Which would you choose

>you can see the outline of his abs
why do the japanese humanize everything to such a disgusting degree?

Neither, fuck wyverns. Give me actual dragons in fantasy games you lazy hacks.
You know all animals that aren't insects have muscles under skin that can be defined like that if the right mixture of taught skin to lack of fat & fur to amount of muscle is present right?

Japanese because I can hug its body while we fuck.

t. amorphous blob

this wyvern
youtube.com/watch?v=rCIU0nnoa7I

haha what if dragons musked on players to avoid fights haha what would it smell like haha

Is this the thread where people complain about a fictional (meaning: not real) creature not being done """"""right""""""?

Is the Japanese one nice? Cause I'd totally hug and fug that one. Parth being Mario makes me not want to do anything but talk to him and be friends.

>musked on players
>to avoid fights
does not compute it only starts a different combat :^)

Japanese Wyvern looks friendlier

No, this is the thread where we appreciate the anatomy of fictional reptiles.

>DND is the sole authority on dragons and related MYTHICAL creatures

This meme needs to die.

I wish they would pee on me.

i too am waiting for that WebM

What the fuck is a wyvern? Those are clearly dragons.

A wyvern is a dragon like a tiger is a cat. Yes, a tiger is a cat, but you're gonna have some questions if you go over to a friends house when they say they have cats and you have 400lbs murder kitties lounging in the living room instead of your typical compact personifications of assholery. Except in the case of wyverns, they're shitty versions of the real deal instead of the same thing but bigger and better in every way.

Except they look identical to dragons.

no thanks, i don't want to be deaf

dragons have 4 limbs with wings, wyverns have 2 limbs with wings

>western wyvern stolen from Dungeons and Dragons
>japanese wyvern stolen from Dungeons and Dragons
>Dungeons and Dragons wyvern stolen from Welsh myth
All seems the same to me desu

They don't, retard. Wyverns are winged bipeds.

They are both actually dragons. You are applying Dungeons and Dragons terms to other imaginary settings.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyvern
no

So then if it's just 4 legs vs 2 legs, what's all this shit about dragons being cooler? They're identicle it seems except the number of limbs.

Wyverns and dragons are the same thing

I want to lift with the one on the right

i think dragons are typically as or more intelligent than humans, whereas wyverns are just wild beasts.

Attached: 1490094546446.webm (960x540, 2.99M)

what the fuck
you use guns in ff15?

The autism is partially attributed to a trend in popular modern media to have wyverns in place of actual dragons for reasons of "But 6 limbs + tail is unrealistic" or "But it's too hard" but still call them dragons anyway (Skyrim, GoT tv series), or even worse, take an ACTUAL DRGON and turn him into a wyvern despite all accounts having him be an actual dragon (Hobbit movies), then still have the gall to continue calling him a dragon after that.
The last time an actual dragon was depicted in any media that had relevance was in 2006, and they gave her bloody BIRD WINGS (Eragon movie).
>t. Scaly autist

I want to romance both but neither game lets me do that.

At least post the real Japanese wyverns

Attached: ccdc3ecb9f4efafa273e31d0199b8737.image.500x500.jpg (500x500, 55K)

Noctis can equip weapons of his partners, one of them is a gun user.

kill those dragons...NOW

Attached: kill paarthurnax...now.jpg (1024x576, 243K)

That's a Western Dragon though. Yes I know what the differences between wyverns and dragons are. But in Skyrim, that's a dragon. It's also bears the traits of a dragon in terms of having magical abilities and being very intelligent.

Attached: 1533293098770.png (427x427, 307K)

Ever seen that bald monkey though? That thing will tear you to shreds.

Attached: joebrogan.jpg (1062x596, 51K)

Actual D&D fan here, wyverns are considered dragons there. The D&D term for the dragons that have more limbs than wyverns is simply true dragon, which hasn't been used in this thread.

Bottom right isn't a wyvern, you fucked your joke up.

>But in Skyrim, that's a dragon.
Dragons aren't actually dragons in the Elder Scrolls universe, they're time constructs (or something like that) that people think are dragons.

Their origins are irrelevant. Dragons usually have magical origins regardless. Unless there is a "true dragon" that exists in the Elder Scrolls world, then those are dragons.

They're dragons, it's okay to admit it

Well what's their final form look like then you lorefaggot? Is it "too abstract to comprehend" ie. the poor writers copout?

>dragons

The one on the right has smooth crotch scales.

Ever seen lizard irl? Or do you base your knowelge of biology from your porn colletion?

Creature A pretending to be Creature B and being called Creature C by the people does not make Creature A a Creature C. That's retarded logic. But it's completely fair to call it Creature C out of shorthand for convenience. I was just educating you, do what you want.

Time. Basically raw energy that's usually described as being misty (or electric when agitated) in appearance. To use an old meme, it's basically a cloud that dragons.

>tfw wyverns are just heraldic dragons drawn differently due to cultural differences in the british isles vs europe, and most places don't distinguish between them at all, but you were tricked by tabletop and video games into thinking they are two separate creatures with different traits and abilities instead of being different ways of drawing the same creature on a gay ass shield or banner
/thread

Attached: 1543034466687.jpg (774x1024, 147K)

You can be happy, that that abstract lore is being replaced with brainlet lore you like so we will never see alian worlds like Morrowind again.

>time can be killed with an iron axe
Pretty shitty time creatures to be honest

Yes, most lizards have a layer of fat and/or scales/thick skin covering their musculature, hence the point of the "if the right mixture of taught skin to lack of fat & fur to amount of muscle is present".

Attached: db6b34c569e9ee7635cb12428dffbfc1.jpg (495x700, 53K)

You're essentially just breaking the containment unit.
The Dragonborn is special because he can in essence actually absorb the thing before it gets away.

It's a lot like, you ever play Metroid Fusion? When you kill the enemies in that, you're only destroying the body that the X Parasite is inhabiting, but Samus can then absorb the parasite due to being part metroid now. It's kinda the same shit.

>Actual D&D fan here, wyverns are considered dragons there.
Not really. They are part of the dragon family, but they don't have many of the key traits that a great dragon possesses, or that traditional dragons throughout fantasy have. Even a Pseudo-dragon is part of the dragon family, sure has hell isn't a dragon though. Still more like a dragon then a Wyvern though.
Wyverns are mere beasts with low intelligence, no magical abilities, and one of their notable traits is their poisonous stingers, and they have no manner of elemental breath.
Literally fake dragons that only ignorant peasants would mistake for a dragon.
Funnily enough, you can go on a quest to hunt wyverns in Baldur's Gate, which begins with the hunter remarking that people claimed that had seen dragons, but he was confident they were wrong and had simply seen wyverns.

If no "true dragons" exist in the setting, then those are the real dragons. Just because they are dragons with a twist doesn't stop them from being THE dragons of the setting. They are dragons, unless as I said, there are true dragons in the setting.

>dragons have two legs
By that logic: this is an angel

Attached: harpy.png (1425x1650, 2.42M)

Right looks more realistic over the left's random chest spike.

You literally just explained the same thing I did but with more words. You even agreed with me before making the same distinction I did. You should read the whole post next time.

This is a man.

Attached: behold.jpg (3664x2445, 1.23M)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon

Yes and that looks nothing like androginized musclee structure, especially chest and abdominal region, because they are not even mamals.

Just admit it that you argue for such stuff for your fetish purposes and stop wasting time.

I choose SMAUG

Attached: dy9ckqq2m7311.png (618x334, 263K)

>Wyverns are very similar to dragons, and in many languages, cultures and contexts no clear distinction is made between the two. Since the sixteenth century, in English, Scottish, and Irish heraldry, the key difference has been that a wyvern has two legs, whereas a dragon has four. However, this distinction is not commonly observed in the heraldry of other European countries, where two-legged dragon-like creatures being called dragons is entirely acceptable.

>is simply true dragon
Yeah you're right

>wide hips
>tiny calves
>small hands
>necklet
>skinnyfat

Never gonna make it

and most video games are made in america, not europe. what's your point?

Well yeah, but Wyverns are still of the Dragon type. There are other monsters with dragon like traits that you could describe as fake dragons but aren't actual dragons, like a Behir or Hydra which are Magical Beasts. Wyverns are still Dragons. Technically a half green-dragon hippopotamus has the Dragon type in D&D and is officially a dragon whether you like it or not.

>If no "true dragons" exist in the setting, then those are the real dragons.
The last true dragon was in one of the earlier games, possibly Daggerfall or Morrowind (I don't remember which).

yes

Attached: maxresdefault (32).jpg (1280x720, 182K)

>The last true dragon was in one of the earlier games,
Ok, source then?

So what does a dragon looks like?

DnD

Attached: Monster_Manual_5e_-_Dragon,_Red_-_p97 (1).jpg (1200x1178, 277K)

That looks pretty spot on for what a iguana's muscles looks like, y'know, because it's a iguana. You don't see defined muscles on most animals because the circumstances to have that come about usually involve a relatively hyper amount of muscle and malnutrition to keep the fat from covering it.
Something that flies then would probably have defined muscles like that if they aren't covered by scales or feathers because large muscles are necessary for flight, and fat is extra weight.

Attached: 68d52043e9d411d2ed1e1f6ea13bda24.jpg (500x700, 111K)

Dragon's and wyverns are historically synonymous.
You are the autistic pedant that isn't even correct

My nigga.

That is no dragon

This.
It's mind blowing to think that there are people being so pedantic while also being dead wrong. Is that the definition of pretention? Being pedantically incorrect?

Outside of nerd culture dragons have had anything between six legs and two pairs of wings to no legs and no wings. Even the breathing fire bit may have been caused by early attempts at drawing forked tongues and then later misenterpretations of those drawings.

All wyverns are a type of dragon, but not all dragons are wyverns. Going to the other anons example, that'd be like calling /all/ kinds of cats, cats. Whether it's a domesticated british shorthair or a panther.

Attached: tumblr_ooklsdCV5v1u921jvo1_raw.png (1707x1209, 491K)

It's Nafaalilargus, who you meet in Redguard. But I also found out that Skyrim has apparently retconned him and all previous true dragons into all being time constructs created by Akatosh, and the reason said constructs take the forms of dragons is because that's the image of Akatosh, who's the dragon god.

So I guess that means Akatosh is the only true dragon. Huh.

It's not about being pedantic, it's about people simply deciding that of the myriad ways to draw a dragon, some people like the way of wyvern+2 limbs and wish they could see more of that. It gets labeled as pedantry because if you try to be specific about what kind of dragon you want, the 2 limbed+wings variation has a word (wyvern) used for it besides the general word of dragon. Meanwhile wyvern+2 is still just called dragon, which means trying to be specific is difficult and has people think you're being pedantic when you just want a specific thing.

It'd be like if you wanted to explain wanted to see a certain model of car, except that model had no name other than just "car".

>final fantasy
>third person shooter

what the LIVING fuck

Attached: 1551546737257.jpg (328x328, 50K)

>But I also found out that Skyrim has apparently retconned him and all previous true dragons
figures

every thread starting with this pic devolves into ES Lore threads.

Attached: Dragon's Dogma_ Dark Arisen Screenshot.png (1920x1080, 2.01M)

they're both cool-looking dragons thanks for sharing OP I like them both

Again, this isn't true.
Wyvern has been used interchangeably with dragon or drake or wyrm longer than DnD autists have tried to steal the word away to feed their "acthualy" autism. Read on some european mythology instead of demanding language bow to epic bazinga nerd "culture", or at least stop whining when people don't give a shit about your whimpering.
Also, cars exist, but dragon's don't, and therefore can be named in anyway the author pleases, because they're as made up as your definitions

Attached: 1547567732079.gif (800x800, 285K)

>Language can't evolve over time
It doesn't even have anything to do with purely D'nD, it's a fantasy thing that slowly acclimated over the years to the modern naming system anyone who gives a shit uses now.

I don't know why you grouped me with the dude posting the picture. I'm the one who acknowledges that wyverns are dragons. I don't give a fuck about any of that shit. My entire point is that it's difficult to talk about the kind of dragons you like when the kind you like is the only one that doesn't have a word for it other than "dragon" meanwhile all the other kinds do, which makes it easy to get specific for all of those. Although D&D tried to solve this by calling that kind of dragon "true dragon" but that only works for people who play D&D while to everyone else you look like the kind of autist you're complaining about.

Yes, they are all dragons. That is fine.
But that's never been the point.

Language around made up subjects can be rejected out of hand. The Unclear communication that could be caused by this wyvern thing isn't on the fault of the author when they are naming something that doesn't exist, it's the reader who get's prissy about the chosen name because "muh board game don't call it that" that is to blame
The fact that you have a whole thread of people shitting their pants over several works of media indentifying dragons and wyverns interchangeably proves that the "wyverns must be two legged" thing isn't as popular as you desperatly pretend it is.

"Wyvern" isn't a type of dragon, it's just another word for dragon

BASED DIOGENES

wyverns just keep on winning

Attached: 1547012877331.jpg (1886x757, 447K)

Up your reading comprehension.

STFU

Attached: plato.jpg (829x863, 281K)

I will not let such positivity go unacknowledged, based user

>It's fictional so it doesn't matter
That's not how things getting names works.
If something is generally accepted to be the definition by people who give a shit, then that's how it becomes 'official', hence definitions changing because different groups of people who give a shit come into being that change it slowly over time for one reason or another. You don't include people who don't give a shit calling it the wrong thing because, they don't give a shit.
Again, that's not just "the people playing a board game", that's anyone who gives a shit about high fantasy fictional species in general. The fact "Dragon" referrs to that entire subset of fictional frequently flying lizards while also being specifically "Scaly fictional flying lizard that breathes fire and has four legs, wings, tail and head on long neck" is a issue, that speakes more to what the default "dragon" is than anything else. The "true dragon" that D'nD is apparantly pushing I can't see catching on.

>n-no I didn't say that wyverns are a type of dragon, you just misread my post!

Right is the perfect size.

Attached: 1520146533060.jpg (1920x1080, 254K)

>my definitions are the popular ones (if you don't count all the people who disagree with me)!
Imagine acting this dishonest over a word.
Using Wyvern to mean a type of dragon, or even a different species entirely, is fine. Getting angry when it's used as a synonym for dragon is being pretentious

Skyrim, the Hobbit film, and GoT are some of the most popular and influential media in recent years where Dragons are featured prominently, and both use the 2-leg, 2-wing "wyvern" design. Like it or not, they've effectively redefined Dragons as having that body type.

My beef with "used as a synonym for dragon" is because of being promised dragons and getting wyverns shoved down my throat. If the mainstream lot made the fucking distinction (From what I can tell, japanese games actually do) I wouldn't get so assmad about it. Not made even better by the likes of slowly happening, at least for the normie audience.

N-no they didn't because they d-don't give enough of a shit to change what Dragon m-means!
Yeah, like how scientific words like petrichor can't change definitions unless people who use the word a lot then use the word to mean something different
And dragons are really obscure! Only true fantasy fans like myself ever use the word dragon, so obviously my definition will be the one to win, since most normies, like the people who wrote GoT, don't even know what a dragon is! I mean, if they did, then they'd agree with MY definition

projecting much?

Dragons and Wyverns aren't real
Why do autists still argue to this very day that Skyrim dragons aren't dragons? If the game says they are dragons then they are dragons. Simple as that.

Attached: 1551592396845.webm (1920x1080, 991K)

>wyverns being shoved down my throat
Oh, I didn't realize you were actually autistic
Hope one day you realize how little the internal rule-heavy world you're stuck in matches the real one.

Attached: received_1234368826636732.jpg (720x960, 55K)

I don't care about the distinction or naming, simple fact of the matter is that wyverns usually suck for gameplay. They rarely look unique or different from each other, 99% of the time they all fight and move exactly the same and are the same brownish color.

Well, I didn't. The word "type" is not anywhere in my post in fact. All you did was attribute extra shit and then respond to that. This is why you need to up your reading comprehension.

First sentence

Attached: Screenshot_20190303-143241_Chrome.jpg (1009x433, 227K)

That wasn't the D&D user, that was me.

Oh I see what's happened. You responded to the wrong post in the first place, great job.

>dnd fags still seething

Attached: 1515806888401.jpg (540x675, 89K)

>Doesn't play D&D
>Called D&D fag anyway

i wanna fuck one so bad

Attached: 1535724185104.jpg (1920x1080, 644K)

based

Attached: 1540784356406.jpg (581x603, 64K)

This is a dragon.

Attached: Crystal Dragon.png (443x417, 36K)

Just like my gay censored chinese porn drawings

based diogenes does anyone have plato getting sucked into diogenes ass pic

How does real dragon anatomy even work?
Wyverns have most of the torso muscles augmenting the wings but dragons have to use half of those for their arms. Not to mention the extra weight.
I doubt a creature designed like that could actually fly.
Do dragons even have hollow bones?

Attached: 1522683668552.jpg (1920x1080, 213K)

wyverns are the best

Attached: hororohoruru1.png (925x696, 245K)

Most settings and mythologies have dragons be magic, and thus didn't evolve naturally.
But if you want me to bullshit a real reason, much stronger and denser muscle fibers that can handle it.

Doesn't matter much. A wyvern can't even work properly at the usual sizes they are depicted at. Claiming one is subjectively more realistic than the other is all bullshit.

>hurr why are dragons and wyverns considered different species just because they have different numbers of limbs
kys my dude. members of the same species don't simply have variable number of limbs. theres no 4 legged humans or two legged dogs. insects and spiders are extremely far from eachother. centipedes and millipedes are also completely separate species.

>real
theres your problem, and in it i believe you will find your answer

>words for fictional ideas can't have clearly defined meanings and everyone should be able to manipulate the definitions as they see fit causing endless confusion

Attached: 1542357503232.png (403x448, 53K)

The Japanese dragon looks like he lifts.

>guaranteed_replies.jpg

Attached: 53693563670.jpg (1200x850, 325K)

Post em

Attached: 1549534822354.png (1280x1280, 821K)

Aren't you bored of making the same threads with the same replies every other day?

welcome to over a decade ago

Attached: unnamed.jpg (323x455, 60K)

>things that dont actually exist can be given rigid definitions
if 15 different fictional creatures all share the name wyvern in the broader popular culture and theyre all accepted as wyverns save for a few autists that give an actual fuck about classifying them for some stupid reason then wyvern doesnt actually mean anything, thats how words work. kinda like how based used to mean something and now it doesnt

>blue board edition
>has porn in the background

Attached: 1547411086305.png (154x154, 29K)

let's talk about dragon feet

the one i can fuck

>censoring the balls

1, You don't stick the wings ontop of the shoulders, you stick them in the middle of the back
2, Of course there's hollow bones
3, Flight sacks filled with lighter than air gasses to offset the mass of beig as big or bigger than a horse

I see you missed reading the free space

Lets see,
[_] [_] [_] [_] [_]
[x] [x] [_] [x] [_]
[_] [_] [x] [_] [_]
[_] [_] [_] [_] [x]
[_] [_] [_] [_] [_]
Nope, no bingo yet.

>everyone should obey D&D rulebooks because it triggers my tism when they don't

Attached: pqafkb6d9ba01.jpg (645x729, 57K)

Attached: 1535400992484.jpg (659x659, 196K)

Pic related and tits on dragons is disgusting

Attached: 1551574013371.png (1198x1189, 414K)

the ingame wyvern in ff15 is turning me on

[_] [_] [x] [_] [_]
[x] [x] [x] [x] [x]
[_] [_] [x] [_] [_]
[_] [_] [_] [_] [x]
[_] [_] [_] [_] [_]
Guess if you're determined to have a BINGO that badly.

I've got a screenshot almost exactly like that

Attached: 367500_screenshots_20180401155233_1.jpg (1920x1080, 217K)

>Wyverns are called dragons in other cultures
this is fine
>Call a dragon a wyvern despite it obviously having four legs
no.