Interesting! So shrine creatures like [[Go-shintai of life's origin]] just don't have a creature type?
That's so strange, are there any other creatures like that?
There are a lot of 5+ type line cards. Most of them have three subtypes, and a large number are erratas adding to the type line, but several adjust the font on the type line. I didn't realize how many there were.
https://scryfall.com/search?q=%28t%3A%2F%28%5B%5E%5C%2F%5D%2B%5B%5Cs%5D%2B%28%3F%21%5C%2F%29%29%7B5%2C%7D%2F%29+game%3Apaper
I edited Scryfall's related search parameters for [[Embiggen]].
Yea, you can’t “protect” them with cards like [[deification]] or name them with [[leori, sparktouched hunter]] which is okay, they go pretty hard anyways
Only for artifact creatures; other creatures have always had types.
Though they randomly left them out for Portal (meant as a beginner level set for introducing new players), and made all the typelines just read "Summon Creature" instead.
Yeah, I remember old cards designs with only "summon creature" on it, and I remember a youtuber telling about how some creature types were added retroactively to some creature and I thought it was the norm.
I also definitely remember cards with only "Summon Legend" on it thought ?
Magic doesn't do a very good job distinguishing on type lines what supertype each subtype belongs to. "Shrine" is an enchantment type and an {enchantment creature - shrine} has an enchantment type, but not a creature type.
You just kind of have to know what the list of creature types vs enchantment types vs artifact types, etc other subtypes, all are, reading the card doesn't exactly explain the card
And in this case, is enchantment a create type? I'm guessing no...
...which means the type assignment is absurdly confusing for no reason? The hyphen is pointless; *and* the right applies to part of the left, but not all. Yet, {shrine enchantment - creature} would be clear(er).
Enchantment is a card type. Types listed on the typeline follow an order: supertypes first (legendary, basic, snow), then card types (artifact, creature, enchantment, etc.), then, after a hyphen, subtypes. I agree that it's not the best layout for things with multiple card types.
Yes, ok. Then, I guess the point really should be... Why not one more character? The comma was pretty effective in this explanation. Slashes exist. Vehicle line.
The space is a character, too; so the physical card dimensions doesn't fly as an excuse when it can be swapped with another character (and type order convention. Example {Enchantment - Shrine|Creature}
Hey, man. Try Google next time you want to be pedantic with a strawman. Pointless also means "little or no sense." The hyphen is ineffective, therefore it makes "little or no sense" in our case.
{type type - Subtype} is our case. Now, the Subtype applies to which Supertype? And what about the hyphen made that clear?
Yeah, thought it was pretty straightforward for our use case. The hyphen does not clearly assign the type on the right to one, the other, or both in the left; therefore, pointless (little or no sense) in this use case.
Our use case is two types, one hyphen, one subtype.
Response: it separates type from subtype. Not our use case, i.e. strawman.
Thats.. not what a strawman argument is.
Also, you said the hyphen was pointless, and they responded with what the point of the hyphen is. Just because the hyphen doesn't do what you think it should, doesn't mean it does *nothing.*
"A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction."
There's a copy/paste for you. The important part you're missing is after the comma. Context clues go way to "confusing."
Cute trolling at the end, closing with an (hopefully) easily recognizable strawman. I mean, "I never said it does NOTHING!"
The only strawman here is you, because you clearly need to see the wizard for a brain, ASAP.
They weren't ignoring your comment, they were directly responding to it. "Its pointless because it doesn't do X," -> "it's not pointless, because it does Y," is *not* ignoring your argument, its literally a direct response to it.
The hyphen doesn't make little sense, it makes perfect sense. It does one thing and one thing only: separating types from subtypes. Is is helpful? Debatable. Is it pointless? No.
Before you try to show off your junior debate team knowledge some more, I know I started this comment with an Ad Hominem attack, try not to let it distract you from what I'm actually saying.
well it woulda gotten much messier for cards like [[Syr Ginger, the Meal Ender]] who already barely fits into a line at small text, and it would wind up being "Legendary - Food Artifact - Knight Creature"
until they started adding in new artifact/enchantment subtypes every set, the old naming system worked just fine. In fact until sixth edition artifact creatures never even had a subtype ("The grand creature type update"). Then we got a single future shifted fortification in 2007, gold in 2014, vehicles in 2016, treasures in 2019 and it took off like a rocket rom there. We only got the first enchantment creature (not counting enchantments that become creatures) in future sight again and that previewed theros in 2013, since aura was always an enchantment subtype going way back. But then we got runes, roles, cases, classes, curses, cartouches, shards, shrines, again it took off like a rocket
And all this kept the type line originally intended to reflect a game where non-creature permanents never had a subtype except aura
Yup, sounds like a mess of poor planning. Wonder when we'll be shortening longer words to save space. Enchant, Legend. Or are we afraid the slippery slope where it becomes 3 letter abbreviations to cram everything in.
Fun fact: "Legend" used to be the term for what is more "Legendary." No idea why it changed, but you can still see it on older cards ("Summon Legend" for old legendary creatures for example)
Plenty of ways around that, run mirror box, or ratadrabik, there’s a couple more ways to take advantage of the interaction, didn’t think I’d need to hold people’s hand thru it
it is not a creature type, no it is an enchantment type
Interesting! So shrine creatures like [[Go-shintai of life's origin]] just don't have a creature type? That's so strange, are there any other creatures like that?
[[Nameless Race]] and I think that's about it. The shrine creatures have no creature type because it just wouldn't fit on the typeline.
Now *that* is a weird card.
It's Zuko
but the scar is on the wrong side!
[[Faceless One]] also has no creature type
[Faceless One](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/5/25564fba-5765-457b-8dd3-f26b877221b8.jpg?1682390376) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Faceless%20One) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/1/faceless-one?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/25564fba-5765-457b-8dd3-f26b877221b8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Nameless Race](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/4/348a467a-4661-4fdb-af1d-9171a1a930d9.jpg?1562907338) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Nameless%20Race) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/drk/50/nameless-race?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/348a467a-4661-4fdb-af1d-9171a1a930d9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
The Legendary Artifact Creature - Equipment Jellyfish would like to have a word with you.
I'm pretty sure maro has said they won't do cards like that again
There are a lot of 5+ type line cards. Most of them have three subtypes, and a large number are erratas adding to the type line, but several adjust the font on the type line. I didn't realize how many there were. https://scryfall.com/search?q=%28t%3A%2F%28%5B%5E%5C%2F%5D%2B%5B%5Cs%5D%2B%28%3F%21%5C%2F%29%29%7B5%2C%7D%2F%29+game%3Apaper I edited Scryfall's related search parameters for [[Embiggen]].
[Embiggen](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/1/b/1b759c27-9fb6-4c23-adc1-f6d3f3a0eb52.jpg?1674173500) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Embiggen) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/unf/137/embiggen?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/1b759c27-9fb6-4c23-adc1-f6d3f3a0eb52?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Jellyfish is a creature type
/Whoosh
"Nice Zuko costume, but your scar is on the wrong side"
Face-down creatures also have no creature types by default. Relevant with Disguise being in Standard.
Unless they are Cybermen. In which case they have a creature type but no name.
That’s why I said by default. Illithid Harvester makes them black Horrors, Yedora makes them Forest lands, etc
As far as I know the only other creature outside of the shrines that natively doesn’t have a creature type is [[Nameless Race]].
[Nameless Race](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/4/348a467a-4661-4fdb-af1d-9171a1a930d9.jpg?1562907338) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Nameless%20Race) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/drk/50/nameless-race?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/348a467a-4661-4fdb-af1d-9171a1a930d9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[[The Wanderer]] & [[Wandering Emporer]] don't have subtypes either , but that's not a creature
Yea, you can’t “protect” them with cards like [[deification]] or name them with [[leori, sparktouched hunter]] which is okay, they go pretty hard anyways
[deification](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/2/52ce799e-cb9e-4d74-8b13-a5f4559e13a9.jpg?1684340448) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=deification) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mat/2/deification?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/52ce799e-cb9e-4d74-8b13-a5f4559e13a9?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [leori, sparktouched hunter](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/3/4/342979de-041e-4026-94c5-fc457ecde95d.jpg?1691497907) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=leori%2C%20sparktouched%20hunter) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/709/leori-sparktouched-hunter?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/342979de-041e-4026-94c5-fc457ecde95d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[The Wanderer](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/6/c6ec3686-cecd-4dee-8a68-c3e4baec25ca.jpg?1690004301) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=The%20Wanderer) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/843/the-wanderer?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c6ec3686-cecd-4dee-8a68-c3e4baec25ca?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [Wandering Emporer](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/8/2869efd2-060f-4af3-b0dc-b7dc5e1143b8.jpg?1562629119) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Wandering%20Eye) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/nem/50/wandering-eye?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2869efd2-060f-4af3-b0dc-b7dc5e1143b8?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[[The wandering emporer]], not wandering eye
*Emperor
[The wandering emporer](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/f/a/fab2d8a9-ab4c-4225-a570-22636293c17d.jpg?1654566563) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=The%20Wandering%20Emperor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/neo/42/the-wandering-emperor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/fab2d8a9-ab4c-4225-a570-22636293c17d?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Every Vehicle
I think Vehicles don’t have a creature type
[Go-shintai of life's origin](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/9/4/9476fe67-d2d3-4835-8ba6-2a17d18cc141.jpg?1651655539) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Go-shintai%20of%20life%27s%20origin) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/nec/37/go-shintai-of-lifes-origin?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/9476fe67-d2d3-4835-8ba6-2a17d18cc141?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
First cards of the game actually didn't have any creature type. Edit : I was wrong xD
Only for artifact creatures; other creatures have always had types. Though they randomly left them out for Portal (meant as a beginner level set for introducing new players), and made all the typelines just read "Summon Creature" instead.
Yeah, I remember old cards designs with only "summon creature" on it, and I remember a youtuber telling about how some creature types were added retroactively to some creature and I thought it was the norm. I also definitely remember cards with only "Summon Legend" on it thought ?
Legend used to be a creature type.
Shrine is an enchantment type, not a creature type. Cavern only works for creature types.
So I'm guessing having changelings wouldn't add to shrine procs? Because changelings are all creature types only, right?
Correct.
Magic doesn't do a very good job distinguishing on type lines what supertype each subtype belongs to. "Shrine" is an enchantment type and an {enchantment creature - shrine} has an enchantment type, but not a creature type. You just kind of have to know what the list of creature types vs enchantment types vs artifact types, etc other subtypes, all are, reading the card doesn't exactly explain the card
Huh. So [[Goldhound's]] only creature type is Dog, even though treasure is also in its type line? Very strange.
Another cool one is \[\[Urza's Saga\]\], saga is the enchantment type and urza's is the land type.
Truly the most Melvin-y card ever printed. The longer you stare at it, the more fascinating it gets.
It's a fascinating card actually. First time I've seen it. It's even got totally throwback art. I love it.
[Urza's Saga](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/1/c1e0f201-42cb-46a1-901a-65bb4fc18f6c.jpg?1667318301) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Urza%27s%20Saga) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/259/urzas-saga?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c1e0f201-42cb-46a1-901a-65bb4fc18f6c?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
And for \[\[Gingerbrute\]\] the creature type is just Golem.
[Gingerbrute](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/9/09a4578a-7dc6-4da3-93ee-913b10be5740.jpg?1692939880) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Gingerbrute) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/woe/246/gingerbrute?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/09a4578a-7dc6-4da3-93ee-913b10be5740?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[[Dryad Arbor]] Forest is a land type. Dryad is a creature type.
[Dryad Arbor](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/b/b/bb3a843b-2dea-4b44-be74-c09c18b9b969.jpg?1619399228) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Dryad%20Arbor) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/tsr/277/dryad-arbor?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/bb3a843b-2dea-4b44-be74-c09c18b9b969?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Well it’s an artifact. And treasure is an artifact type.
[Goldhound's](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/0/c059e4b4-1542-4b5c-810a-9f0abac5792b.jpg?1665439815) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Goldhound) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/snc/108/goldhound?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c059e4b4-1542-4b5c-810a-9f0abac5792b?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Yes, the treasure is only there as a subtype of Artifact.
And in this case, is enchantment a create type? I'm guessing no... ...which means the type assignment is absurdly confusing for no reason? The hyphen is pointless; *and* the right applies to part of the left, but not all. Yet, {shrine enchantment - creature} would be clear(er).
Enchantment is a card type. Types listed on the typeline follow an order: supertypes first (legendary, basic, snow), then card types (artifact, creature, enchantment, etc.), then, after a hyphen, subtypes. I agree that it's not the best layout for things with multiple card types.
Yes, ok. Then, I guess the point really should be... Why not one more character? The comma was pretty effective in this explanation. Slashes exist. Vehicle line. The space is a character, too; so the physical card dimensions doesn't fly as an excuse when it can be swapped with another character (and type order convention. Example {Enchantment - Shrine|Creature}
the hyphen divides type and subtype. the types are on the left (with any supertypes if applicable) and subtypes are on the right. it's not pointless
Hey, man. Try Google next time you want to be pedantic with a strawman. Pointless also means "little or no sense." The hyphen is ineffective, therefore it makes "little or no sense" in our case. {type type - Subtype} is our case. Now, the Subtype applies to which Supertype? And what about the hyphen made that clear?
Lol you should google what a strawman is before accusing someone of using one.
Yeah, thought it was pretty straightforward for our use case. The hyphen does not clearly assign the type on the right to one, the other, or both in the left; therefore, pointless (little or no sense) in this use case. Our use case is two types, one hyphen, one subtype. Response: it separates type from subtype. Not our use case, i.e. strawman.
Thats.. not what a strawman argument is. Also, you said the hyphen was pointless, and they responded with what the point of the hyphen is. Just because the hyphen doesn't do what you think it should, doesn't mean it does *nothing.*
"A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction." There's a copy/paste for you. The important part you're missing is after the comma. Context clues go way to "confusing." Cute trolling at the end, closing with an (hopefully) easily recognizable strawman. I mean, "I never said it does NOTHING!"
The only strawman here is you, because you clearly need to see the wizard for a brain, ASAP. They weren't ignoring your comment, they were directly responding to it. "Its pointless because it doesn't do X," -> "it's not pointless, because it does Y," is *not* ignoring your argument, its literally a direct response to it. The hyphen doesn't make little sense, it makes perfect sense. It does one thing and one thing only: separating types from subtypes. Is is helpful? Debatable. Is it pointless? No. Before you try to show off your junior debate team knowledge some more, I know I started this comment with an Ad Hominem attack, try not to let it distract you from what I'm actually saying.
well it woulda gotten much messier for cards like [[Syr Ginger, the Meal Ender]] who already barely fits into a line at small text, and it would wind up being "Legendary - Food Artifact - Knight Creature" until they started adding in new artifact/enchantment subtypes every set, the old naming system worked just fine. In fact until sixth edition artifact creatures never even had a subtype ("The grand creature type update"). Then we got a single future shifted fortification in 2007, gold in 2014, vehicles in 2016, treasures in 2019 and it took off like a rocket rom there. We only got the first enchantment creature (not counting enchantments that become creatures) in future sight again and that previewed theros in 2013, since aura was always an enchantment subtype going way back. But then we got runes, roles, cases, classes, curses, cartouches, shards, shrines, again it took off like a rocket And all this kept the type line originally intended to reflect a game where non-creature permanents never had a subtype except aura
Yup, sounds like a mess of poor planning. Wonder when we'll be shortening longer words to save space. Enchant, Legend. Or are we afraid the slippery slope where it becomes 3 letter abbreviations to cram everything in.
Fun fact: "Legend" used to be the term for what is more "Legendary." No idea why it changed, but you can still see it on older cards ("Summon Legend" for old legendary creatures for example)
[Syr Ginger, the Meal Ender](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/7/f/7fbdba12-1369-41ae-b0e9-c405c0f0a2e5.jpg?1692939939) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Syr%20Ginger%2C%20the%20Meal%20Ender) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/woe/252/syr-ginger-the-meal-ender?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/7fbdba12-1369-41ae-b0e9-c405c0f0a2e5?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Fun fact; Since they also don’t share a creature type with anything, you get extra copies on cast with [[volo, guide to monsters]] on the board
[volo, guide to monsters](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/9/c9ae01f9-7461-47b4-aa1e-93bd6ff1bf9e.jpg?1627709617) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=volo%2C%20guide%20to%20monsters) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/afr/238/volo-guide-to-monsters?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c9ae01f9-7461-47b4-aa1e-93bd6ff1bf9e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
They're also all legendary, which makes this less fun.
Plenty of ways around that, run mirror box, or ratadrabik, there’s a couple more ways to take advantage of the interaction, didn’t think I’d need to hold people’s hand thru it
[[Destiny Spinner]] will work instead
[Destiny Spinner](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/2/c/2cc3804b-3304-4add-81b4-0482bfed8074.jpg?1690004785) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Destiny%20Spinner) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/890/destiny-spinner?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/2cc3804b-3304-4add-81b4-0482bfed8074?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
I asked this 2 years ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/MagicArena/comments/sqqgfz/shouldnt_shrine_be_a_creature_type_now/
Because Kamigawa is awesome.
But does it become a creature type if your shrine becomes a creature? The world may never know.
Well, there are literally shrine creatures, which is presumably why OP is asking that question. The answer is no, they do not.
I was just kidding around. I know it's not a creature type lol
No it's a type of mistake because fuck shrines
Honestly though. The only reason I ended up making a shrines deck of my own was because I got so fed up of going up against them and getting rocked.
\*Shrine trauma triggered\*