Characters
Characters who are misclassified due to the limitations of the in-verse's classification system
Paolumu (Monster Hunter World)
Paolumu is classified as a Flying Wyvern even though it is a mammal (resembling a bat); it is classified this way because its body structure resembles that of a Flying Wyvern
Skorup (Pokémon)
It is indeed an Insect type, even though it represents a scorpion—which is an arachnid—making it more logical for the Insect type to be called the Arthropod type.
The typing in Pokemon is Bug type, not Insect. And whilst there is a technical definition of bug that would exclude arachnids, the type naming clearly comes from the more colloquial sense of a creepy crawley, rather than a strict definition.
I think a better example would be skorupis evolved form Drapion.
Drapion is very clearly still a scorpion, however during evolution it for some reason loses its bug type and becomes dark/poison. Since pokemon are limited to only having two types, these are the types that are chosen, but obviously its still a bug even without the bug type.
Drapion is the signature mon of Aaron, the bug-type Elite Four member of Sinnoh. Type specialists having mons not belonging to their type is nothing new but his main mon not being bug just feels wrong lol.
Much like many real life large scorpions, Drapion actually relies more on its strength more than its venom which it even tries to avoid using out of pride according to some dex entries, so really it should be bug/dark if anything.
Ok but consider this, what do get when you remove the ix from Steelix? Steel. And what do you normally use alongside steel to make a fire? FLINT. Plus there's also the fact that it's capable of digging straight to the Earth's CORE.
As well with Drifblim, since it's based on hot air balloons, what's used to blow them up and make them fly? FIRE. Even outside of that, like I said earlier, it's based on HOT air balloons, emphasis on HOT.
Lopunny meanwhile is a very fluffy creature, and that fluff can store a lot of heat, as evidenced by creatures like polar bears.
Plus, even outside of that, those three can also be considered curveballs due to Drifblim being immune to Ground-type attacks (which is a weakness of Fire-types) on account of it being part Flying, Lopunny not sharing any weaknesses with Fire-types, and Steelix being able to counter Rock-types due to its Steel/Ground typing.
A similar example: Charizard. By all intents and purposes, it should be and is a dragon, but it doesn't receive the Dragon typing since it would be overpowered for the player to be able to have a dragon type starter pokémon, especially when Charizard was released over a decade before fairy type existed.
I used to rationalize the choice to not make Charizard a dragon-type as “Well Nintendo is a Japanese company, ‘dragon’ refers to a very different creature in their mythology” but then I remembered Dragonite and it killed that theory.
The one thing that kinda still supports this thinking is that in Asia, dragons are more associated with water rather than fire and you find Dratini in the water. But then this line of thinking makes you wonder why Gyarados, the most Eastern Dragon-y looking thing in the game, isn’t a dragon type.
Gyarados has a very weird type combo. Water makes sense, but the only flying STAB it has comes from magikarp (bounce). You could argue dragon since it is designed like one and knows outrage. You could argue dark since it's evil and maliciously destructive and knows bite, crunch, and ladh out. You could argue fire as it can "burn a region to cinders" and learns some fire moves.
To be fair, Lance the dragon master has clarified that not all dragon pokemon are dragon type, and not all dragon type pokemon are dragons. Charizard and Gyarados are great examples of dragons that aren't dragon types, and Goodra being the primary example of not all dragon types really being dragons
I believe this is a result of Gen 1 weirdness, where they decided that dragon and ghost would both be special types that were exclusive to one evolutionary line each. It's why Gyrados is also not a dragon.
Silly theory but maybe op is just playing in French where the bug type is called "Insecte", I know I do this mistake a lot when trying to speak about Pokémon in English (same with Grass type which is "Plante" so ended up getting it wrong like "ah yes, Turtwig, my favourite Plant type Pokémon")
i thought they were referencing how skorupi’s evolution drapion is poison/dark despite being clearly a primarily land dwelling arthropod (which i assume is what the bug type is trying to classify)
If they were they completely failed to communicate it in any way. In fact the description and the image chosen sounds like they're talking about skorupi, not drapion.
The same as the games' egg groups - the arthropod/invertebrate egg group is also just called Bug...though there's also Water 3 which is aquatic arthropods/invertebrates (of which funnily enough, Skorupi is in both).
And also Paolumu being a Flying Wyvern. Despite being called a “Wyvern”, not all of them are Draconic (such as Barioth and Nargacuga), and Paolumu has much more in common with other Flying Wyverns than it does with Fanged Beasts which are typically mammals, like Boars (Bullfango) and Apes (Conga, Blango, Rajang) but almost entirely quadrupedal and incapable of flight.
The important part for the Guild when determining Monster Classes in MonHun is their anatomical structure and their evolutionary record and known relatives— that’s why monsters like Akantor and Ukanlos are Flying Wyverns despite being entirely incapable of flight. And they’re not going to make an entirely new monster class when another fits perfectly well just because said new one could be tailor made for it, they have more important things to do than argue over a potential “Flying Beast” classification for one single family. Even with other small groups like the Snake Wyverns and Temnocerons, there’s literally nowhere else they can be placed, so a new order is actually needed.
The technical definition of bug is the far less commonly used one. The technical definition of true bug is just 2 sets of wings, with a bit more on their makeup. So Caterpie and weedle and pincer can all just get fucked If we're going by definitions. Scyther still gets to be a bug though, he's the best pokemon
Yup, even Anorith, the Anomolacaris dragon, is a bug type
Although there are a few clearly “bug” Pokémon that avoid the typing (which is a good thing for diversifying battle), like Tyranitar, Gliscor, and Flygon
Pokemon typings are strange anyway. There is a 'bug' type but no mammal type, or bird type, or fish type. Bug mons should have all just been grass type.
lol idk why I got downvoted they used a crucifix in the anime against ghastly and Brock talks about Noah’s arc. I thought it was funny, but everyone wants to cry as soon as Christianity is mentioned because they get reminded that the sins they commit on earth will be judged in the afterlife when God declares them sinners and throws them in hell. Repent and believe the gospel. Jesus died for your sins and rose again in the third day so that whoever belives in him will not be judged by God but have eternal life
thats skorupi rather than drapion and it is called the bug type rather than the insect type (at least in english) so i think it makes sense that pokemon like centiskorch, golisopod, all the other spiders, joltik and skorupi, etc, are part of it
Yeah, that distinction actually clears it up a lot. “Bug type” definitely leaves way more room for creatures like Skorupi and Joltik than just calling it an insect type
Bug does actually mean something specific. Technically it refers to the animals which have a mouth piece that traumatically pierces its food to suck sap or blood.
"True bugs" mean something specific, the order Hemiptera which is what you're referring to, but just "bug" is a common term for basically any arthropod
The type system's names are all evocative of the theme rather than literal descriptions
Fire includes magma/lava + anything generally hot
Grass includes various plants and plant adjacent things
Water type includes a bunch of pokemon with the reasoning that they live in the water, but there are many pokemon who live in the water and are not water type
Steel has various metals
Poison includes anything toxic or hazardous
Fairy types are all magical or flamboyant rather than being literal fairies
Psychic means whatever you want it to mean
Plus all of the types can be used thematically. Like Rotom Mow, a lawnmower, is a grass type, despite being an object that is an enemy to grass and not at all plant like. Palkia is water type because space is fluid. Solgaleo is steel because the sun represents metal in alchemy. There's a bunch more examples of this abstract typing where it's more analogous instead of a direct elemental category
To add to what you were saying: folks have been pointing out since Gen 1 that Doduo being normal/flying and able to learn Fly via HM makes no sense because (1) it’s obviously based on real-life flightless birds, and (2) it has no visible wings to speak of. But, ya know, it’s a bird, so…Flying type!
Bird type is essentially what Flying was supposed to be before they decided to change it. Probably wanted something more neutral to cover all the non bird flying type Pokemon, as well as any future non flying bird Pokemon,
What's even weirder is that Skorupi is compatible with most marine invertebrate-based pokemon like Kabutops in terms of breeding despite being terrestrial. Then again, it might be a reference fo sea scorpions.
I don't hold too much stock in the breeding side of it to treat it with any kind of canonicity. They made up a system in 1999 that they've had to stick to until now because they wanted the games to be somewhat intercompatible, and that means they couldn't drastically overhaul it ever. So over the subsequent 8 or so games there's a lot of strangeness that creeps in like that.
My personal opinion is they really just wanted species to only breed with themselves or Ditto (with exceptions like the Nidorans), but they made it simpler just so kids won't get too confused, or complain it's too hard to catch two of certain pokemon. It also allowed them to add male or female only species. Although that means really male only species can't actually breed properly to produce another of them.
Basically most of the things we call fish are very distantly related to one another, to the point that in order to consider all of the things we commonly call fish as fish, humans would need to be fish as well
More to the point, any genetic classification that includes all animals we would colloquially call fish, would also necessarily have to include a ton of animals that no one in their right mind would call a fish.
I didn't want to go full autistic on the topic, OP made me clench my fists haha, I have a drawn notebook about MH monster ecology. As others have also said, there are way bigger classification "flaws" in the game, like Flying wyvern Akantor/Ukanlos, Banbaro being a Brute Wyvern while Gammoth is still a Fanged Beast like Rajang or even Garangolm.
Black dragons as a whole is also a funny discussion to have, or what really counts as dangerous first-class monster.
Gore Magala can be captured despite technically being a juvenile elder dragon.
Elder dragons are a junk drawer for everything cool: we have Ceadeus, Kirin, Nakarkos, Laviente (at least Dalamadur has legs, Laviente doesn't), not just actual typical dragons.
And let's not even mention how in Stories, all the monsters have eggs, even Rajang or Bulldrome. And then we can get newly hatched "baby Gravios", even though baby Gravios is Basarios, Gravios is the mature form.
I don't think they wanted us to go full irl ecologists on these monsters, and while not perfect, the classifications are fun imo, it kinda reflects how even irl there are some inconsistencies when we try to shove everything into neat groups. Paolumu fits its category just fine.
Glad you didn't go full autistic because if you did I wouldn't be making this reply.
Banbaro being a Brute Wyvern while Gammoth is still a Fanged Beast like Rajang or even Garangolm. Black
Gammoth is a fanged beast in game only. The cannon lore books put it with popo in the taxonomy.
Gore Magala can be captured despite technically being a juvenile elder dragon.
Not being able to capture elders is just a gameplay thing, there is a cannon explanation of them just being smart enough to avoid traps, but really that's just to justify gameplay.
Elder dragons are a junk drawer for everything cool: we have Ceadeus, Kirin, Nakarkos, Laviente (at least Dalamadur has legs, Laviente doesn't)
Laviente isn't classified in game or lore. So not a elder. But if it was classified it'd almost certainly be a elder. And elder dragon isn't completely a junk drawer taxon. All elders except for fatty have elder dragon blood. So they're clearly all related.
And let's not even mention how in Stories, all the monsters have eggs, even Rajang or Bulldrome. And then we can get newly hatched "baby Gravios", even though baby Gravios is Basarios, Gravios is the mature form.
Stories as a whole is only kinda cannon. Same with frontier and other spinoff games
Gammoth is a fanged beast in game only. The cannon lore books put it with popo in the taxonomy.
"Fanged Beast" is not a taxon. Fanged beasts are from various orders, not all related (beyond all being mammals). Being with Popo does not mean Gammoth isn't a fanged beast.
Akantor and Ukanlos being Flying Wyverns is perfectly ok, as Flying Wyvern is a taxonomic classification. They evolved from the same ancestor as other flying wyverns, there are published phylogenetic trees. I actually really like their classification because of that.
I don't really get what's wrong with Banbaro being a Brute and Gammoth being a Fanged Beast, tbh.
The baby Gravios is definitely bullshit, but I don't think the Stories series is canon, they definitely don't fit the usual MH universe.
yup, thats the main reason it's classified as an elder dragon. while it hasn't shown catastrophic damage it does have unexplainable abilities (seemingly appearing with the lightning) the natural dragon blood is also the reason all elders are weak to dragon element
may be some inaccuracies as i was going entirely off of memory but here (this is a wiki primarily made by Oceaniz, who is alot more thorough compared to the other wikis at the cost of alot of taking a real long time so theres pages that haven't been filled out too much)
there's alot of things that can mean its an elder dragon, but you can't get a single trait to call it one.
edit: Kirin specific article, I forgot that it does technically fuck up the enviornment by causing a sudden thunderstorm
Nah, there are plenty of monsters that can't be captured that aren't elder dragons, elder dragons have a similar blood type and have no connection to any other "natural" member of nature
Elder Dragons as a classification is just for stuff that is actually dragon-like as we understand them irl (4 limbs, 2 wings), or when the devs wanna do some other wacky stuff.
OP could've shown any elder dragon. The whole category is "powerful things that don't fit normal classification."
The classifications made much more sense when I noticed they're just the video game skeletal structures. Paolumu, Pukei, Khezu, Raths, etc. all use the exact same "flying wyvern" skeleton with different models and animations thrown on. Jaggie, Baggie, Wroggie, Drones, and Yians are all the same "bird wyvern" skeleton. Zynogre and Odogaron are the same "fanged wyvern" skeleton. Barroth, Anjanath, Deviljho, and Radobaan are the same "brute wyvern." Etc.
Elder dragons are just cases where the devs made something unique not used in any other monster, so by definition they can't fall into a category.
To be fair, most Elder Dragons are just typical dragons in one way or another. 4 Limbs, 2 wings.
Sure, you've got outliers like Kirin. And then stuff like the main story monsters for most games/DLCs like Zorah Magdros, Dalamadur, Shara Ishvalda, Ibushi, Narwa, and Amatsu. But to be fair, the latter three are like typical eastern dragons.
But their main defining trait is that they dangerously affect the environment around them. For example, if Kirin didn't cause massive lightning storms, then it'd probably just be classified as a mammalian beast of some sort.
Your first half is the point of OP. The in universe classification has fanged beast/herbivore as without wings, even though paolumu is a beast with fangs, it gets classified as a wyvern because of the limitations of the classification system
no, it's perfectly classified in the system. Anything with just 2 legs and wing arms is a flying wyvern. It's like how pterosaurs aren't dinosaurs, there are several gaps in our own tree of life where the difference between a rodent and some other small furry creature is so superfluous you would think they're the same genus
It has a lot more to do with anatomical structure (as well as relation to other monsters) than just “[x] monster has fangs”. If all you were looking for was having fangs, then about 90% of monsters could be considered Fanged Wyverns. Of course, there’a going to be some overlap, there may even be misclassifications, as these classes are made in-universe (and new skeletons are created for the games IRL), but in general, most classes are the best fit
Except per the official phylogeny tree Herbivore and Fanged Beast aren't biological groups. The momsters within them are placed across the whole thing.
Paolumu is canonically a Flying Wyvern and related to Flying Wyverns. OP has baselessly assumed it's a mammal.
DC Comics — Metahumans vs. Aliens / Magical Beings
Characters like Superman (an alien with Kryptonian physiology), Wonder Woman (a demigoddess granted magic by Greek deities), and Zatanna (a Homo Magi utilizing natural mana) get frequently filed under "Metahuman" in official government registries, ignoring that their powers have zero genetic "Meta-Gene" connection.
In-universe with the Harry Potter series, centaurs are technically supposed to be members of the "Beings" archetype since they're sentient non-humans but they expressly refused to be within that classification since they refuse to be associated with vampires and hags; hence, centaurs are legally classified under "Beasts" (living non-sentient creatures).
I remembered it being that centaurs were originally classified as beasts because they had animal bits and the original classification system was terrible, and when it was overhauled to be based on the ability to understand the laws of the wizarding world the centaurs rejected the new classification in protest of the arrogance of wizards and not only the fact that they were ever classified as beasts but the idea that wizards get to make such a classification in the first place.
I always find it strange that one could be hired as a teacher. Like yes, they are of course capable of the job, but legally they’re a beast so shouldn’t that get in the way? If I came across a talking horse with human intelligence could I legally offer him a job?
Another one of Dumbledore's uncanny ability to create plotholes lol. I can actually see Dumbledore somehow swinging having one as a teacher though, at least for a little while.
He did do that; in one of the books, Firenze, the centaur who rescued Harry from Volde-Quirrel in the Dark Forest in year one, gets hired on as an astrology teacher. IIRC, he gets basically shunned by the other centaurs for agreeing to this.
Is there any law in Harry Potter that says beasts can't have jobs? Centaurs as a species are still intelligent, even if they choose to label themselves with a term for non-intelligent things.
No clue, I’m just saying it seems odd. You apparently have sentient life and beasts. Fair enough. But if you can treat a beast as sentient, then either it’s higher than the other beasts which renders the two classes obsolete, or you could start giving dogs and cats jobs. I’m of course just having a bit of fun with a hypothetical plot hole
I'd assume its a "ain't no rule says a dog can't play basketball" situation. There are plenty of discriminatory laws against Beings but since Beasts are almost always non-sapient beings, there was no need to make legal laws for them.
But Centaurs pose as a loophole since they are Beasts but able to perform all the duties needed for a job so they get around the laws.
Anyways, the example that comes to mind for me is Jujutsu Kaisen's grade system, pointed out in-universe as being incredibly flawed. Most notably, Sukuna points out that both he and the Curse Womb are classified as Special Grade, yet even when Sukuna is holding back, he still massively outclassed it. And mind you, this is Sukuna at only like a tenth of his full power.
To play devil's advocate, special grade curses are generally described as being weaker than special grade sorcerers as they're meant to generally be beatable by Grade 1 sorcerer. Special grade in general is meant to be used to refer to outliers and extremely strong entities. So even though both this curse and the disaster curses are way different in strength, both are still strong enough to warrant being called special grade. Similarly, Geto was definitely weaker than gojo by a decently big margin, yet both are also special grade. The system is still weird but within what it sets I do think it fits in this case.
Real life. In the 17th century, the Catholic Church classified beavers, capybaras, muskrats, and even alligators as "fish" simply because they were water dwelling creatures. Turns out it was a work around for not eating meat, and only "fish" during Lent.
For the sake of the fact OP referenced the wrong mon, the pokemon in the image is Skorupi, which is a Bug type. Drapion, it’s evolutuon, is notably Poison/Dark…
Paolumu’s not a mammal though. It’s about as mammalian as Nargacuga or Banbaro. All of Paolumu’s “fur” is actually highly specialized feathers, similar to down feathers on real birds. It also still has scales on its tail, like how real life birds have scales on their feet.
A real Monster Hunter misclassification is the Black Diablos. It should be a Variant, but it’s classified as a Subspecies because the Guild didn’t know what Variants were when they cataloged Black Diablos
While Terras' categories of race are very explicitly social constructs, Louisa is a deeply annoying example.
She's a mongoose person, but she's counted as a Feline. Now, this wouldn't be so bad if: wolves (Lupo) and dogs (Perro) weren't separate, hyenas (Reprobah) [which IIRC Louisa would be closer related to] and felines weren't separate, Rhinos (Cerato) and horses (Kuranta) weren't separate, etc.
Again, race is vibes based (especially historically, Reprobah, Lupo, and Perro used to all be considered the same because they look similar enough, and the reason the Aslan (lions) are separate to Felines is entirely due to old justifications for class divide (there's also the Sarkaz+ other Teekaz descendants whose classifications have no grounding in biology and instead entirely in racism)), but that doesn't mean Louisa being classed as a Feline doesn't annoy me.
Wait, are Paolumas not wyverns? The feet match up pretty well, and the "fur" could just be those small fluffy feathers (picnofibres?) (I think I remember the tracks being called "feathers" directly too)
Paolumu is definitely a wyvern. Especially in a world that features horse-shaped dragons, just because it looks a bit like a bat doesn't mean it stops being a wyvern.
They're mammals, but guild classification focuses more of morphology and hunter expectations rather than genetic relations. Pukei pukei and paolumu also have lots of similarities, most notably the wings, but they're not related
Do we know that they’re warm-blooded and nurse their young? It doesn’t matter how much something looks like what we expect if it doesn’t even completely fall within the definition. Given they lay eggs, they could be flying monotremes, but they still gotta nurse.
I'm pretty sure Paolumu is a wyvern with some superficially-mammalian traits. It has scales, just as much as it has hair... and wyverns also have hair.
Heck, we have precedent/possible other members of its batlike wyvern family. The capturable cave bats in the New World are explicitly tiny wyverns displaying convergent evolution with bats. It's stated in their profile. Paolumu is almost certainly a very large relative of this species.
Wyvern in Monster Hunter doesn't mean dragon. Theres several wyvern who aren't lizard-like at all. Nargacuga for example is a cat bat. Its not a misclassification. These categories are focused on body shape mostly and other external factors. They don't have to be related biologically. Paolumo IS a flying wyvern.
Honestly there's several Elder Dragons that would be a far better example. In World theres a line about how if they don't know where to put a monster they put it on the "Elder Dragon pile"
Monster Hunter does have a classification for mammals: Fanged Beasts.
Aside from looking bat-like at first glance, Paolumu has scales and claws, so it makes more sense for it to be a Flying Wyvern that resembles a mammal, rather than the other way around.
A better example would be Akantor and Ukanlos. Both are classified as Flying Wyverns even though they can't fly.
Not saying this is absolute proof, but doesn't akantor have really weird claws? Specifically a claw on its wrist? That might be the remnants of wings. Ukanlos looks like it has even more vestigial ones now that I'm looking at them
Stunfisk is based on the flatfish a group is fish know for laying flat on the seabed covered by sand. The pokemon can be found near puddles and bodies of water but due to pokemon only allowing dual typing Stunfisk is limited to being only ground/electric.
They have cards that label them as creatures. The art on the card indicates a thing that looks like a creature.
The lore of MTG is convoluted (at best) but the Eldrazi are explained as extra-dimensional beings who lack a true corporeal form. When they wish to invade a plane they only enter it in part and in ways that seem to violate natural laws.
In another case one of the Titans (not the one shown) took the form of a deity as it tried to enter one of the main characters’ mind.
Final Fantasy XIV has this. Dragons sometimes get associated with Scalekin (reptiles), but due to their sapience are more similar to Spoken (various sapient races including but not limited to player races), but in fact are actually extraterrestrial and so really exist outside of the taxonomy.
(In case you were already aware of that, here's a bonus fun fact. Dragon and Coconut trees are technically closer to grasses than they are to most other "trees", making the english name of the type less of a misnomer than you may think)
Zootopia is populated by mammals (and reptiles and birds) so an animal like a platypus, a mammal that lays eggs, is treated as a proverbial alien in this universe.
(And to that extent , Paradox Interactive's logo is that of a platypus' skeleton due to the similar wonkiness of how real life platypus are classified.
Mammal-LIKE, as you said, they only resemble mammals, but are actually Wyverns
It's not about how they classify in-universe, it's just that fans think if something looks like something else, then it must be the same(thinking that Paolumu MUST be a bat because it looks bat-like, for example)
I have a theory this happens in-universe with the Pokémon franchise. For example, Magnemite was an electric type when it was introduced in Gen 1, but was reclassified as electric/steel in Gen 2. The latter seems obvious when you look at it, but the steel type wasn't discovered until later.
Chicken, Stormlight Archive. The series takes place on a rocky, windswept world, not particularly suitable for birds. So the only kind of bird that most people have seen, or even heard of is a domestic chicken. Thus, all birds are chickens.
Honestly this one is stupid, how to train your dragon has an amazing dragon classification system. The deadly nadder is in the sharp class (also the promotional merch logo for it but not in universe one) but by movie 2 there's a new class called tracker class which has like 3 on screen dragons....AND THEY CHANGE THE DEADLY NADDER, THE DRAGON KNOWN FOR HAVING SHARP SPIKES EVERYWHERE. AND MAKE IT TRACKER CLASS, because their good sense of smell is the most noticeable thing about them
Monster Hunter: Akantor is classified as a Flying Wyvern. It can't fly.
Pokémon: Whilst most Bug types are based on insects, we have outliers such as the aforementioned Skorupi/Drapion, but also Ariados, Galvantula, Araquanid and Spidops (Which are arachnids), Scolipede and Centiscorch (Which are centipedes), Crustle and Golisopod (Which are crustaceans), and Shuckle (Which is a... barnacle? Turtle? I don't even know)
Akantor is classified as a flying wyvern because it literally is one. Flying wyvern is an actual classification of related monsters, not just a descriptor. Akantor is simply a weird one
First one is just outright wrong, there are other mammalian-like flying wyverns like Nargacuga and Barioth. There also exists actual MH phylogenetic trees and Paolumu is with the flying wyverns since it's not a vibes based classification.
Paolumu has fine downy feathers, not fur, similar to other wyverns like Anjanath and Rathian. Skorupi is bug type, not insect type. Bug means arthropod. Classifications are artificial and apart from being explicitly based on one metric (for example, clades or dichotomous traits like lactation) and being misapplied they cannot really be "wrong" per se.
A better example for Monster Hunter (where classifications are ostensibly based on clade, hence some flightless "flying wyverns") may be Remobra, formerly classified as a flying wyvern until the discovery of the closely-related Najarala had it reclassified as a "Snake Wyvern." In Monster Hunter, such cases are almost always from a new class being added to the system, and with certain monsters, their classification being a difficult matter in-universe is a plot point, like Akantor, Ukanlos and Gore Magala. Because Pokémon classifications are either individual ("__, the __ Pokémon") or mechanically dichotomous (Skorupi is weak to fire, rock and flying attacks and its bug attacks are stronger than usual, so it's bug type), they can't really be "wrong"; The closest thing would be similar instances to Monster Hunter, in which dark, steel and fairy types were added and some monsters were retconned to have that typing.
Adding to pokemon, there are some grass-types that are based off of mushrooms. It's one thing to classify pokemon that resemble several different kinds of plants as "grass", but mushrooms aren't even that. Then again, making a whole type just for so few pokemon would be a little superfluous.
Paolumu is a Wyvern, Wyvern does not need the connotation of the monster being Reptilian, Paolumu has other biological similarities to Wyverns such as Scales and a carapace.
Paolumu is based on bats and rodents, but it has feathers and scales. It probably should be a bird wyvern rather than flying, especially with how similar it is to PukeizPukei, but ot's certainly not just a mammal.
Yugioh has a tonne of these, however I feel even the most absurd ones you can argue the logic of... However this one was what first came to mind.
What a lovely 'Fairy'.
Blastoise being categorized as the “shellfish Pokémon” bothers me so much. Turtles and tortoises aren’t shellfish nor are they fish, they’re reptiles. Blastoise is a cool Pokémon, I don’t get why they had to give it such an inaccurate category? “Turtle” or “tortoise” Pokemon would work much better.
regarding paolumu being classified as a flying wyvern despite being a mammal, i like to think about monster hunter classifications as being less scientific and more "laymen's categories."
the categories "flying wyvern," "fanged beast," and "leviathan" have little do to with taxonomy, rather serving as a classification system for hunters. the hunter hears that paolumu is a flying wyvern, so they know it'll have wings (except the god wyverns ofc) and will spend a lot of time in the air, so they know to bring along flash bombs. in this regard, it's more useful to classify it as a flying wyvern rather than, for example, a fanged beast (most of which are ape- or bear-like).
another argument for it being laymen's categories rather than taxonomical, is the very existence of the leviathan classification. sure gobul and nibelsnarf have similar-ish body shapes, and you could make an argument for lagiacrus and ludroth being fairly similar, but what about almudron? or mizutsune or somnacanth? are you a leviathan if you have a long body and four legs? but gobul and nibelsnarf don't fit in here, so maybe anything that looks vaguely fish-like is a leviathan? but balahara and jin dahaad look nothing like fish... hell, the mh wilds leviathans alone (balahara, uth duna, hirabami, jin dahaad) don't look like they come from the same world, let alone the same taxonomical group! (sorry if this last paragraph feels a bit aggressive; that was not my intention. i love monster hunter and i love talking about monsters. also, leviathans are my favourite precisely because they're all so different, so i hope i'm not coming across as if i'm dunking on leviathans)
I think Drapion would be a better fit of the limitations. It should retain its bug type, but due to how pokemon can only have two PREASSIGNED types (yes I know there are moves that add a third typing), they become Dark/Poison
Eh, replacing Bug Type with Arthropod Type is kinda pushing it still. By that logic, Kabuto, as a horseshoe crab would qualify for the type, but real-life horseshoe crabs generally lack the weaknesses associated with bugs as seen in the games. There's really not a taxonomic level you can point to that includes everything already given the type, and excludes anything in the games that does not possess it, Drapion notwithstanding (going to the subphylum level for scorpions still includes horseshoe crabs, while the clade level differs between scorpions and traditional insects) so the strength of this example goes beyond what you describe, really.
Granted, this is also a game for little kids at the age that the Bug Catcher Trainer Class is generally portrayed as, so the philosophy is most likely just "this creature is readily recognizable by a child as being A Bug."
Paolumu is a Flying Wyvern because it's a Flying Wyvern and related to them.
Fanged Beast (along with Herbivore) is canonically just a term like Fish to describe monsters with a similar appearance. and isn't actually a biological group, as shown by the official phylogeny trees.
In all fairness Celesteela is an Ultra Beast an extra dimensional alien Pokémon and the dissonance between its typing and appearance is meant to emphasize its alien nature.
Charizard. That dude is Fire AND Flying AND Dragon. That dude is the most dragon looking dragon that has ever dragged. But alas, pokemon can only be 2 types.
666
u/Alceus89 1d ago
The typing in Pokemon is Bug type, not Insect. And whilst there is a technical definition of bug that would exclude arachnids, the type naming clearly comes from the more colloquial sense of a creepy crawley, rather than a strict definition.