Cards specifying "creatures"

[Tripwyrz]

Question: Are weapons in the weapon slot (not flying) considered creatures or not?

The reason I ask is because the implementation is not very consistent. While I have not done any significant testing at this point, I understand the behavior of two cards, both of which specify creatures in their effect:

• Sundial
• Fog Shield

Implementation:
Sundial
Stasis: creatures do not attack for one turn.

• Slotted creatures are affected
• Non-flying weapons are not affected

Fog Sheild
Shield: the attacking creatures have a 40% chance to miss you.

• Slotted creatures are affected
• Non-flying weapons are affected

Answer: Inconsistent. Non-flying weapons are not definitively distinguished from creatures.

[miniwally]

Is just the wording, weapons are not creatures.

[Tripwyrz]

Is just the wording, weapons are not creatures.

That's exactly what I mean; the description should be clear and consistent across all cards. Fog shield specifies creatures, and yet weapons are still affected by it.

[smuglapse]

So then your suggestion is that Fog Shield should read "Physical attacks have a 40% chance to miss you" and Dusk Mantle should read "Physical attacks have a 50% chance to miss you"?

Sounds good to me.

[Tripwyrz]

That would be one solution, yes. All I'm suggesting is that things be made consistent, if that means changing the shields to "physical attacks," that works for me.

[unionruler]

Seconded. We need consistency if we are going to have to deal with more definitions, like "airborne" and "ranged", and I'm quite sure at least a few more will crop up in the future.