Talk:Children of Bul-Kathos

Editing aside as a whole, there is one particular issue that I believe warrants explanation and, potentially, discussion. Namely that of the druids. The original page had druid lore included, but I would claim that this would be better represented on the druid page, and not on the CBK one. This is because:


 * The term "Children of Bul-Kathos" has only ever been used for the Barbarians, as far as I can tell. If anything, druids should be "Children of Fiacla-Géar."


 * The cultural differences are to the extent that the druid culture can't be given its due in the CBK culture section, nor is it accurate to just list them as a CBK tribe.


 * A lot of the history section is to do with the Barbarian history. There's comparatively little druid history, and none whatsoever post-LoD. As such, the article is representative of the Barbarians, but would barely represent the druids.

There is a snag I guess, and that would mean the druid class page also getting its lore section as well, whereas it's the preferred method to separate gameplay and lore for classes (e.g. why there's a necromancer and Priests of Rathma page). Still, this wouldn't be the first time it's happened (e.g. the demon hunter page covers both the class and the order said class belongs to). Ergo, the druid page will get the lore too unless there's any objections.--Hawki (talk) 02:18, August 31, 2013 (UTC)

◄► Tephra ◄► 10:20, August 31, 2013 (UTC)
 * Well I added Druids to this article as I knew they had a common ancestry, however, I am not a lore person and actually know very little about the topic upon which I wrote. You do what you think is best.