pearl have butchered the definition of legendaries. Now they can bread and come in both genders.
I do not consider Rotom, Manaphy, Phione, and Heatran legendaries for that reason.
Actually, I've never considered anything besides the pokemon on the cover and the 'trio' of the generation legendary. The specials only obtained through events (Mew, Celebi, Jirachi, Deoxys, Shaymin, Darkrai, Arceus) are 'special' legendaries. The rest (Latios, Latias, Cresselia), I suppose are what I'd consider semi-legendaries.

Post by **WhoKnows_WhoCares** » Sat 19 May, 2007 9:56 pm

I'd consider Manaphy a legendary, since while it can breed, it doesnt breed itself or a pre-evolved version of itself which you can then evolve and get a second Manaphy.

As long as you can't get a second on in anyway way without trading or chearting (so as long as you can't catch a second or breed a second/pre-evo that you can evolve for a second), i'd say it was a legendary. So i wouldnt consider Rotom or Phione legendary since they can breed other versions of themselves.

Post by **Pikachu3828** » Sat 19 May, 2007 10:21 pm

Shrine Sprite wrote:.
Actually, I've never considered anything besides the pokemon on the cover and the 'trio' of the generation legendary.

Charizard, Blastoise, Venusaur and Pikachu are legendary?

zen · Post by **zen** » Tue 25 Sep, 2007 12:17 pm

I actually think that each pokemon could have pages of discussion deciding if it's legendary or not...

My classification for legendaries:

1. Cannot breed.

2. Has a sprite you can talk to before battiling them.

3. Does not belong in a trio.

Yes that includes Lati@s, you can find their sprites on Southern Island. I also consider the trios only "SemiLegendary" because that's what they'd be in battle.

Post by **WhoKnows_WhoCares** » Tue 25 Sep, 2007 5:58 pm

So niether the bird trio from kanto, the dog trio from jhoto, the regi trio from hoenn and the psychic trio from sinnoh are legendary by your definition?

Strange since they all meet the first two conditions of your definitions/