So aren’t there a lot more treants than are designated. I mean treants are tree creatures, so wouldn’t that make cards like Lucentbark and Rotten Applebaum treants; therefore having tribe benefits. We got big dragons and little dragons, big and small mechs, even big murlocs, so why are all treants little 2/2’s? Ancient of War and Goru are treants too!
Hearthstone (for gameplay purposes, obviously) treats only the smaller, sapling-esque members of the Treant/Ancient/whatever family as “treants” since it’s designed to push a token archetype, not just minions spanning the full mana spectrum like Elementals.
2 Likes
I guess you could argue that those are Treants too. In the sense of Hearthstone, Treants are only the little sapling tokens for druid, but they could expand Treant synergy. Hazelbark is a Treant, and she’s a giant tree with more significance than a token. You could make your case with that.
3 Likes
I would love to see the treant tribe expanded!
4 Likes
If Hazelbark gets classified as a Treant, would using Flik on any Treant token act like sacrificial pact on Jaraxus? 
Because that would make me laugh
interesting note that in warcraft lore (i guess at least in the game) all living tree creatures are defined as “elemental’s” so if anything the tribe would be elemental rather than treant!
1 Like
Well, I mean storywise Treants are more than just little baby trees that are shoved into aggro decks, as seen with Hazelbark who Blizzard themselves labeled as a Treat. My point is that they can be expanded as a tribe as anything “tree animated figure” related to expand synergy of Treants beyond just the 2/2 token from a narrow set of cards.