Most Hated Creature Type

[MrPapersHead]

R&D Monkeys!!!!

 

[Oversoul]

...and chimpanzees too!

 

[DÛke]

Human. It is the most flawed creature type and one that is least necessary. Kavus (sp)? - I just don't get, I guess. Those two creature types I dislike. On a better note, my two favorite creature types are Spirits and Illusions. I sure hope they do something with Illusions in the future.

 

[Oversoul]

Originally posted by DÛke
Human. It is the most flawed creature type and one that is least necessary.

Ha, my anti-human coalition grows ever stronger!

 

[MrPapersHead]

Like Rob Crow one said,

I'm so filled with hate today
I wanna cry but I can't seem to,
I'm dry as a f***ing desert.
I just stare off into space.
I must be a f***ing robot
I don't want to be a f***ing robot
Kill all the Humans!

 

[Oversoul]

The really sad thing about the human creature type is the explanation for it...

But our Merfolk masters will right the wrongs that have been commited.

 

[Rooser]

Can't ... find ... Kavu ... option......

*dies*

 

[Oversoul]

Shoreline Raider can make the Kavu go away, Rooser. Merfolk have all the answers...

 

[mythosx]

kormus bell hacked with engineered plague doesnt work because islands turned into 1/1's dont have a creature type!!!!!

 

[Istanbul]

I'm really beginning to dislike the new Zuberas.

 

[Ephraim]

I dislike goblins. They've gone from a creature type established for flavour (which is good) to a creature type that defines an entire deck archetype. Wizards tried to make tribal viable in Onslaught block, but all they really ended up doing was making goblins stronger. Fine, failed experiment, move on. What pisses me off is that red persists with an uinterrupted chain of sets in which it gets goblins as its creature type, while they continue to switch around the other colours' creature types. It wouldn't be hard to take a break from goblins and shore up soldiers, wizards, birds, zombies (which aren't actually all that bad - just not as good as goblins), or elves. Of course, now we're getting samurai, snakes, and rats, while red continues to get (surprise!) goblins.

 

[Killer Joe]

You missed one choice: None at all.

That's my vote.

 

[chris92]

i voted merfolks because cephalids weren't there. i hated those slimy tentacled creatures dressed in robes and stuff.

And I have thr urge to just erase the Fish Jasconious from the name and put it into play for free. The casting cost is a typo, as lands don't have them.

well you'll be needing four blue to untap it first

 

[Oversoul]

I think that would be worth it...

 

[Mikeymike]

Originally posted by Ephraim
I dislike goblins. They've gone from a creature type established for flavour (which is good) to a creature type that defines an entire deck archetype. Wizards tried to make tribal viable in Onslaught block, but all they really ended up doing was making goblins stronger. Fine, failed experiment, move on. What pisses me off is that red persists with an uinterrupted chain of sets in which it gets goblins as its creature type, while they continue to switch around the other colours' creature types. It wouldn't be hard to take a break from goblins and shore up soldiers, wizards, birds, zombies (which aren't actually all that bad - just not as good as goblins), or elves. Of course, now we're getting samurai, snakes, and rats, while red continues to get (surprise!) goblins.

Excellent point Ephraim. That never made any sense to me either.

I voted Goblins as well. Though I don't hate them, I'm not very driven to make a force fed deck. There are cool goblins that I do use though, like Siege-Gang Commander, and Goblin Archeaologist.

 

[Reverend Love]

They're opening a big can of worms with continued tribal themes. The longer they continue printing tribes, the larger these respective tribe's cardpool will be. Therefore increasing the likelihood of broken/degenerate tribal decks forming in Extended, or on our casual kitchen tables.

Players are always seeking to create degenerate tribal decks. The more options they give us, the likelier we'll pull it off.

Just look at Lackey and Recruiter.

 

[Oversoul]

I so concur with that! Well, when i first saw Lackey it only looked good, but not broken. Part of it was that back then I didn't understand the game as well. Another part of it is the fact that since then things like Goblin Ringleader and Siege-Gang Commander have been printed.

If merfolk had seen the continued emphasis goblins have in recent years--well, let's just say it would be Train's nightmare...

Zombies and elves aren't doing too poorly either. They will probably be the next creature types to break.

Also, why does everyone keep calling them "tribes"? Was I gone the day we collectively decided to trade a term that made sense for one that happens to be used in taxonomy, among other things?

 

[Chaos Turtle]

Beast. Too generic.

Humans, by the way, are a good creature type. In my opinion. Which is correct.

 

[Oversoul]

CT, you're a humanist?

 

[Spiderman]

Originally posted by Oversoul
Also, why does everyone keep calling them "tribes"? Was I gone the day we collectively decided to trade a term that made sense for one that happens to be used in taxonomy, among other things?

I don't know about "everyone" doing it, but the ones who are probably are subconsciously thinking about Tribal Magic format where "all of one creature type" is synonomous.