I really hope that all of the Ancient breeds are flightless. I think that would be a nice anatomical distinction between them and other dragons. I was looking up what constitutes are dragon in human folklore because there was a question raised - "If dragons don't have wings are they really a dragon." So we looked it up, and yes, yes they are.
Eastern cultures tend to depict dragons as wingless though. That fact did amuse some of us because Imperials resemble dragons in human lore.
"Dragons in eastern cultures are usually depicted as wingless, four-legged, serpentine creatures with above-average intelligence."
Gaolers already seem to have lore that indicates that they're more intelligent/evolved than every other breed. I know flightless =/= wingless, but I hope all of the ancient breeds have flightless wings.
I really hope that all of the Ancient breeds are flightless. I think that would be a nice anatomical distinction between them and other dragons. I was looking up what constitutes are dragon in human folklore because there was a question raised - "If dragons don't have wings are they really a dragon." So we looked it up, and yes, yes they are.
Eastern cultures tend to depict dragons as wingless though. That fact did amuse some of us because Imperials resemble dragons in human lore.
"Dragons in eastern cultures are usually depicted as wingless, four-legged, serpentine creatures with above-average intelligence."
Gaolers already seem to have lore that indicates that they're more intelligent/evolved than every other breed. I know flightless =/= wingless, but I hope all of the ancient breeds have flightless wings.
I think itd be really cool to have some flightless ancients, but I would also want a lot more diversity than that. The point of ancients was to stray away from the two wings-four legs kinda thing. I think itd also be cool to have some with many wings, more legs, less legs, more heads, more tails, no tails, etc...
I think itd be really cool to have some flightless ancients, but I would also want a lot more diversity than that. The point of ancients was to stray away from the two wings-four legs kinda thing. I think itd also be cool to have some with many wings, more legs, less legs, more heads, more tails, no tails, etc...
yes but consider
ancients with like 10 wings or something and no legs
yes but consider
ancients with like 10 wings or something and no legs
I personally disagree, but to each their own.
The reason I don't want only flightless ancient breeds is because I'm looking forward to the immense variety ancients give the opportunity for. I'm hoping for a wyvern, wyrm, drake, amphiptere, whatever, because ancients don't have to follow the 4 legs 2 wings rule that modern breeds must adhere to. We can have an ancient with tons of legs, or no wings, or multiple heads, etc., and THAT is what I'm looking forward to; many differences.
I want ancients that are landbound, ancients that are waterbound, heck, give me ancients that are completely airbound and never touch the ground! There's so much possibility for ancients <3
I personally disagree, but to each their own.
The reason I don't want only flightless ancient breeds is because I'm looking forward to the immense variety ancients give the opportunity for. I'm hoping for a wyvern, wyrm, drake, amphiptere, whatever, because ancients don't have to follow the 4 legs 2 wings rule that modern breeds must adhere to. We can have an ancient with tons of legs, or no wings, or multiple heads, etc., and THAT is what I'm looking forward to; many differences.
I want ancients that are landbound, ancients that are waterbound, heck, give me ancients that are completely airbound and never touch the ground! There's so much possibility for ancients <3
Flightless ancients? Yes
All of them? No
Flightless ancients? Yes
All of them? No
I personally disagree with you. We shouldn't have a monotype of anything on a website where diversity is what makes it fluorish. Am I up for flightless Ancients? Absolutely. Do I think all or even a majority of them should be flightless? Absolutely not. That would take away the spice of what makes FR so fun.
I personally disagree with you. We shouldn't have a monotype of anything on a website where diversity is what makes it fluorish. Am I up for flightless Ancients? Absolutely. Do I think all or even a majority of them should be flightless? Absolutely not. That would take away the spice of what makes FR so fun.
It shouldn't be all Ancients that are flightless. The Encyclopedia actually says that Snappers (and I believe Bogsneaks too) have wings but do not have the ability to fly, yet both are modern breeds. So it wouldn't really make sense for all the Ancient breeds to be flightless as a way to determine which breeds are Ancient and which are Modern, since it's already been proven that either can be flightless.
Another reason that all Ancient breeds should not be flightless is in the case of dragons like wyverns. (Yes, I personally believe that wyverns count as dragons.) A wyvern has two legs and two wings, and in most cases wyverns actually depend on flight as a way to travel. So if wyverns were flightless, it would sort of defeat the purpose of them being wyverns. And we most likely will get some sort of wyverns at some point, since the whole idea of Ancient breeds was to be able to have line-breaking tertiaries (extra heads, wings, etc. or gnarlhorns/shardflank in the case of Gaolers) as well as an excuse to get away from the one head/four legs/two wings/one tail rule that all of our current breeds have.
It shouldn't be all Ancients that are flightless. The Encyclopedia actually says that Snappers (and I believe Bogsneaks too) have wings but do not have the ability to fly, yet both are modern breeds. So it wouldn't really make sense for all the Ancient breeds to be flightless as a way to determine which breeds are Ancient and which are Modern, since it's already been proven that either can be flightless.
Another reason that all Ancient breeds should not be flightless is in the case of dragons like wyverns. (Yes, I personally believe that wyverns count as dragons.) A wyvern has two legs and two wings, and in most cases wyverns actually depend on flight as a way to travel. So if wyverns were flightless, it would sort of defeat the purpose of them being wyverns. And we most likely will get some sort of wyverns at some point, since the whole idea of Ancient breeds was to be able to have line-breaking tertiaries (extra heads, wings, etc. or gnarlhorns/shardflank in the case of Gaolers) as well as an excuse to get away from the one head/four legs/two wings/one tail rule that all of our current breeds have.
|
Waywind Wanderers
We will wander wherever the wind takes us.
|
I like the idea of more flightless dragons, but I wouldn’t llike all the ancients to be flightless.
I want giant, manta ray-esque dragons that float above the clouds, or on the surface of water.
I like the idea of more flightless dragons, but I wouldn’t llike all the ancients to be flightless.
I want giant, manta ray-esque dragons that float above the clouds, or on the surface of water.
Im back
I just want them to break from the 1 Head, Wings always, 4 legs model
I just want them to break from the 1 Head, Wings always, 4 legs model
would dragons that didn't live like our modern ones do work? like a dragon that lives 100% underwater. with fins and bioluminescence (special genes here anybody?)
or dragons who are maybe legless or have major features missing due to lore or habitat reasons?
would dragons that didn't live like our modern ones do work? like a dragon that lives 100% underwater. with fins and bioluminescence (special genes here anybody?)
or dragons who are maybe legless or have major features missing due to lore or habitat reasons?
Merry part and merry meet again!
