>>16096357>>16096399>So the colors aren't the exact same at allHe's saying the gems are different colors. The stone/flesh/fluff are the same colors.
>implying it's carbon and not carbuncle>implying you know what GameFreak's intention was>Because it makes sense for cute gemstone monsters to have the same typing. That's hardly a theme.Name another pair of pokemon that share such a similar theme, colors, typing, etc.
>two rock types having gems is as notable as saying two flying types are birdsExcept they have gems in the same places (on the top of the head and on the rock). Not to mention that two pokemon having similar features in the same places is far more similar than two pokemon who have the same species.
>Their ears are drastically differentBecause pointed grey bits on the top of their heads are extremely different, right?
>You have no way of proving this, and fur turning into a dress is just asinineHow? It's white and puffy, the same way the dress is. Not to mention it gets taller in general, so it's not too out-of-the-way to say that the fluff gets taller as well.
>They're rocks. Not shocking.They're the same exact color with the same cone-shape.
>Another anon already pointed out how drastically different the rocks areIt gets longer. How is that drastically different?
>...you can't have it both ways.Fair enough, but evolutions are generally different from the pokemon they evolve from.
>So what? That means nothing.What if Boufalant and Tauros were in the same generation? They would certainly be related, if not an evolution/alt. forme of some sort.
>They have virtually no similarities beyond being cute gemstone monsters with a similar typingJust like how Pikachu and Raichu are just cute rodents with a "similar typing", right?
