>>20736717Normal may as well be called boring type tbh.
Not to say that the pokemon it houses are inherently boring by concept; it's just that the type as a whole just doesn't seem to mesh very well together. I don't understand why people bash on Fairy and Dragon as being too obscure when Normal is shared by 'mons like Porygon or Exploud and also Tauros or Stoutland.
At LEAST fairy or dragon types have unifying traits that warrant them being placed under the same types. Normal is really all over the place.
(BTW, there's truly no reason as to why Blissey is not pure Fairy)
Normal pokemon could very easily be separated into two categories:
>based on animals>not based on animalsWhich leads to believe that a 'Beast' type would be more fitting for pokemon like Kangaskhan, Lopunny, and Pyroar.
I think it's safe to say that normal is a placeholder type for pokemon with more quirky concepts that don't fit with any other existing types; just in case GF feels like springing new types upon us in the near or far future.
There's nothing 'normal' about Pokemon, so why name a type after it?
