Natsu, the one trying to eat charmander, is from the Manga/Anime series Fairy Tail. He is a Wizard that is know as a dragon slayer and focuses on fire based magic. In the series he eats fire to power up his abilities and replenish his stamina during battles.
Natsu, the one trying to eat charmander, is from the Manga/Anime series Fairy Tail. He is a Wizard t
No, that's a very common, but wrong reverse-assumption. The flame goes out, if charmander dies, however this doesn't work vice-versa. Otherwise this species would have been extinct in no time
No, that's a very common, but wrong reverse-assumption. The flame goes out, if charmander dies, howe
The Wikipedia can say whatever it wants, but it doesn't change the fact that it has been proven several times in the anime that the Charmander line does not die by artificially putting out its flame, even submerging it underwater.
I could even throw in some physics and "real" stuff and argue how the tail would continuously emit the gas or whatever combustible enables the combustion to take place, even if a catalyst such as oxygen is not present to make ignition (meaning the flame would be lit under normal circumstances, and would spark on again when those circumstances are met; e.g. coming out of the water and such).
The Wikipedia can say whatever it wants, but it doesn't change the fact that it has been proven seve
Well, I'm glad we can agree on that last part, but I'm curious as to how else would you go about putting it out... (without directly harming the Pokemon, that is, since the flame weakens as its life force does).
Well, I'm glad we can agree on that last part, but I'm curious as to how else would you go about put
flame needs oxygen, if you remove all oxygen around the flame it cant be sustained. theres oxygen in water, so it ont go out there. also in an early episode of the first season of pokemon, they rescue Charmander from the wilderness (after it had been waiting for like a week on its trainer) And they made a scene out of trying to cover its flame from the rain. My guess is, if it gets sick the flame will be easier to put out.
flame needs oxygen, if you remove all oxygen around the flame it cant be sustained. theres oxygen in
If you do remove oxygen around the flame, then you're probably also removing it around the nose, which would kill most living beings anyway, since they need to breathe oxygen to live. If you're not removing the oxygen for breathing, then theoretically you could take that oxygen to sustain the flame (very speculative, but we don't know how that "flame system" works anyway or how it's internally connected to anything). In any case, that's assuming the actual flame is needed to keep it living, which does not make as much sense as the actual life force determining the strength of the flame by regulating the output of the combustible.
I don't question the tail being especially weak to water (fire type and all), but I can't consider it enough to kill the pokemon; weaken it, at most. Getting sick weakens any living being, which in the pokemon's case would also weaken the flame, which is an indicator of its life force (as opposed to simply making the flame easier to put out). In that episode, the Charmander was already very weakened, and in my opinion, the whole point of covering the flame would be to avoid the pokemon (not the flame itself) from getting even weaker by further exposure to the rain (they didn't cover just the flame). They kept a watch on the flame to better assess the pokemon's state (kind of like measuring one's pulse).
...Man, discussing fiction can be both so fun and so exasperating :P
If you do remove oxygen around the flame, then you're probably also removing it around the nose, whi
