7: For some reason, Lance's two Dragonair and his Dragonite would not use any damaging moves against it (at least the times I have played through, anyone care to confirm?) allowing you to beat them with Leech Seed while playing the PokeFlute.
They use Agility because it's Psychic-type and the game thinks it'll be super-effective against Venusaur's Grass typing.
I take it you play the game a lot slower and more leisurely than others of us in this thread. We've mostly been talking about the starters being able to beat the game quickly and efficiently, at which Charmander and Squirtle are better.
I wonder if you've considered using another starter and picking up Victreebel instead of using Venusaur. --- YOU DON'T KNOW MEXICO SON THEY WILL BEAT YOU DOWN
Geez, people, this is a video game. A(n arguably) kid's game, at that. You make this all sound like some grand philosophical debate. What on earth was that "straw man" business? Good lord, can't we all just play the damn game our own way and be happy with it... I would think that a simple question should have a simple, straightforward answer, even if that answer happens to be an opinion. What's all this massive debate going on for? Are you people crazy? Yikes...just, yikes. --- Proud creator of the Gutsy Bunny Challenge in Star Ocean 3. "What the hell are you trying to steal, the enemy's virginity?" ~ StarkMaximum
samthedigital posted... It's a straw man because it has nothing to do with Pokemon or Fissure. That should be obvious though.
That's not what a straw man is at all; those were two completely separate arguments. One was on which is the best starter for a solo game, the other was on why one shouldn't use the term illogical on the interblog. Stop trying to be cool and philosophical. A straw man would be akin to the statement, "Bulbasaur isn't the best starter because it isn't the most efficient in speed solo runs." Ohwait. ps: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
Stop being illogical. *sigh*
The best is the most efficient. Wait, does [t]he answer depends completely on the context not apply anymore?
I mean, you're either a troll (my sarcasm meter is broken ATM), or both a sore winner and loser. Yes, I agree that you are right about pokemon, but you were wrong on every meta-discussion on the thread, and when it's pointed out to you, you throw a little hissy fit over definitions and fallacies that don't even apply. It's frustrating trying to carry on a conversation with someone that has knowledge in one area but not in another, yet acts as an expert on both.
Thanks to MS and Bohepans- I learned new things from each of you.
I mean, you're either a troll (my sarcasm meter is broken ATM), or both a sore winner and loser.
I stopped taking this topic seriously when the topic derailed if that's what you are wondering.
Yes, I agree that you are right about pokemon, but you were wrong on every meta-discussion on the thread
I would be careful about using the word wrong. It's trivial to explain the use of the word logical. Maybe wikipedia can help show how the word can be used? I've never been one to continue debates on philosophy though as there really isn't a point. I find it's one of the areas where people are the most stubborn. --- GTM Fanclub