Ad blocker interference detected!
Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers
Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.
This may seem like a dumb question, but is there a unified way of dealing with these "Plant Elementals?" In reference to their in-game status, and therefore their NPC listings, there seems to be some ambiguity here on the wiki. The Bog Beast article indicates, though, that Bog Beasts, "timberlings, and thistleshrubs, and conglomerate elemental creature tar beast, while using the same model as bog beasts are each considered separate types of creatures." However, I've seen them all used interchangeably as NPC classifications around the wiki. Now, if they are to be used interchangeably (which I can accept just fine), then is there really a need for there to be separate categories for each? (i.e. Bog Beast category, Thistleshrub category, etc.) If they are not to be accepted as being interchangeable, then it should be more clearly defined how the wiki will categorize each (as there seems to be very little, if any, indication in game as to which is which). Please Note: I did not know where would be the best page to put this question on, if it is in the wrong location, my apologies. Shakume 20:00, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- They are seperate creature types in the RPG lore. That's what that "seperate species" reference is to. In the rpg books they were each split into seperate articles, each listing specific sub-types under those articles.Baggins 20:09, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- I understand that, and personally I believe that the Lore should take precedence. However, my question was regarding the categorization of the respective NPCs here on the Wiki. Some are referred to Bog Beast, some Timberlings, etc. Except, near as I can tell, none follow any guildlines of defining which NPC falls into which category, leading some categories to have considerably more than others. I cannot see any guildline or anything, and I was wondering if the classification here on the wiki had one, and I simply missed it, or not. Shakume 20:26, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well the way I see it bog beast is the most generic of the names. So unless some source specifically refers to one of the other types as being a member of its own unique type, then they should default to the bog beast category.Baggins 20:31, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- So, unless stated otherwise, assume all "Plant Elementals" are Bog Beasts. At least, for Categorization purposes? Sounds decent enough for me. ^_^ Shakume 20:50, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ya, that's the best way to do it. However, its also possible that the other categories, Timberling, Tar beast, and thistleshrub may still be major sub-categories within bog beasts, although that is not specifically mentioned in the RPG (though potentially implied by the references to bog beasts in Swamp of Sorrows, Ashenvale, and Teldrassil.Baggins 20:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Manual of Monsters ArtworkEdit
Anyone want to make a good scan of the artwork, from Manual of Monsters?Baggins 20:17, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I just found something that must be where Blizzard found inspiration! You Guy's decide if this is what it's supposed to be! (Man-Thing)
http://www.bloodsprayer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/manthing.gif ( Look's to me like the walking animation)
http://www.bloodsprayer.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/marvel-man-thing.jpg (Idle Animation)
The more i look at this the more I'm convinced... any one else to?