Talk:Carcosa

Possible Conflict

Bestiary 4 clearly denotes Carcosa as a planet and that is how this page is initially set up. However, Pathfinder 110: The Thrushmoor Terror clearly describes Carcosa as a city near a lake. Is P110 merely myth or do we have a conflict here? I'll leave this to any Lovecraftian scholars out there to unpick. --Fleanetha (talk) 14:55, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Today's Paizo blog post suggests city too. I have added a question there. --Fleanetha (talk) 16:59, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

By the canon policy, "city" would win out as the primary descriptor; Bestiary volumes aren't a high-tier source for canon information, only for creature infoboxes. That said, it also isn't inherently a conflict, as suggested by the responses by Adam Daigle and James Jacobs on that 2016 post: "Carcosa doesn't do categories very well." If Carcosa can be both a city and planet simultaneously, it can and should be categorized as both simultaneously here. While I'm not aware of any other city-planets to compare it to, we have some city-states that get both {{City}} and {{Nation}} (Pitax, for example, is in both Category:Nations and Category:Small cities, and Category:Chaotic neutral nations and Category:Chaotic neutral settlements). -Oznogon (talk) 21:19, 3 November 2018 (UTC)