User blog:MrYokaiAndWatch902/ELEMENTS SCHOOL: BACK 4 YOU

After a bunch of recreations only to be blown up OVER AND OVER AGAIN, I'm making an elements school dedicated to the revival of SSLW. The table of contents are below; this is specifically for Pokémon-style weakness charts. It might expand depending on my view.

Picking Your Elements
Simple stuff; it's all about picking your elements. Except it's actually hard if you're trying to cram a bunch of elements into your game, so you should try starting out with simple elements like Fire, Water, or Grass. Try and avoid redundant elements in any way possible. Also try and avoid one-line elements, which are just elements for one specific thing (EXAMPLE: A Rabbit element just for rabbits, a Short element just for short things).

And then there's a variant to one-line elements... rarity elements. Rarity elements only exist to show off the rarity of a character. For example, there's a legendary character. Do you really have to give it Legendary?

Sometimes you might wanna add subcategory elements. That's basically one part of an element seperated into a seperate element. Well, I don't have any tips on that, except... stay in the same spot. Try to.

The Weakness Chart
Your weakness chart should be logical. It should try and include real-world things. But! If you're going for a videogame/television/whatever example, try something that's common... like, say, lava being a common obstacle in video games. Don't do some one-time thing that's incredibly minor such as Royal > Green because QwerbyKing happened to kick TheGreenTree.

Try keeping your element restricted to the main category. For example, if you make a Fire element that also includes hot meals in it, you shouldn't make it weak to Poison (unless you're doing your weakness chart differently). If you're really desperate to have subcategories, try to just have only one-to-two subcategories. In the case of subcategory elements, try and differentiate them slightly from the main element.

As a warm up, start with simple logic, and as you progress do more research. (Fire melting ice, sharp stuff popping rubber balls, etc)

What If I Want to Explain Them?
Well, good question. Recommendations:
 * Don't cause confusion or be confused. That won't be a very nice outlook to your weakness chart.
 * If you added it, yet the reason is something like "I don't know," why did you add it in the first place? If you don't know, maybe try researching next time.
 * Stay calm, just explain, even if it's something very basic, such as Grass > Water.

Typing
There's not much to be said; you wanna logically type them... but you don't always have to exert a bunch of logic into all your enemies. For example, normal Charizard is Fire/Flying, despite there being a Dragon type (it's probably because dragon was thought of after Flying). Doduo is Normal/Flying yet it doesn't have wings (and can learn fly). Basically, you don't have to go full-on out with logic... which I'm going to stop doing, actually. You still wanna logically type them, just not too much.

A Prove 'Em Wrong?! WHOA! That's Not Ancient!
History repeats itself, we're harnering back to that ONE rant and with my newlyfound knowledge... the one time where TSRITW threatened to remove Elements School from history if I didn't include his philosophies. I never truly finished it... and yeah. So... what is wrong with that rant?

POINT 1: Balancing
Sadly, he uses a completely different type of weakness chart (though it's 55% my fault for not specifying which weakness chart we're using) which is tiered, and is a hatching game weakness chart. Which is bound to be limited and try to be absolutely balanced (except a few like Outernauts)... and then he makes a rant on how all of my elements are based off of real life. So basically you're calling Pokémon unbalanced? (sure it might have some weird ones like Bug > Dark but they all at least have one explanation)

Ironically enough, Nightmare is the most unbalanced element I've seen, because it beats EVERYTHING.

POINT 2: Series-Based Elements
I don't get it but I think he's talking about me saying no TWOW-related weaknesses. But voting charts shouldn't be a reason on why something should lose to something else... trust me. The Grass type shouldn't beat the Flying type just because Leafy is safe and Balloony is eliminated. What's causing these people to vote for Leafy safe anyways? That's for another day though, same goes with the mystery of TOO popular Winner who's essentially just a variant of Loser.

POINT 3: The Ice > Fire Debate
Well, yeah, but, seeing dry ice dominate fire isn't going to be easy to see in action when not counting YouTube videos. And liquid nitrogen, I could SWEAR that won't be a common sight either. Basically, to sum it all up, fire > ice is actually more logical since it's an easier sight; all you just gotta do is freeze water and place it in the heat, or just dump it into the fire.

Another ironic fact, it took him ages to add Polar > Pyro after Polar stopped being water.