Talk:Toa (Generation 1)

So... Why can't it be there? Seems interesting enough. --Boidoh (talk) 02:56, 22 October 2014 (CEST)

I'd vouch for it. Something like, "If a Matoran believed Toa to look like Skakdi, then upon transforming into a Toa, that Matoran would gain exterior resemblance to a Skakdi". That phrasing is pretty terrible, but I think that's all that really needs to be said. It's a hypothetical, anyway. :/ --Angel Bob (talk) 03:36, 22 October 2014 (CEST)

It's dumb that he changed his mind - even standing by it after it was pointed out that he has said quite the opposite before. But it's what it is now, so... why not? It is the kind of thing that seems like a trivia point to me... --~|RC|~ ^(Talk/_Contribs)

I saw it better as a brief note on the A&T section (where it explains the transforming bit) I just wanted MotR's take, since it sounded like he had a different take on it. -- I AM THE DOREK _{do not truffle with me} 11:05, 22 October 2014 (CEST)

Even though I want it as a trivia point, and I still do, I'd like to hear how you would fit it in the A&T section. --Boidoh (talk) 02:41, 23 October 2014 (CEST)

My take on this is that decorative spikes would be fine, but big teeth is pushing it. All Toa have the same basic physical appearance, and adding anatomical features that don't exist on the others stretches my definition of 'basically the same.' My understanding of the whole thing was that if you got a bunch of Toa from different teams together and had them remove their armor, they'd all look basically the same, no matter how radically their armor designs differ. Changing their basic exoskeleton seems to fly in the face of that. --Master of the Rahkshi ^{Ask, and ye shall receive. Eventually.} 06:05, 23 October 2014 (CEST)

I don't think the A&T section would be a good place for the note. Not only is it hypothetical, but it would be incredibly rare: skakdi have only masqueraded as toa once. considering that, the fact would be better served in the trivia section, not the A&T, where we have info pertaining to general toa A&T. Intelligence4 (talk) 20:53, 2 November 2014 (CET)

@Wolk regarding removing my claim that Helryx and the Mata were the only Toa who didn't start as Matoran: My mistake, I didn't realize Greg's statement on that was no longer valid, as I didn't realize Orde was created as a Toa. @Morris the Mata Nui Cow regarding removing Wolk's sentence in the introduction: Even if it is too specific of information to have in the introduction, would it not make sense to be more explicit in the history section? It mentions Helryx, Orde, and the Mata being created, but it doesn't specifically say that they are the only known Toa who did not start as Matoran. Turaga of Force (talk) 22:11, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, if you see a way to fit that info naturally into some other section, feel free to! -- Morris the Mata Nui Cow (talk) 06:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Actually, all the known Toa, except that 8, were confirmed to have been a matoran before they became Toa, throughout the OGDs so I found this info redundant. If anyone bothers on that topic, they can check Lhikan's/Nikila's/Jovan's/etc. pages, to know if they were matoran. And we still don't know, if there were a First Toa of every element, which would be the most logical, seeing the pattern of Helryx and Orde.--Surel (Talk) 08:16, 2 May 2021 (UTC)