Pokemon Taxonomy

eevulpes

eevulpes

  • Poké Ball Great Ball
    • 33
    Posts
    98
    Days
    Hi All! Maybe there's a better place for this, but I wanted to share and get some feedback.

    For a separate writing project I have spent years studying actual taxonomy, and one of my other side projects is an unofficial Pokedex (one that tracks general information about each Pokemon, and then one that is specific to the ones in my permanent team). To help with naming and organization, I've grouped similar Pokemon together in the past but it always felt imperfect, so I married Pokemon together with true taxonomy.

    There are two core considerations with this taxonomy: breeding and evolution. The primary method of organizing the Pokemon is not a true mirror of actual taxonomy, but consideration of the egg groups assigned to Pokemon in-universe (e.g., amphibians are not a single phylum). Where a Pokemon might have two egg groups assigned, a decision was made as to a "primary" egg group. Given the nature of evolution, it was also considered (per the second consideration) that the individual evolutionary stages need not exist as a group. While many Pokemon do, others (like Remoraid and Octillery) do land in separate families with the evolution being the "scientific" means of changing so dramatically. Beyond the egg grouping, it then relies on traditional taxonomy to group Pokemon more specifically (e.g., all dogs together, all ducks together, etc.).

    Legendary Pokemon are grouped together not by shared lineage but by theming meant to indicate some sort of shared lineage. The Tower Duo and Ultra Beasts, for example, form a clade in the taxonomy despite no real indication they are related, especially as they are a non-egg group.

    Lastly, the new introduction of Paradox Pokemon is associated with their modern counterparts. Iron Treads, for example, would appear grouped with Donphan, and Walking Wake joins Suicune in the same family - the idea being that historically they would share a strong lineage despite being distinct species (e.g., Cobalion appears as "Justicia cobalion" in this taxonomy, while Iron Crown appears as "Justicia cobaferrous").

    Please let me know your thoughts!
     

    Attachments

    • Pokemon Taxonomy (1).pdf
      336.3 KB · Views: 10
    This is so cool! I also found a guy on Youtube (called Nick Rose) who made a Pokémon taxonomy chart, but didn't create many new categories, he just associated every Pokémon with an animal. I think that your chart is way cooler, congrats!
     
    Doesn't look too shabby, heck I really liked the usage you made with spacing and how that reflects on the relative breadth grow of some branches like Aves. Although I'm a bit puzzled by the Mineral and Amorphous groups and in particular how the Mineral group is split. But then again, that's rooted on how flimsy defined are they in actual game canon and that's where you are drawing from for the topmost branches (plus the added limitation of using unidimensional branching only) so it is understandable that it just Naturally Feels Off.

    From a taxonomical perspective it's also a point of note and more than a bit of contention that you'd place all legendaries together into a "no eggs" groups and subclassify them according to their "theme" because that's only a game restriction and for many Legendaries it doesn't even really reflect what they are set up in their (usually game) appearances proper. For example: Mew and Mewtwo are somehow in two different branches. Or something like the Tao duo (/trio) who are considered partitions of a singular being, would not really be "no eggs" in the "same way" the Regis would be "no eggs" as crafted automators according to their lore, or the "same way" as Ho-Oh and Lugia would be "no eggs" when they are pretty much just superior birds even better (and Lugia do canonically breed in the animeverse). Heck, for that matter there's that issue with Nidoking and Nidoqueen. So if you intend to refine this at any point and breeding is gonna remain the "primary method", I'd expect the No Eggs group is defo the first thing to be revised.

    Also sucks that Dragon gets more or less relegated to a sub sub sub group. Ssshhhhh, don't let them know that! XD
     
    Venia Silente said:
    Doesn't look too shabby, heck I really liked the usage you made with spacing and how that reflects on the relative breadth grow of some branches like Aves. Although I'm a bit puzzled by the Mineral and Amorphous groups and in particular how the Mineral group is split. But then again, that's rooted on how flimsy defined are they in actual game canon and that's where you are drawing from for the topmost branches (plus the added limitation of using unidimensional branching only) so it is understandable that it just Naturally Feels Off.

    From a taxonomical perspective it's also a point of note and more than a bit of contention that you'd place all legendaries together into a "no eggs" groups and subclassify them according to their "theme" because that's only a game restriction and for many Legendaries it doesn't even really reflect what they are set up in their (usually game) appearances proper. For example: Mew and Mewtwo are somehow in two different branches. Or something like the Tao duo (/trio) who are considered partitions of a singular being, would not really be "no eggs" in the "same way" the Regis would be "no eggs" as crafted automators according to their lore, or the "same way" as Ho-Oh and Lugia would be "no eggs" when they are pretty much just superior birds even better (and Lugia do canonically breed in the animeverse). Heck, for that matter there's that issue with Nidoking and Nidoqueen. So if you intend to refine this at any point and breeding is gonna remain the "primary method", I'd expect the No Eggs group is defo the first thing to be revised.

    Also sucks that Dragon gets more or less relegated to a sub sub sub group. Ssshhhhh, don't let them know that! XD
    Click to expand...
    I think your notes are spot on - that No Eggs group was definitely something that felt at odds with everything else. In an early attempt at this, I had assigned a "true animal" to each Pokemon first and then used that to create the taxonomy, and that helped with things like keeping Mew and Mewtwo together (I had them with the cats). I think that's also where using Egg Groups creates some of the other things you mentioned. I had pretty much all the Ghost types together in the early draft, and then because they had different Egg Groups they wound up split here. I love your feedback - the next version may need to be more of a marriage of those two systems (theme/essence and biology) rather than a dedication to one because they don't strictly abide to just the one.
     
    You must log in or register to reply here.
    Back
    Top