MtG creature typing, specific or general? Any too broad?

Discussions and debates about video games

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
OgreBattle
King
Posts: 6820
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am

MtG creature typing, specific or general? Any too broad?

Post by OgreBattle »

In Kamigawa the snake people are generalized typings of "Snake + Job title"
In Tarkir the snake people are the specific typing "Naga"

In Kamigawa the fighters and sneaks are specifically "Samurai" and "Ninja"
In Tarkir the fighters and sneaks are generalized "Warrior" and "Rogue"

In Lorwyn-Moor the flamekin/cinders are sapient elementals typed "Elemental"
In Kaladesh the aetherborn are sapient elementals typed "Aetherborn"

Which do you prefer for MtG typing?

Generalized typing is good for synergy with creature types in other blocks (ex: Elves n' soldiers have great synergy across blocks), like have ninjas be rogues so they can play nice with prowl. But there's still room for specific typing if the set this specific typing came out in has really good synergy for that specific typing you don't want others to get (which really wasn't the case for ninjas and samurai in Kamigawa...)

For me the ideal is generalized typing but then have an extra typing for your block specific synergy, like how Zendikar has "Human Soldier Ally" creatures who can synergize with humans and soldiers in EDH decks but also get block specific Ally benefits.

There's also the case of some typing being so common you might as well break them up. Like "Wizard", "Soldier", and "Zombie". They've been using more alternates like Shaman, Warrior, Scout and so on but Zombie is still a really broad typing where mindless ghouls and lich wizards are the same thing.

I figure "Zombie" can be kept for the mindless and Frankenstein's monsters. Sentient undead able to hold jobs then get the typing "Mummy". So Liches and Death Barons are mummies.
"Skeleton" though has too little support to stand as its own typing and I'd be fine with the oddity of relabeling them "Zombie", the only card that buffs them, Death Baron, is a zombie that also buffs zombies too anyways.

Here's a list of creature types and frequency of use:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... =drive_web

As you can see elementals are also high up there in frequency. MtG colors are already tied to elements though so instead of having ifrit, sylph and so on they can have color specific effects like "red/blue/green elementals get +1/+1". Dryads and Nymphs can then be considered elementals associated with certain colors.

Spirits are also high up there and encompass both "spirits of people" and "spirits of places/ideas". The "spirits of people" could be made into a new type, Geist, and then spirits only refer to spirits of places/ideas.
Last edited by OgreBattle on Fri Nov 04, 2016 5:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
AndreiChekov
Knight-Baron
Posts: 523
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:54 pm
Location: an AA meeting. Or Caemlyn.

Post by AndreiChekov »

I found the typing in MTG to be both too broad and too narrow at the same time. Like minotaurs and orcs. Both of those were ideas that just died, and I'm a bit disappointed with them, but the ones that lived ended up going too far. Are elves insect warriors or not?
Peace favour your sword.

I only play 3.x
User avatar
OgreBattle
King
Posts: 6820
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am

Post by OgreBattle »

AndreiChekov wrote:Are elves insect warriors or not?
Only if Champion of the Parish is an Ape Soldier and Aven are Bird Warriors
User avatar
AndreiChekov
Knight-Baron
Posts: 523
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2012 12:54 pm
Location: an AA meeting. Or Caemlyn.

Post by AndreiChekov »

OgreBattle wrote:
AndreiChekov wrote:Are elves insect warriors or not?
Only if Champion of the Parish is an Ape Soldier and Aven are Bird Warriors
I don't know how to read sarcasm, so I can't tell, but one of the older times when they had elves, they were insect warriors that summoned fuck tons of insects. And it was its own thing that just doesn't blend with EDIT:lorwyn elves in anyway at all. They should have just had new creatures. I think that it is a matter of how much the lore moves.

EDIT: said morrowind instead of lorwyn
Last edited by AndreiChekov on Mon Nov 07, 2016 7:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Peace favour your sword.

I only play 3.x
User avatar
OgreBattle
King
Posts: 6820
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:33 am

Post by OgreBattle »

I know lorwyn's faeries look like elves+bug parts, but I don't recall "insect elves" other than the Acridian being insect type but ridden by elves.
TiaC
Knight-Baron
Posts: 968
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2013 7:09 am

Post by TiaC »

OgreBattle wrote:I know lorwyn's faeries look like elves+bug parts, but I don't recall "insect elves" other than the Acridian being insect type but ridden by elves.
He's probably talking about this. That's the only instance of bug/elf I'm aware of.
virgil wrote:Lovecraft didn't later add a love triangle between Dagon, Chtulhu, & the Colour-Out-of-Space; only to have it broken up through cyber-bullying by the King in Yellow.
FrankTrollman wrote:If your enemy is fucking Gravity, are you helping or hindering it by putting things on high shelves? I don't fucking know! That's not even a thing. Your enemy can't be Gravity, because that's stupid.
Post Reply