Is it up to the creator of the source material to decide whether a creature is a dragon or a wyvern or should there be a universal canon? Thanks to Hackson and Skyrim this is what people think of as a dragon.
Implications:
>Be you
>Be reading a book
>They mention a dragon
>'Okay so am I supposed to visualise two or four limbs?'
All wyverns are dragons, but not all dragons are wyverns.
>>62746697
>be you
Why don't you ask reddit
>>62746743
This.
I honestly don't know the difference and I've played fantasy games and read fantasy books as a kid. Don't think you can blame it on just those 2 there is a lot of inconsistency
>>62746743
this
is it so hard to comprehend?
are all /tg/ posters mentally disabled?
>>62746697
Wyverns are part of the dragon family or a sub species more accurately, but calling a wyvern dragon is like calling humans mammals every time you discuss them.
>>62746697
At least it's better than WoW's two lion chimera as a wyvern.
But at the same time it's all fantasy and why should a canon be strictly required? Why do almost all elves follow the Tolkien canon now? Is it necessary?
which is this?
Amputee dragons are real dragons. Just because they lost their arms doesn't make them any less of a dragon.
Just look at this dragon, >>62746697
he's not letting his disability get in the way of terrorizing villagers. A true inspiration
>>62747382
A wyvern from the dragon family, notice how it has 4 limbs where the front limbs are part of the wings.
>>62746743
In Witcher wyverns aren't dragons, IIRC.
And in Monster Hunter this is considered a wyvern.
Then I don't know why we talk /v/ on /tv/.
>>62747671
No it isnt. Rajang is considered a Beast type monster not a Wyvern type.
There are people having sex right now while you kekolds are getting butthurt over the appropriate term for fictional fantasy creatures on an online Bhutanese childrens smoke signal forum
>>62747833
You are not one of them
>>62747833
At least they would use the right term while having said sex and not call it internal masturbation.
>>62746743
All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares. But when I see a fucking square, I call it a square because that is what it is. You don't stick a specific subspecies of creature in your film/game and then call it by it's generic name.
>>62747756
This is considered a wyvern, though.
>>62747999
And this a dragon.
you're right OP, you really shouldn't be thinking while you're reading
>>62746697
>>62747975
Why the hell would you bring geometry into a discussion about taxonomy of fictional animals?
>>62748083
That dragon doesn't even really look like a dragon, almsot like a cimera. Limbs are too big, neck too short.
Nigga it's fantasy, it's up to the author to describe what he is writing. If a book says "dragon" and leaves it at that then it's a shitty book.
Do you read fantasy about vampires and imagine fucking Twilight sparkling boys as vampires? There you go.
No, it isn't. They can call it whatever they want but they will be wrong. It's like calling a unicorn with no wings a pegasus. Just because its an imaginary creature doesn't mean you get to define what it is if it already has an established defintion. You can make up a new thing to call it but you can't use existing terms.
>>62748202
a·nal·o·gy
əˈnaləjē/
noun
a comparison between two things, typically on the basis of their structure and for the purpose of explanation or clarification.
I brought up geometry to show the absurdity of calling a wyvern a dragon. When someone sees a square, they call it a square despite the fact that it is technically in the rectangle family. In the same way, when a piece of media portrays a wyvern, it should be called by its specific name, wyvern in this case, regardless of whether or not it is technically still in the larger dragon family.
I hope that clarifies things for you.
When I become a billionaire, I will fund a dragon movie and force them to call it a unicorn
>>62748296
you need to reverse that second line for it to make sense.
calling sparkling bitches who's heads come off with a popping sound "vampires" is more applicable.
>Bethesda made another glitchy post apocalypse autismfest rather than a new Elder Scrolls
>>62746697
Autism general? Autism general.
>>62749675
Do you really want a new TES at this point?
>>62746697
>literally being autistic and giving a fuck about fantasy
Literally who cares faggot, its a dragon and its AMAZING!
>>62749736
>>62749768
>Caring about lore is autism
>>62749831
Yes. If you even know what the hell a wyvern is without having to Google it first, I'm assuming you're somewhere on the spectrum.
>>62749760
Honestly yes I do
>>62749831
>lore
which one. every version of dragons is a separate lore. it is all imaginary
>>62749885
High fantasy lore
>Just accept it dude everyone can write what they want
No they CANT fucking do that they can if they create a total new kind of monster but if you're using a dragon make it a dragon or I'll write your publisher and demand correction.
>>62748341
>it should be called by its specific name, wyvern in this case, regardless of whether or not it is technically still in the larger dragon family.
Except it's STILL apart of the dragon family
It like saying "call my Sony Tube it's brand name, don't call it a tube"
![penguin_cnt_15jul10_rex_b[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/mVcs6r1.jpg "penguin_cnt_15jul10_rex_b[1].jpg")
>>62746697
Wyvern is a type of a dragon, the same as the penguin is a type of a bird.
>>62749947
>No they CANT fucking do that
You sound like a tumblrdyke
As long as it's a lizard like monster then it's all good with me.
>>62749947
They can, here is a story I wrote.
"High elven wizard suddenly encountered a dragon! With 5 wings and 7 heads! and 3 arms!"
they are a fantasy story and author can call anything as dragon. get mad and go check for autism
>>62749947
What exactly is high fantasy lore, and who are you to make it a standard?
The dragon myth is centuries old, and nobody knows who was the first faggot to make it up.
>>62749760
>>62749675
Say my name.
>>62750036
That's called bad writing though. You're using words that have established meanings to mean something else completely. Even worse than Dune making up so many dumb words that it literally comes with a thesaurus. However, this whole wyvern v dragon thing doesn't fall under that. It's a dumb distinction.
real talk though
dragons ARE real
>>62749947
>No they CANT fucking do that
Calm down, Autistus.
>>62749947
>I'll write your publisher and demand correction.
Kill yourself
>>62750258
but dune's 'made up' names are usually not made up. it is arabic or latin or whetever
>>62750370
With different meanings in many cases. The real problem though, is that the words are not used in the story in a way where you can understand them by context or through exposition. They just throw them out there and you have to flip to the encyclopedia (not thesaurus. Ironically, I used the wrong word) to understand what the fuck they're saying.
>>62747121
Eh, it's more like calling a human an ape.
>>62749947
Is this wyvern controversy a meme or are there actual autists who are triggered by it?
Wyverns are not just dragons with four limbs instead of six. They're a very specific kind of dragon-like creature with a barbed tail and were used in medieval heraldry. Dragons used in heraldry most often had six limbs but that was just because of heraldic convention, not a binding rule that said a dragon must have six limbs or it isn't a dragon. A dragon can have four limbs like a wyvern without being a wyvern. Some dragons in folklore had no limbs at all and slithered around like snakes.
>>62751124
>are there actual autists who are triggered by it?
yes there are. people insist that dragons should be called wyren depending on their hands or something
>>62751124
your thinking of wyrms of lindworms mate
