Is There Pokémon No Anime Characters Have Used?

Question

Just curious

Comments

If you mean main characters, like our dear Ash Ketchum, then yes. There are plenty of examples where he sees a Pokémon, but doesn’t use it.
If you mean minor characters, then I’m not quite sure. A lot of Pokémon are used, and so it’s hard to keep track of them all. Obviously, legendaries and mythicals (although Mewtwo was used by Giovanni, and Tobias owned Latios and Darkrai, I think).But there are some Pokémon I’m fairly certain haven’t been used by someone, like Fearow and Gastly.
I can’t give you a clear answer(sorry about that) because there are hundreds of Pokémon episodes, and I’m not keen on binge-watching every single one.

---

porygon i guess

---

Porygon and its evolutions would most like by the answer if you don't count their cameos or the banned episode.

Answer 1

I'm answering this because I have nothing better to do, and I want Internet points! :D

Pokemon only seen in flashbacks, or Pokemon that were released/traded, still count as being had by a Trainer, for the purpose of this answer. A person that is caring for/protecting a Pokemon does not count as owning that Pokemon (for example, Archen was cared for, but never actually captured, so for this list, Archen is on here.). This answer also doesn't differentiate between regional forms.

Gen 1
Omanyte doesn't seem to have a specific Trainer, according to Bulbapedia.
Kabuto doesn't seem to have a specific Trainer either.
Mew

Gen 2
Unown
Porygon2
Raikou
Lugia befriended Ash and Goh, but was never captured
Ho-oh

Gen 3
Lileep was looked after, but never used by a real Trainer.
Anorith was never used in battle.
Jirachi

Gen 4
Porygon-Z
Regigigas
Cresselia
Manaphy hatched with May, but hatching isn't technically capturing.
Arceus

Gen 5
Victini
Tympole
Cofagrigus
Archen was revived and raised by Fennel, but never captured or used.
The same with Archeops.
Cobalion
Terrakion
Kyurem was controlled by Team Plasma, but it may not have been captured.
Keldeo
Meloetta
Genesect

Gen 6
Skrelp
Amaura was revived, never captured.
Carbink
Trevenant
Diancie
Hoopa
Volcanion

Gen 7
Wishiwashi are at the Aether Paradise, they may have not been technically captured.
Toxapex
Dewpider
Bewear
Oranguru
Wimpod
Minior
Drampa
Dhelmise
Tapu Koko
Tapu Lele
Tapu Bulu
Tapu Fini
Lunala
Celesteela
Kartana
Guzzlord
Necrozma
Marshadow

Gen 8
Thwackey
Corvisquire
Blipbug
Nickit
Thievul
Boltund
Applin
Barraskewda
Sizzlipede
Perrserker
Dracozolt
Arctovish
Drakloak
Zacian
Zamazenta
Kubfu
Zarude
Glastrier
Spectrier
Calyrex
Wyrdeer
Ursaluna
Basculegion
Sneasler
Overqwil
Enamorus

Gen 9
Spidops
Nymble
Tandemaus
Maushold
Nacli
Naclstack
Armarouge
Maschiff
Mabosstiff
Shroodle
Grafaiai
Toedscool
Toedscruel
Klawf
Capsakid
Rellor
Rabsca
Tinkatuff
Bombirdier
Palafin
Varoom
Revavroom
Orthworm
Glimmora
Greavard
Veluza
Farigiraf
Great Tusk
Scream Tail
Brute Bonnet
Flutter Mane
Slither Wing
Sandy Shocks
Iron Treads
Iron Hands
Iron Jugulis
Iron Moth
Iron Thorns
Frigibax
Wo-Chien
Chien-Pao
Ting-Lu
Chi-Yu
Roaring Moon
Iron Valiant
Miraidon
Walking Wake
Iron Leaves
Dipplin
Poltchageist
Okidogi
Munkidori
Fezandipiti
Ogerpon
Archaludon
Hydrapple
Gouging Fire
Raging Bolt
Iron Boulder
Iron Crown
Pecharunt

Hope I helped!

Source: Every single Pokemon's Bulbapedia article

Comments

Something about partially answering a question and saying you’ll finish it later don’t sit right

---

Why not? There's nothing wrong with it. I personally think its's good, because it shows that the question isn't going unanswered. It's also intended to be a sort of placeholder. My answer won't be unfinished forever.

---

Some answers take longer than others, if you can’t answer it in full save your work because an incomplete answer is still a wrong answer. Taking it off unanswered isn’t a good thing, because you’re reducing the visibility of a question without a proper answer.

But I get it, everyone lately just wants to claim questions so that they can be the only one to answer

---

That last bit doesn't make sense. There's no point in having multiple answers, so why not answer partly? It shows that someone already has an answer, and there's likely no need for another answer.

---

Idk man I guess it’s not explicitly in the rules but in the 7 yrs I been here I don’t think answering a question partly and then just coming back to it has been allowed as much as it has, I think moderation has let up. It doesn’t sit right/seem fair/comes off as very point grubby

Users over the years who didn’t have a full answer would leave a comment sharing information they had, in fact that’s what people still do nowadays

---

I do agree with melcakes a bit here. Answering with a partial answer before you have all of the information is kind of like claiming a question, even if that isn't the intent, as people will see that somebody else is already working on it and there isn't a point in two people doing the same lengthy research, however, if there isn't an answer in the first place, two people could be working on it at the same time, and after one person answers, the other person has just wasted their time gathering the information... I'd personally say avoid actually answering, and state that you're working on an answer in the comments, and, if you choose to do so, update your comment with the information you're getting over time. If you don't do that, just keep your answer in a google document or something and add it when it's complete.

---

Ok. So I'll hide this answer, then reshow and edit it when I have all the info?

---

Go ahead and keep it up, but avoid doing this in the future.

---

thanks for the answer!