Three Typed Pokemon

[DanZC]

How would Pokemon with three types change the dynamic of the game? Would it make it easier or harder to find suitable counters?

 

[Hikamaru]

Ah yes I remember when I saw topics like this discussed a lot in the past, but I have to say that triple type combinations would really make the whole type matchups system really confusing and difficult to understand. We only just had a new type added in recently and it took some people ages to work out its resistances, weaknesses, advantages etc.

It may seem like something fun and interesting but in reality it's just gonna be very complex, think of the kids this franchise is targeted towards. They may struggle with remembering stuff well unlike most veteran players. Remember, not everyone can get used to changes fast enough.

 

[Sage Ebock]

I think that its already very unofficial. Some pokemon seem like they belong with a 3rd type but don't have it (Hydreigon comes to mind with his wings and what not, tho they did give it levitate -_-).

All i know is

I'm glad Hydreigon doesn't get manhandled by electricity... or I would shed tears of sadness

 

[Treecko]

I think two-typed Pokemon are enough. I already have a hard time remembering Pokemon types without using a pokedex or Bulbapedia so three-typed Pokemon would make things beyond complicated. Plus some Pokemon would do 6x or even 8x damage if a move is super-effective against it making battling certain Pokemon way too easy.

 

[大輔]

I think two-typed Pokemon are enough. I already have a hard time remembering Pokemon types without using a pokedex or Bulbapedia so three-typed Pokemon would make things beyond complicated. Plus some Pokemon would do 6x or even 8x damage if a move is super-effective against it making battling certain Pokemon way too easy.

Kouzan basically said it. Mathematically it would make the damage ratio too high or too low. I think two is enough for a balanced well rounded system.

 

[Pokemon_Fangirl]

I agree that having 2 types is enough. I've always had a personal theory that pokemon have a recessive trait not strong enough to make it "officially" a third type. For example, up until X and Y, Charizard was officially Fire/Flying yet had a lot of dragon traits, but just not enough to be a true dragon.

 

[Hiatus]

Although it might cause things to be more complicating, I honestly wouldn't mind if they had introduced this form of system. They could make trial-typing exclusive to only some limited amount of legendary, maybe. Legendary Pokémon don't usually get used in competitive play, so it wouldn't really make much of a difference in terms of that. Two Pokémon that could possibly have three types is Black Kyurem and White Kyurem (they are considered separate, aren't they?). Former could be a combination of ice, dragon, and electric, and the latter could be dragon, fire, and ice. d:

 

[mangamusicfan]

I think the game get's unbalenced If they will ad this.

 

[Puddle]

It'd be hard to actually find a move that hurts 3 types as a x6, so I think it would be fine. for example, Gengar is the definition of dark Pokemon, but it's not a dark-type because they didn't have those in Gen I. It'd be cool to see it as a Ghost/Dark/Poison Type. It'd actually lose an effectiveness to Psychic type moves and things like that.

Also, there's Pokemon like Masquerian and Dustox.
Masquerian is a water-type based Pokemon, but it's bug/flying. Dustox clearly has wings and it's counter-Pokemon is Bug/Flying, but it's Bug/Poison.
Making Masquerian Bug/Water/Flying and Dustox Bug/Poison/Flying would be cool.

 

[Zorogami]

I think having three-typed Pokemon would just be going overboard with the whole typing system. 2 types is fine, it's balanced, 3 types would be too much if you ask me. And while Pokemon could be 3 types design-wise, i think 2 types are already good enough to represent their design

 

[Aeroblast]

I think two types is fine as is. Adding a third type will bring even more confusion to some Pokemon and types with confusing enough weaknesses and resistances.