Talk:Personality value

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


For Unown's letter, does 0 correspond to A, or do the punctuation come first, or how is it sorted? -- Slim

Also, does it count for FR/LG where eah form of Unown is found only in one of the ruins? FabuVinny 12:49, 16 January 2006 (CST)
From 0-27 they go like this: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z ! ? as shown by sprite data.
In the FR/LG ruins the unowns' personalities are generated like normal but are controlled for whatever building's conditions. When they are controlled for unown letter the effect on other personality traits is probabilistically insignificant. --Sheep 13:10, 12 February 2006 (CST)
Can somebody provide me with an Unown's personal value and letter? I need to check something. --Kyoufu Kawa 16:46, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Too late! 0x00003C6E comes down to the letter C. Please don't ask why the personal value is so small. --Kyoufu Kawa 10:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

what is the Unown calc in the second games? (Gold silver crystal) --Hanmac 16:16, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


Maybe no one else noticed this, but the gender equation doesn't work correctly. If it was a 100% female (base gender of 254), then the pgender could potentially be 255 which is higher than 254 resulting in a male Pokémon when that Pokémon is supposed to be female-only. --Naokohiro 22:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

What it does is it first checks the base gender stat. If the BGS is 0, the Pokémon is automatically male; if it's 254, the Pokémon is automatically female; if it's 255, the Pokémon is automatically genderless. For any other value, it will make the equal-to-or-greater-means-male comparison. Otherwise, Female-only Pokémon could be male 1/128 of the time, and genderless Pokémon could be male 1/256 of the time. --JoeMoron2000 16:15, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


Can someone tell me what personality a Wurmple needs to become a Dustox. I don't understand this equation at all. Plus it would just be so much easier to list the ones that work. - unsigned comment from Mystrich (talkcontribs)

That's nature, determined itself from personality value. You'd need to go through many more calculations than simply looking at what nature the Pokémon is to see if it's gonna become a Silcoon or a Cascoon. TTEchidnaGSDS! 02:43, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Ah, well do you think you would be able to explain how to figure it out. I've captured an evolved a lot of wurmples and not one has been a cascoon. - unsigned comment from Mystrich (talkcontribs)
I really don't know myself... Just get lucky, I guess... TTEchidnaGSDS! 20:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
Does the personality value's effect on nature imply that certain natures of Wurmple are more likely to evolve into Silcoon than Cascoon? Ultraflame 04:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
It might... though Wurmple's evolution is determined by the lowest word value, while nature is on the overall p doubleword. TTEchidnaGSDS! 05:04, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, it may, but only veeeeery slightly. Think of it this way:

If the part of the personality value that affects Wurmple's evo (which we'll call the Wurmple Value) converts to 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 in decimal, then its evo will be Silcoon. If the Wurmple Value is 6, 7, 8, 9, or 10, it will become a Cascoon. If it's 11, 12, 13, 14, or 15, it will become a Silcoon, and so on until 32768. But there's no way of checking this in-game, so it's all luck. --Clorox (diskussion) 00:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

And essentially its relation to nature is as follows:
Personality value (p) p%25 Nature pw%10 Evolution Gender
Binary Decimal
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 0 0 Hardy 0 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000001 1 1 Lonely 1 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000010 2 2 Brave 2 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000011 3 3 Adamant 3 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000100 4 4 Naughty 4 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000101 5 5 Bold 5 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000110 6 6 Docile 6 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000111 7 7 Relaxed 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00001000 8 8 Impish 8 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00001001 9 9 Lax 9 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00001010 10 10 Timid 0 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00001011 11 11 Hasty 1 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00001100 12 12 Serious 2 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00001101 13 13 Jolly 3 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00001110 14 14 Naïve 4 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00001111 15 15 Modest 5 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00010000 16 16 Mild 6 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00010001 17 17 Quiet 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00010010 18 18 Bashful 8 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00010011 19 19 Rash 9 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00010100 20 20 Calm 0 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00010101 21 21 Gentle 1 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00010110 22 22 Sassy 2 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00010111 23 23 Careful 3 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00011000 24 24 Quirky 4 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00011001 25 0 Hardy 5 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00011010 26 1 Lonely 6 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00011011 27 2 Brave 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00011100 28 3 Adamant 8 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00011101 29 4 Naughty 9 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00011110 30 5 Bold 0 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00011111 31 6 Docile 1 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00100000 32 7 Relaxed 2 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00100001 33 8 Impish 3 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00100010 34 9 Lax 4 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00100011 35 10 Timid 5 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00100100 36 11 Hasty 6 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00100101 37 12 Serious 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00100110 38 13 Jolly 8 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00100111 39 14 Naïve 9 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00101000 40 15 Modest 0 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00101001 41 16 Mild 1 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00101010 42 17 Quiet 2 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00101011 43 18 Bashful 3 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00101100 44 19 Rash 4 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00101101 45 20 Calm 5 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00101110 46 21 Gentle 6 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00101111 47 22 Sassy 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00110000 48 23 Careful 8 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00110001 49 24 Quirky 9 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00110010 50 0 Hardy 0 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00110011 51 1 Lonely 1 Silcoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 01111111 127 2 Brave 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 10000000 128 3 Adamant 8 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 10000001 129 4 Naughty 9 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 11111111 255 5 Bold 5 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000001 00000000 256 6 Docile 6 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000001 00000001 257 7 Relaxed 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 11111111 11111110 32,766 16 Mild 6 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 11111111 11111111 32,767 17 Quiet 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000001 00000000 00000000 32,768 18 Bashful 0 Silcoon
00000000 00000001 00000000 00000001 32,769 19 Rash 1 Silcoon
11111111 11111111 11111111 11111110 4,294,967,294 19 Rash 6 Cascoon
11111111 11111111 11111111 11111111 4,294,967,295 20 Calm 7 Cascoon
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 Nature comparison
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 Evolution comparison
00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 Gender comparison
(Wurmple's value is 01111111)

Gender's in there, too. TTEchidna 04:22, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Furthering this, when the games create wild Silcoon and Cascoon, could their personality values be such that the (theoretical) Wurmple that became it should have evolved into the opposite species, and therefore theoretically the wild Silcoon/Cascoon with that personality value shouldn't technically exist?
To reword all that, can I have a Wurmple and Cascoon (both caught as-is from the wild) with the same personality values, but the Wurmple will evolve into a Silcoon instead? I mean in terms of whether the game legally allows for this, rather than cases of hacking. ~ Serial Colour 22:14, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
What about specific nature-gender-shininess combinations resulting in specific evolution?--MisterE13 18:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)


Please see this page for Gatorshark's notes on his Spinda painter.

I'm not too certain the whole coordinate thing is right. I went and generated several Spinda earlier, making screenshots and writing down the personality values for each. Just today, I was informed of a page where you could see the spot pattern for a given PV, and I just had to try it out.

For a Spinda with PV 0x077F9E5F, the original sprite from Fire Red was this while the generator's sprite was this. --Kyoufu Kawa 18:18, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I talked to someone at Legendary Pokémon and their generator does not work. Gatorshark's generator seems to work though [1]... of course, it only covers the R/S sprites. --Codemonkey85

It would seem that there are four spots of varying shape that can only move in certain bounding rectangles. Very interesting... this should make deciphering the pattern easy. I'm gonna play around with this now. --Kyoufu Kawa 15:34, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Interesting. Assuming Gatorshark's generator is correct (I haven't tried the Lineup yet), the spots are stored in an X/Y nibble pair, but with the bounding box rules on top of that. All you'd need to do for different poses is change the spot shapes and bounding box origins to match. --Kyoufu Kawa 15:38, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Well, that sounds simple enough... assuming the bounding boxes are the same size for different poses, or more importantly (to me anyway) the Gen IV sprites. --Codemonkey85 11:00, 29 December 2008

Assuming they are still based on a randomly generated 32-bit value with the same rules, you'd think the boxes only have to move, yeah... --Kyoufu Kawa 16:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

Kyoufu Kawa, do you think you could hook me up with those screenshots and PIDs? I have an algorithm I'd like to test, as I'm creating a program that can graph Spinda's spots like the generators you have seen online. --Codemonkey85 15:41, 30 August 2008

Not a problem. [2] --Kyoufu Kawa 19:57, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll be sure to look at these. I'd really like to figure out how this works for the D/P sprites. --Codemonkey85

Hey guys, I have gotten some info from Gator Shark, and written my very own Spinda drawing program for Windows. You will need the latest .Net framework installed to use it.

Check it out here:

I'll edit the info on Spinda's entry to reflect what I now know, when I get time. --Codemonkey85

Any way to contact this GatorShark guy?--MisterE13 21:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I have some ideas that could potentially utilise his work.--MisterE13 03:51, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Does anyone think we could somehow use a generator like that? Either through uploading a generatable sprite to the archives or external links. Random sprites like that could be even better than the spotless ones we use now.--MisterE13 16:27, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
I think random Spindas could be done. All you need is a serverside app to generate one by request. All it needs is pixel editing, a blank Spinda and the spots. --Kyoufu Kawa 11:41, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Would it be able to generate a Personality value then create R/S/FR/LG, E, and D/P Spinda, both shiny and normal, which correspond to that PV?--MisterE13 18:27, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Rolling a PV is the easy part. The rest is just a matter of having the right source pics, spot bitmaps and box coordinates, I'd imagine. In fact, if it's just random spots you want, why bother rolling a PV? Just roll four coordinates! One can always add a PV parameter to overrule that behavior. --Kyoufu Kawa 12:49, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
[3] --Kyoufu Kawa 16:29, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

And we could be sure that they would all be the same (controlled) PV? And Emerald would be a .gif and D/P/Pt would be anipngs?--MisterE13 18:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


When is Personality Value calculated? In the egg? When it's hatched? Basically, I'm asking if I can save a few steps before an egg hatches and still get different values if I restart the game. Jazzmoth 21:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Nature, shininess and gender are determined when the egg is created (before you take it), and IVs are determined when you receive the egg from the day care couple. So, PVs are probably calculated when the egg's created... ▫▪Ťïňắ 21:56, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Why all the xor-ing?

The formula for determining shininess is redundant. You don't need the variables E or F at all - the formula boils down to (p1 xor p2) xor (ID xor SID), which is just p1 xor p2 xor ID xor SID. Xor is associative and commutative. Ztobor 17:51, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

  • If that's the actual formula Nintendo uses, I need a word with their programmers.
It's not that it's redundant, it's just that it uses more memory than necessary. You're still doing three xor operations in both cases, it's just that this way makes it easier to comprehend... or something like that. --JoeMoron2000 16:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, by redundancy I meant with memory, but alright. Ztobor 18:50, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Gender AND Unown letter?

The gender byte doesn't matter on Unown, right? Because having 11111111 (for genderless) would cause to never span certain Unown shapes (only modulus would be 3, 7, 11, etc.) --Johans 07:30, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't have to be that number, that is the 'base stat' for the Pokemon. In otherwords it can be anything for any individual Pokemon. The Pokemon's value is then compared to the base stat value (in this case 11111111), if it is lower it is female (except for genderless species) and if it is higher then it is male. Werdnae (talk) 07:51, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh, I get it now :) So it's just a flag for the species which is used for comparisons only on unisex species. Thanks for the answer. --Johans 01:45, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Shiny imposibility

With all the ⊕ing is it posible that some trainers with insainly high IDs and SIDs cant posibly get a shiny. I personaly dont understand the math of an ⊕ so could sombody please explain and awnser my question.--Megamaxxor-- 01:00, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

It's always possible to get a shiny. Given a player with ID a and SID b, a Pokémon with a personality value in which p1 is 0 and p2 equals a xor b (among many other possible personality values) will be shiny. —Minimiscience 01:28, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
To clarify a little more, since Megamaxxor doesn't quite understand the ⊕ operation: If what Minimiscience said is true, then let's go with that example.
  • Let's take the numbers a (trainer ID), b (trainer SID), and the Pokémon's personality value and convert them into binary representation (base 2). In binary, a and b have 16 bits, or digits.
  • When we do ab, we're checking each bit to see if they're the same between a and b. For example, suppose we're checking the 5th bit of a and b. The 5th bit of ab will be 0 if the 5th bit of a is the same as the 5th bit of b, and 1 otherwise. We then get another 16-bit number in ab.
  • Now we check the personality value's binary representation, which is a 32-bit number (unlike a or b). If the leftmost 16 bits of the personality value are all 0, and the rightmost 16 bits of the personality value are exactly the same as what you got for ab, then the Pokémon with that personality value is shiny.
Since trainer and secret IDs can each be anywhere (in binary) from 0000000000000000 to 1111111111111111, and a Pokémon personality value can be anywhere from 00000000000000000000000000000000 to 11111111111111111111111111111111, what's actually impossible is finding a situation where you can't find a possible shiny combination in that example that I referred to. Of course, as Minimiscience said, the example that I referred to is just one possible combination of ID, secret ID, and personality value for a shiny Pokémon. Ultraflame 03:27, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the brife explanation so your saying that all numbers in the ⊕ combonation except for the last (Befor final ⊕) have to be the same. But if were olny working with zeros and 1's why does the equation say below 8 if there are olny two posible combonations?--Megamaxxor-- 18:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

When they said "less than eight" they meant 8, in binary representation. The number 8 in 16-bit binary representation is 0000000000001000, so you can think of "less than eight" as any 16-bit binary number whose leftmost 13 bits are all 0. Ultraflame 20:24, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Finding out your Secret ID

So, if I'm correct, (and I'm probably not) you could catch a bunch of shiny Spinda or Unown, and use the spot locations (or letter) to find out part, if not your whole Secret ID? --Pichu Master 18:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Update needed in the Shiny section

Since the chance of finding a Shiny has increased in Gen VI, the article section on shininess needs updated to reflect this. I have no head for math or anything like that, so someone who knows what they're doing will need to update the section accordingly. Yamitora1 (talk) 14:52, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

Gender and Ability

I think there is something wrong with either the gender or ability section, the way it's currently written would suggest that all male only species have and PV ending with 00000000 which makes the PV even and gives the first ability, all female only species a PV ending with 11111110 which again is even with the first ability and genderless species ending with 11111111 which gives an odd PV and therefore the second ability, yet the examples given Magnemite and the Nidorans all have 2 possible abilities. - unsigned comment from Purple (talkcontribs)

Those values do not refer to an individual Pokemon's PV, they are gender thresholds (values that are set for every species of Pokemon and compared against the individual's PV). In any case, logically, the game must handle all-female species (and therefore likely all-male and genderless as well) specially; if not, it would be possible for a Pokemon's PV to be interpreted as an invalid gender. A Pokemon's PV should be able to be absolutely anything for all-male, all-female, or genderless Pokemon. Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:11, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Nature in Gen V?

The page says, "From Generation V onward, the nature is untied from the personality value, and stored separately."

Does that mean that the nature never has anything to do with the personality value, and is calculated on its own at some point? Or does it just mean that the nature is initially calculated from the personality value and then stored in an independent location so that it doesn't have to be recalculated every time it needs to be known? Tiddlywinks (talk) 14:38, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

The reason it was done was that the Masuda method was clashing with the Everstone in Gen IV, and the Shiny Charm would have just caused more issues with Synchronize. I would assume it means they are completely separate. Based on Shiny event Pokémon that have random Natures (and can be any Nature) and fixed Trainer IDs/Secret IDs, I'm fairly sure this is the case. --SnorlaxMonster 15:25, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Encryption constant

I don't know the specific details, but apparently now Spinda's spots, Wurmple's evolution, and the characteristic in the case of a tie are determined by the Pokémon's "encryption constant" instead of its personality value. From what I've read, the encryption constant is equal to the PID for Pokémon from previous generations, so there's no backwards compatibility issues. If someone with more knowledge could address this in this article (and maybe make an article for the "encryption constant", since it seems to determine more things in Gen VI than PID does), that would be appreciated. --SnorlaxMonster 11:49, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Now that I look at it again, a separate article on the encryption constant will be/is too similar to this article. A better long-term solution might be to have an article about the Gen VI data structure instead. Chenzw (talk) 08:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
If the encryption constant substitutes perfectly for the PID where it's been implemented, then we could perhaps just redirect encryption constant here and add a bit of detail here. Outside of a few things the PID used to do (and, obviously, encrypting the Pokemon data structure), does the encryption constant do much else? Tiddlywinks (talk) 13:42, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
To the best of my knowledge (assuming that there is no new feature/mechanic introduced in gen VI which would have otherwise depended on PID in a previous generation), no. Also, someone else might want to confirm if "encryption constant" is a fan designator. Chenzw (talk) 17:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

The relationship between PID and gender

This is no longer true with the introduction of a new byte in the Pokemon's data. I extracted data from a gen VI savefile and checked against Pokemon which are known to be legit (generated in-game, and untouched), and confirmed that the PID has no effect on gender. The opposite is also true–the game does not generate a PID to "fit" the Pokemon's gender (and thresholds).

A bit more about this byte: gender is determined by a bit field in 0x1D in gen VI, presumably primarily intended to store the forme (if any) of the Pokemon. It seems that this particular byte was introduced in gen IV at offset 0x40. I don't have a gen IV savefile to check against at this moment, but I suspect, given gen IV's quirks when it comes to PID generation, while PID may not affect gender in gen IV, the opposite could be true in the sense that gender will affect the final PID generated. Chenzw (talk) 17:54, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Litleo and Pyroar's ideal ratio

Does anyone have a guidebook that says what their ideal ratio (or percentage) is? We currently say it's "1:7", but just from the numbers, I guess it could actually be intended to be "1:8" (and/or just buggy). Nescientist (talk) 13:28, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

The ratios are logically based on powers of 2. Tiddlywinks (talk) 15:48, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Please see here for why I ask for explicit confirmation of their intention (and/or your logic) for those two. (I agree that they're "logically powers of 2" for the others.) Nescientist (talk) 19:16, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Without wading through that wall of text, if you agree the others are logically powers of two, it's basically nonsensical to doubt that Litleo is also a mirror of one of those. Tiddlywinks (talk) 19:36, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
Whoa! You can't say that a theory is nonsensical without even trying to understand it thoroughly. I believe my theory is absolutely worth being investigated (or at least mentioned), even more so when Earthoul apparently had the very same idea, independently (and within a 140 character limit). It's okay if you don't want to pursue this in any way, and this discussion petering out wouldn't be the end of the world, but please don't make it look like an answer isn't desirable or sensible.
Some official confirmation (either way) would be really neat. Nescientist (talk) 15:51, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
...All your referencing of arguments/justification makes it seem like you're trying to actually argue for it to be changed, which has made me want to say, no, there's not good reason to change it yet. If an explicit confirmation one way or another of the intentions is all you want, it'd be much cleaner/less confusing if that was all you said (at least in your responses). I've come to understand now. Tiddlywinks (talk) 17:43, 13 June 2017 (UTC)