Dragons are cool
Lets have a non-sexual thread about them because /trash/ and /furry/ both exist.
>>47841553
>Nonsexual
We can hope, my friend.
We can hope.
Your problem is that the same people who masturbate to giant flying lizards are the ones who actually save pictures of them, but good luck I guess
How about half dragons?
>>47841644
I don't think that's necessarily true in the general population, but it is most likely true on 4chan.
I'd attribute this more to the higher frequency of sexual deviants present on 4chan than to anything else.
>>47841553
So how do you like your dragons?
>Intelligence comparable to an animal
>Sapient, within the breadth of human intelligence
>Hyperintelligent schemers
>Natural/mundane in their functioning
>Magically inclined
>Cannot live without magic
>Physical manifestation of primal forces
>>47841769
I think they all work.
I personally enjoy stories where they're "normal" people with their own wants and desires over a lot of other varieties, even if I do think they work well as a symbolic entity for evil in general. There's just something interesting to me about humanizing the concept of a dragon.
>>47841769
I like them to range from young wyrmlings or dragons that are more akin to clever predators, eventually scaling up to normal human intelligence and beyond as they age to ancient.
For Biology, I prefer it to be mostly considered natural in-setting, but them also having a great deal of natural magical talent. Not to the degree where they'll die without it, but it would still weaken them if you took it away.
Dragons as primal unintelligent forces sounds neat, but I feel like it loses a lot.
>>47841862
Well, they could still be intelligent, but with most of their characterization/behavior dominated by whatever they represent.
>>47841919
I feel like at that point though there's little reason for them to be intelligent. After all, if every dragon you meet is smart, but the earthquake dragons don't care about anything other than causing earthquakes, and they don't have any hobbies outside of that, then do they need to be intelligent?
If they can be reasoned with and bargained with other wants, are they really a primal force of nature at all?
I like it when characters are kept guessing a bit as to what exactly a particular dragon might want.
>>47842116
I don't know if the artist drew the eyes unfocused on purpose, or if he fucked up and was too lazy to fix it.
Either way, retarded fairy dragons are spooky as shit.
>>47841769
>INT Levels
I like them all, as separate Sub-species.
Dragons, Drakes, Wyrms, etc.
Natural/Mundane or Magically inclined for the most part.
Sometimes Physical Manifestation
Feathers!
>>47841769
Yes.
>>47841669
No.
>>47841769
I generally always like my dragons around human-levels of intelligence.
ESPECIALLY if they are meant to be a threat in any way to other sapient lifeforms.
>>47843919
Yeah, big and dangerous things get a lot less dangerous when they're of animal-level intelligence.
>>47844757
I suppose among the best of both worlds is:
>Dragons are largely thought to be animals
>Revealed (at a shitty time for everyone else) they aren't and are perfectly capable of rational thought and logic
>"Clever girl..."
That and doesn't this sound very dragony?
>"You're intelligent?"
>"More than you."
>"Why did you never show this intelligence before?"
>"Because you were stupid enough to assume otherwise."
>>47844870
I think that approach works better if the dragon never actually talks. Let people guess what it's thinking.
>>47844870
Remember, just because dragons are smart, doesn't mean they have to speak.
>>47845107
Talking dragons are far more fun though.Wow, the non-sexual versions of these threads die really fucking fast
>>47842407
Not enough feathers, anon.
>>47841553
There can't possibly be a /furry/ board. Pics or it didn't happen.
>>47847356
There isn't one.
Although /trash/ has effectively become one.
Space mecha dragon only looks like a dragon until you open the pic. I suggest just not opening it.
>>47841553
What about pink dragons?
>>47841553
>because /trash/ and /furry/ both exist
fuck you for making me check for /furry/
>>47841770
what does the sign say?
>>47851560
Здecь был cтpим (и cкopee вceгo бyдeт зaвтpa)
Stream was here (and likely will be here tomorrow)
>>47841769
As physical manifestations of a person's biggest flaw (Anger, greed, regret, fear, etc) that engulf their bodies and dominate their personalities when they give in completely into said fault.
The most powerful individuals tend to the be the ones that can "indulge" into their flaws enough to make the transformation and, therefore, their dragons reflect that power themselves.
A peasant that hoards all the money for himself while letting his family starve won't turn into a dragon. Probably.
A king doing the same, but with his kingdom is a different matter.
Powers, shape, and behaviour varies depending on the flaw that gave origin to the dragon. A dragon made from a glutonous man will be a fat, toad-like giant creature hell bent on consuming everything it can, a very active hunter.
A dragon born from another glutonous man, one that consumend every kind of alcoholic beverage he could land his hands on, will also turn into a toad-like dragon, but one covered in barrel-shaped cyst all over its back and full of flamable, high-proof liquors. This kind also lives more sedentary and reclussive lifestyles, hidden away into dark, humid lairs only venturing outside to collect new ingredients to make new kinds of brews to fill its boils with.
A person that has turned and its dragon CAN work together, as long as the human realizes that he is along for the ride or being an advisor the the dragon, at best.
At the end of the day, the dragon has total control of the body.
It is a good way to reign in players, showing them a dragon made from the flaw that they are falling in and how it could easily be them generally is enough. Also when they are unsure if the increase in power they are feeling is because they really got more powerful, or is because they are starting to turn.
>>47851851
So they are demons?
>>47847284
That's a lot of feathers
>>47851867
They're not fallen angels, or followers of a tempter/punishing figure. They're mortals corruptedby their flaws. I think he's basing this on Fafnir and Andvari's gold.
>>47841669
As long as they're not just humans with horns.
>>47852557
She's a big girl
Okay. 4 legs+wings or 2 legs and wings?
>>47852582
UUUU
>>47852603
2 legs + wings is a drake, not a dragon.
>>47851331
That's (2^3)chan, retard.
>>47852582
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1d8d5CdyAKA
>>47853994
No 2 legs plus wings is a wyvern
>>47841669
>>47854111
This is correct. >>47853994 confirmed for never owning the comprehensive book on dragons
I once bought a rather shabby video game that tried to make itself more interesting by including an unrelated story about a dragon in the game manual. Apparently this dragon discovered a thief trying to steal from his hoard ala Bilbo. The thief pretended to be a traveling minstrel who got lost. He stole a gold flute from the hoard, and the dragon wanted him to play it. But the dragon was craving the sound of flute and voice at the same time, and couldn't understand why the thief couldn't play the flute and sing at the same time. The minstrel played the flute and eventually got the dragon to sleep and tried to find his way out. But after three hours walk, the tunnel led back to the same room, where the dragon was knowingly lying awake waiting for him. I remember all this because the game was even worse than the story. Welp, that's my dragon story. the end.
>>47841769
I like huge buff dragons.
>>47841769
Mainly, I just like them non-color-coded.
>>47841769
>Supra genius intellect
>Cosmic awareness on the same level as gods
>Extremely powerful and almost impossible to kill
>Everlasting, if their bodies are destroyed they revert to a spirit form and eventually are reborn. They can travel the multiverse and time freely.
>Usually worshipped by small cults trying to appease to the dragon for its gifts of immortality and power
>>47857111https://static1.e621.net/data/86/e7/86e7187f925e1b21d6578826f99e2740.png
>>47841769
>Intelligence comparable to an animal
>Natural/mundane in their functioning
These are the most interesting to me, simply because it's not done as often as it should be anymore.
>>47844870
So are Dragons all massive Rush Hour fans then?
>>47841769
I think there's something endearing about extremely classic dragons, like to hoard treasure and sleep a lot, probably as smart or smarter than a person but prideful to a fault, like Smaug
I don't like to mix them with supreme magical powers and cosmic shit too much though, they should be powerful enough to where other stuff doesn't bother them
>>47858093
T-thanks
>>47854070
...anon, check your math.
>>47841769
Dragons should be non-sapient, terribly rare and secluded creatures. However, a couple of times during their immense life spans they go on a migration looking for new hunting grounds and territory to settle down in. Every area that they pass through is desolated by their vast hunger and destructive nature. As such a dragon is more akin to a natural catastrophe than anything else.
The dragons' normal seclusive nature combined with their rare and sudden outbursts of utter destruction lends itself well for all manner of mysterious interpretations and explanations by sapient races. Thusly some cultures fear them as the instrument of an angry god while others see them as mighty deities in need of appeasement. Other cultures sees them on the other hand as a natural ill that needs to be destroyed.
>>47859456
Whopsie daisy, forgot the pic!
>>47859004
What, 2 times 2 times 2?
I hate that no one seems to acknowledge that there is no /furry/ board on 4chan and OP is a liar.
>>47841769 speaking.
I've no strong opinions as of yet, but I do know I kind of like the weird dragons in the West Marches livestreamed campaign.
>Ancient beings, creating/devouring worlds on a whim, their powers now stolen and tamed by the gods.
>Intelligent, but dominated by greed and gluttony, their main form of sustenance is the despair caused by their destruction.
>Pseudo-immortality, as their children inherent the parent's (singular) knowledge, powers, memories and personality, but only one egg per clutch hatches, at most.
Really though, they're less like a spin on dragons, and more a class of semi-divine creatures with immense destructive powers and a personality/mindset comparable to that of a regular dragon. There's only been two dragons "on-screen" so far, so it's hard to discern a pattern. The first was an adult Brass dragon (looking like a sandworm-shaped brass machine), and the misshapen Black dragon the PCs recently hatched (typical dragon, but with 3 pairs of wings and eyes)
>>47860083
*despair from the destruction they cause.
>>47860147
I recognize that creature. They were called Locks, or Lockjaws, I think?
>>47856526
Wut? That book even describes Wyverns as having 2 legs and wings, Drakes are wingless
>>47858093
That's not a dude though
>>47851521
That is far too cute
>>47860197
Locks
>>47841553
>>scrolling through front page on /tg/
>>dragon thread
>>"Lets have a non-sexual thread about them"
>>ladies, and gentlemen, 4chan
>>47853994
actually there is no solid definition of dragon it changes based on lore.
harry potter had dragons with 2 legs + leg/wings
>>47860528
>not wanting to do lewd things with a dragon
What are you doing on /tg/?
>>47862902
shitposting and starting 3.pf troll threads. why, what are you doing?
>>47851521
Goddamnit anon, I want a coin pouch dragon so bad. Why did you remind me they exist?
