Felix Posted October 12, 2009 Report Share Posted October 12, 2009 The limiting of Fake types limits imagination. Some of us do not want to be tied down to the official types and would rather expand into something unique and new. Fake type hatred is childish. I understand the distaste for noobish fake types' date=' but those with more detail and complexity do not deserve the hate. Some cards just can't fit into the established types. Myself in particular feel that luck based cards should have their own type, instead of being Warriors/Spellcasters/Fairies/Etc. My Gambler type fits perfectly for cards back on luck, because using them is typically a gamble.[/quote'] You sir, are a n00b. Just make them "Luck Lord" Archetype instead of coming up with some lame Fake Type. There are already multiple luck based cards, none of which have had the need for a new Type. I present a valid argument and you write me off as a n00b, really where is the validity in your argument? Why make an Archetype when several of the cards you would like to include in the group wouldn't fit with the Archetype name. Say I use your "Luck Lord" name for the basis of an Archetype, there are only so many things you can do with that. With Fake types you are allowed more creative freedom to work with, Say I want to name one card "Tuning Ace" and another "Luck Reaper" there isn't really a good way to tie those two cards together with an Archetype. I am not saying we should change all the old cards to match certain Fake types. I would like to see a type expansion, allowing for more depth and strategy to the game. There is so much meta game bullshit that it is killing the fun of playing the game. Creativity is what this site is about and all of your hatred of Fake types is killing that Creativity. No, you didn't “present a valid argument”. You were suggesting that to create a luck based card, you need a new type called "Gambler", while "Sand Gambler", "Time Wizard" and "Legendary Gambler" do fine with there classification of Spellcaster. Others such as "Barrel Dragon", "Snipe Hunter", "Dice Jar" all seem to be more than suited to an irl Type. You also don't understand what I mean by Archetype. To fit the card "Tuning Ace" into an Archetype you call it, "Luck Lord - Tuning Ace", piece of cake. You can then make Archetype specific support for your Luck Lord cards that were built to work together. If somebody comes up with a decent Fake Type then by all means use it, but anything I can think of can be equally classified as another irl Type. If you make a new Type then the idea is that there would need to be a lot of that Type to make it worth anything and an acceptable addition to the game, but with an Archetype, or Subtype even, 20 or so monsters are more than acceptable. @Corporal Atlas: You didn’t take up my challenge:/ And your point is mediocre, you said “random guy”; why would someone make a random guy for yugioh that can’t be classed as a Warrior, Spellcaster, Psychic etc? Even the card “People Running About” is happy to be labeled as “Pyro”. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted October 12, 2009 Report Share Posted October 12, 2009 Pyro was a terrible label for "People Running About". And I didn't notice your challenge. The only thing I really ever thought deserved a type was "Denizen". And labeling every single hero as a warrior or the such can be annoying, I think a "Hero" type would've been good had Warrior not taken up that role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milk-Chan Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 But not every warrior is a hero, so what would you name the other; villain?Archtype, duh. Here's an example: Natural Hero Ark - Natural Villain Eros.Both would be warriors, however they are clearly named as hero and villain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 I suggested Hero in addition to Warriors, Villains fall under Fiends. And having to fit beings that don't all work properly with one another into an archetype is silly as you could do that to everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolta Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Depends. Some are terrible' date=' some are actually unique and interesting.[/quote'] Agreeable, some type like Bluddy F***tard-Type sounds very retarded. No. They can all be classified into an already existing type. For example...Human=Spellcaster/Warrior/PsychicVampire=ZombieNinja=WarriorAny animal=Beast' date=' Winged-BeastMythical animal=Beast, Beast Warrior, Winged-Beast, DragonAquatic Life=Aqua, Sea Serpent, FishEtc.[/quote'] Then, how 'bout Psychic, Fiend... yeah, Vampire isn't Zombie-Type, It's Fiend. Create a fake type called the President-Type? Who IS gonna be the monster. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deustodo Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 No. They can all be classified into an already existing type. For example...Human=Spellcaster/Warrior/PsychicVampire=ZombieNinja=WarriorAny animal=Beast' date=' Winged-BeastMythical animal=Beast, Beast Warrior, Winged-Beast, DragonAquatic Life=Aqua, Sea Serpent, FishEtc.[/quote']Then how about Mad Puppet-Type? It could be classified into wich existing type? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolta Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Mad is Psycho... Psychic-Type, i guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deustodo Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 But the Puppet? Is Mad Puppet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 A puppet like Malice Doll of Demise you mean? Fiend obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SupaGreenMushroom Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 I like fake types.And milk chan, not all fake types can be classified into an already existing type.Like the (kind of) famous food type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deustodo Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 A puppet like Malice Doll of Demise you mean? Fiend obviously. Fiend cannot be classified as Mad Puppet, they aren't demons, they are just, mad puppets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Are you stupid? Did you even read what I put about Malice Doll of Demise? If a burger can be a Warrior then a puppet can be a Fiend. A puppet can't be mad because they have no soul or brain. So to be moving by its self it would have to be a Machine or be possessed/bewitched; Fiend. Mad Puppet would be an archetype, not a type. EDIT: Reported because I asked if you're stupid? That's pretty weak :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 A puppet like Malice Doll of Demise you mean? Fiend obviously. Fiend cannot be classified as Mad Puppet' date=' they aren't demons, they are just, mad puppets.[/quote']Yes they can because fiend has more then one meaning. Fiend can mean1. Satan; the devil. 2. any evil spirit; demon. 3. a diabolically cruel or wicked person. 4. a person or thing that causes mischief or annoyance Here the Puppet is evil and so would be a fiend Also Mad Puppet would work better as an archtype then as a type. The same goes for most fake types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Requiem Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Fake types are just idiotic and people think that they show creativity, but they don't. All you do is change one little word of the whole card, the name is more original then the actually type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Horologia Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 Hate them too, but wont join you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
::тǿρħєя:: Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 I'm fine with them, as long as they aren't too over the top. I see no reason to bash Human. However, if you make a machine a "robot" type, then you should get bashed on, unless it's a joke card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milk-Chan Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 I like fake types.And milk chan' date=' not all fake types can be classified into an already existing type.Like the (kind of) famous food type.[/quote'] Like Felix said, a burger was classified as a warrior.I mean, it's not like you're going to make cupcakes out of a monster. If you do, you have problems. But depending on the situation, you could classify it as a fairy, if magical, fiend, if demonic or possessed, heck I'm sure I could find a way to even put it in Pyro. And to whomever said Vampire's aren't Zombies, I say Zombie because of Vampire Lord (Or whatever it's name is. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkest Hour Posted October 13, 2009 Report Share Posted October 13, 2009 When it comes to beings of an elemental section, I wouldn't mind them, say, things made out of wind. i don't like classifying it as "Winged-Beast." Some things can easily be classified as "beast" and "dinosaur" most of the time, as for "Fairy"="angel". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolta Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 A puppet like Malice Doll of Demise you mean? Fiend obviously. Fiend cannot be classified as Mad Puppet' date=' they aren't demons, they are just, mad puppets.[/quote'] Mad=PsychoPuppet or Plushie=Fiend. Since they made Beast-Warrior, how does Psychic-Fiend sound? It's quite... more general. Fake types are just idiotic and people think that they show creativity' date=' but they don't. All you do is change one little word of the whole card, the name is more original then the actually type.[/quote'] Next you're gonna tell me fake Archtypes are equally bad...And Zombie-Type doesn't sound good... Zombies aren't ectoplasmic enough.And how 'bout Pokemon-Type? Another story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Milk-Chan Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 PokeMon is a general enough term for a PokeMon, and if you were to use fake types, while I hate them, I won't bash on you, because it's somewhat sensible. Even though! They could all be classified into a pre-existing group. I want to say this is a one-sided argument, but hey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 I like fake types.And milk chan' date=' not all fake types can be classified into an already existing type.Like the (kind of) famous food type.[/quote'] Like Felix said, a burger was classified as a warrior.Your logic against the Food type is that a monster that would very well work as a food was poorly labeled? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Felix Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 To be fair though, Food wouldn't exactly be a classy Type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~/Coolio Prime\~ Posted October 14, 2009 Report Share Posted October 14, 2009 It would have to be slightly altered I agree, but it would be better than some of the bad types already in Yugioh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jolta Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 PokeMon is a general enough term for a PokeMon' date=' and if you were to use fake types, while I hate them, I won't bash on you, because it's somewhat sensible. Even though! They could all be classified into a pre-existing group. I want to say this is a one-sided argument, but hey.[/quote'] Pre-existing group... [align=center]Pokemon Type - Yugioh TypeDark - FiendPoison - N/AGrass - PlantWater - AquaFire - PyroFighting - Beast-Warrior/WarriorDragon - DragonPsychic - PsychicRock - RockNormal - Divine-Beast/BeastGhost - ZombieBug - InsectIce - Aqua[/align] Which Yugioh Type can replace the Poison Type? Hmmmm... How about Shoop Da Whooper-Type? Or the Meme-Type Tenkage created? Or Wooden Object-Type? Nyeah... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pikachu Posted October 15, 2009 Report Share Posted October 15, 2009 There are 9 voters for 'Yes' and so far no one has posted saying they truly like them. Oh right, The Fake Type Knights. Who else could it be? >_> Anyways, I say no to Fake Types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.