The PokéCommunity Forums

The PokéCommunity Forums (https://www.pokecommunity.com/index.php)
-   Pokémon Clubs (https://www.pokecommunity.com/forumdisplay.php?f=24)
-   -   The Dragon's Den V.4 (https://www.pokecommunity.com/showthread.php?t=231793)

Tony Montana December 19th, 2010 9:11 PM

I'd love to join. Dragons are awesome. And Red Gyarados, Charizard and Dragonite rule.

zapdos926 December 19th, 2010 9:39 PM

Sorry for my extreme amount of innactivity... I have only really had enough time to check my VM's, and my subscription to thread got cancelled, so I don't know what's going on, except for the most recent topic. Sorry again, hope I haven't been kicked out :(

on topic: Ima gonna have to say... Umm... None, for this reason: almost every legendary from the R/S/E era have been dragon, psycic or both. We need no more legendaries of those typings.

tkallab December 20th, 2010 1:06 AM

I do think Dragons a are the best fit to be legendaries, simply because we consider them as legendary in real life too. At least I do.

dragoniteuser December 20th, 2010 8:07 AM

Well let's see, what dragon pokemon is the strongest, and faints all other pokemon just by looking epic...? LOL
I'm kidding, i don't like legendaries, so i wouldn't make Dragonite one!
But, Kingdra perhaps...?

Dooonerz December 21st, 2010 8:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dragoniteuser (Post 6351740)
Well let's see, what dragon pokemon is the strongest, and faints all other pokemon just by looking epic...? LOL
I'm kidding, i don't like legendaries, so i wouldn't make Dragonite one!
But, Kingdra perhaps...?

I don't know about Kingdra now, I mean, having a powerful Pokemon and having it being non-legendary is truly great. But having a legendary like Kingdra kinda takes away the epicness of it.. </3

Silhouette December 21st, 2010 1:04 PM

I could see either Garchomp or Salamence being legendary. Seeing as how they're both in uber now. >_>

Dooonerz December 21st, 2010 2:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silhouette (Post 6353798)
I could see either Garchomp or Salamence being legendary. Seeing as how they're both in uber now. >_>

Oh nononononononono. Salamence is too good for legendaries.
If that's possible.

tkallab December 21st, 2010 2:57 PM

I'd say Salamence is too plain for a legendary. Not wise nor savage enough... And too small. Same goes for Garchomp.
I'm such a critic.

Anyway, I made this drawing of Reshiram and Zekrom for an upcoming chapter of my comic (the cartoon head in my signature), and I'm actually quite proud of it, so I thought I'd show it off here.

I can post it here, right? Since this is the Dragon Club and all... And if not, I just change the rules, I'm a co-owner! I kid, I kid.

Dooonerz December 22nd, 2010 3:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkallab (Post 6353944)
I'd say Salamence is too plain for a legendary. Not wise nor savage enough... And too small. Same goes for Garchomp.
I'm such a critic.

Anyway, I made this drawing of Reshiram and Zekrom for an upcoming chapter of my comic (the cartoon head in my signature), and I'm actually quite proud of it, so I thought I'd show it off here.

I can post it here, right? Since this is the Dragon Club and all... And if not, I just change the rules, I'm a co-owner! I kid, I kid.

Salamence is wise enough! *goes to cry in a corner*

Niiicce, but, a bit scribbled don't you think?!

Regeneration December 22nd, 2010 3:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkallab (Post 6353944)
I'd say Salamence is too plain for a legendary. Not wise nor savage enough... And too small. Same goes for Garchomp.
I'm such a critic.

I actually wondering what made you say that Salamence or even Garchomp was not wise enough. Is there anything backing that statement? A Pokemon Anime episode or maybe something from the manga would satisfy us.

And size, I believe is hardly an argument for a Pokemon not to be a legendary. We have had legendary Pokemon of any size, even though Dragon type Pokemon might not have been small. Exceptions always exist, and therefore a Dragon type Pokemon of a small height can be a legendary as well.

Dooonerz December 22nd, 2010 3:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regeneration (Post 6354996)

I actually wondering what made you say that Salamence or even Garchomp was not wise enough. Is there anything backing that statement? A Pokemon Anime episode or maybe something from the manga would satisfy us.

It could be because that Salamence (<3) is a very angry Dragon and here's some proof:
Quote:

It's uncontrollable if enraged. It flies around spouting flames and scorching fields and mountains.
And I think that shows that he is rather unwise, even though he truly is awesome. <3

Regeneration December 22nd, 2010 4:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dooonerz (Post 6355001)
It could be because that Salamence (<3) is a very angry Dragon and here's some proof:

And I think that shows that he is rather unwise, even though he truly is awesome. <3

What does someone's anger have anything to do with one's wisdom? -_-

And even if that is the case, how are Pokemon like Mewtwo, Rayquaza, Arceus, etc. considered legendary? Haven't we had more than enough instances of their wrath?

What I finally want to say is that size, wisdom ( -_- ), etc are not the basis for Pokemon being considered legendary.

dragoniteuser December 22nd, 2010 11:34 AM

I don't see why any of them should be legendary...
Legendaries suck, so why would anyone want their pretious dragons brought to theur miserable lvl?!
'Nuff trolling, don't you think? :D

tkallab December 22nd, 2010 12:44 PM

How can you say legendaries as a group suck? Do they all have something in common, except for the fact that they are legendary?

Okay, I guess I was wrong about my arguments about Salamence, but I guess I just couln't really describe what I meant. Try replacing Rayquaza with Salamence in the Emerald cxutscene. Would he fit in? I doubt it, to be honest.
That's probably also a bad example, isn't it..? This is a pretty hard subject.

Silhouette December 22nd, 2010 2:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkallab (Post 6353944)
I'd say Salamence is too plain for a legendary. Not wise nor savage enough... And too small. Same goes for Garchomp.
I'm such a critic.

*coughMewCelebiJirachiAzelfUxieMespritcough*

I think I caught something reeeeally bad while I was out in the snow. O_o
Quote:

Originally Posted by dragoniteuser (Post 6355582)
I don't see why any of them should be legendary...
Legendaries suck, so why would anyone want their pretious dragons brought to theur miserable lvl?!
'Nuff trolling, don't you think? :D

I think that it's extremely biased to simply say that legendaries suck just because they are legendaries. Beside, most of the 'legend' stuff that includes legendaries are just myths (i.e. we don't really know if Kyogre/Groudon created the sea/land, respectively).

I guess it's being very prejudice, which I'm strongly against (even if it is just Pokemon XD).

Regeneration December 22nd, 2010 8:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkallab (Post 6355719)
How can you say legendaries as a group suck? Do they all have something in common, except for the fact that they are legendary?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silhouette (Post 6355954)
I think that it's extremely biased to simply say that legendaries suck just because they are legendaries. Beside, most of the 'legend' stuff that includes legendaries are just myths (i.e. we don't really know if Kyogre/Groudon created the sea/land, respectively).

I guess it's being very prejudice, which I'm strongly against (even if it is just Pokemon XD).

You two can't even take a simple joke on dragoniteuser's part. XD

Quote:

Originally Posted by tkallab (Post 6355719)
Okay, I guess I was wrong about my arguments about Salamence, but I guess I just couln't really describe what I meant. Try replacing Rayquaza with Salamence in the Emerald cxutscene. Would he fit in? I doubt it, to be honest.
That's probably also a bad example, isn't it..? This is a pretty hard subject.

You know what? Even if Rayquaza would be replaced with Latios in that scene, he wouldn't fit in. And Latios happens to be a legendary Pokemon. Get what I mean?

Silhouette December 23rd, 2010 4:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regeneration (Post 6356525)



You two can't even take a simple joke on dragoniteuser's part. XD



It's a bit hard to tell one's tone through text... just sayin'. :P

Anyway, you never know. I don't understand why people really hate legendaries. D:

tkallab December 24th, 2010 3:05 AM

Darn it, now I feel the need to start a discussion about what makes a legendary a legendary, but I can't because this is the Dragon's Den...

Anyway, I can totally see Dragonair hiding in a holy lake or something.

Le Creep! December 24th, 2010 3:15 AM

Could I please be a member? :) I love dragon types, especially after acquiring a Dragonite..

tkallab December 24th, 2010 11:51 AM

Ummm, do I add the members now or does Amore still do that? We're kind of in a confusing situation right now...

dragoniteuser December 24th, 2010 12:57 PM

Well since Amore hasn't posted quite some time, I'd say you're pretty much on call here... :)

Oh, and welcome Le Creep! :D
PS: I love your username! :)

Silhouette December 26th, 2010 9:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Le Creep! (Post 6358927)
Could I please be a member? :) I love dragon types, especially after acquiring a Dragonite..

Welcome to the Den!
Quote:

Originally Posted by tkallab (Post 6359108)
Ummm, do I add the members now or does Amore still do that? We're kind of in a confusing situation right now...

Yeah, you can make a list wherever you want, I can just link it in the first post.

tkallab December 28th, 2010 2:04 PM

Oh right, I'll make a members list in the first post I made in the thread.
http://www.pokecommunity.com/showpost.php?p=6146464&postcount=5

Also, I have a new topic!
Do you think Dragons evolve at a too high level?

It's hard to make topics when everything has been done...

dragoniteuser December 29th, 2010 3:00 AM

No, they don't. Dragons are the most powerful Pokemon you'll find. So it's perfecty natural for them to take a while to evolve. Naturally, this doesn't mean that game-freak went overboard with the latest generation, cause lvl.70 for a moth is just too hogh, no matter hoe good the Pokemon is.

Xilfer December 29th, 2010 6:31 AM

Hey, I'm back, hope Draggy told ya i'd be gone.
Anyway as for the topic: the ne gen Vs evolve too slowly, it takes so long for them to reach their final form i mean, it's really anoying, dragons aren't the only ones, loads of cool pokemon take a century to get too. :(


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:38 AM.


Like our Facebook Page Follow us on Twitter © 2002 - 2018 The PokéCommunity™, pokecommunity.com.
Pokémon characters and images belong to The Pokémon Company International and Nintendo. This website is in no way affiliated with or endorsed by Nintendo, Creatures, GAMEFREAK, The Pokémon Company or The Pokémon Company International. We just love Pokémon.
All forum styles, their images (unless noted otherwise) and site designs are © 2002 - 2016 The PokéCommunity / PokéCommunity.com.
PokéCommunity™ is a trademark of The PokéCommunity. All rights reserved. Sponsor advertisements do not imply our endorsement of that product or service. User generated content remains the property of its creator.

Acknowledgements
Use of PokéCommunity Assets
vB Optimise by DragonByte Technologies Ltd © 2023.