Topic: [REJECTED] Tag alias: beotodus -> piscine_wyvern

Posted under Tag Alias and Implication Suggestions

magnuseffect said:
Should the Monster Hunter *_wyvern families have _(monster_hunter) appended to distinguish them from traditional fantasy wyverns or are they fine as-is?

I wonder if the Monster Hunter *_wyvern tags should really exist. Seems to me it's similar to pokemon types, in the sense of categorizing the creatures (flying-type pokemon, flying_wyvern, water-type pokemon, piscine_wyvern, fighting-type pokemon, fanged_wyvern, etc). Is there a real purpose to having them, when other fantasy creature IPs aren't given similar categorization tags?

Regardless, if they do stay it would make sense to include _(monster_hunter) or the shorter _(mh) to clarify they're not for "normal" wyverns. Also, and this is more the fault of the games themselves, but I find their use of wyvern types incredibly confusing. Wyverns are winged flying creatures (with two legs, two winged forelimbs, and a tail), so having non-winged, non-flying, creatures categorized as types of wyverns really throws me off. Any way to clarify the tags as not meaning a normal mythological type of wyvern would be a benefit.

watsit said:
I wonder if the Monster Hunter *_wyvern tags should really exist. Seems to me it's similar to pokemon types, in the sense of categorizing the creatures (flying-type pokemon, flying_wyvern, water-type pokemon, piscine_wyvern, fighting-type pokemon, fanged_wyvern, etc). Is there a real purpose to having them, when other fantasy creature IPs aren't given similar categorization tags?

Well, Pokemon has legendary pokémon, shiny pokémon, baby pokémon, fossil pokémon, and mega evolution (among others).

magnuseffect said:
Should the Monster Hunter *_wyvern families have _(monster_hunter) appended to distinguish them from traditional fantasy wyverns or are they fine as-is?

I think that would be a good idea. Most of the wyverns/dragons in the game (MHW at least) don't follow the design of their traditional counterparts, which can be made even more exaggerated/different with each artist's rendition of them (e.g., Kirin_(MH), an "elder_dragon" that looks more like an equine/unicorn rather than an actual dragon).

watsit said:
I wonder if the Monster Hunter *_wyvern tags should really exist. Seems to me it's similar to pokemon types, in the sense of categorizing the creatures (flying-type pokemon, flying_wyvern, water-type pokemon, piscine_wyvern, fighting-type pokemon, fanged_wyvern, etc). Is there a real purpose to having them, when other fantasy creature IPs aren't given similar categorization tags?

I do not know specifically why pokemon classes are removed/alised to the base Pokémon tag, but if that's the case then Monster Hunter should follow suit.
All of the elemental types have been aliased to the base Pokémon tag already, yet there are some exceptions made for one type of pokemon (i.e. fossil_pokémon), alternative colours (i.e. shiny_pokémon & shadow_pokémon), and special pokemons (i.e. legendary_pokemon).

Using that logic, we should:

And that is only from my knowledge of Monster Hunter World!
There are even more pitfalls that I wouldn't even begin to touch yet - other monster classes, alternate forms (HC, variant, deviant, zenith, special, etc).

Updated

Genjar

Former Staff

magnuseffect said:
Should the Monster Hunter *_wyvern families have _(monster_hunter) appended to distinguish them from traditional fantasy wyverns or are they fine as-is?

I'd be in favor of that. Wyvern tag has been pretty useless ever since MH stuff got thrown in.

  • 1