Template talk:Creature types

CSS is the worst

I'd like the top two rows to be evenly spaced, so that the colors line up in each, but there's something really dodgy going on with the column width. Maybe later. --Corveroth (talk) 08:00, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Ah, there we go. navbox's hlist class is setting display: inline, while columns rely on it being list-item. --Corveroth (talk) 08:31, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Elder type

What we do with Elder? Because it's a race for the Dominarian dragons, and it's a class for the Tarkiran dragons. --Tuamir (talk) 22:35, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

I never really thought of that distinction, for me it is one of the odd creature types like Sand or Wall, which simply do not go well with the race/class model. When in doubt it is a Race I would say. - Yandere Sliver 23:36, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

My logic had been that if it ever appears as the sole creature type, it must be a race - everything has a physical type, if not a profession. But there are some odd ones, so I've sent an ask towards Maro hoping for clarification. Should probably check the mothership (circa Grand Creature Type Update?) for any useful information. --Corveroth (talk) 23:38, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Well, another similar case: drone and spawn, both they were used as races until the Eldrazi used them as classes. --Tuamir (talk) 14:44, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Yeah race/class is always a vague split. Even if you definition makes sense, Corv. We have Adarkar Sentinel which is only a soldier, but where you can argue that artifact does the race duty... And then you have Arcanis the Omnipotent, who simply has an unknown race... - Yandere Sliver 15:46, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

In light of these complications, I'd be okay with removing the distinction from the navbox entirely (save for the independently relevant iconic/characteristic groups). --Corveroth (talk) 19:17, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Iconic/Characteristic

Just plopping this link down for later reference. Feel free to jump on it if y'all feel compelled. --Corveroth (talk) 03:25, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Race categorisation

I'm curious on whether certain categories have precedence over others. Some listed strike me as misplaced regardless.

• Phoenix, Juggernaut, Masticore, Specter and Shade could probably be listed as mechanically themed types.
  • Nymph has a potential one as "all enchantments". Wraith's all-swampwalk may be a bit loose if "has flying" doesn't count, as it probably shouldn't. Skeleton has "doesn't stay dead" as a theme, but it changes as a mechanic.
  • Weird doesn't seem to have a mechanical theme. Incarnation has three themes, which is an odd way to define it. Moonfolk is an interesting case in that the 14 printed in Kamigawa block have a theme and 13 afterwards do not, with Erayo and Tameshi swapping times and themes.
• Mite (1 nontoken), Fractal (1 nontoken) and Pest (3 nontoken) should probably all be treated similarly. Thopter is interesting to consider, with 18 cards and 42 token makers.
• Gargoyle seems to be more of an Artifact type rather than multicolored. Reflection shouldn't be there at all - it's closer to a token-specific and the only Reflection typed creature is a colorless transformed artifact.

114.76.200.191 06:32, 17 July 2023 (UTC)