>>29636356You can't be this stupid.
>>29636529That's not what the thread is about. Hell, the thread isn't even about Magmar, it was just being used as an example.
The point is that there are objectively good designs and bad designs in this series. The point is that you can like a Pokemon while acknowledging that it, or part of it, is poorly-designed. And you can dislike a Pokemon's design while acknowledging that it has a good design. Most of my favorite Pokemon designs have objective design flaws. I've got no problem with admitting that.
This isn't about personal preference.
