Technically i guess. But The Thing could also just be one of a number of mutated and monstrous creatures that were slumbering in the swamp. Flavor text is a little vague.
Yeah but would they also be "Things"? Or would they just be some "mutated and monstrous creatures that were slumbering in the swamp"? Even if we interpret the flavor text in that sense (which I don't agree with), it's the same with Isran: She is an Ironfist Inquisitor, and there are many Ironfist Inquisitors, and they may all be the same, but there is only one Isran - same as there is only one Thing. At least that's how I see it with my powers of logic.
Isran has an actual name, The Thing is named purely because they do not know what, who or where it came from. Its vague and difficult to ascertain. Im not saying that idea i posted in my last comment is correct, its just a plausible alternative because flavor text is vague as is the runes design. Also id appreciate it if u didnt passively aggressively insult me.
- True revere is pretty OP nerf it more So having a name is making things 1x ...not balance related reasons? Shouldn't all those runes be playable before they are hindered by 1x rulings?
Lets create a rune "The god of pox". Immune to everything and 100 Damage because it's a god as stated. Do you really want to empower or limit runes because of wording ?