Kangaskhan Pre-Evolution?

[Hatenko]

This has been a mystery to me for so long.. why isn't the baby in Kangaskhan's patch a baby Pokemon on its own? For its evolution it could be similar to Nincada, like there has to be another baby in the party at a lower level while the higher-level baby evolves with the lower-level in the pocket. It's really weird because Nintendo recognizes Mantine and Remoraid and Shelder and Slowbro/king as separate Pokemon..

 

[シルバー]

That is very true and I have wondered it as well.

 

[Potter65]

O_o I wonder if in gen 5 they'll make kangaskhan and kanga (thats the name of the pokemon in the pouch) would be like manaphy and phione.

 

[coolcatkim22]

*sigh for the hundredth time*

Wouldn't that defeat the concept of Kangaskhan being the 'Parent Pokemon'?

And don't even compare this to Mantine and Slowbro, they share a symbiotic relationship why this is a maternal thing.

 

[Miror B.]

*sigh for the hundredth time*

Wouldn't that defeat the concept of Kangaskhan being the 'Parent Pokemon'?

Not at all, if the baby was classified as, "The Child Pokémon" or something similar.

 

[Gary the Magic Fairy]

I like a theory I heard once on the "baby" being Kangaskhan, and the "mother" being a mindless puppet controlled by the "baby", that only has the most basic functions independent, such as breathing, etc.

 

[coolcatkim22]

Not at all, if the baby was classified as, "The Child Pokémon" or something similar.

How does that make it different then any other baby Pokemon?

 

[Charmageddon]

I does seem so obvious that Kangskhan should have a pre-evo. I'm surprised they haven't added one yet, they already have the look for it and it could get some more moves to improve Kangaskhan's popularity. Like a Miltank/Tauros prevo, I'm 90% sure there'll be one in the fifth gen.

 

[The Scientist]

Would a young Miltank be considered an entirely separate Pokemon? What about young Absol? How about a baby Mawile?

Why can't the baby Kangaskhan be just that: a baby Kangaskhan? Why does it need to be something else?

 

[Charmageddon]

Would a young Miltank be considered an entirely separate Pokemon? What about young Absol? How about a baby Mawile?

Yes, it would be counted as a seperate pokemon. Baby pokemon usually are.

Why can't the baby Kangaskhan be just that: a baby Kangaskhan? Why does it need to be something else?

Well it doesn't need to be a prevo. But since we have got baby pokemon, giving the parent pokemon with a baby visible in its pouch a baby-stage evolution does need logical, yes?

 

[Mitchman]

Ever thought that instead of being a baby evolution its just a baby of kangaskan? I mean this was before babies were brought in so its logical.

 

[coolcatkim22]

I don't think most of you understand the point of the kangaskhan staying in it's mother's pouch.

 

[Gary the Magic Fairy]

Ever thought that instead of being a baby evolution its just a baby of kangaskan? I mean this was before babies were brought in so its logical.

This. In fact, it's specifically called a baby Kangaskhan in the anime, games, etc.

 

[Charmageddon]

I don't think most of you understand the point of the kangaskhan staying in it's mother's pouch.

Well impart to us your wisdom, oh Kangaskhan-understanding one.

 

[Legobricks]

Doesn't the baby stay in the pouch until it reaches a current Kangaskhan form anyway? Though evidently it'd still need to grow in size somewhat, but all Pokemon vary in size and weight in case you never payed attention to that fact.
But point is, regardless of pre-evolution status, the Pokemon won't be relevent to the games since it can't fight — you can't do battle from your mother's womb.

 

[Redstar]

But point is, regardless of pre-evolution status, the Pokemon won't be relevent to the games since it can't fight — you can't do battle from your mother's womb.

I always found it odd you could battle baby Pokemon... I would imagine you'd have to level them solely through non-battle related happiness boosting. Otherwise it just seems like throwing a kitten out there at a shark.

What I think the real problem here is the fact that a Kangaskhan hatches with a baby Kanga already in its pouch... What they should do is put a timer on the thing, so if you check the in-game stats it at first has nothing, then an egg, then a Kanga.

 

[Fishyman]

I just think they need to explain the part where Kangaskhan is born with a baby.

 

[coolcatkim22]

Well impart to us your wisdom, oh Kangaskhan-understanding one.

There are many reasons why there shouldn't be a baby Kangaskhan:

1. People just want a baby Kangaskhan for novelty. They don't want it for any other reason but to be able to say "Go Kanga!" or whatever.

2. Do you really think a Pokemon that requires to remain in it's mother's pouch could survive very long?

3. As I said before Kangaskhan is the Parent Pokemon removing the child would destroy it's purpose. You could just have Kangaskhans with babies as well as babies without mothers but it would confuse people. Where did the mothers go? Why isn't the baby with it's mother? And other questions.

4. The baby makes it unique. It be like saying "Why don't we make a charmander without a tail on fire?" or "Why don't we remove one of Doduo's heads?". It makes the Pokemon bland.

5. Both the mother and the baby make up one Pokemon. To separate them would be like separating the exeggcute, it would probably diminish the Pokemon's power.

6. The baby isn't a pre-evolution. It's just a young Kangaskhan nothing more. I think most of the people who are in favor of separating them don't understand the difference between evolution and maturing.

 

[Hatenko]

Oh I think I understand. It's kind of a different form, as in Shaymin's land/sky forms, burmy's cloaks, the unown's letters, cherrim's sunlight form, and others.

 

[Demigod]

it's stupid that kangaskhan is from the old generation and the baby wasn't counted as a pokemon >.< the scientist didn't even noticed it? wow.