Okay, now I'm thinking maybe I'm the one that's confused, because I'm seeing a lot of example that I can't help but think are entirely against the concept. A Fire/Flying offensive Pokemon? A Water/Electric Defensive Pokemon? Water or Electric showing up in any suggestions at all, even? I think we need some clarification on what exactly is is that we're trying to do here. Here are the different ways that people are interpreting this, as I understand them: 1DTO We pretty much seem to agree on this, but there's still at least some confusion: * This is an offensive Pokemon with typing that may not normally be considered good offensively. The topic explanation includes Steel Arceus and Mewtwo as examples of this. I think anybody that says something like "Oh, we're just going to give them high stats and a wide move-pool, so what's the point?" is being very unimaginative, but that's beside the point. Deck and I seem to agree on this interpretation. * The only things I've seen that have confused me were that people were discussing Strategem (pure-Rock) and somebody said something about pure-Ground, neither of which make any sense because I'm pretty sure those types are normally considered good offensively. Where is this coming from? 2MTO This is where we're definitely getting our wires crossed: * One interpretation is that we're creating a Pokemon neither of whose types are normally considered good offensively. The topic's explanation does not seem to name any examples to this effect. An example of this could be a Poison/Normal Pokemon. This is my own interpretation. * Another interpretation is that the typing selected might include one or two good offensive types. This seems to be Deck's interpretation. The topic's explanation arguably includes Volcarona as an example, though it definitely includes a theoretical Rock/Fire Pokemon. I interpret this as counter to the selected concept. Suggestions like Fire/Poison or Fire/Flying fit here. 2CTD Our wires are also getting crossed here: * One interpretation is that we're creating a Pokemon neither of whose types are normally considered good defensively. An example could be a Rock/Psychic Pokemon, and examples in the topic's explanation are Celebi and Tyranitar. This is my own interpretation. * Another interpretation is that the typing selected might include one or two good defensive types. This seems to be Deck's interpretation. The topic's explanation does not seem to name any examples to this effect. I interpret this as counter to the selected concept. Suggestion like Water/Ice or Water/Electric fit here. The problem seems to be that the examples used in the topic are inconsistent and that the mono-type/dual-type conversation still sounds like a red herring to me. What is the consistency between 2MTO using typing good for its intended role but 1DTO and 2CTD using typing bad for their intended roles? If we're not always using typing bad for their intended role, then what's the point of the concept? If this concept can include (a) offensive Pokemon with poor offensive type, like Steel Arceus, (b) offensive Pokemon with good offensive type, like Volcarona, (c) defensive Pokemon with poor defensive type, like Celebi, and (d) defensive Pokemon with good defensive type, like Krillowatt, then... doesn't cover everything? The way I see it, the point of this concept is to go with either A or C, but apparently a lot of people disagree.