Baby Pokemon: wasted space or needed addition?

Started by Ayselipera November 26th, 2010 5:23 PM
  • 2055 views
  • 25 replies
I've noticed that a lot of Pokemon fans have different opinions on baby Pokemon. Most don't see the point while others embrace them due to either the want for another evolutionary stage or just because they're cute. So it got me wondering, what are the members here stance on baby Pokemon? Here is a list of baby Pokemon as a reminder.
  • What do you think about baby Pokemon? Do you like them? Why or why not?
  • Do you think they're a wonderful addition to Pokemon as a whole or just another unnecessary addition?
  • Are there any particular baby Pokemon you especially like or dislike?

Aquacorde

⟡ not everything is sink or swim ⟡

Age 29
she/her/he/him
Ankh-Morpork
Seen 5 Hours Ago
Posted March 15th, 2023
12,275 posts
18.9 Years
> What do you think about baby Pokemon? Do you like them? Why or why not?
> I don't particularly like them. They're a generally pain to get, only useful for Pokedex completion, and not at all something I would ever use in battle. :/
They're usually pretty ugly, too.

> Do you think they're a wonderful addition to Pokemon as a whole or just another unnecessary addition?
> I think they are unnecessary.

> Are there any particular baby Pokemon you especially like or dislike?
> I hate Happiny, Bonsly, Mime Jr, and Mantyke the most.
marie & casey & rosey
groc x aquacorde x juno 4ever | rp is just collaborative writing
join rp: ultra sinnoh

Male
Adelaide, Australia
Seen August 5th, 2014
Posted April 9th, 2012
1,238 posts
18 Years
I don't have a problem with them, and it's fun to hatch for them, but I do think they should have been used more efficiently.

They could have dual-evolution paths, for example a Tauros|Miltank baby that can evolve into either, or Scyther|Pinsir, or even Solrock|Lunatone.
Age 34
Male
Australia
Seen April 10th, 2012
Posted January 7th, 2011
217 posts
12.6 Years
They could have dual-evolution paths, for example a Tauros|Miltank baby that can evolve into either.
I like this alot. ^

As for my own opinion. Im not particularly fond of baby pokemon in general. I dont see alot of them as overly necessary. Especially when they get added in as another evolutionary stage for pokemon that dont really need them when like the above said there could be one for a dual-evo path for Miltank/Tauros (it would be the same concept as Tyrogue -> Hitmonlee/Chan/Top)

On the other hand, I quite like Magby and Elekid though.
I can feel your fever, taking over me.

Aquacorde

⟡ not everything is sink or swim ⟡

Age 29
she/her/he/him
Ankh-Morpork
Seen 5 Hours Ago
Posted March 15th, 2023
12,275 posts
18.9 Years
They could have dual-evolution paths, for example a Tauros|Miltank baby that can evolve into either, or Scyther|Pinsir, or even Solrock|Lunatone.
I like that idea as well. I also think that they should be more easily obtainable in the wild. I mean, what the heck are the Daycare people doing to magically make eggs of the hatch into a subspecies you can't catch? What do they actually do with that Sea Incense to create Azurill? Are they geneticists or something?

Logic, that's key.
marie & casey & rosey
groc x aquacorde x juno 4ever | rp is just collaborative writing
join rp: ultra sinnoh

PlatinumDude

Nyeh?

Age 29
Male
Canada
Seen July 31st, 2020
Posted May 30th, 2020
12,958 posts
12.7 Years
What I think of baby Pokemon: They're cute, they're cuddly, but tough to train.

Do you think they're a good addition to Pokemon?: Most of the time, yes because some baby Pokemon can learn moves that their evolved forms can't (like Tyrogue with Fake Out and Pichu and Riolu with Nasty Plot).

Favorite baby Pokemon: Riolu, Tyrogue and Elekid.

Elite Overlord LeSabre™

On that 'Non stop road'

Age 97
Shimoda City
Seen 1 Week Ago
Posted January 25th, 2022
9,705 posts
15.5 Years
They're only useful to get moves that their parent forms can't. Otherwise, they're pretty near useless in battle because of their lower stats.

And Igglybuff and Cleffa are not as cute as their next stage form, at least IMO.

Elite Overlord LeSabre™
PC Vital Stats
* Pair
* PC Family
* Bishies
* VG Claims
* Friend Codes
Links
* Blog
* Web Site
* Fan Fictions:
* Leaf Green LP
Male
Look behind you. I'm not there.
Seen December 2nd, 2016
Posted January 28th, 2014
329 posts
12.9 Years
I think baby Pokemon are essentially wasted space. However, they can be useful to get some moves that their evolutions would otherwise be unable to get. This has sometimes made the evolution in question "better," (I'm looking at you, Wynaut).

Y Team: Volcarona - Garchomp - Tyranitar - Starmie - Alakazam - Lucario

Amore

Seen 7 Hours Ago
Posted 4 Days Ago
5,237 posts
13.7 Years
What do you think about baby Pokémon? Do you like them? Why or why not?

I personally love them.....they add some variety to the game, further showing how evolution is basically pokémon maturing (like how Munchlax can't breed, but Snorlax can, etc.), and they're cute. They're also
often either really weak, which adds to the challenge of using them, or remarkably strong, like Munchlax, Happiny or Mantyke, who have awesome stats, and some even have good movepools, like Mime Jr. (admittedly, all these are Gen IV babies, but so what?).

Do you think they're a wonderful addition to Pokémon as a whole or just another unnecessary addition?

I do think they're a wonderful addition, and I like most of them. Particularly unique ones like Tyrogue, which linked two separate species by being able to evolve into both, Happiny, which needs to evolve holding an item and being happy, or Magby/Elekid, which have to hit lv.30, higher than most normal pokémon evolve (at least before Gen V).

Are there any particular baby Pokémon you especially like or dislike?

Well, I like most of them. Particularly Pichu, Mantyke and Munchlax (fell in love with the latter after the movie "Destiny Deoxys"). Smoochum is also worth a mention as I hate it's evo, but like the aforementioned baby.

However, I dislike Igglybuff and Cleffa's designs....they're trying too hard to be cute....and I deem Chingling to be pointless...then again, I don't actually like Igglybuff's family, and whilst liking psychic-types, I hardly use them, hence the Chingling dislike....

miltankRancher

Mega Ampharos is the one.

Age 27
Male
Philippines
Seen June 11th, 2014
Posted September 7th, 2013
3,947 posts
13 Years

They could have dual-evolution paths, for example a Tauros|Miltank baby that can evolve into either, or Scyther|Pinsir, or even Solrock|Lunatone.
Like. That's the point Pokefans around the world have been trying to speculate, but GF is none the worse for hearing us. The Tauros/Miltank would be the most epic of all.

What do you think about baby Pokemon? Do you like them? Why or why not? No. It's hard to obtain them, only through breeding or, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Backlot.

Do you think they're a wonderful addition to Pokemon as a whole or just another unnecessary addition? Unnecessary, except maybe for Togepi, Riolu, and Elekid?Magby Tandem. They all play a vital role to their evolutionary line.

Are there any particular baby Pokemon you especially like or dislike? Those mentioned above, I half-heartedly like. Others not listed, I hate.

I am a Roleplayer


...and I am PROUD of it.
Lanistae Jacet [Lies of a Trainer]
They could have dual-evolution paths, for example a Tauros|Miltank baby that can evolve into either, or Scyther|Pinsir, or even Solrock|Lunatone.
I agree, another baby Pokemon like Tyrogue would be a lot more fun an useful. Not to mention it would further the link between already compared Pokemon like Tauros and Miltank. I just don't agree with your Scyther/Pinsir example. I'd rather see a baby evolution between Pinsir/Heracross.

I also think that they should be more easily obtainable in the wild. I mean, what the heck are the Daycare people doing to magically make eggs of the hatch into a subspecies you can't catch? What do they actually do with that Sea Incense to create Azurill? Are they geneticists or something?
Speaking strictly for the game I saw the items needed to breed baby Pokemon as just another annoyance. It could have been to make breeding them a bit harder so egg moves wouldn't be so abundant. Although it's not hard to figure out which Pokemon needs which item after a quick Google search so I'm a little lost on that one.

However, I dislike Igglybuff and Cleffa's designs....they're trying too hard to be cute....and I deem Chingling to be pointless...then again, I don't actually like Igglybuff's family, and whilst liking psychic-types, I hardly use them, hence the Chingling dislike....
I do tend to use psychic types more regularly then others and yet I find Chingling pointless too. Chimecho was an already forgettable Pokemon in my opinion, but maybe that's why Chingling was thrown in. A way to revive it possibly?


What do you think about baby Pokemon? Do you like them? Why or why not? No. It's hard to obtain them, only through breeding or, if I'm not mistaken, Mr. Backlot.
In generation IV baby Pokemon were made a bit more accessible. For example Chingling and Cleffa can be found in Mt. Coronet while Budew can be found very early on in the game, a little ways past Jubilife City if I'm not mistaken.

Aquacorde

⟡ not everything is sink or swim ⟡

Age 29
she/her/he/him
Ankh-Morpork
Seen 5 Hours Ago
Posted March 15th, 2023
12,275 posts
18.9 Years
Speaking strictly for the game I saw the items needed to breed baby Pokemon as just another annoyance. It could have been to make breeding them a bit harder so egg moves wouldn't be so abundant. Although it's not hard to figure out which Pokemon needs which item after a quick Google search so I'm a little lost on that one.
What I was saying is, logically, what would be the point of having to have a Sea Incense to create an Azurill, or suchlike. I think that babies should be more readily obtainable in the wild like Budew is, if they have to be a part of Pokemon at all. It would make more sense.
marie & casey & rosey
groc x aquacorde x juno 4ever | rp is just collaborative writing
join rp: ultra sinnoh


What I was saying is, logically, what would be the point of having to have a Sea Incense to create an Azurill, or suchlike. I think that babies should be more readily obtainable in the wild like Budew is, if they have to be a part of Pokemon at all. It would make more sense.
That's why I said speaking strictly for the game. Just for the game I think it's another way to make baby Pokemon less accessible. Logically I really don't know. I know in nature different variables can create different outcomes during childbirth. Which could be something that they're getting at, just in a more extreme way. Overall I don't think they were going for a logical stand point as they were a barrier.
Male
Seen March 1st, 2011
Posted March 1st, 2011
21 posts
12.5 Years
I do agree that baby pokemon are entirely pointless in-game.

Competitive play? They help alot.

filling the pokedex? that's about all they do in-game.

and yes. that idea established above with the tauros/miltank thing is a really good idea. if only Nintendo had thought of that.

Superjub

Pokémon Aureolin

Age 28
Male
Hoenn
Seen August 23rd, 2022
Posted November 5th, 2014
2,288 posts
15.7 Years
What do you think about baby Pokemon? Do you like them? Why or why not?
I like them. the majority are quite cute.

Do you think they're a wonderful addition to Pokemon as a whole or just another unnecessary addition?
I wouldn't say they're a wonderful addition, but I would not say their unnecessary either. I'm probably more in the middle with this one.

Are there any particular baby Pokemon you especially like or dislike?
Mantyke and Azuril are adorable. :P Smoochum is a mini Jynx... nuff' said.

Maruno

Lead Dev of Pokémon Essentials

England
Seen October 22nd, 2022
Posted July 3rd, 2022
5,281 posts
15.3 Years

I like that idea as well. I also think that they should be more easily obtainable in the wild. I mean, what the heck are the Daycare people doing to magically make eggs of the hatch into a subspecies you can't catch? What do they actually do with that Sea Incense to create Azurill? Are they geneticists or something?

Logic, that's key.
Incense stunts the baby Pokémon's growth. That's why they're not as developed as they would be without the incense.

I don't mind baby Pokémon. I do mind, however, the incense stuff, specifically that you'll get a different baby without incense than with it. It's only done to keep things consistent amongst the games (i.e. you could breed Snorlax in Gen 2, but you didn't get a Munchlax out of it, and that's still true now), and that's just stupid.

The earlier babies are fine, but I don't like the Gen 4 ones (except Budew and Mantyke, and possibly Munchlax, which I like). Riolu doesn't count as a baby in my mind, because it was introduced at the same time as the rest of its family.
Go to the Essentials Docs Wiki

Essentials Docs Wiki

Follow me on Twitter: @maruno42


Male
Seen November 30th, 2010
Posted November 30th, 2010
16 posts
12.5 Years

I like that idea as well. I also think that they should be more easily obtainable in the wild. I mean, what the heck are the Daycare people doing to magically make eggs of the hatch into a subspecies you can't catch? What do they actually do with that Sea Incense to create Azurill? Are they geneticists or something?

Logic, that's key.
The day care doesn't, it's the Chansey Egg Delivery Black Ops that do it.


I don't like babies cause it's odd story wise.

I mean in red you assume that pikachu's made pikachus when they are macking it up then Elm comes along and goes ZOMG PIKACHUS GIVE BIRTH TO PICHUS.

BTW I dun like Pichu, in the land I come from he tends to be kinda mean.

But you know what was a cool baby?

Mantyke..

SOOO CUTE! <3

vaporeon7

My life would suck without you

Male
Preparing for trouble and making it double.
Seen September 6th, 2016
Posted May 27th, 2014
5,143 posts
12.7 Years
Wasn't the point of baby Pokemon in Gen II to use the new breeding function?

And yes they should make a Miltank/Tauros Pre-evoloution.
Age 30
Female
Ecruteak City, Johto
Seen February 19th, 2011
Posted December 6th, 2010
51 posts
12.5 Years

1. What do you think about baby Pokemon? Do you like them? Why or why not?
> I don't really like them I find it a waste.

2. Do you think they're a wonderful addition to Pokemon as a whole or just another unnecessary addition?
> Unnecessary.

3. Are there any particular baby Pokemon you especially like or dislike?
> The only one I really like is Elekid. I HATE Igglybuff and Clefa.

Age 29
Male
Glitch city
Seen June 11th, 2015
Posted May 9th, 2015
785 posts
13.8 Years
I never did care that much for baby Pokemon because I don't really use them. Sure, I guess they add some much needed diversity but at the same time, I also feel that they exist for my team to use as punching bags to beat into a bloody, unrecognizable pulp during battles.

Credit goes to Team Brushfire for the awesome banner!
Male
North Carolina
Seen December 5th, 2011
Posted November 28th, 2011
1,431 posts
12.9 Years
Their only use is pokedex completion and getting a few moves their evos can't. But they're generally somewhat difficult to evolve, spare a few, like mantyke.
In progress

Hoenn, 1 Badge
My Youtube Channel: Check out my Pokemon Red Walkthrough
Pokemon White FC: 2322 5491 2643

Nearsighted king of Ice

We'll get to that tomorrow

Age 26
Male
Manehattan, Equestria
Seen May 4th, 2014
Posted May 4th, 2014
991 posts
14.2 Years
I don't think baby pokemon are waste of space in fact I use Muchlax and Riolu in my team.... I'm not a big fan of smoochum though

Make sense? Oh, what fun is there in making sense?

Black FC: 1592-5761-9212
Pokemon X FC: 2921-9174-9000