>>28676349They don't have to make sense biologically, as evidenced by Magnemite.
But they do have to not be shit and follow a couple of conventions. There's no Pokemon that is just a dog, for example. Literally justa beagle with no added features. All Pokemon are based on an animal or concept, there's none that are literally an animal, or object though.
I'm not trying to prove a point because I'm right, I don't need to prove it. I can already give proof, I don't need to create more. There's no Pokemon that is literally just "thing", they're always some twist on "thing", or based on "thing" and combined with "other thing". Even garbage designs like Klefki or Vanilluxe have some sort of theme, some twist on their bases. Vanilluxe is an icicle formation that look like an ice cream cone, not literally an ice cream. Klefki is a little fairy that resembles a key, not literally a key.
There are certain unspoken rules of Pokemon. You'll never, ever see a Pokemon that is literally just a computer mouse, or a hat.
