Category talk:Skeleton: Difference between revisions
Created page with 'Cross type template? Equally, for zombies, vampires, and probably many other undead that can be humanoid and monstrous humanoid? ~~~~' |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Cross type template? Equally, for zombies, vampires, and probably many other undead that can be humanoid and monstrous humanoid? [[User:Cure|Cure]] 10:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC) | Cross type template? Equally, for zombies, vampires, and probably many other undead that can be humanoid and monstrous humanoid? [[User:Cure|Cure]] 10:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC) | ||
I think no. The point of Cross-type template was for templates that don't alter the creature's type. All skeletons become Undead when they become skeletons, regardless of what they started as. This is not true of some templates, like Lycanthrope, which could be applied to giant or humanoid, and the creature remains giant or humanoid. All "undead" templates that I know of change the creature type to undead as part of the template, so those can safely be in the undead category, not cross-type. There are very few cross-type templates, really -- [[User:Gonzoron|Gonzoron]] 19:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 13:16, 3 January 2011
Cross type template? Equally, for zombies, vampires, and probably many other undead that can be humanoid and monstrous humanoid? Cure 10:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
I think no. The point of Cross-type template was for templates that don't alter the creature's type. All skeletons become Undead when they become skeletons, regardless of what they started as. This is not true of some templates, like Lycanthrope, which could be applied to giant or humanoid, and the creature remains giant or humanoid. All "undead" templates that I know of change the creature type to undead as part of the template, so those can safely be in the undead category, not cross-type. There are very few cross-type templates, really -- Gonzoron 19:16, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
