Talk:??? (type)

From Bulbapedia, the community-driven Pokémon encyclopedia.
Jump to navigationJump to search

Statistical averages

Wait, how can ??? type have statistical averages? -OmegaPlatinum

That... is a very good question. TTEchidna 04:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
It was added a while ago, obtained through hacking the game (also check the diffs following). Don't think that should count, myself. --DarkfireTaimatsu 05:10, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Nor do I, so I baleeted it. Arceus alone should not be what something's based on. TTEchidna 07:11, 25 August 2007 (UTC)


Wait a moment, where is ??? featured in RBY? As far as I can remember, some glitches had ???, but it says "Non-glitch" element, so I assume in the programming.. but still, it slightly weirds me out that it says "Generation I". TinaTheKirlia 16:12, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Because it was a glitch in Gen I, but not in Gen II onwards, I'm guessing.--Nebula 17:09, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Arceus and Roost

It's been suggested that when a Sky Plate-holding Arceus uses the move Roost, it will turn into the ???-type Arceus. However, as the only way for Arceus to GET Roost is through hacking, I have not been able to test these claims yet. However, if anyone here manages to play out this scenario by hacking an Arceus that has the move, please edit the article accordingly should the theory be proven correct. --M. Burusu 08:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, then the same could happen to a Smeargle that Sketched Skill Swap and Roost, then swapped abilities with Kecleon. TTEchidna 06:23, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
THAT I could probably try out . . . but I don't think I have any Smeargle spare. I'll have to bring a friend into this . . . thanks for the suggestion! --M. Burusu 04:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
I hate to bump ancient conversations, but I tested this last night.

Test 1: Smeargle Skill Swapped Kecleon. Switched in Nidorino and used Peck, turning Smeargle to a Flying type. Smeargle used Roost and Nidorino used Peck again, trying to activate color change; if Roost had changed Smeargle to ???, Color Change would activate. It did not.

Test 2: Smeargle Skill Swapped Kecleon. Nidorino Pecked it. Switched in Magcargo that held Lagging Tail. Smeargle Roosted and Magcargo used Earth Power. KO'd Smeargle.

Test 3: Same as Test 2, except Magcargo used Rock Smash. No effectiveness message.

My findings; if a pure Flying-type uses Roost, it DOES lose the Flying typing. However, it does not gain the Normal type temporarily, nor any type against which Fighting is Super/Not Very Effective, for that matter. More testing is needed to be absolutely sure, but I think that a pure Flying type that uses Roost does indeed become the ??? type. Missingno. Master wants YOU! Join the Order of the Glitch! (my talk page) 17:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

UPDATE! Between Ground and Fighting, I was able to eliminate all types except Water, Fighting, and Dragon. I just conducted another test in which I used Meowth's Bite (eliminating Fighting), and Bibarel's Water Gun (eliminating Water and Dragon). Thusly, I can confirm that when Smeargle is a pure Flying type and uses Roost, its type becomes ???. I should maybe add this to the article? Also, since article names with question marks now work, I shall do with this what I did with the Generation III Glitch Pokémon and move this article to the correct title. If anyone disagrees, feel free to move it back. Missingno. Master wants YOU! Join the Order of the Glitch! (my talk page) 20:31, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

How much does anyone wanna bet...

That ???-type Arceus is what Arceus becomes in the reverse world? TTEchidna 01:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but unless we can get such a place in the games, the most I can wager is . --Shiningpikablu252 01:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I think there's going to be an event sometime after the Arceus event to get a special plate for the ???-type form. After all, Nintendo has demonstrated in the past that they can edit the coding of the Pokémon games (Berry Glitch Fix). A similar coding update could be used for the Apricorn Poké Balls from GSDS. Shiny Noctowl 02:12, 27 May 2008 (UTC)


Doesn't redirect here. MathijsP 06:50, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


In Generation II, Porygon can learn Curse using the TM for it. I wonder if Porygon only knows Conversion and Curse, and it uses Conversion, if it has a chance of becoming the ???-type or if the game's coding ignores Curse when Conversion is used and doesn't do anything, either failing or executing with no effect since Porygon is already the type of Conversion. TorchicBlaziken 18:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

If Porygon uses Conversion and if it only knows Curse, then Conversion fails. GameFreak kept that in mind. hfc2X 03:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

??? type and Judgement

If Arceus would be holding a ??? plate and used Judgement, or if the Smeargle Roost/Skill swap would work, what would be the outcome? As this might be the only legit move capable of doing ??? type damage. Cake of Rage 20:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

As there is no ??? plate, I don't think that's possible. I guess, with some fairly intensive hacking, we might be able to come up with something. --((Marton imos)) 20:54, 20 September 2008 (UTC)
I hacked a patch into the game with an item called "Test Plate". It boosts ??? type moves and would change arceus into ??? type. anyway i gave to arceus in three ways.

1) Gave to Arceus. Got into starly battle. Used judgement. It said "arceus used |-|-Z! and it acted as if it was a ground type move or something, because i repeated the test with bidoof and it said "Arceus used |-|-Z!" and it said "It's super effective!".

2) Gave to Arceus. Saved. Battled Cynthia. It said "Arceus used Judgement!" Then it said "It's super effective!" Lucario comes out. "arceus used judgement!" Then it was super effective again. all pokemon were One Hit KO'ed.

3) Gave to Arceus. Entered a Contest. Used judgement. It said arceus used J---?!!!" and the contest froze for a second. Then it came up with my 18th box on my PC, then I got into a wild battle with Linoone. Then it made me battle my rival (as at the battleground) then it took me back to the contest, where the game came up with the Contest Completed thingymobob. I had lost?! even though i was the only entrant. This is wierd! Then I saved and the game froze after I saved. Turned off and on and I was in Solacion town. My Test Plate was gone.

Hope that helped!!! SpecialK Leiks Lucario and The Celebi Glitch 17:45, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Please look and someone add onto the article! SpecialK Leiks Lucario and The Celebi Glitch 11:27, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
Sounds like a trippy experience. I can't possibly imagine what kind of glitch in the code could possibly cause those sequence of events. ProxyVortex 20:10, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Shadow moves in Pokémon XD aren't ??? type, they're ----- (or just "Shadow") type. Unlike ??? moves, they have Physical/Special differentiaiton, and they have type effectiveness (although not STAB). In fact, if you consider Shadow a type, then you have three-type Pokémon in XD. I think we need some kind of article on Shadown type, even if it doesn't include all that information. I'll make it tomorrow during lunch break if nobody esle wants to. LordArceus 03:05, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

No, they're ???-type. There is no Shadow type. TTEchidna 03:16, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I know that there's no 'Shadow' type, but the type of XD's Shadow Moves is NOT ???. In the space for a colored type bar, there's only a ------- (as opposed to Colloseum, which DID have the ??? bar). Moreover, obviously it is not ??? because it has type advantage and resistance applied. LordArceus 14:20, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Moves in XD are ???-type too, and they are split in physical or special category depending on if they do or not contact on the target. ???-type is only appliable to moves and not to Pokémon. hfc2X 20:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
I'll load up Colosseum then XD and report back. Gywall(Talk) 20:33, 25 November 2008 (UTC)
Shadow moves are type-less. Not ??? Type, but no type at all. Gywall(Talk)
Yeah, they are typeless, but doesn't this count as ???-type anyways? hfc2X 20:50, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

In essence, that's what I said. I was correct: they have "-------" for a type. However, there's no way it can be ??? type becuse ??? type does not have super effective or not very effective. I called it 'Shadow' type in the same way ----- is called DPBox. LordArceus 02:41, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

Move to ??? (type)

Hi. Um, this article is referred to in the games (as well as any other place) as ???. So I was thinking; should I move this to ??? (type)? Noname4you 02:19, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Well being that we're getting issues with question marks now where they weren't before, I'm gonna say hold the freaking crap off on this if we do decide to for a really long while. TTEchidna 06:30, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
What about Unknown (type) to fit in with the others?--MisterE13 17:38, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


How can an eg be a ??? type. It is is considered as such because you don't know what pokemon its going to be. The ???-type Arceus is different. - unsigned comment from Hyurnat4 (talkcontribs)

Because technically the contents of the egg are unknown. So, the type that the Pokémon inside will be is also unknown... Even though most players know what will be inside their Pokémon Eggs. - Kogoro | Talk to me - 04:45, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Statistical averages

OK, since we've established that Eggs are ???-type, and Arceus and Smeargle have the capability to become ???-type, might this warrant a statistical averages section? Perhaps, sans Arceus, since there is no legal way to get its type changed to ???? And I know I read somewhere that Eggs have base stats of 10 across the board, so that technically would count. Just gotta dig up where I found that... Missingno. Master wants YOU! Join the Order of the Glitch! (my talk page) 20:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


...I'm pretty sure question marks in titles still don't agree with the inner workings of the wiki, considering I can still see pages being moved for that reason. Is this working alright, or should it be moved back to "Unknown type"? ▫▪Ťïňắ 01:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

They appear to be working fine on my end. My guess is that Archaic wasn't aware that question marks in titles actually were working, singled out Which One ~ Is It? (the newest Japanese ending theme of the anime), and moved the article to a location without the question mark, citing problems which appear to not exist. Don't know how these signals are getting crossed...--Shiningpikablu252 01:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
It's the archives that screws up the question marks. TTEchidna 20:09, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Arceus and HG/SS

We know that in D/P/Pt, Arceus has a ???-type sprite. But does it have one in HG/SS? TorchicBlaziken (talkedits) 15:12, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

yes. SpecialK Leiks Lucario and The Celebi Glitch 10:25, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Arceus testing

If Arceus's base type is hacked to be ??? instead of Normal, does it show the ???-type sprite? TorchicBlaziken (talkedits) 15:34, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Some people have already used a game-altering device so that when Arceus is sent out it is the ??? type. The sprite indeed changes, however I've only seen videos of Arceus changing into his ??? form and then back into his Normal form because there is no ??? plate. --Chickasaurus 15:56, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Phys/Spec split

"Because they're not programmed to be either physical or special moves, even with a base power of 255 (the highest that the game allows), the move will do almost no damage."

Is this true for 4th gen games? Because, logically, it shouldn't be. (Unless Gamefreak used some really cheap work-around, which is unnecessary as far as I know.) --~Poke~ 05:59, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


Struggle has no offensive properties. Could it be '???' type? What is it listed as in the game's coding?

Normal --Chickasaurus 09:20, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

Shadow Sky weather ball.

Weather Ball during Shadow Sky is a proper ??? move in XD. Should be added to the article. --Deuxhero 16:09, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

I think it is really Shadow-type rather than ???-type. I don't have XD, so I can't test it. Apparently, Shadow moves are super effective against non-Shadow Pokémon and not very effective against Shadow Pokémon. --SnorlaxMonster 06:15, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
I do and just played the fight where it is seen. It is neutral against everything. --Deuxhero 19:05, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


As mentioned earlier in the article Smeargle can apparently be ??? type by doing somethings. If this is true shouldn't Smeargle be added to added to the article? Also I think it raises the question of what happens when Smeargle does the same thing in Gen V.
Tasty Salamanders 08:14, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

That was on there before, but it got removed. I'll put it back on. --SnorlaxMonster 10:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
According to this: it has been confirmed that using Roost on a Pure-Flying now changes to Normal. Tasty Salamanders 11:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

??? type in bulbapedia

Shouldn't it be noted that ??? type is used in templates in bulbapedia where there is no data about actual type of something or as default type? Links in this templates are lead here, I believe it should be explained why.--ЫъГЬ 07:56, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

It should just be the default on templates, and its color is often used for glitches. However, it shouldn't be appearing on mainspace pages where the type is not actually known. I don't know how to explain it anymore than that. --SnorlaxMonster 02:03, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Hidden Power

Is hidden power Normal-type or ???-type? - unsigned comment from SPCC (talkcontribs)

Let's check the Hidden Power page to see. R.A. Hunter Blade 03:09, 26 April 2011 (UTC)


Ignores Curse in Gen V? Anyone wanna see? TTEchidna 12:05, 7 June 2011 (UTC)


It isnt made clear on the page if a ???-type Pokemon would gain STAB from using a ???-type move. Would they? Vuvuzela2010 Δ 13:35, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

There are no damaging moves or Pokémon of this type. If there were then it would go without saying. So I don't see how adding it is helpful. Toon Ganondorf (t c) 13:42, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
In XD, Weather Ball becomes ???-type. A Pokemon could probably be hacked to be ???-type in that game, if anyone wants to check. Vuvuzela2010 Δ 13:53, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Is it actually ???-type, or is it the unknown type that Shadow moves use? The two are not the same. Werdnae (talk) 01:45, 19 December 2011 (UTC)
It's not super effective against non-Shadow Pokemon, or weak against Shadows. I don't know what type it would be in the game's code though. Vuvuzela2010 Δ 19:55, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Mystery Dungeon

In mystery dungeon series there is 2 ??? type moves (wide slash and vacuum-cut). - unsigned comment from Savelijah (talkcontribs)

Weather Ball and Colour Change

Does a Weather Ball used during Shadow Sky activate Kecleon's Colour Change, and turn it into the ???-type? Can someone check this? XVuvuzela2010X 11:22, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Weather ball in gen V

How does generation V get around with weather ball in gen V?--Cobalt174 (talk) 01:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

If you're referring to this, it requires Shadow Sky, a Generation III-exclusive move. --Abcboy (talk) 01:52, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Category of Weather Ball

Is ??? type Weather Ball a Physical move or a Special move? You can test it with Counter and Mirror Coat. (I'd do it myself but I don't have a Castform.) BOOXMOWO (talk) 19:39, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit Request...

Change "Leading up to the release of Pokémon X and Y, Sylveon's type is listed as ??? on official materials as its actual type has not been revealed." To "Leading up to the release of Pokémon X and Y, Sylveon's type is listed as ??? on official material until its actual type was revealed to be Fairy."

Pokemon nomekop (talk) 18:54, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

This is ridiculous

??? isn't and was NEVER a true type. The ??? simply means that something's type is unknown, which is why eggs are all categorized under this "type". The fact that this article treats it like a regular type is pretty cringe-worthy. - Ericss (talk) 13:42, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

It has coding that makes it recognizable as a type (until Generation V) and moves like Wide Slash, Vacuum Cut, and Weather Ball (While Shadow Sky is in effect) are ???-type moves. Heck, there is even a sprite for an ???-type Arceus. The above comment is supported by Spyspotter. 14:18, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

"Hacked ??? type moves in 2nd/3rd-gen games would always do very little damage" this true? Because I'm pretty sure the games before the physical/special split determined whether a type was physical or special just based on where it was in the programming (types assigned to the numbers 00 through... I think it was 09 or so... were physical, types above that were special.) I know I made some moves ???-type in a Gold/Silver ROM hack once years ago, and I don't remember them doing abnormally low amounts of damage, but it's been a while... so I can't say off the top of my head whether they worked normally or not. I do remember that Conversion 2 would crash the game if you tried to use it after being hit by an ???-type move, since ??? doesn't have any resistances defined for it. I've never tried it in the 3rd-gen games, though. But anyway... the whole "since ??? type wasn't defined as physical or special, attacks of that type would always do very little damage" thing just doesn't sound likely to me. It sounds like the kind of thing someone would make up after the fact, not understanding how the old physical/special type system actually worked. Anyone have a source for this claim?? FnrrfYgmSchnish (talk) 22:26, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

While I can't say anything for Gen II, I can confirm that it's true for Gen III, as I've seen the code myself. It's a consequence of the fact that types, rather than moves, are assigned as physical or special. The damage calculator doesn't know whether to assign ???-type moves as physical or special (and thus, which set of offensive and defensive stats to use), and thus doesn't even try, simply returning 1 (not just "minimal" damage, exactly 1).--Gou (talk) 12:08, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
It's apparently calculated as if it was Physical in Gen II (if only an attack's type is altered). Nescientist (talk) 21:21, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
Just for reference, in Generation IV, it seems it could also be exactly 2 damage, i.e. the +2 at the end of the damage formula, randomly varied; the main part of it is apparently just 0 rather than something based on (Sp)Atk/(Sp)Def. Nescientist (talk) 09:02, 12 May 2018 (UTC)


From Generation II onwards, Struggle affected all Pokémon with normal damage. The only type move that can do this is the ??? type. However, if one hacks Struggle onto a Pokémon's moveset, it appears to be a Normal-type move. Why?

Dylanfrinkled314 (talk) 01:45, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

It's just a normal-type move coded to do typeless damage, apparently. If you're asking why GF specifically coded this rather than use the ??? type for it... I've got nothing. Yamiidenryuu (talk) 17:30, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Burn Up

When a pure fire type uses Burn Up it becomes ??? type, I believe (page for Burn Up says "typeless" [1]). Should probably be added. DrampasGrandpa (talk) 02:17, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Having no type is not the same as having the type ???. --SnorlaxMonster 06:24, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
You're wrong. It behaves as if it's ???-type, not "typeless" NinjaBoyLao (talk) 05:46, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
If you look at the user interface, you can see that the Pokémon has no type (rather than the ??? type). If another Pokémon transforms into it, it becomes Normal type; if another Pokémon uses Reflect Type on it, Reflect Type fails; if the Pokémon uses Revelation Dance, it does not change the type of a Pokémon with Color Change and Conversion 2 will fail if that Revelation Dance was the last move used by the target. It is definitely not ??? type. --SnorlaxMonster 06:04, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Well, I guess you shoulda just went ahead and said that the first time then. Useful to add to this page anyway, since there isn't a page for "typeless", as that was roughlythe same as this before generation V. - unsigned comment from ‎NinjaBoyLao (talkcontribs)
Typeless things don't belong on this page because typeless is not the same as ???. There's some discussion of typelessness at type → typeless at the moment, but if you want a better place for it, why not create a draft of a full article titled "typeless" in your userspace? Pumpkinking0192 (talk) 16:49, 27 March 2017 (UTC)
I do not think "typeless" needs a page. There's a section on the type page, and I think that's enough. --SnorlaxMonster 09:04, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Roost and Weather Ball

Roost:As we've said here, we can't be 100% perfectly sure without looking at the code, but I've done the research I said I might do, and it turns out that wherever it matters, it looks like Roost does not actually turn pure Flying types into ??? types in Gen IV. If it did make them that, the programmers took considerable effort to actively hide it wherever it matters, and that's just unlikely. It's far more likely people assumed it to be ???, just because all attacks are normally effective against it.

Basically, there are two equally easy ways to implement the effect so far known:

  1. If the user is (part) Flying-type, set the user's Flying type to ??? until the end of the turn
  2. Make an exception to ignore the Flying type when the user has used Roost this turn

Now, here's my information that clearly points to the second option, not the first:

  • UPC says, in Gen IV, "attacks against user are normally effective against the Flying type". From past experience, they are very very reliable at technicalities, and they apparently inspected the code. Were it Option 1, I believe they would have said "changes Flying to ???", not what they actually say.*
  • When Ditto transforms to a pure Flying type in Gen IV that has just used Rest, it becomes Flying-type! We know Transform copies the target's current types (and just to be sure, I reconfirmed it while testing), and were the target ???, Ditto would become ??? (unless there's a very delibarate exception I mentioned earlier, one that is absent for Burn Up!). I just tested this, and a Fighting type move was not very effective against said Ditto.

I will point to this explanation when I will be adjusting pages accordingly within the next few days.

Weather Ball:I have never played XD, but this page says Shadow Sky Weather Ball will change Color Change Pokémon to Normal type. Could someone confirm whether this is the case, and whether the game (or the battle engine) is roughly similar to core series? (Or at least answer whether it is countered by Counter a few sections up?) Unless there is a significant difference, that would point to it still being Normal-type, despite its type effectiveness always being 1x. It's basically the same case as Roost then, and I'd assume incautious ??? assumption as well. Nescientist (talk) 17:24, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

We've meanwhile found out that Weather Ball is indeed countered by Counter, and appears not to receive STAB (see User talk:Suic12-#Weather Ball). Consequently, I've removed Weather Ball from here. Nescientist (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Also just learned that Chosen apparently had his Color Change Pokémon become Normal type with shadowy aura Weather Ball in 2013. Nescientist (talk) 20:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Weather Ball

Shouldn't the listing of Weather Ball also be placed in the spin offs category, seeing as this only mentions it's effects in Gale of Darkness? Maradi (talk) 20:12, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I've removed it from this page (see the above section), so it's a moot discussion. Nescientist (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Proposition: Clarify the difference between ??? and Typeless

I feel like it would be useful to have a section clarifying the difference between the ??? type and being typeless. I was inspired since a recent video by Moxie Boosted seems to conflate the two terms. Sure, they're functionally the same, but ??? in this article refers to the type used as placeholder for eggs and Curse pre-GenV (among other things), while typelessness refers to a Pokemon not possessing a type at all, in the case of Burn Up. Simply put, I think it's important to stress the difference between the two, as since they function the same mechanically, it's easy to think of them as the same. I'm a newbie at wikis though, so if anyone would like to weigh in with their opinion, that would be greatly appreciated. Sporecore (talk) 21:15, 18 October 2023 (UTC)