>>50802396I respect that you actually tried to explain.
Breaks and outliers are one thing, but a number pattern can still go.
2-2-1-2-3-2-2-1-1-2 It's still a pattern.
Graphs very rarely work on a perfect scale.
Now the echidna thing I think is valid, Though i stand by my close enough thing if they say fire mouse, it's a mouse. Plus they put it in the year of the rat things. Granted with sandshrew, but chinks gonna chink. Trying to put western mindset onto them doesn't really work.
But to use your own argument against you, There's literally nothing stopping them froom making the designs completely opposite to the zodiac. Make a fire fish, though It would be pretty funny if they made a seahorse. An octopus, a crab, a insect, there's plenty of things not related to the zodiac in any way shape or form. Like fuecoco. The only loose connection you could make between a crocodile and the zodiac is the males are bulls. And even that's a stretch for me. But if it becomes a snake like many people believe. I think that falls under, close enough to the pattern.
I don't believe that gamefreak would say if it is or isn't a thing because they barely have any grasp of their own games anyway. And it took them forever to even address the ditto theory.
>>50802425I will give you sheep and ox. But they have 2 different enough designs that they could be distinct.
You know what a cow is and you know what a sheep is.
Compared to foxes and dingos, wild dogs etc It's hard to compare a wolf, to a pug. But you would never say a Wolf isn't a form of dog.
>>50802443I personally believe it's a pattern, but a loose pattern. You could pick apart details in most of the fire starters. Charmander's not a dragon, but charizard is. Blaziken is barely a chicken but the first 2 are. Same with emboar, same with litten.
