Quoted By:
>tl;dr: pokemon types are thematically limiting and sometimes don't make sense for attacks, and in an ideal world would be culled to rectify these issues
My prime candidates would be Bug, Dragon, Fairy, Rock, Fighting, and arguably flying:
>Bug, Dragon, and Fairy just makes bug-, dragon-, and fairy-based pokemon less diverse, and along with Dark types don't really make sense; what is a beam of bug? A beam of darkness? What is the physical difference between being gored by a bug and a normal type?
>Rock and Ground should be one type, as others have pointed out.
>Fighting is conceptually literally normal-type that lifts. Just really serves to make normal types look weaker. It would make more sense to combine both into Physical.
>Flying doesn't really make sense other than offering an immunity to ground types; suffers from the same conceptual issues as Bug, Dragon, etc., and special normal moves are just force at a distance, i.e. wind, i.e. flying. Maybe just make levitate a secondary trait that doesn't consume an ability slot for all flying pokemon?
My ideal type-list would look like
>Physical
>Electric
>Fire (perhaps change to Heat to make it more diverse, thematically?)
>Ghost (saved from having Bug-esque issues by the concept of ectoplasm)
>Grass (doesn't make too much sense attack-wise, but the physiological difference defense-wise justifies it IMO)
>Earth
>Ice (perhaps changed to Frigid for thematic diversity?)
>Poison
>Psychic
>Steel
>Water
Another thing I would do is make pokemon types make more sense as evolutionary adaptions, i.e., no water-types living in the ocean since why the fuck would you develop a type that everything else in the ocean resists? But I can understand why a fish shooting water is appealing to some, so I'm ambivalent
