Talk:Prototype creature
Production issues with Prototypes?
I stumbled upon this set of pages and while I get what their original creator was thinking... I'm not too sure. Each tab looks to list all the cards which fit the type, which given the last updates were 2021 means they are not very up to date. Plus it's just out of date, full stop. 2/1 or 2/2 for 1 mana aren't rare outside white any more, for instance, and most colours will now get them regularly with upside. I've not really come across many of these terms being used, either, except for Beer. I can see how they could be a thing, but also I'd probably associate a 2/4 with a Spider before I did an Ox thanks to Giant Spider: the 2/4 stats being almost as iconic as Reach is. But the main thing is that it doesn't seem like many pages actually link in to any of these at all. If I hadn't been hitting the random button I'd probably not ever come across them. It's good information, I guess, but is it better covered elsewhere or at least condensed a bit and/or rephrased in a historical context given it belongs to an older stage of the game? - —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Beatsandskies (talk • contribs) 02:38, 21 November 2025.
- I agree this article needs to be rephrased in a historical context. It's from the old set design era where we would have "Bear with set's mechanic" or "Drake with set keyword", etc. Current design, and the aim to make creatures better in general, has rendered much of what this article was talking about inapplicable but that doesn't mean it won't stabilize with a new set of "prototypes" in the future. Having said that, I think "prototype" is a bad description and what we should really be using is "holotype". Even that's not quite accurate though because they're really more creature templates. -- RivalRowan (talk) 06:16, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
- Let's dig around a bit and see what sources we can find. Wizards has given us Bear with Set's Mechanic, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone has written about this subject with that card as a jumping off point. This article here uses the word "template" in its discussion (at the bottom), which seems like a viable option for a new title. Corveroth (talk) 01:33, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- After some of that digging: I can turn up plenty of references for "bear" as a term for a 2/2 for 1M. The article currently has a reference for "Snidd". I'm not sure how many of these we can really source, but I've tried pinging Maro. Corveroth (talk) 03:42, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- While "bear" and especially "hatebear" are common, aside from the one Blogatog ask about Snidds, I'm not finding evidence of any of the others being notable. This seems to mostly be a personal project by Circeus, and these pages have been mostly untouched for several years. I'm going to suggest that we remove the card lists, and consolidate the supported claims at something like Bear (template), which could have a heading listing any less-common but sourceable templates like Snidd. Corveroth (talk) 21:47, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- Piker is the one of most use otherwise. You'd have to go to limited podcasts to hear things described as Hill Giants, Centaur Coursers or Grey Ogres. In contrast, Limited articles are much rarer and usually avoid old-card comparisons as opposed to the literal definition that takes the same wordspace. Given the uptick in power, most of the old templates don't have a place now: if blue can get 3/4s for 4 and 3/2s for 3, Ogres and Giants don't fit well. Shield (talk) 22:37, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- I believe I read Lion in a few articles. But yeah I do believe the is no need for the extensive lists. In doubt they can be handled with a scryfall search. - Yandere-sliver (talk) 22:54, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- Piker is the one of most use otherwise. You'd have to go to limited podcasts to hear things described as Hill Giants, Centaur Coursers or Grey Ogres. In contrast, Limited articles are much rarer and usually avoid old-card comparisons as opposed to the literal definition that takes the same wordspace. Given the uptick in power, most of the old templates don't have a place now: if blue can get 3/4s for 4 and 3/2s for 3, Ogres and Giants don't fit well. Shield (talk) 22:37, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- While "bear" and especially "hatebear" are common, aside from the one Blogatog ask about Snidds, I'm not finding evidence of any of the others being notable. This seems to mostly be a personal project by Circeus, and these pages have been mostly untouched for several years. I'm going to suggest that we remove the card lists, and consolidate the supported claims at something like Bear (template), which could have a heading listing any less-common but sourceable templates like Snidd. Corveroth (talk) 21:47, 25 November 2025 (UTC)
- After some of that digging: I can turn up plenty of references for "bear" as a term for a 2/2 for 1M. The article currently has a reference for "Snidd". I'm not sure how many of these we can really source, but I've tried pinging Maro. Corveroth (talk) 03:42, 22 November 2025 (UTC)
- Let's dig around a bit and see what sources we can find. Wizards has given us Bear with Set's Mechanic, so I wouldn't be surprised if someone has written about this subject with that card as a jumping off point. This article here uses the word "template" in its discussion (at the bottom), which seems like a viable option for a new title. Corveroth (talk) 01:33, 22 November 2025 (UTC)