Category talk:Fiend

Insofar as this is now a category, the list at the top is redundant, no? DeepShadow 14:50, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Addressed Cure 15:07, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I would argue that Isolde is an Category:Outsider, but not a Category:Fiend -- Gonzoron 15:54, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I would agree. Since we have Strahd on the list for his nickname, perhaps we should specify that this is Pacali's hypothesis? DeepShadow 16:41, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I wouldn't even put Strahd on there. What's next, deviled eggs?  ;) But sure, if Strahd is on there because some people think he's a devil and (like in real folklore) aren't too picky about what's a vampire and whats a demon, sure put him on there with an explanation, and Isolde could be on there too with a similar explanation that Pacali and his cronies think she's a fiend of some sort. As long as it's clear. -- Gonzoron 21:09, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

addressing non-outsider fiends

given that CotN:D expanded the definition of fiends to include non-outsiders, it's not quite accurate to have Category:Fiend be in Category:Outsider. I know it's kind of weird, but since Fiend is now a cross-type category, wouldn't it belong in Category:Other Monster Groupings instead? (much like Category:Mist Creatures) -- Gonzoron 22:13, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The thought occured to me to. Stictly speaking yes. But that is an unpleasant enough idea that I forced myself to forget about and pray that the matter occurred to no one else.Cure 00:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Further, and related, wouldn't it make more sense for the Snakes category to appear in both Animals and Magical Beasts, than to be shunt off to the Other Monster category? That is to ask, how strict do we have to be about this matter generally and hence also about fiends. Yes it is nice have things be absolutely certain, no user intepretation, etc., but maybe this is one of the moments when logic breaks down.Cure 00:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)