Creature naming as additional types...
Posted: Sun May 13, 2012 14:38
A thing just occurred to me: Many of our units seem to have general, unpersonal, names. We have taken up this convention from BfW, and I have nothing against it.
What it leads to is us having cards that are names, for example, "Elvish Scout". In addition to a name many creatures will also have one or more subtypes. Due to how our creature template looks we have issues with fitting such text in the given space, as would be the case with longer creature names (which isn't necessarily a bad thing given we should prefer to use short names anyhow).
What about letting each creatures naming double as creature types as well? And then we would still have the smaller letters there for additional types if they're needed.
It would create many types, but that isn't a problem unless we use them all, so while it creates many in theory it doesn't do so in practice.
An example here would be that "Elvish" becomes a type and "Scout" another, both derived from the name "Elvish Scout" (Types are always single-worded and separated by space or whatever)
I think this could end up saving us plenty of space, and it also will, in many cases, eliminate the need for us to do what we do now: Explicitly state "Elf" as a subtype eventhough the cards name is "Elvish Scout".
Thoughts?
What it leads to is us having cards that are names, for example, "Elvish Scout". In addition to a name many creatures will also have one or more subtypes. Due to how our creature template looks we have issues with fitting such text in the given space, as would be the case with longer creature names (which isn't necessarily a bad thing given we should prefer to use short names anyhow).
What about letting each creatures naming double as creature types as well? And then we would still have the smaller letters there for additional types if they're needed.
It would create many types, but that isn't a problem unless we use them all, so while it creates many in theory it doesn't do so in practice.
An example here would be that "Elvish" becomes a type and "Scout" another, both derived from the name "Elvish Scout" (Types are always single-worded and separated by space or whatever)
I think this could end up saving us plenty of space, and it also will, in many cases, eliminate the need for us to do what we do now: Explicitly state "Elf" as a subtype eventhough the cards name is "Elvish Scout".
Thoughts?