You know, with all due respect, I honestly can't agree with that at all.
Ok. Everyone is entitled to their opinions.
We're here, from my understanding, to create believable Pokemon that'll mix up the metagame. That's the entire point. I would think following Gamefreak's lead would be the entire point. We're just doing what Gamefreak does in the areas they haven't yet explored. A Ice/Bug sweeper or a Poison/Ground utility, or whatever else.
The pokemon don't have to be believable, because they aren't believible by their definition. Gamefreak will never take our submissions, and if we find something similar in Gen 5, it'll be sheer coincidence. Next, to follow Gamefreak's lead, we would be doing some pretty wierd things. Say I said I had a pokemon with 600 BST, two weaknesses, a boatload of resists, and Attack and Defense over 130. This pokemon has a huge support and offensive movepool. The only crutch is mediocre speed, but still quite usable, and it gets a priority move to make up for this. You would say broken. I would say Metagross. See? We can't follow Gamefreak down to the last detail because we AREN'T Gamefreak. We're making Pokemon here. Just because Gamefreak hasn't made them yet doesn't mean they won't milk the cash cow later. Besides, would you give random non-stab attacks that don't make sense to random CAPs? (Syclant doesn't count, its fanboyish and we all know it.) How does Flygon get Roost? U-Turn? It's neither flying nor bug.
This idea that we can just bend the rules to fit whatever we want really just brings out the ultimate inner fanboy (in a project that already attracts that way too much).
Rules said:
There is no public Nintendo guide or rulebook that delineates what is acceptable or unacceptable when making a Pokemon. So, don't act like you've read such a manual and memorized it word for word. No matter how experienced you are ingame, battling, or otherwise -- you are no more an "authority" on the rules of Pokemon creation than anyone else. All we have is opinions to present and discuss.
There are no rules. There are no guidelines. Therefore, we can't bend/break the rules and guidelines, because they don't exist! Also, most "veterans" of the project keep the fanboyism in check. If you look in the threads, there are always the people advocating the random, broken things. They are always shot down. There aren't any rules, but there are boundries.
So yeah, I'm all for following the trends. I roll my eyes every time someone suggests creating a new Ability. I think we should try to play within the rules and ideas that Gamefreak has already established. And of course, I know that there are exceptions, but that doesn't mean we have to work in that murky area.
I agree, I cringe when someone submits a new ability. The problem with the "following Gamefreak" arguement is that if we did that, we wouldn't be making pokemon, because they make the official pokemon.
I agree about spiking and encore, without question.
k.
Cute is a little bit harder. What Lorak was presenting wasn't just a non-threatening face, it was more the cute, bouncy fairy. Unless we want to say that the Daddy long-legs is literally holding opponents down, then I think Gravity would be debatable.
Tailwind is hard to justify on all designs thus far, I think.
Yeah, Poison/Ground isn't the best supporting move type outside of the Spikes and the stylistic moves. I fail to see Wish on any of the current submissions, but mark my words, someone will come up with a discription for it, like my "turbulence" arguement. Although in retrospect, turbulence is bad xD
All I'm saying is that some of the designs would be out of place in the groups of Pokemon that learn the attacks we want this Pokemon to use. Don't get me wrong, many of the designs themselves are amazing, but I don't feel they fit the purpose very well. And I think that's a valid argument against them.
So true =/ Lmao @ the dead pikachu and the Knife.