Talk:Phione (Pokémon)

Phione- Legendary or not?

Can phione really be considered a legendary? It is by no means limited to one a game cartridge as legendary Pokemon are, given that it can breed with Ditto as well as any Magnemite, Rotom, or Baltoy. It's base stats are the same as Glalie's. Which is NOT legendary. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order to be a legendary, doesn't a Pokemon have to be only one per game without trading, and have at least SOMEWHAT good stats?

In my opinion, it's okay the way this article puts it. It doesn't mention Phione being a legendary, yet it's in the legendary category because it's related to Manaphy (and its Pokédex number is among legendaries). Kind of like an honorable mention in lists, but still not worth of mentioning a legendary status when talking about Phione itself. --Johans 16:43, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... It's because of the criterion of mine I mentioned in the last paragraph that I didn't like this update. I wonder if somebody agrees with me. Was it really necessary to mention that "it's still considered a legendary"? --Johans 00:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

My opinion is that Phione is classed as a legendary Pokémon because of it's relation to Manaphy as Johans has said. Also, legendary Pokémon do not evolve. Phione does not evolve into Manaphy either therefore, it must have some legendary traits. Tesh

You know, I'd have to say Phione is best classified as legendary. It's a derivative of a legendary - more closely tied to a true legendary Pokémon than Mewtwo is to Mew. It's a black sheep of the lot, but still pretty legendary, I think. --Pie ^~♪♫ 02:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

What's the role of the Phione species in Mystery Dungeon 2? I still vote for never mentioning explicitly "Phione is a legendary" until the whole franchise hints it well enough. This means official text saying it's a legendary, side games with extraordinary plots related to Phione, whether or not it will protagonize a hosou or a story arc, whether or not it will be a bonus Poké Ball in Super Smash Bros. Brawl... IDK... Stuff like that. --Johans 22:44, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Before continuing with the edit war on the Trivia section, I must say I agree with Missingno. Master on removing that line from the Trivia section which says "Without using cheats or trading, Phione is the only legendary Pokémon that a player can have more that one of". The reason to put it back (as seen here) is based just on the template. Such unability to say whether Phione is legendary or not only makes that line worthy of being removed IMO. Something can be an exception, but you can't tell if this one is. --Johans 17:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

It's because I suck at reasons. XD; Tina ^δ♫ 17:37, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

If Pokemon.com says Phione is legendary, Phione is legendary! Phione is most likely considered legendary because it is of legend in the same way Mew and Arceus have legends surrounding them. I don't actually recall Nintendo or the Pokemon franchise explicitly state what the benchmark is for a legendary. The classifications for a legendary, (such as only one per game, high stats and inability to breed), were most likely assumed after the second Generation or so and were constatly reinforced with more legendaries fitting the criteria. Maybe the classification has just been broken.

Phione is definately legendary but it's caused so much debate because it doesn't fit into the assumed criteria. Bttsstewart 13:00, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Phione is a conundrum. I really don't think of it as legendary, as it is "legendary" the same way Rotom is. Rotom is rare and has the legendary music play, but reproduces more of its own kind with Ditto; Phione's breeding is exactly like Rotom's. It traces its lineage from legends but doesn't have the stats to match up. Mewtwo is considered legendary due to its "one-of-a-kind" status and immense power. I say Phione is more of an "Almost, but not quite Legendary" pokemon, as it basically lacks that one special (probably yellow) element or essence that Manaphy has that makes it legendary. So, I think it's not like Phione is a demotion to borderline-legendary status, I think it's more like Manaphies being "Chosen Phiones" who are more powerful and pure (and legendary) as a result. This occasional legendary status isn't passed down from this special "Phione", and thus its children are normal Phiones. I don't think this debate would be so hectic if breeding wasn't the only way to obtain Phione. I say Phione belongs in the same category as Rotom as far as legendary status is concerned (Which is no) That's actually not a bad theory, that Manaphy are stronger Phione rather than Phione being weaker Manaphy. Kohdok 08:53, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Phione isn't a legendary. Multiple Phione can be bred from Manaphy. Multiple Phione can be bred from Phione. Also, its base stats aren't very high. I don't know why its banned from the Battle Tower, but likely because they are too delicate for competitive battling. Dusknoir477 09:13, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

"Phione is a legendary because it can be obtained by breeding a Manaphy, and Manaphy is a legendary. Yes, it is a baby pokemon, but it's cool that a baby pokemon is a legendary. The only reason it's band from the Battle Frontier is because it IS A LEGENDARY!!!!! (duh) --Platinum giratina13 21:44, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

As per my above post, has anyone actually read or heard Nintendo state what actually MAKES a Legendary a Legendary? With the arrival of the Phione/Manaphy legendary debate, the assumed criteria of not being able to breed, one-of-a-kind-ness, and high stats would technically be outdated as Phione and Manaphy are confirmed legenderies. Accoriding to the "new" rules, the only criteria for a legendary to be legendary is for Nintendo to say it's legendary! END OF STORY! Bttsstewart 20:05, 24 May 2009 (UTC)

Phione is not legendary. However, evolution cannot be the only criteria because when togepi was introduced it was considered to be legendary but it now is part of a three-tier evolutionary line.

Baby Pokemon?

Is it really ok to designate it as a Baby? It really doesn't fit any of the criteria of a Baby Pokemon. I mean it can breed, and to my understanding, Phione isn't a pre-evolution of Manaphy (As exemplified by the fact that it can't ever evolve into it. >_>) so much as a Manaphy that was bred in colder waters. --Dual 04:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

It's not a baby Pokémon. Baby Pokémon evolve and can't breed. Phione breeds and can't evolve. -- Glitch and Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 14:06, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

This... Egg move...

Okay, weeks ago I taught my Manaphy the move Waterfall, and I recently got a Ditto. Today, when my first Phione hatched from its Egg, guess what? It knew Waterfall!! But why in the world no Pokémon site mentions it? Not even Legendary Pokémon, the first people to publicly hack the game, talk of this. Maybe now that Manaphy was given away in an easier way, more people can help me confirming this (maybe it's an in-game bug or something? Or some game mechanics that have been overlooked?).

By breeding

Generation IV
Waterfall

Please do discuss. --Johans 02:18, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

It's an HM. That's why. TinaTheKirlia ♥ File:281MS.gif 02:20, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh... Does it always happen with babies and HM moves then? ^_^' And why isn't it valid to place it in the learnset lists? Is it because it's "obvious"? --Johans 03:26, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, and yes. It's listed under... breeding... i think. Inker 21:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Always happens with compatible HMs and TMs. TTEchidna 01:06, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

They grow up so fast.

Pssssst

Well well well, I just checked Pokemon.com and they just said Phione is indeed, not legendary. Aww shoot, I totally thought it was. Go to the mailbag. Tina ^δ♫ 04:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

does that mean i can use it in the PBR little cup? MAGNEDETH 04:21, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

No because all the Pokémon you use have to be a pre-evolution of another Pokémon. And since Phione doesn't evolve well... --File:Ani048MS.gifケンジFile:Ani183MS.gifガールFile:Ani123MS.gif 04:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

oh well. its not like i have PBR anyway. (oh the irony!!) MAGNEDETH 04:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, I absolutely HATE to say I told you so.... But what the heck! I told you so! =D -- Glitch Pokémon. Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 11:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, contradiction. This is also from Pokemon.com's mailbag, saying that Phione is legendary. // SzayelAporroGranzFile:Ani282MS.gif 19:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

WHAT?! This is impossible! Why would they change their answer??? HOW can something with Glalie's base stats be legendary?! -- Glitch Pokémon. Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 20:02, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Yessss! I totally thought Phione was legendary, I mean, it IS related to one anyway. Anyway, no more fricking revert/edit wars now. Tina ^δ♫ 20:14, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Why are you so happy? Phione breaks all the laws of legendaries- it can breed, it has bad stats, you can have more than one of them in PMD2... This upsets me, because all my carefully reasoned arguements, which by all rights should've been right, have been proven wrong! Plus, this means that if I use Phione in competitive battle, I'll be breaking my own rule of no legendaries. D< -- Glitch Pokémon. Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 20:18, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe because I actually THOUGHT Phione was a legendary? There's a word that you might want to hear about-- Exceptions. Tina ^δ♫ 20:20, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

But how can Phione be an exception to EVERY SINGLE RULE THAT DEFINES A LEGENDARY, AND STILL BE A LEGENDARY?! IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. -- Glitch Pokémon. Official Pokémon. There is no real difference between the two. In my opinion, the two should be considered equal!-- quoted by Missingno. Master 20:22, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Yea, it says here http://www.pokemon.com/#mailbag_02042008 that it is legendary....--Theryguy512 21:47, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Lol yeah, we reverted the 'non-legendary' things a while ago. *points up to Szayel's post* Tina ^δ♫ 21:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Let's not forget that there was never a specific "rule" that said legendaries couldn't do what Phione does. After all, Latios and Latias didn't break the legendary genderless rule, they were merely the first legendaries with genders. TTEchidna^G_SDS! 08:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Plus, Articuno, Zapdos, and Moltres were sort of confirmed to lay eggs in Pokemon Snap, though I'm not sure if that counts or not.

~~Weedle_McHairybug~~

I recall an episode, no, three episodes of Pokémon: Master Quest where Ash encountered a Lugia and a baby Lugia. Does that mean Legendary Pokémon can have babies, in this case Manaphy getting Phione? BlueJirachi 18:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Some Legendaries have been shown to breed outside of the main series, like the three Birds in Snap. But Phione is not a baby Manaphy because it can never become a Manaphy. Perhaps if one were to breed a Manaphy in Fiore then one would get another Manaphy egg. Of course, Manaphy eggs can't appearantly hatch in Fiore. This is all speculation, of course. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 19:07, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

But Phione can get another Phione as a baby.BlueJirachi 02:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, but you can also breed a Magnemite to get another Magnemite. That doesn't classify it as a baby Pokémon. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 13:44, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, the classification of "Baby Pokémon" is that they're too young to breed. I forgot that until now.BlueJirachi 14:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Just a thought: I still don't feel naming Phione a legendary Pokémon for a reason like that (the mailbox from Pokémon.com) is enough. What about Japanese denominations (densetsu, maboroshi, shinwa)? Which one is Phione? Bulbapedia is an output from us, but it's an input to many people. Saying Phione is a legendary because of that may be unhelpful if players organize battles or even trades where "legendaries aren't allowed" and they want to believe in this article instead of believing in sites that base themselves on stats and stuff. --Johans 20:33, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

An excellent point. How do we know Pokemon.com is correct? They changed their answer once before, which could indicate that they themselves don't have any idea, and are just guessing. Really, the only ones who'd know for sure are the creators themselves, the ones who actually came up with Phione. We can't count on Pokemon.com to know what the creators were thinking. So I'd say Phione's legendary status would still be uncertain. I'm Missingno. Master, and I approve this message. 14:26, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

I think that given its place in the Pokédex and how it was required to have a Legendary Pokémon to obtain should be enough proof. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 14:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh, so Dratini, Dragonair, and Dragonite are legendaries, because they're squeezed in between the bird trio and Mewtwo, are they? They are according to your logic. And secondly, just because a legendary Pokemon breeds to make a different species altogether, doesn't mean that the different species is also a legendary. Now, if Phione was unable to breed and had better stats, I would think it's a legendary. But anything with base stats equal to Glalie's and the ability to breed with Ditto like crazy? I mean, isn't the whole thing behind legendaries the fact that they're supposed to be HARD TO GET? And Phione can frickin' breed! Nintendo's never let us get more than one of each legendary per game w/o trading. Alright, here is, as I percieve it, the main points in the Phione Legendary Argument; Phione must be legendary because;

• It is bred from another legendary
• Its position in the Pokédex
• Genderless

Phione CAN'T be a legendary because;

• Its stats are mediocre at best
• It can breed, and therefore more than one per game cart can be easily obtained

And two of the points that say it's legendary I have already shot down. The Dragonite, Tyranitar, and Metagross families are squeezed between legendaries, and does that make them legendaries? No, it does not! Does Phione's position in the Pokédex classify it as a legendary? Absolutely not! And maybe it is bred from another legendary- does that actually MEAN anything about Phione's legendary status? No! Mew was said to be the ancestor of all Pokémon, does that mean that every single Pokémon in existance is legendary? I didn't think so! And the stats! The one major consistancy about legendaries (aside from the whole can't breed thing) is their good stats. And Glalie's base stats are not good. Now then, based on that argument, I'd say Phione cannot in any way in any form, shape, or existance, be a legendary, and you'd be insane to think it is. Thank you and have a nice day. I'm Missingno. Master, and I approve this message. 11:45, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

The families you mentioned are not Legendary because they are families. Phione does not evolve from or into another Pokémon. Don't be so stubborn... Phione is a Legendary, and MissingNo. isn't a real Pokémon. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 16:41, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

Until recently, Roselia couldn't evolve into or from anything else. And don't drag MissingNo. into this. The fact that they are families means nothing. I'm Missingno. Master, and I approve this message. 18:46, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

The fact that they are families means everything because Legendaries do not evolve. Which is why they can be surrounded by Legendary Pokémon in the Pokédex and not be considered. And you brought them up. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 22:04, 29 June 2008 (UTC)

Well, Rotom doesn't evolve and is oddly squeezed in between a bunch of evolutions and legendaries, and is it a legendary? Definitely not. Some people even thought it WAS a legendary for that reason (and the fact that legendary battle music played when it was battled), and yet, they were WRONG! Evolutions notwithstanding, the mere fact that there CAN be non-legendaries sandwiched between legendaries in the Pokédex means that Phione's position in said Pokédex doesn't mean a thing. And just because something doesn't evolve to or from anything doesn't mean it won't. Again, I point out Roselia as a prime example here. Dang thing got a pre-evo AND an evolution in the same generation! Now, I know Pokémon.com said that Phione is legendary, but they originally said it wasn't. The mere fact that they changed their answer indicates that they are doubtful. They could be guessing. Phione breaks the two cardinal rules that define legendaries; rarity (Phione can breed with Ditto to create more Phione), and strength (base stats of Glalie-not good). Legendaries are supposed to have at least DECENT base stats, and Phione's stats? Far from it. Most importantly, and this is the point most of you are overlooking, legendaries are supposed to be ONE PER GAME, sans trading/events. And Phione can BREED. Legendaries aren't SUPPOSED to reproduce in the games like this! That's why Phione was created in the first place-so Manaphy could lay eggs that hatched into something other than itself, so people wouldn't be running around with a *bleep*load of Manaphy on one game. Now THINK about that for a while, won't you? I propose that Phione's legendary status be labeled as "unconfirmed" until we get irrefutable proof of its legendary status (or lack thereof) by those who would know. Let's wait and see how the Anime portrays it, for example. I'm Missingno. Master, and I approve this message. 10:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Cardinal rule that defines legendaries? There are none, and there hasn't been one that didn't get thrown out the window in the last two generations besides the fact that they can't evolve.

Also, don't use Roselia for an example. Just because it can't evolve doesn't mean it's a legendary, but because Phione's legendary it cannot evolve. Squares and rectangles, you see. TTEchidna 14:05, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Exactly. And I highly doubt that Manaphy will ever gain an evo or even a prevo. Rotom, on the other hand, is more likely. Besides, who ever said that base stats defined legendary status? ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 14:48, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Nobody... It's more of an intuitive meaning. Like, most Pokémon movies and major story arcs are protagonized by legendary Pokémon. In the anime, legendary Pokémon are "powerful". And non-coincidentally, their stats are high in the Pokémon games, which is an accurate meaning for "powerful". --Johans 16:43, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Doesn't mean they couldn't make a crappy legendary. As of Gen I, the rules were ONE PER GAME, HIGH STATS, and NO EVOLVING. Once Gen II rolled around we got NO GENDER and NO BREEDING. Gen III took down the ONE PER GAME thing since Brandon had the damned Regi and the NO GENDER thing with Lati@s. All Gen IV did was remove NO BREEDING and HIGH STATS, since Phione sucks. Well, actually, not really sucks, just isn't incredibly cheaply high. People want less legendaries, how the hell else are they going to do anything unless they gradually reduce legendaries into little more than normal Pokémon? Sheesh, Heatran has a variable gender! TTEchidna 00:45, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sure, they COULD create a crappy legendary, but why would they? Legendary Pokémon have always been portrayed as powerful Pokémon that cannot breed. Legendary Pokémon are put up high on pedestals by those who create them. Legendaries sell movies. It's clear that the creators of Pokémon want the public to have a high opinion of legendaries, so why wreck it with a legendary that you can get a *bleep*load of in any given game, and that has less than decent stats? I don't think they would. Now, I want any one of you to list for me all the overwhelming reasons that prove beyond conclusive doubt that Phione is a legendary. Anyone? Nobody? OK, let me think here.... Oh, I know! Phione's bred from Manaphy! My goodness! Oh, how I must have been mistaken! Oh, Phione's bred from Manaphy! Son of cheese, that MUST mean it's legendary! Anyone who agreed with my last two sentences is a complete imbecile. For the love of Arceus, people, just because a Pokémon can be hatched from an egg that has been laid by a Legendary Pokémon doesn't mean that the offspring is legendary! Pichu hatch from eggs laid by Pikachu and Raichu, so does that make Pikachu and Raichu baby Pokémon? Of course not! Now, I want you people to think- just THINK- about it for a moment. Given the evidence I have presented, not just now, but over my entire career of arguing that Phione cannot be legendary, versus the single, measly fact that it can be bred from Manaphy, not to mention an entirely unconvincing letter from Pokémon.com (in which, may I remind you all, they changed their answer, indicating that they don't really know and are more than likely guessing), can you REALLY, in sound mind and complete sanity, STILL say, with the utmost conviction, that Phione is a legendary? DIDN'T THINK SO! OH, DUH! I'm Missingno. Master, and I approve this message. 01:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Phione is legendary... ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 02:14, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Phione's legendary status is debatable as we have not received word from the Jap creators. But still, Phione is legendary because it can ShoopWhoop. It's the Θρtιmαtum♏_Talk|Links09:37 2 Jul 2008

If Phione's not legendary, neither is Manaphy. Neither is Mewtwo. Manaphy is hatched from an egg, it matters not that you can't dump it in the daycare and get more Manaphy. The reason FOR Phione is just that: they KNEW that after getting an egg with Manaphy people would try for more, breed with Ditto, and end up whining if it were like Mew or Celebi. So they made Phione to trick people. As for Mewtwo, it was created by humans. No legend there. TTEchidna 14:13, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

And why do you think they did that with Manaphy in the first place? So people couldn't get more easily! Phione, on the other hand, can breed. I'm Missingno. Master, and I approve this message. 14:15, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Which makes Phione the first legendary that can successfully breed. No one ever said that all legendaries have to fit into some definable category forever more. And the fact that it's stats are lacking is because it can breed. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 14:50, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

YOU'RE MISSING THE POINT! The mere fact that Manaphy can breed, but not to create more Manaphy, indicates that legendaries aren't SUPPOSED to breed! As I've previously stated, if the fact that Manaphy can breed to make Phione is the only argument for Phione's legendary status, then it's a real feeble-ass argument, as, if Phione were indeed a legendary, then it would be the only legendary with breeding capabilities and mediocre stats, and I don't think that that's all that likely! Think about it! If they were going to make it so legendaries were breedable, there would be no Phione, and Manaphy could just lay more Manaphy eggs! OH DUH! I'm Missingno. Master, and I approve this message. 16:52, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

It was never set in stone that legendaries cannot breed and have to be one of a kind. If Nintendo and Game Freak want to make a sub-par legendary, then SO BE IT!!! Obviously the person who stated that Phione was not legendary was mistaken, and they corrected that mistake. Things change. Nothing has to be the exact same every generation. ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 17:26, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

OK, what you're saying WOULD make a lot of sense, if it didn't indicate that you never actually comprehended my arguments. THINK! If Nintendo and Game Freak wanted to create a breedable legendary at all, Phione wouldn't even exist, as the only reason they made it was that Manaphy could lay eggs without them hatching into more Manaphy! They would've just made Manaphy able to produce more Manaphy eggs! But they didn't! They made Manaphy able to breed a completely different species, and THAT species can breed, and it can't evolve into Manaphy. You know what this means? LEGENDARIES ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BREED, AND PHIONE IS LIVING PROOF! Now I agree, they COULD make a sub-par legendary. My point, however, is, WHY WOULD THEY? Look at the movies- legendary Pokémon are constantly spoken of with reverence, portrayed as grand, majestic, powerful, and rare, depictions that hold true in the games. Now, do you REALLY think that they'd besmirch the good name of legendaries, which they have worked so hard to glorify, by creating a legendary as common as Bidoof and as weak as Glalie? DIDN'T THINK SO! And before anyone replies to this, why don't you actually READ what I type, and let it sink in, let the gears of reason start turning in your head, and don't just come up with another lame excuse of an excuse as to why Phione is STILL legendary, despite all my well-reasoned arguments proving otherwise. Thank you. I'm Missingno. Master, and I approve this message. 11:27, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

<<sigh>>... The games and the movies are made by different people and follow completely different canon. According to the anime, Unown are legendary and powerful. Plus, who's to say that you can't produce more Manaphy eggs in a future generation? ~$aturn¥oshi ^{THE VOICES} 14:15, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Missingno. Master, I don't really think that the Games even held Legendaries as being high, majestic, and one of a kind. If they had, Brandon would NOT have had the three Golems OR the three Birds (the former of which can ALSO be caught in the wild), Palmer would NOT have owned Heatran, Cresselia, and Regigigas. Also, I won't get too spoilerific, but in Movie 11, let's just say that Shaymin isn't the only one of it's kind (Then again, considering the same event that Shaymin debuted in had a similar white rock located in Kanto (not to mention it being obtained in Almia), it was also hinted that it wasn't really one of a kind there either.). And anyways, even IF you can't breed Manaphies from Manaphies in Sinnoh, the mere fact that it HAD an egg proves that it can breed from another Manaphy, which would hint that, by your logic, it's not even a legendary. Also, the three dogs, Rayquaza, Groudon, Kyogre, Celebi, Mew, and Deoxys wouldn't have multiple members in Fiore (If Manaphy is counted as an official Main Legendary despite originating from a Spinoff game, then I'm going to count Fiore as a main game region as well.). the three dogs, Lugia, and Ho-Oh would ALSO have not appeared in Kanto/Sevii Islands if that was the case. heck, the three dogs, Ho-Oh, Lugia, the three birds, and Celebi would NOT have existed in Orre at all if they were one of a kind. The three Regis would ALSO have not existed in Sinnoh at ALL if legendaries were truly one of a kind. So please stop acting as though they shouldn't have multitudes. In fact, the only legendary pokemon that HASN'T had multitudes period is Mewtwo itself. Weedle Mchairybug 11:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

But, the fact still remains that in the games, legendaries are supposed to be one per cartridge. Manaphy itself is proof of this- if legendaries weren't intended to be one per cartridge, Phione wouldn't exist, as Manaphy would be able to produce more Manaphy. That's why Phione exist- to prevent Manaphy from breeding more Manaphy. And Phione are certainly NOT one per cartridge, as anyone with a Phione, a Ditto, and access to a daycare center can easily get as many Phione as they wish. And then there is the matter of its stats. Legendary Pokemon are powerful. They have good stats. They can learn Hyper Beam and other powerful moves. Phione has base 80 stats all around and can't learn Hyper Beam or any variant. It has no exclusive move (true, not all legendaries do). It doesn't even learn all the moves Manaphy can. And it doesn't learn ANY move Manaphy can't. True, this does not conclusively prove Phione to not be legendary, but it certainly lends a hefty amount of support towards that side of the issue. Certainly more than "It's bred from Manaphy, it must be legendary". - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 02:34, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I can come up with better. It says so right there on Pokemon.com. Yes, I get that they corrected the answer. You're just reading into WHY it was. It's a wild guess, but I'm betting that the IT person who updates the website isn't intricately connected with anyone who makes or translates the games. He tried to answer it on his own, did it incorrectly, and was corrected. Either way, if you have a better source than POKEMON.COM that that says it isn't a legendary, I'd like to see it.

As for all this talk about "Legends are this, legends are that", none of it is true. The only requirement to be a "Legendary Pokemon" is to be deemed one by Game Freak. What moves they learn are largely irrelevant, because many Pokemon have vast move pools. Gen 3 and 4 often have Legends as Plot Devices, but it doesn't hold true to Gen I, II, and those that are exclusive to events.Randomspot555 22:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know why the so-called MissigNo. Master is so upset that Phione is a legendary! I could say more reasons why it is I just don't want to, and some of them are already said, becasue it's so obvious! It is!!! DEAL WITH IT! Now, another reason nobody has said or at least so far I've read, it makes no sense to make a legendary Pokémon to breed into(I don't know which preposition goes here) a not-legendary one. That's just not logic!, I mean, we all know Manaphy IS legendary right, then why would it be able to bread (into another species, anyway) into a not legendary?? MAKES NO SENSE, it is legendary despite its "bad stats", ability to breed and it doesn't evolve, even into the species it can come from, etc..

Would other legendary breed (if more could) into a not-legendary one? for example a Moltres if it could breed together with Ditto... you think the baby would be a, say, Growlithe? Of course not, It would be, I don't know, a new species, or another Moltres and it would still be a legendary.

Pokémon is in constant change, they created a new kind of legendary, maybe the only one of its kind -that can breed-, or at least so far, who says that maybe in next generations more and new legendaies will not be able to breed?? Maybe they would! People really need to start THINKING about the logic in here, and the BIG, really big POSIBILITY that it could be a legendary!--YukitoOoO 18:38, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Reviving this argument, I will just have what I hope to be my final say in this. Thus far, here are the facts:

Phione must be legendary because;

• It is bred from another legendary
• Its position in the Pokédex
• Genderless
• Pokémon.com said so

Phione CAN'T be a legendary because;

• Its stats are mediocre at best
  • Legendaries have stats that are decent at the least.
• Inordinate amounts of them appeared in the anime, more than any legendary.
  • It's rare to see more than one of any given species of legendary in the anime, let alone in the same episode. No less than six appeared in DP113.
• It can breed, and therefore more than one per game cart can be easily obtained
  • It's a well-known fact that legendaries are supposed to be one per game cart, outside of trading.

The points in the "Phione must be legendary" column are full of crap inconclusive because;

• Manaphy can breed to create Phione for the sole purpose of preventing the breeding of more Manaphy, which right there proves that legendaries are not supposed to breed. See, if legendaries were supposed to breed, Phione wouldn't even exist, as Manaphy would be able to create more of itself.
• Dratini, Larvitar, and their evolutions are sandwiched in between groups of legendaries in most Pokédex entries, and they're not legendaries.
• Voltorb, Magneton, Baltoy, Metang, and Rotom are all genderless. None of them are legendary.
• Pokémon.com also said that Shaymin's Sky Forme had Natural Cure, that Swallow was a new attack for Generation IV, and that there was a Staraptor in Jumping Rocket Ship. Also, the fact that they changed their answer denotes unsureness.

Now, let me get this through to you. I will say this once, and only once. I will only back down from my argument if, and only if, Satoshi Tajiri himself personally declares that Phione is a legendary. That, in my opinion, is the only source that will provide a definitive answer. I will accept nothing less. Missingno. Master says: The Celebi Glitch is real!(talk page) 22:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Pssssst. Legendary (ˈlɛdʒənˌdɛri) adj. 1. of, pertaining to, or of the nature of a legend. // Phione is allegedly a bringer of good luck to those who see it; tourists flock to Chocovine just to get a glimpse of Phione. That hints at Phione being a rare Pokémon with uncommon abilities, both of which can be associated with a Pokémon of legend. [1] ~ solaris 22:40, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

I am not getting mad at video games. I am getting mad at people mistaking Phione for a legendary. As for the anime, that actually proves nothing. In the anime, Phione are rare. In the anime, Metagross are damaged by Poison Tail. In the anime, wild Squirtle form troublemaking gangs. In the anime, Dustox can learn Stun Spore. In the anime, Geodude and Golem can be floored by Thunderbolt. In the anime, ahem, PIKACHU! AIM FOR THE HORN! In the games, Phione are easy to get. In the games, Metagross are unaffected by Poison Tail. In the games, there are no wild Squirtle. In the games, Dustox can't learn Stun Spore. In the games, no ground type can be harmed by Thunderbolt. My point being, the anime was made after the games, and do not necessarily need to conform to them. And they don't, in many cases. I admit, it was therefore wrong of me to drag the anime into this argument. Missingno. Master says: The Celebi Glitch is real!(talk page) 22:50, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Just because you're too stubborn to admit that you're incorrect doesn't mean you're correct. <3 ~ solaris 23:06, 5 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to drag up an old debate again, but I have another point that hasn't been mentioned yet and which crushes MM's arguments: If they didn't want Manaphies to breed Manaphies, then they wouldn't be breedable! --エルレイド 07:09, 11 July 2009 (UTC)

Phione's advantages

• Does Phiones have any advantages that Manaphy doesn't have? If not, then what's the point? --Kid Sonic 00:13, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Irrelevant. Someone remove this. Θρtιmαtum♏_Talk|Links 00:32, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

That was rude. Now, in response to the question, Phione does not have any sort of advantage over Manaphy. All its stats are lower, and it doesn't learn any moves Manaphy can't. So no, there is no point other than keeping people from breeding multiple Manaphy. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 13:07, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Except they're not Manaphy. --Kid Sonic 05:03, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Exactly. It's there to piss you off because people would be all "O LOL I HAS MANAFY FROM EGG I PUT DAYCARE IT MAKE MOAR MANAFY I PUT ON GTS AND GET MEWTOO". And then you get Phione. TTEchidna 09:14, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Random Something Thinks I

Why is Phione not in the No eggs group if it's genderless.Laxafett19:41, 18 December 2008(UTC)

Because it has those egg groups in the game's internal data. UltimateSephiroth ^{(about me · chat · edits)} 19:48, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Battle Tower

I didn't see anyone mention this, surprisingly. But doesn't the fact that it can't be used in the battle tower (or any Frontier facility I'm assuming) prove it's legendary? Every other Pokemon restricted from being used there is a Legendary Pokemon... ~RR~ 21:46, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Probably more because it's semi-event-exclusive, methinks. Not all legendaries are banned from there. All event-exclusive species are banned from there, however. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 21:47, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

It's true that not all legendaries are banned, but I didn't say that anyway :p I said that all Pokemon that are banned are legendary. The converse isn't true though, as you so pointed out. However, the Aura Sphere-using Riolu from Ranger is also an Event Pokemon and it isn't banned, so there's a hole in your theory. ~RR~ 22:53, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

I said event-exclusive SPECIES, and for exactly that reason. Riolu can easily be obtained outside an event. Phione, not so much. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 22:55, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Once and for all

As has been pointed out before and confirmed on Pokemon.com, Phione is a legendary Pokemon. If anyone has a more reliable source that says otherwise, such as a direct interview with someone in the franchise, please present it. Otherwise, I can't see how the debate can continue. Pokemon.com says so, and no one else has any other sources that say otherwise. Note that I only changed the intro paragraph. The trivia section already reflected it's legend status, and the page on Legendary Pokemon say it's a legend also. Randomspot555 04:38, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

YES! Finally! Everybody knew it was in fact legendary. YukitoOoO 19:37, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Legendary Status has been officially revoked.

From the Vol. 1, Pg.27 of the official Pokemon HeartGold & SoulSilver Version guide book: "Since Phione can be obtained by hatching Eggs, it is not classified as a Legendary Pokemon."

The guide book is published by The Pokémon Company International, which is the same company that runs Pokemon.com, the website that originally confirmed it's Legendary status. Obviously they've changed their minds. --Dual 19:10, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Well, well, well. I was right the whole time! Now, I don't like to gloat.... Who am I kidding? I love to gloat! I was right, and you all were wrong! I'm off to change the page! - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 02:51, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I think it is legendary. Why would the exact same company ban usage of it in VGC? CuboneKing 02:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

For the exact same reason they banned Rotom until HG/SS came out. Event exclusive species (formes in Rotom's case). I knew it all along, the evidence was incontrovertible. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 02:58, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

I still don't feel comfortable about this... CuboneKing 02:59, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, well. If the Pokémon Company International, the exact same company in charge of the official Pokémon website, says Phione is not legendary, then it's not legendary. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 03:01, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

They've been wrong before. CuboneKing 03:03, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Two things: If TPCi says it's not legendary, how else are we going to get official confirmation? It's not legendary. There. lol

The other thing is... you don't need to rub it in everyone's face that you were right. Seriously. Cut it out. >_> ▫▫ティナ^♫★ 03:05, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

...I think I remember My Pokémon Ranch calling it legendary... CuboneKing 03:09, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

The Trivia section mentions the conflicting sources, isn't that good enough? Seriously. 梅子^❀_✿ 03:11, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

No. See, this is more definitive proof. See, the website, well, they could change it on a whim. But if they were to change their minds and declare Phione a legendary, they'd have to do something about these guidebooks. So if they put in the guidebooks that Phione is not a legendary, they must have been sure about it. Besides which, the conflicting online source no longer exists. If there are no further objections (that contain actual reasoning, not just moaning and whining from people who are just upset that they've been wrong the whole time), I will go ahead and unhide that bit in the intro to the article. It's been a pleasure winning this argument. In all seriousness, however, I am sorry if I came across as rude about this whole ordeal. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 14:27, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

(unindent) I don't see why we can't mention the controversy. If we're not going to cite our sources on a conflicted bit on information, we should at least bring out where it conflicts. That's what good reporting is about. Shady got 10,000 for winning 23:55, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

MM, the source still exists. Origin.pokemon.com. CuboneKing 23:57, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, so it does. Well, it still doesn't change the fact that a more recent source from the same company has something different. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 01:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

People should really not forget that guidebooks aren't always correct. Some say things like Cascoon can only be obtained at night, so it could be an error Malake256 01:35, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

OK... too much arguing here. First, I couldn't get origin.pokemon.com to work, much less access the mailbag... anyone care to put up a direct link to the specific mailbag that stated Phione's status? Also, I think that Phione should be considered not legendary as TPCI, the most official source in this matter other than TPC or the games themselves, has stated most recently (the HGSS guidebook) that it is not legendary. Arguments about "they could be wrong", "they couldn't be wrong", "they could sometime change their mind as they have before" are invalid, as they only serve to invalidate the other point of view whenever convenient. Its not an issue of the website or the guidebooks being more official, they are both equally official, but as the guidebook is the most recent, Phione should be considered not legendary until TPCI or a more official source states otherwise. However, I believe that stating "it's not a legendary" in the lead of the article is unnecessary; we only put up when it is legendary, we do not go around and put up in every non-legendary's Pokémon article that it's not legendary.

That said, precisely because TPCI has contradicted itself before, and there have been numerous debates on this, I think an entire section explaining everything is in order, maybe under Trivia. I'd put it up in the article myself, but I don't wanna get into an edit war so I'll put it up here for everyone to approve/disapprove of first. Also, I think putting up dates the announcements were made might be necessary too. Memo³²⁶ 04:24, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Keep this in mind: the guidebooks are written by idiots. They constantly screw stuff up and throw in their opinions, not Nintendo's, and their assumptions, not the game programming. It's said that Wurmple evolves depending on time, or on gender, and that was a persistent rumor during Gen III. But we ripped the games apart and verified that no, it's based on the PV. TTEchidna 04:34, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I want to point out here that the Media Factory guidebook (the one from which the English guidebook was translated) indeed states that Phione is not considered legendary. I can't be assed to take an actual picture, but here have a blurry-as-hell webcam picture. I assure you that it says exactly the same thing as in the English guidebook. 梅子^❀_✿ 04:59, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Then Manaphy isn't legendary either, I assume? And what of Unown? TTEchidna 05:19, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Well, yes, the reasoning of "it's not legendary because it can breed" would exclude Manaphy as a legendary. Though Unown is a moot point, since the reasoning is not "every Pokémon that can't breed is a legendary"... But I digress. On the topic of the trustworthiness of the guides: yes, they have been inaccurate, but the site has contradicted itself also. My point is, they're both equally reliable (or unreliable). I mean, both are TPCI, or rather, people employed at TPCI who could make stuff up or make assumptions. So, we either take both as accurate (and the guide, as the most recent update, states how it is as of now) or neither, and therefore we CAN'T conclusively say Phione is or isn't a legendary. Now that I think of it, maybe that last one is for the best. Memo³²⁶ 06:00, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Status as a legendary Pokémon

When Phione was first discovered in the Pokémon games, there was much debate whether or not it should be considered as a legendary Pokémon. Some said it should be, citing its inability to evolve and its rarity (as it could only be bred initially from an already rare Manaphy), as well as its exclusive relationship to the indisputably legendary Manaphy. Others said it shouldn’t be considered legendary, mentioning its capacity to breed and be hatched from regular eggs, as well as its generally weak stats. Even The Pokémon Company International has had conflicting announcements about Phione’s legendary status. Firstly, Pokemon.com mentioned in its mailbag that Phione was not a legendary Pokémon, but it was changed shortly thereafter, making Phione officially a legendary for a while. Recently, however, the official guidebook of HeartGold and SoulSilver Versions, published also by TPCI, stated that Phione is not a legendary due to its ability to reproduce. Given that this is the latest official update on this Pokémon’s status, it is currently considered to not be a legendary Pokémon.

Breeding

To keep consistency, doesn't Phione need a breeding section "By Breeding/None." I put it up bt someone deleted it >:( so do we need this section or not? It's on Rotom's and other other Pokes that can be obtained through breeding but have no egg moves. Malake256 01:42, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Consistency is enjoyed. Plz to be putting it there. TTEchidna 05:11, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I removed it because I thought I had seen other articles without a "by breeding" section. But I must have been wrong. Shady got 10,000 for winning 22:30, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Legendary status

Thought I'd add this to the start of the article, to settle the legendary argument:

"Phione is considered by some to be a legendary Pokémon. However, due to the fact that it can breed and multiple individuals can be obtained, its legendary status remains disputed, with contradiction occuring even between official sources." T a r o m o n 21:40, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The new Pokémon Ranger game definitely confirms it as non-legendary. CASE CLOSED -I Liek Gengarz! _{Do Joo Liek Dem?} 16:23, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

It may not be referred to as legendary, but does it explicitly say Phione is not legendary? If not, then it is certainly not settled "once and for all". XVuvuzela2010X 08:17, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Black and White disagree it seems, as Phione is banned from the Battle Subway. The difference this time around? Zorua and Zoroark, also event Pokemon, are NOT banned, while Phione, despite being recently stated as non-legendary, is still banned. If someone can simply contact Game Freak themselves and not rely on a spin-off, THEN we can confirm it's status once and for all. Better to get the answer from it's original creator yes? Shiramu Kuromu 00:40, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Zorua and Zoroark are slightly easier to get without an event, as you can merely trade for them over the GTS. If you talk to the silent boy in Hiun City, Zorua is recorded as "seen" in your Pokedex, and N uses a Zoroark, so you can search for them. Phione, on the other hand, cannot be seen in any games, and the only way to see Manaphy is to look at Backlot's book in Platinum. And even then there's no guarantee that anyone will trade you a Manaphy over the GTS. And seriously, Phione not being referred to as legendary or rare in Ranger:Guardian Signs when every legendary is? I'm pretty damn sure that can't be a coincidence. Please, let's not drag up this old argument again, as I still have my other valid points as to why Phione can't be legendary. - unsigned comment from Missingno. Master (talk • contribs) 00:45, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, until we get a confirmation directly from Game Freak themselves and not someone else saying it for them, Phione's status is still under debate it seems. Shiramu Kuromu 00:47, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Besides it's not like Phione is breaking Metagames anytime soon unlike Zoroark with it's Illusion ability causing massive mind games..... Regardless of how it is found, Zoroark deserves a banning more than Phione in a way. Shiramu Kuromu 00:49, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Game Freak are unlikley to reply to any fan e-mails, even if sent in Japanese. But if Phione is confirmed as non-legendary, then a good bit of info for the Trivia section would be "Phione is the only non-legendary Pokemon not in any regional Pokedex." XVuvuzela2010X 00:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

I can be debated either way, but don't base if it's legendary or not based on Pokemon Ranger Games. Because according to Pokémon Ranger Celebi is not legendary it's "rare" :| --Pokemaster97 01:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Rare is still legendary. It's just that there are two kinds in Japanese "legendary" and "rare", which this game distinguishes between. Phione gets nothing as if it were a regular Pokémon (because it is). --SnorlaxMonster 04:04, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Still.... I don't really like trusting spin-offs for this kind of information because sometimes they can make mistakes rather easily (Loads of places mislabel Wurmple's evolution as time based or gender based after all, with even the official site listing it incorrectly last time I checked the site years ago [Doesn't say evolution methods in the modern day site]). I think it's more of a safer opinion if we get an answer from Game Freak, even if they rarely answer, it still seems like a much better option as we can get the truth once and for all... Shiramu Kuromu 14:06, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Why is everyone making such a big deal out of this? In my opinion, Phione is a legendary Pokemon. However, I am not going to argue for or against it. All I have to say on this matter is this: 1. Since WHEN are side games the deciding factor on the status of the Pokemon. 2. The game does NOT say whether it is legendary or not. Thus, I would never go so far as to base the status of this Pokemon on what the new ranger game says. I suggest we do not jump to conclusions and say flat out that it is not legendary. I say we just state that its status is disputed. Both sides of the argument have given ample evidence, but neither has any evidence that proves WITHOUT A DOUBT that they are right. I say we wait for an OFFICIAL statement on the matter. Till then, I'm not convinced either way (not that it matters). (Toolen 03:00, 18 December 2010 (UTC))

On a side note, is their any way to contact Game Freak on this matter? (Toolen 03:04, 18 December 2010 (UTC))

Ample evidence? For: Pokémon.com mailbag entry (the whole mailbag has since been taken down). Against: Recent official HGSS game guide, Ranger GS. Game Freak would be highly unlikely to respond, even if we could contact them. The side game is not the sole proof, it's the tipping piece of evidence. Due to there no longer being any evidence to support it being legendary, and two pieces against, it is now considered not legendary. --SnorlaxMonster 03:40, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Not to throw more wood onto the fire, but I noticed a user making this edit:

"However, Director of GameFreak inc, Marc Parker, has stated that Phione is indeed a legendary after months of debating with Kacey Traver, the founder of http://www.smogon.com/"

What to make of this? --rockersk08 20:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

If we get a reliable source for that, I think we can change it back to being legendary. --SnorlaxMonster 12:41, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

I've changed some of the wording in the article so it has a more neutral point of view; at this stage we can't really prove if Phione is legendary or not. If all official sources gave the same answer then of course the article could contain that information, but as the official sources contradict each other, it's best just not to say either way. Although Ranger does seem like the best source to go by, it's still not set in stone, and to say that Phione is not currently classed as legendary is still only Bulbapedia's opinion. Marc Parker's statement would be a good addition to the Trivia section if we can find a reference. T a r o m o n 19:55, 3 February 2011 (UTC)