Dracthyr Buffness

[Synapse12]

You're banging your head against a wall. I had like three interactions with him and decided it would be more productive arguing with flat earthers.

Going back to your original topic about customization, I saw a MrGM video on it and it puts the older races to shame. I hope they leverage whatever tech they had to develop for this and take another pass at the old races.

Yeah he is clearly living in some kind of delusion. I actually feel extremely sorry for the guy, it’s crazy people like this actually exist.

And yes I though the same thing. The customization is seriously out of this world. The colors alone and shades you can turn your dragon form into is absolutely insane. You can even make yourself look like an infinite dragon flight dracthyr if you want.

[Syegfryed]

And that's where subjectivity enters into the discussion - because I actually prefer the Dracthyr model to this one, especially for a race that's intrinsically bound to a spellcaster class. I actually think the model above looks lame. It's more a lizard than a dragon, it kind of resembles more what I'd say a bipedal Naga would look like and not a Drakonid or dragonkin.

Of course you would say it look lame, besides being in such high quality, that would mean we were right and that can't happen. On top of that, there is no problem with this being "bound to a spellcaster class" if the race was not bound to it in the first place, as again, come to the design problem, as the race should not be tied to it and the class tied the race.

I once again bring up pandarens, monk is tied to pandarens, and they can be fat, despite not being common for monks and how they can be other classes, and, the class itself, would be open to other races, just like people discussed in the threads about next races/classes. Thats why we say it was 100% a design problem, that instead of please many people are cattering to a few.

Saying it look more of a lizard than a dragon have to be a joke, cause i don't even think you believe in that, when the dracthyr itself straight up look like a skinny lizard with a small and tiny snout without the teeth showing off to actually look like a wow dragon.

Keep in mind that, this is just a NPC, a MOB, not actually a playable race, of course their overall quality of different options will be inferior, and yet, they actually bring up the idea of a humanoid dragon, that funny enough look like a dragonborn from dungeons and dragons and a warcraft dragon





In short, they should just put wings on that model, and add as an option for players, done, both sides are pleased with two different types of bodies to play.

Then, you just have to add more visage option and the problem is solved.

[Aucald]

Of course you would say it look lame, besides being in such high quality, that would mean we were right and that can't happen. On top of that, there is no problem with this being "bound to a spellcaster class" if the race was not bound to it in the first place, as again, come to the design problem, as the race should not be tied to it and the class tied the race.

I once again bring up pandarens, monk is tied to pandarens, and they can be fat, despite not being common for monks and how they can be other classes, and, the class itself, would be open to other races, just like people discussed in the threads about next races/classes. Thats why we say it was 100% a design problem, that instead of please many people are cattering to a few.

Saying it look more of a lizard than a dragon have to be a joke, cause i don't even think you believe in that, when the dracthyr itself straight up look like a skinny lizard with a small and tiny snout without the teeth showing off to actually look like a wow dragon.

Keep in mind that, this is just a NPC, a MOB, not actually a playable race, and actually bring up the idea of a humanoid dragon, that funny enough look like a dragonborn from dungeons and dragons and a warcraft dragon

In short, they should just put wings on the model, and add as an option for players, done, both sides are plaesed with two different types of bodies to play

Then, you just have to add more visage option and the problem is solved.

I'm not arguing that it's not a high-quality model, I'm saying it doesn't seem draconic to me - it looks more like a Naga or an unrelated lizard, especially with those prominent tendril-like things on its face and its webbed aquatic-looking ears. You, or the "we" you're referring to, can think whatever you want; I've got my own opinion, which while subjective, is just as valid as yours (or theirs).

If the Dracthyr race/class wasn't bound up like it is you might have an argument to make, sure; but that's neither here nor there when we're discussing customization for the race/class as it currently is. Like I said before, that's a different subject and a different argument, more germane to a different thread overall.

I wouldn't even be opposed to the above model being a kind of choice for the Dracthyr, either, although I personally wouldn't select it for the reasons given above. Body type 3-4 of the current Dracthyr model would be more my preference for an Evoker spellcaster type of model, and that's just how it is for me on a subjective level.

[Syegfryed]

I'm not arguing that it's not a high-quality model, I'm saying it doesn't seem draconic to me - it looks more like a Naga or an unrelated lizard, especially with those prominent tendril-like things on its face and its webbed aquatic-looking ears. You, or the "we" you're referring to, can think whatever you want; I've got my own opinion, which while subjective, is just as valid as yours (or theirs).

Fun fact, dragons are reptiles, they are supposed to look like snakes or serpents,the etimolgy of the word literally means HUGE SERPENT,thats why you see then closest to Naga, because thats precisely what they are suppose to look like.

Those features you mention are straight up what dragons in general media have, tendrils and fins? thats 100% wow dragons:

If the Dracthyr race/class wasn't bound up like it is you might have an argument to make, sure; but that's neither here nor there when we're discussing customization for the race/class as it currently is. Like I said before, that's a different subject and a different argument, more germane to a different thread overall.

And the point that they were not, is because they didn't exist, they made then to be restrict this way, they made then look like this, that does not cater to most people requests and lore, therefore, making a problem with the design.

A problem that can be EASILY, worked around, but just giving what the other half of fanbase want, which, is not hard, as we see, they basically already have then

I wouldn't even be opposed to the above model being a kind of choice for the Dracthyr, either, although I personally wouldn't select it for the reasons given above. Body type 3-4 of the current Dracthyr model would be more my preference for an Evoker spellcaster type of model, and that's just how it is for me on a subjective level.

But thats the thing, giving player options.

There is a problem going on in wow fanbase that half(not literally half, i can't stress this enough, is a figure of speech) half want the buffy options, on top of the ones we already have

Meanwhile, the other half don't want any more options, by whatever reasons they try to make, you can see then in this very thread, which is beyond bogus how someone can be combative like that.

[Aucald]

Fun fact, dragons are reptiles, they are supposed to look like snakes or serpents,the etimolgy of the word literally means HUGE SERPENT,thats why you see then closest to Naga, because thats precisely what they are suppose to look like.

Those features you mention are straight up what dragons in general media have, tendrils and fins? thats 100% wow dragons

There's a distinct difference between something looking like a graduated salamander or newt and a dragon, and I'm sure you're aware of that. Saurok, Sethrak, and many of WoW's reptilian models pointedly don't look draconic. The model above looks a lot more like a bipedal version of this:



As opposed to looking like a dragon, IMO.

And the point that they were not, is because they didn't exist, they made then to be restrict this way, they made then look like this, that does not cater to most people requests and lore, therefore, making a problem with the design.

A problem that can be EASILY, worked around, but just giving what the other half of fanbase want, which, is not hard, as we see, they basically already have then

But thats the thing, giving player options.

There is a problem going on in wow fanbase that half(not literally half, i can't stress this enough, is a figure of speech) half want the buffy options, on top of the ones we already have

Meanwhile, the other half don't want any more options, by whatever reasons they try to make, you can see then in this very thread, which is beyond bogus how someone can be combative like that.

I already said I think it'd be a fine option to include, as well - I personally wouldn't go for it, but that by no means it or something similar shouldn't be included. I've said multiple times now that the more options they provide, the better overall.

[Syegfryed]

There's a distinct difference between something looking like a graduated salamander or newt and a dragon, and I'm sure you're aware of that. Saurok, Sethrak, and many of WoW's reptilian models pointedly don't look draconic. The model above looks a lot more like a bipedal version of this:

As opposed to looking like a dragon, IMO.

I mean, i s raight up put a picture of wow dragons with fins and tendrils, with basicaly the same shape of head, 100% look alike the new drakonid

Of course, they will also look like naga, because again, nagas are based around serpents, as dragons are too, they will have similiraties.

Which also brings to the point of how sad that a naga model look more draconic and fierce, witht he strong jaw and showing teeth, than the giraffe looking dracthyr, with tiny and long snout with hidden teth. Dracthyr look more like some dinossaurs you can find in zandalar than acual dragons.

[Aucald]

I mean, i s raight up put a picture of wow dragons with fins and tendrils, with basicaly the same shape of head, 100% look alike the new drakonid

Of course, they will also look like naga, because again, nagas are based around serpents, as dragons are too, they will have similiraties.

Which also brings to the point of how sad that a naga model look more draconic and fierce, witht he strong jaw and showing teeth, than the giraffe looking dracthyr, with tiny and long snout with hidden teth. Dracthyr look more like some dinossaurs you can find in zandalar than acual dragons.

Perhaps if there were other forms of this model they'd look more draconic, but this one strikes me are more Naga than Dragon - the Dracthyr model at least initially seems draconic in origin to me, and doesn't make me think of something else entirely.

I don't really think the Naga model looks all that fierce, either; I think they actually look kind of dumb given the story that is behind the Naga as a race in WoW. The male Naga model, like the female model, should hearken back to the origins of the Naga as former Night Elves as opposed to appearing more like beasts than humanoids - obviously more feral and savage than their forebearers, but still humanoid in appearance. The Legion Fal'dorei models in Suramar do a much better job depicting a corrupted version of an Elven humanoid, IMO.

[Syegfryed]

Perhaps if there were other forms of this model they'd look more draconic, but this one strikes me are more Naga than Dragon - the Dracthyr model at least initially seems draconic in origin to me, and doesn't make me think of something else entirely.

Yeah, i can't wrap my head around the fact that someone sees an updated drakonid, - that look like onyxia and nefarian model with tendrils and fins - and say the dracthyr - that look like a giraffe - is more draconic.

I don't really think the Naga model looks all that fierce, either; I think they actually look kind of dumb given the story that is behind the Naga as a race in WoW. The male Naga model, like the female model, should hearken back to the origins of the Naga as former Night Elves as opposed to appearing more like beasts than humanoids - obviously more feral and savage than their forebearers, but still humanoid in appearance. The Legion Fal'dorei models in Suramar do a much better job depicting a corrupted version of an Elven humanoid, IMO.

"fiece" charactersterics are the strong and wide jaw, thick neck, exposed teeth and proeminent forehand, those are predator characteristics, or at least, what people imagine when they see an "monster".

The dracthyr have a thin long snount, that does not show teeth, those are characterstics of some herbivores and animals that catch fish.

The new drakonid look way more fierce and way more draconic, dracktyr lack the bulky display with thin shoulders and thin neck, they lack the wide jaw and exposed teeth of dragons.

They are just too, how can i say, too "behaved" and clean, to fill the fierce category.

[Aleksej89]

the newly released screenshots of the new race look awfully low quality.
like someone was playing in the model editor for an afternoon level of awful.

also strange how the "body type 2" can't be without a shirt while the body type 1 can, some kind of oversight.

[Icelin]

Apparently, they don't need to go back to the drawing board, they already did what people asked, they just need to put wings and make playable:

It's a good body option 1 form. That or Blizzard could potentially make it an Allied race. Since they kept fishing to see what people want for allied races. I would hope they would actually make it an Evoker class choice for that race. If they went the latter route. I honestly just prefer body options 1 and 2. It's the companies choice ultimately.

It doesn't address or fix the body option 2 form. Which is the original concept. I am not happy with it. I been trying to rack my brain on why I don't like it. Now I am to the point I'd rather just see a new concept instead of pin pointing why it is off-putting. This is due to seeing much better concepts in this thread or forum in general. (Quoted ones I felt did a better job of slender spellcaster) I am not trying to be arrogant. I am just expressing my unhappiness.

[Aucald]

Yeah, i can't wrap my head around the fact that someone sees an updated drakonid, - that look like onyxia and nefarian model with tendrils and fins - and say the dracthyr - that look like a giraffe - is more draconic.

Art is subjective, in the end - I can't wrap my mind around someone who thinks that the above model looks more draconic than the Dracthyr model, but I'm not going to say you don't actually think that. I'm not sure how you think the Dracthyr model looks like a giraffe, either; because I've never seen a giraffe look either reptilian or obviously like a carnivore. I just have to chalk it up to differences in aesthetic choices.

"fiece" charactersterics are the strong and wide jaw, thick neck, exposed teeth and proeminent forehand, those are predator characteristics, or at least, what people imagine when they see an "monster".

The dracthyr have a thin long snount, that does not show teeth, those are characterstics of some herbivores and animals that catch fish.

The new drakonid look way more fierce and way more draconic, dracktyr lack the bulky display with thin shoulders and thin neck, they lack the wide jaw and exposed teeth of dragons.

They are just too, how can i say, too "behaved" and clean, to fill the fierce category.

The Fal'dorei are pretty fierce and monstrous without a "strong and wide jaw," thick neck, or prominent foreheads. In point of fact, the best trait to determine a predator is actually its sensory organs, such as the eyes, being directly facing as opposed to being at the sides of the head in order to maximize field of view. Predators are specialized to focus and track, whereas prey are specialized to have a maximal field of view for sighting predators. That being said, the Dracthyr has pretty prominent teeth when their mouths are open, especially since they have the sharp angular teeth of an obligate carnivore as opposed to those of a herbivore or omnivores such as humans.

The new Drakonid model does look more fierce, but it also looks a lot more primitive and unintelligent, the stereotypical Neanderthal to the Dracthyr's more evolved presentation, one might say.

[Bigcountry11782]

They still look like weird furries so still not much of an improvement.

[Syegfryed]

Art is subjective, in the end - I can't wrap my mind around someone who thinks that the above model looks more draconic than the Dracthyr model, but I'm not going to say you don't actually think that. I'm not sure how you think the Dracthyr model looks like a giraffe, either; because I've never seen a giraffe look either reptilian or obviously like a carnivore. I just have to chalk it up to differences in aesthetic choices.

Yes, art is subjective, you can like one more than the other, but saying one look more dragon-ish than the other, when they clearly don't, is something else

Again, put onixia and nefarian side by side with the new drakonid and the dracthyr, hell, put any classic warcraft dragons, you can't say honestly that they look more like the dracthyr, is not about taste is about denying the truth

The Fal'dorei are pretty fierce and monstrous without a "strong and wide jaw," thick neck, or prominent foreheads.

They don't look fierce, they look monstrous and creepy, but not "fierce", is like saying those girls in terror movies are "fierce", nope, a t-rex in jurrasic park is fierce.

In point of fact, the best trait to determine a predator is actually its sensory organs, such as the eyes, being directly facing as opposed to being at the sides of the head in order to maximize field of view. Predators are specialized to focus and track, whereas prey are specialized to have a maximal field of view for sighting predators. That being said, the Dracthyr has pretty prominent teeth when their mouths are open, especially since they have the sharp angular teeth of an obligate carnivore as opposed to those of a herbivore or omnivores such as humans.

So you are going to straight up ignore the bulky and build of predators that have to be muscular to chase the prey, that they need to have strong jaws to deliver a killing blow and other factors, to focus on eyesight alone, all right.

Yeah, i saw their theeth when they are smilling, totally not dragons, cause dragons in wow have teeth coming out with the mounth closed, exactly what drakonid have.

And about the snout, no, its wrong, its the snout and the neck of a herbivore or a fish catcher.

The new Drakonid model does look more fierce, but it also looks a lot more primitive and unintelligent, the stereotypical Neanderthal to the Dracthyr's more evolved presentation, one might say.

yeah they "evolved" into, basically, not wow dragons, which is the crux of the problem int he design. The new drakonid is more aligned with wow design.

[Aucald]

Yes, art is subjective, you can like one more than the other, but saying one look more dragon-ish than the other, when they clearly don't, is something else

Again, put onixia and nefarian side by side with the new drakonid and the dracthyr, hell, put any classic warcraft dragons, you can't say honestly that they look more like the dracthyr, is not about taste is about denying the truth

This is seemingly starting to veer into the territory of people not being able to have opinions that differ from yours, by the sound; and that's not really a discussion I care to continue overly. But to put it succinctly in a way I hope you can understand and accept: yes, I can honestly say the new Drakonid model you're referring doesn't look as draconic as the current Dracthyr model in my view, and yes, I prefer the current Dracthyr model to the newer Drakonid model. Beyond that, I don't honestly care if you can't accept it or don't believe me at my word, I'm going to blithely go on thinking and feeling the way I care to regardless of your opinion on the matter. End of story.

They don't look fierce, they look monstrous and creepy, but not "fierce", is like saying those girls in terror movies are "fierce", nope, a t-rex in jurrasic park is fierce.

"Monstrous and creepy" certainly qualifies as a kind of ferocity in my view. The Fal'dorei have an insectoid single-mindedness as befits their arachnid natures - they ask no questions and brook no discussion, just acting as killing machines in the lion's share of encounters.

So you are going to straight up ignore the bulky and build of predators that have to be muscular to chase the prey, that they need to have strong jaws to deliver a killing blow and other factors, to focus on eyesight alone, all right.

There are more predators in the wild than just jungle cats and hulking mammals, so yes. Stealth and ambush predators don't chase prey, and many of them rely on poisons and traps to ensnare their victims.

Yeah, i saw their theeth when they are smilling, totally not dragons, cause dragons in wow have teeth coming out with the mounth closed, exactly what drakonid have.

If visible teeth were the only things that defined what a dragon was or wasn't, sure.

And about the snout, no, its wrong, its the snout and the neck of a herbivore or a fish catcher.

yeah they "evolved" into, basically, not wow dragons, which is the crux of the problem int he design. The new drakonid is more aligned with wow design.

The Dracthyr model doesn't have anywhere close to the neck length of a giraffe, or of an animal that ducks its head into the water to catch fish (which would typically require a beak and not a snout). Not to mention, bobcats and bears are predatory mammals that also dabble in catching fish, which doesn't do much to help your argument. Both the Drakonid and Dracthyr models strike me as being "aligned with WoW's design," just serving different purposes - the Dracthyr are specialists in the form of spellcasters who emphasize natural specialization and magical abilities over brute force, and the Drakonid model seems more like a brute combat monster that would wade into melee. You not liking the former doesn't mean it should be excised from the game.

[Aresk]

Well, it's because the artists they hired are furries...it's not like an artist can't give different takes on a subject, they could do badass dragons, they just don't want to.

What does being or not being a furry have to do with the art being drawn? Regardless of an artist's membership or lack thereof to the furry community, they can draw lots of different styles. I really don't understand the point you're attempting to make here.

I mean, i s raight up put a picture of wow dragons with fins and tendrils, with basicaly the same shape of head, 100% look alike the new drakonid

Of course, they will also look like naga, because again, nagas are based around serpents, as dragons are too, they will have similiraties.

Which also brings to the point of how sad that a naga model look more draconic and fierce, witht he strong jaw and showing teeth, than the giraffe looking dracthyr, with tiny and long snout with hidden teth. Dracthyr look more like some dinossaurs you can find in zandalar than acual dragons.

The model you seem so fond of reminds me a lot of turtles (obviously without the shell). For me, personally, beyond just the wings, the lack of horns really kills it for the "WoW Dragon" appearance. All WoW dragons have horns. Dracthyr have horns. The model that you're proposing does not. The fin ears do seem more at home on a naga or other aquatic creature.

I understand your displeasure, and I think the model you posted looks cool, but I don't think it screams "dragon" more than the dracthyr do. We may just prioritize different elements of WoW dragons.

[Gaidax]

I think it could use a few levels more of buff.

For me the highest option now seems good, but if people want to be a hulk with wings, then just let them really.

[Syegfryed]

The model you seem so fond of reminds me a lot of turtles (obviously without the shell). For me, personally, beyond just the wings, the lack of horns really kills it for the "WoW Dragon" appearance. All WoW dragons have horns. Dracthyr have horns. The model that you're proposing does not.

As you can see in, the top of their head, horns, like dragons.

The fin ears do seem more at home on a naga or other aquatic creature

Fin ears and tendrils look 100% like wow classic dragons, i linked two easy comparisons with onyxia and nefarian.

I understand your displeasure, and I think the model you posted looks cool, but I don't think it screams "dragon" more than the dracthyr do. We may just prioritize different elements of WoW dragons.

they 100% do, dracthyr are skinny lizards with tiny heads, long snout and smiled faces, they lack the bulky, the strong necks, strong jaws hell, they lack the fins and tendrils of classic dragons.

The only dragon the dracthyr look like, is the nightmare dragon with their mouth looking like a beak, i give you that, but not the classic ones

- - - Updated - - -

This is seemingly starting to veer into the territory of people not being able to have opinions that differ from yours, by the sound; and that's not really a discussion I care to continue overly. But to put it succinctly in a way I hope you can understand and accept: yes, I can honestly say the new Drakonid model you're referring doesn't look as draconic as the current Dracthyr model in my view, and yes, I prefer the current Dracthyr model to the newer Drakonid model. Beyond that, I don't honestly care if you can't accept it or don't believe me at my word, I'm going to blithely go on thinking and feeling the way I care to regardless of your opinion on the matter. End of story.

Look how you made a whole paragraph to not answer about they looking like onyxia and nefarian, unlike the dracthyr.

"Monstrous and creepy" certainly qualifies as a kind of ferocity in my view

.

But its not, ferocity is the ability to be savage, again, the ring girl, is not ferocious, the girl from exorcist? creepy, not ferocious

And see how weird is, that you are trying to make how "insects"(because spiders are no insects), are ferocious, to validate the soft features of the dracthyr, that are opposite of the true dragons

There are more predators in the wild than just jungle cats and hulking mammals, so yes. Stealth and ambush predators don't chase prey, and many of them rely on poisons and traps to ensnare their victims.

And all of the phunter predators have the traits i mentioned, crocodiles, extinct theropodes, crocodiles, sharks

we are talking about DRAGONS, active hunters, dragons do not rely on poison and traps to ensnare their victims, they are not stealth and ambush, this is not even true for dracthyr, let alone true dragons;

If visible teeth were the only things that defined what a dragon was or wasn't, sure.

It isn't, thats i i listed, several other features.

The Dracthyr model doesn't have anywhere close to the neck length of a giraffe,

They don't, thats why i ddin't talk about length, but about head format and thickness of the neck

Both the Drakonid and Dracthyr models strike me as being "aligned with WoW's design,"

By being alligned with wow design you mean by then looking nothing like the wow dragons, i guess you are right?

They being spellcasters doesn't mean they should be skinny lizards, as wow dragons themselves - magic and spellcaster-ish creatures - are thick and bulky.

This argument also falls appart too with their visage forms looking abnormally ripped, then again, this is another problem of the visage design

You not liking the former doesn't mean it should be excised from the game.

Once again, i never said that, i said they should have both options

Sadly, the damage is already done to remove one, and blizzard is not well know for assuming their mistakes.

[Gaidax]

*snip*

Bruh... I know it's hard to accept, but what you want is not exactly what everyone wants and you don't even know if most want.

So I mean, I would not mind if they'd get a bit more meat on their bones, within reason, but what I see now - I like and you gotta learn to live with that.

[Aucald]

Look how you made a whole paragraph to not answer about they looking like onyxia and nefarian, unlike the dracthyr.

If you read my whole paragraph, then you'd have the answer to your question: I don't think they look anything like Onyxia or Nefarian, where the Dracthyr at least do to some degree. In addition, you're basically also agreeing that no one has a right to an opinion different than yours, making any other discussion with you rather pointless.

But its not, ferocity is the ability to be savage, again, the ring girl, is not ferocious, the girl from exorcist? creepy, not ferocious

And see how weird is, that you are trying to make how "insects"(because spiders are no insects), are ferocious, to validate the soft features of the dracthyr, that are opposite of the true dragons

This has to be the worst semantic dodge I've seen in some time. Sure, spiders are arachnids and not insects - but I think you could take my meaning easily enough without having to channel your inner entomologist. The point still stands.

And all of the phunter predators have the traits i mentioned, crocodiles, extinct theropodes, crocodiles, sharks

we are talking about DRAGONS, active hunters, dragons do not rely on poison and traps to ensnare their victims, they are not stealth and ambush, this is not even true for dracthyr, let alone true dragons;

This seems like the point where I should make you reference your degree in Draconolgy, so I can certify you're scientific knowledge of fantasy creatures is on the up and up, right? Did you attend a certified university and do the required years of fieldwork to study the biology, hunting habits, and courtship rituals of the dragon? Are there pronounced differences in the manner in how the Northrend proto-drake and the Eastern Kingdoms whelp track and devour prey? Do Azerothian dragons even need to consume prey or do they subsist entirely on Ley energy and ambient mana?

The above is obvious sarcasm because I think the conversation has drifted into the absurd.

By being alligned with wow design you mean by then looking nothing like the wow dragons, i guess you are right?

They being spellcasters doesn't mean they should be skinny lizards, as wow dragons themselves - magic and spellcaster-ish creatures - are thick and bulky.

This argument also falls appart too with their visage forms looking abnormally ripped, then again, this is another problem of the visage design

If you don't think *either* design really belongs in WoW, then this entire argument is rendered pointless and it makes me question why we're bothering to have it.

Once again, i never said that, i said they should have both options

Sadly, the damage is already done to remove one, and blizzard is not well know for assuming their mistakes.

I've already said that I think both options would be fine, merely that I favored one over the other, an opinion I'm apparently not entitled to have without your explicit permission for some reason.

Since this entire conversation has been rendered pointless in any case, I'm going to end it by saying I think the Dracthtyr model is still superior as it stands, and you can go on thinking what you think. I hope you manage to get some solace with future updates, as well; though given the givens I doubt that will work out for you.

[Syegfryed]

Bruh... I know it's hard to accept, but what you want is not exactly what everyone wants and you don't even know if most want.

I mean, i never speak for "everyone", i don't know why the fetish in forum to always go for a strawman fallacy here, but i didn't.

Seeing different pools of players, which, of course are not the entirity of the community show great displeasure in the model and people wanting changes, so keep that up

- - - Updated - - -

If you read my whole paragraph, then you'd have the answer to your question: I don't think they look anything like Onyxia or Nefarian, where the Dracthyr at least do to some degree. In addition, you're basically also agreeing that no one has a right to an opinion different than yours, making any other discussion with you rather pointless.

So, basicaly if i say a dog look more like a tiger than a cat, its not something blatantly absurd, its just a different opinion, got it

This has to be the worst semantic dodge I've seen in some time. Sure, spiders are arachnids and not insects - but I think you could take my meaning easily enough without having to channel your inner entomologist. The point still stands.

Nope, the point does not stands, they are not fierce, savage or hunter predators like dragon are meant to be, the definition fo fierce is going off

This seems like the point where I should make you reference your degree in Draconolgy, so I can certify you're scientific knowledge of fantasy creatures is on the up and up, right? Did you attend a certified university and do the required years of fieldwork to study the biology, hunting habits, and courtship rituals of the dragon? Are there pronounced differences in the manner in how the Northrend proto-drake and the Eastern Kingdoms whelp track and devour prey? Do Azerothian dragons even need to consume prey or do they subsist entirely on Ley energy and ambient mana?

Now you are trying to ridicule me, by my knowledge of fantasy, in a fantasy game, now this is rly something, and this is after you accused me of semantic dodge

You don't need to attend to a university to know about dragons, you just need to read a book about then, which seems like is hard to do cause to compare then with spiders or insects is rly something

If you don't think *either* design really belongs in WoW, then this entire argument is rendered pointless and it makes me question why we're bothering to have it.

Let me rephrase it

The design of the drakonid belongs to WoW, they are bulky, rough and similar to other races and creatures in the warcraft universe, the drakonid was in the game since classic, they looks closer to actual dragons and wow classic dragons AKA the ones from the main dragonflights

The design of dracthyr does not belong to wow, they do not like anything like what we had before aka races or creatures, they do not look like wow classic dragons or the ones from the dragonflights, the closest the dracthyr can look, and i talk because im fair, is the nightmare dragon from Legion, as even then is a far shot cause their jaw is off and no showing teeth, hell, they don't even look like Maloriak that is a skinny dragonmen

I've already said that I think both options would be fine, merely that I favored one over the other, an opinion I'm apparently not entitled to have without your explicit permission for some reason.

another strawman as i never denied anyone from having preference