a few years ago I made
this post. here's an end of 2023 update. I did not read the previous version prior to making this, nor did I consult the encyclopedia. I determined these by pulling up every breed in the scryshop and evaluating both adult poses.
definitely not men (feathered)
skydancers
coatls
auraboas
aethers
windclaws
definitely not men (not bipedal)
tundras
gaolers
obelisks
bogsneaks
mirrors
ridgebacks (I don’t think they can walk upright with those claws)
imperials
guardians
probably spirals but who knows for sure
undertides
sometimes men
banescales: depends on if they have plumage
possibly men??
nocturnes: are they bipedal?? they are inspired by bats so I looked up if bats are bipedal. internet said they’re “inverted bipeds.” are they the opposite of men?
veilspuns: are they bipedal? the female pose sits up, but can they walk like that?
pearlcatchers: can they walk on two legs I dont know!
sandsurge: he looks like he’s supporting himself okay but he also kinda looks like my cat who can go up like that a little but not stay (
example) (no he (cat) is not allowed up there)
probably men (im like 80% sure here)
fae: I *think* they could walk on two legs if they wanted. unsure. or they might be like nocs
abberations: yeah they look like they can walk. probably
definitely men
banescales without plumage
fae: pipp is standing up!
nocturnes! evidence: higgins stands up
snappers, weirdly enough! a snapper was shown standing on two legs during dustcarve dig. and they have no feathers!
this does raise the question of whether other breeds I classified as definitely quadrupedal might actually be men after all. maybe we don’t know anything actually.
a few years ago I made
this post. here's an end of 2023 update. I did not read the previous version prior to making this, nor did I consult the encyclopedia. I determined these by pulling up every breed in the scryshop and evaluating both adult poses.
definitely not men (feathered)
skydancers
coatls
auraboas
aethers
windclaws
definitely not men (not bipedal)
tundras
gaolers
obelisks
bogsneaks
mirrors
ridgebacks (I don’t think they can walk upright with those claws)
imperials
guardians
probably spirals but who knows for sure
undertides
sometimes men
banescales: depends on if they have plumage
possibly men??
nocturnes: are they bipedal?? they are inspired by bats so I looked up if bats are bipedal. internet said they’re “inverted bipeds.” are they the opposite of men?
veilspuns: are they bipedal? the female pose sits up, but can they walk like that?
pearlcatchers: can they walk on two legs I dont know!
sandsurge: he looks like he’s supporting himself okay but he also kinda looks like my cat who can go up like that a little but not stay (
example) (no he (cat) is not allowed up there)
probably men (im like 80% sure here)
fae: I *think* they could walk on two legs if they wanted. unsure. or they might be like nocs
abberations: yeah they look like they can walk. probably
definitely men
banescales without plumage
fae: pipp is standing up!
nocturnes! evidence: higgins stands up
snappers, weirdly enough! a snapper was shown standing on two legs during dustcarve dig. and they have no feathers!
this does raise the question of whether other breeds I classified as definitely quadrupedal might actually be men after all. maybe we don’t know anything actually.
–micah
–they/them
–fr +3
|
|
Nocturnes are not men. They're vampires.
Nocturnes are not men. They're vampires.
Local Overthinker, He/Him, Pings and notifications are fine.
I don't know if all Nocturnes are men, but I'm sure
Higgins is men.
I don't know if all Nocturnes are men, but I'm sure
Higgins is men.
@
Almedha oho! I forgot higgins stands up!!
@
Almedha oho! I forgot higgins stands up!!
–micah
–they/them
–fr +3
|
|
see this is the dragon philosophy i need in my life. no more "dragon vs wyvern vs drake" crap.
i could see the case for spirals being argued either way- they do look like they could potentially stand on two feet and use their foreclaws as arms, but the noodleyness might be an issue
i think faes are like monkeys (could walk either way) which is like. man-adjacent. theyre men when they feel like it
pearlcatchers are very cat-shaped so i get the feeling they're quadrupedal and thus not men
sandsurges i think can be men. they could walk i think. their posture kind of sucks but isnt that true of all of us really
Wait I just realized Aberrations are missing.
Wait I just realized Aberrations are missing.
Local Overthinker, He/Him, Pings and notifications are fine.
huge news I have just rememberd that I drew this back during the og thread (how is this spiral that old what)
[img]https://i.imgur.com/HiHs5SW.png[/img]
huge news I have just rememberd that I drew this back during the og thread (how is this spiral that old what)
–micah
–they/them
–fr +3
|
|
fae and nocturnes are definitely men i believe, higgins is shown standing bipedally in his grand exchange shop with no issue, and in the swap stand art pipp is shown very comfortably standing on her hind legs only to gesture at the trading board
i'd also suggest bogsneaks may fit into the possibly men category for the same reason as sandsurges. baldwin is shown balanced on his hind legs only in his art, but all official bogsneak poses show them on all four legs, so it's not clear if they're really capable of it
aberrations also might not be men after all? with their build it definitely looks like they [i]could[/i] walk bipedally, but i'm not convinced of their featherless status. it's especially clear with the m pose, but certain genes (such as trail and jester) highlight a part of their mane in such a way that it's not clear if it's fur or feathers, and as far as i know i'm not sure there's any canon confirmation one way or the other?
points for them probably being men: they look like they can walk
points against them being men: they just might be feathered little liars
[img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=10&bodygene=0&breed=20&element=4&eyetype=0&gender=0&tert=90&tertgene=0&winggene=231&wings=76&auth=caf9d28907789fbd3dc594a9d0843a2dfe90b651&dummyext=prev.png[/img]
banescales however are absolutely truly 100% men
behold. i've brought you a man
this is the ideal man dragon. you may not like it but this is what peak performance looks like
[img]https://www1.flightrising.com/dgen/preview/dragon?age=1&body=44&bodygene=47&breed=18&element=2&eyetype=0&gender=0&tert=157&tertgene=45&winggene=49&wings=156&auth=7dfc992025adf8b09a38f6d39cdb6af599f8105c&dummyext=prev.png[/img]
fae and nocturnes are definitely men i believe, higgins is shown standing bipedally in his grand exchange shop with no issue, and in the swap stand art pipp is shown very comfortably standing on her hind legs only to gesture at the trading board
i'd also suggest bogsneaks may fit into the possibly men category for the same reason as sandsurges. baldwin is shown balanced on his hind legs only in his art, but all official bogsneak poses show them on all four legs, so it's not clear if they're really capable of it
aberrations also might not be men after all? with their build it definitely looks like they
could walk bipedally, but i'm not convinced of their featherless status. it's especially clear with the m pose, but certain genes (such as trail and jester) highlight a part of their mane in such a way that it's not clear if it's fur or feathers, and as far as i know i'm not sure there's any canon confirmation one way or the other?
points for them probably being men: they look like they can walk
points against them being men: they just might be feathered little liars
banescales however are absolutely truly 100% men
behold. i've brought you a man
this is the ideal man dragon. you may not like it but this is what peak performance looks like
|
limes, benrey, or belial || they/them & neos
on at weird times
very anxious, so forum activity is sporadic at best
for my dragons - pose =/= pronouns. please use they/them for any of them unless otherwise specified
|
yeah @corrosivelimes has a good point about aberrations, the fluff behind their horns definitely looks more like feathers than fur, although i could also see them as being just weirdly shaped ears. i think it's really the secondary gene though that influences what it looks more like so it really is hard to tell. ex in the img provided by limes it looks like feathers, but in the case of rosette it looks more like fur [emoji=aberration confused size=1]
[img]https://www1.flightrising.com/rendern/350/913473/91347296_350.png[/img]
what i have learned from this thread will keep me up at night
what i have learned from this thread will keep me up at night
