Class[]
I'm thinking about removing this page and put the yetis at "giants". Any objections?
Art Featherpitch 20:53, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
I think they'd fit better with the apes, personally. Vhazhiphor 21:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- I agree - yeti's suit better with apes.
Craggles
Random::Chat::Contributions::Tibicam Profile
08:37, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I think it has more in common with a big bear. They are supposed to wander around the Himalaya mountains, more a bear place than an ape place. ^^ Bennie (talk ~ fellows) ^^ 13:02, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
No, but move them to Giants. Why? Aren't they big Apes with white fur or a big bear? Because they're giant and they're primates looking-like beasts. If I'm wrong, why aren't Behemoths in Elephants sections? They have huge legs and their inferior paws look like an Elephant paw?
Manjyome Black - May 7th, 2009; 11:02 GMT-3
- They're artic "bigfoot"'s, which are thought to be apes - considering they're bipedal when walking. Bears use all fours. Also behemoths are supposed to be in with Hybrids - they're giant offspring with bulls, but people didn't like it when I moved them there, so you know.
Craggles
Random::Chat::Contributions::Tibicam Profile
16:15, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Cyclopes, frost giants and behemoths are also bipedal when walking. While behemoths could agruably be seen as some kind of minotaur, cyclopes and frost giants just look like overgrown primates. They are as much apes as the yetis are, except less furry. Yetis have more in common with giants than primates - hence, yetis should fit best with the giants, being huge and all. Alternatively included in both.
By the way, apes are actually humanoid, since they're more intelligent than the other mammals. I was thinking about double-linking them on the template (both in humanoid and mammal section) but that might be unnecessary. While most humanoids could arguably be mammals too (dwarves, elves, trolls and giants, possibly the greenskins too), that would leave too many double links on the template. So I'm not really sure what to do.
Art Featherpitch 15:35, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
- You're making a mountain out of a mole hill really - the current giants are unquestionabley giants. Yeti's cannot as far as the legends go speak, therefore not humanoid. I brought bipedal into it just because someone mentioned it looked like a bear. Also the legend doesn't state them as being giants - just tall even that is just to imtimidate people. They're not supernatual just a wierd species of ape that lives in cold regions - up mountains. They're not giants - just apes. However if the arguement affects you this much, best just leave it alone.
- Also - yeti's have the same amount of toes as merlkin and are built like upright Kongra
Craggles
Random::Chat::Contributions::Tibicam Profile
- Also - yeti's have the same amount of toes as merlkin and are built like upright Kongra
15:48, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I personally would like to see them in both, you can debate it to your heart's content, but it does equally fit in both of the classes. Apes is a mammals class and Giants a humanoid, a Yeti is as much ape-like as he is human-. -- Sixorish 18:17, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
I am changing the primary and secondary types to apes and giants, respectively. Ape is more descriptive of a yeti so it is primary, following other multi-type creatures like vampires.
--DM ><((°> Contribs <°))>< talk to me 05:18, 9 May 2009 (UTC)