| Latest revision |
Your text |
| Line 17: |
Line 17: |
| | | | |
| | Even beyond any potential dislike, I don't think the British could afford to waste one of Iskierka's eggs on a risky cross with Temeraire. The French might go for a Celestial/Fire Breather cross as suggested towards the end of Ivory, but with a single, female, fire breather the British have to concentrate on crosses with the best chance of keeping the fire breathing ability without extra complications. I don't think we "know" that Celestial Imperial crosses always produce Celestials, but it seems likely, every living Celestial is such a cross as all the Celestials are too closely related to allow Celestial/Celestial breeding. [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 02:14, 8 November 2007 (PST) | | Even beyond any potential dislike, I don't think the British could afford to waste one of Iskierka's eggs on a risky cross with Temeraire. The French might go for a Celestial/Fire Breather cross as suggested towards the end of Ivory, but with a single, female, fire breather the British have to concentrate on crosses with the best chance of keeping the fire breathing ability without extra complications. I don't think we "know" that Celestial Imperial crosses always produce Celestials, but it seems likely, every living Celestial is such a cross as all the Celestials are too closely related to allow Celestial/Celestial breeding. [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 02:14, 8 November 2007 (PST) |
| − |
| |
| − | I think the french will not have any celestial line, beacuse Lien is an albino and for that she isn't fertile ... so in the time the better would come in the briths side ...
| |
| − | SAM
| |
| − |
| |
| − | After reading VoE, I'm beginning to wonder if Celestials are interfertile with any other "breeds" (species?) <i>besides</i> Imperials and other Celestials. Which pretty much shoots any British plans for crossbreeding in the wing. [[User:Rose|Rose]] 07:13, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
| |
| | | | |
| | == Dragonback Cannons == | | == Dragonback Cannons == |
| Line 27: |
Line 22: |
| | There's not really a good place I can find to start discussions like this on the main site, or any other site I frequent on the net (If you know of somewhere please let me know) so I think I'll start filling my talk page here as this sort of thing occurs to me. Anyway... | | There's not really a good place I can find to start discussions like this on the main site, or any other site I frequent on the net (If you know of somewhere please let me know) so I think I'll start filling my talk page here as this sort of thing occurs to me. Anyway... |
| | Is anyone else surprised that there seems to be no mention at all of cannons on dragon back? I know that recoil issues would be a bigger factor than on a ship, the lack of obvious flat spots, and there would be dangers in storing so much powder aboard and so on, but the advantages to having a big gun in the air are so obvious, does anyone else think it is a missed opportunity? [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 02:43, 9 November 2007 (PST) | | Is anyone else surprised that there seems to be no mention at all of cannons on dragon back? I know that recoil issues would be a bigger factor than on a ship, the lack of obvious flat spots, and there would be dangers in storing so much powder aboard and so on, but the advantages to having a big gun in the air are so obvious, does anyone else think it is a missed opportunity? [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 02:43, 9 November 2007 (PST) |
| − |
| |
| − | Wait for VoE. [[User:Rose|Rose]] 06:32, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == Related Species ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | One thing I think is missing from Novik's world is other Draconic creatures. We've seen there is a large number of dragon species, and there's a definite relation to the Sea Serpents, such as the one that attacked the Allegiance, but we've not seen anything else. Dragons if they were around, would be a new Class (Order, Phylum? Biology isn't my strong point [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_classification/ Look]) of animals. You'd expect to see examples of the class in different niches around the environment. Just live we have mammals ranging from Rats to Whales; fish from Whitebait to Sharks and so on for the other major animal groups. Where is the Draconic Badger? Or at least the Turkey Dragon? Anyone have any thoughts? [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 09:08, 2 January 2008 (PST)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Dragons are obviously warm-blooded - it's mentioned pretty frequently that they feel warm to touch. It's also mentioned that cooler climates favour the smaller breeds, while the larger breeds prefer warmer climates where their air sacs are more buoyant. If they were cold-blooded, the opposite would be true - smaller breeds, with a larger ratio of surface air to mass, would have a harder time maintaining body temperature in cooler environments.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | There are theories that at least some dinosaurs were warm-blooded, and certainly birds (class Aves) evolved from dinosaurs and are members of the superorder Dinosauria. So I'm guessing that Draconia is also a class in this same superorder, which means Andrew is right, one might expect to find various families, geni and species within this class. (Alternate hypothesis: draconia is a species, but in that case, in which genus, family and class?)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | One thing I'm wondering about is, are we sure that all draconic "breeds" are interfertile with each other, or are we, at least in some cases, looking at different species? There's certainly enough range in size and ability to fill various ecological niches. But even if we're looking at Draconia as a genus with different species (Draconia celestialis, for example), that still leaves family and class open to question.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Another thing I'd point out is that we've been learning about dragons pretty much entirely from the viewpoint of military personnel rather than scientific personnel. For example, we don't have a list of every bird, lizard and snake Laurence & Co. saw in China, Central Asia or Africa. So there might have been various draconoid fauna whose presence simply wasn't noted.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I'm looking forward to visiting Australia, already known for its distinct mammals, and hoping for some diversity in draconic evolution as well. [[User:Rose|Rose]] 07:10, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Further thoughts:
| |
| − | In the class Mammalia, placental mammals (cohort Placentalia) outperformed marsupial mammals (cohort Marsupialia) on almost all continents. The exceptions are the Americas, where opposums survived, and Australia, where the marsupials took over. So maybe the primitive ancestors of modern day Draco sapiens were sort of like opposums - the one example of their group that *didn't* get wiped out by placental mammals on most of the planet.
| |
| − |
| |
| − | The theory is that in Australia, the low metabolic rate of marsupials gave them an advantage over placentals in the hot Australian climate. A hot climate would also favour draconoid families/orders/species by making it easier for them to fly. Thus, perhaps a greater diversity of draconoids survived in Australia along with the marsupials?
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Alternate theory: Draco sapiens was once the dominant species on the planet, as Homo sapiens is now. Dragons created advanced civilizations, complete with military-industrial complexes. Warfare and pollution wiped out almost all life on the planet, including the dinosaurs and all the non-intelligent draconoid fauna. The survivors of Draco sapiens retained their intelligence but survived in caves, eating raw meat. Over time, the radioactivity and chemical poisons died down, and a new class, mammals, evolved to fill the vacant ecological niches. Eventually evolution produced an intelligent mammal, Homo sapiens...
| |
| − |
| |
| − | [[User:Rose|Rose]] 09:15, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Hahaha, Rose, of course that's what happened *wink wink* You hit the nail on the head with that one!
| |
| − | -[[User:Laurelhach|Laurelhach]] 15:12, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | == Spelling Differences ==
| |
| − |
| |
| − | You're from Britain, right? Oh boy, is this gonna be fun! Especially when American English and Britain's English have so many differences in spelling!! Oh what joy!! --[[User:Skiewolf|skie]] 05:42, 22 May 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Yep. I'm going to keep sticking those u's in every time I'm editing a page too. Though I probably wont edit anything to specifically add u's. And it's England's English. :)[[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 05:06, 23 May 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Sorry 'bout that then, 'cause I first thought to call it "The Queen's English" but I wasn't sure if that was right either. --[[User:Skiewolf|skie]] 05:34, 23 May 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | The Queen's English is fine. I just always think British English makes it sound as if it's an imported or changed from a base language (not that it isn't a mish mash of various roots anyway...). It's not really, British or England's English, it's just English, and it's from here... Does that make any sense? [[User:Andrew|Andrew]] 14:00, 25 May 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | A bit, though both forms of English are spoken almost exactly the same, just the written spellings are different, which is what I find ironic. I can, however, say one plus, at least we are not using Shakespeare's English, or else few people would be able to easily understand this Wiki. [[User:Skiewolf|skie]] 05:38, 27 May 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | Amen to that Skie!!! And Hooray for 'U's! My friends always bug me when I use an English spelling--I'm from and live in Arkansas, so they think it's weird when I spell out 'colour' and not 'color'. Hahaha, what's really funny is that my Word program keeps telling me I've spelling it incorrectly....
| |
| − | [[User:Laurelhach|Laurelhach]] 19:18, 24 September 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | I've been wondering about spelling myself. I've been using the spellings I'm used to in Canada, which are pretty much what they use in Britain (with a few exceptions - we have jails and tires, not gaols and tyres). I didn't know how hard we were striving for consistency in this matter? [[User:Rose|Rose]] 06:35, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
| |
| − |
| |
| − | You know, I think that if someone were reading an article here on the wiki, they wouldn't really notice subtle differences in spelling all that greatly--I know I don't. I mean, does anyone really pay attention to whether you spell it 'colour' or 'color'? Well, maybe, but I still don't think those kinds of spellings should be all that strictly regulated.
| |
| − | -[[User:Laurelhach|Laurelhach]] 15:07, 25 September 2008 (PDT)
| |
