So turns out, Dracthyr design isn't half so bad...

[8bithamster]

wait.. MMO champion had faux outrage about a race that ended up not being so bad? Wow.. that never happened before. Sorry can't keep lying like that.

Welcome to this website. People rage about everything because they have no idea.

[Teriz]

And don't look like the dracthyr. Only have a passing resemblance.

Totally not dragons according to Ielenia and @Rageonit...

Hover, the ability that is unable to keep the dracthyr airborne? Hover, The ability that when used while jumping off a cliff will just make you glide slowly to the ground instead of keeping you airborne? Hover, the ability that lasts only a few scant seconds?

That hover?

The Hover that has to exist within the confines and balance of WoW's race/class system? Yeah, that Hover.

[Rageonit]

The Hover that has to exist within the confines and balance of WoW's race/class system? Yeah, that Hover.

...and within the confines of WoW systems, it's a gutted version of what a dragon should be. There was never any other option than to gut them completely in terms of their capabilities and power, which begs the question: why make dragons playable, if you need to make them a silly imitation of a proper dragon? I guess because it still sells.
Oh well. At least they don't call them dragons, but "draconish humanoids".

[FelPlague]

It being or not being a requirement is not even that important; like I've said, since dragons don't exist in reality, in your fantasy a dragon can look like a chair for all I care. It's just that personally, I find it a bit sad that a druid in flight form is, in many ways, more competent in the art of flying that something you claim to be a literal dragon. If it doesn't bother you that this so-called dragon is a clumsy and weak version of a proper dragon, that's great. Have fun with it (I will too).

Your argument has jumped the shark so high it left the stratosphere.

cause your argument has literally become

"this is more of a dragon"

"Then this"

"And this"

"and this"


like come on this is fucking silly mate.
you are legit argueing a bird is more of a dragon then all of the above...
cause in game it can hover midair permanently?
come the fuck on dude.

[Rageonit]

Your argument has jumped the shark so high it left the stratosphere.
cause your argument has literally become "this is more of a dragon"

Nope, my argument is that the latter thing shouldn't be so much less capable in the art of flying than the former thing, because it makes it a travesty. My argument is that I'm not really comfortable with a dragon being on the same power level as a gnome rogue or vulpera warrior. But apparently it isn't because @Teriz Dracthyr will level armies of those with his fire breath

[Teriz]

...and within the confines of WoW systems, it's a gutted version of what a dragon should be. There was never any other option than to gut them completely in terms of their capabilities and power, which begs the question: why make dragons playable, if you need to make them a silly imitation of a proper dragon? I guess because it still sells.

They did a fine job of recreating the power of a dragon by allowing a race to get a flight form as a racial, multiple flying abilities while in combat, and allowing the class to have abilities from each dragonflight.

Your mileage clearly varies.

Oh well. At least they don't call them dragons, but "draconish humanoids".

Different segments of the same Dragonflight announcement video listed above also supports the idea of Dracthyr being true dragons rather than mere dragonkin:
John Hight: “Alright, you know I’m gonna ask. Can I be a dragon?”
Ion Hazzikostas: “…Yes, we have an all-new playable race: the Dracthyr race.”
John Hight: “What classes can they be?”
Ion Hazzikostas: “They have unique abilities as literally a dragon…”
‘https://youtu.be/c3nPloFgHkM?t=1393 1’

Official Blizzard Dragonflight announcement deep dive:
“Dragonflight introduces a new race and class in one known as the dracthyr Evoker, allowing players to play as a dragon (one that can still fit in a raid without crushing your allies.)”
‘https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/ne...t-deep-dive’

Alpha spoilers
When exploring Stormwind/Orgrimmar after the Forbidden Reach starting zone, npc’s refer to the player explicitly as a “dragon”
End Alpha spoilers

They are able to take a visage form, something no other form of dragonkin has been shown to do - other than the true dragons. “Dragons in warcraft have the ability to take on a humanoid form.” -Ion Hazzikostas (in the above announcement video)

They share the exact same physical features as true dragons, except they walk upright rather than on all fours. Other forms of dragonkin often lack typical draconic features such as wings.

Dracthyr fight differently than any form of dragonkin other than the true dragons. They breathe fire & spellfrost, soar with their wings, and use magical claw attacks. Other forms of dragonkin seem to use weapons exclusively (drakonids) or cast typical mage spells (dragonspawn) or even use alchemical concoctions (dragonmen like Maloriak). Dracthyr instead fight like “real” dragons.

Enjoy.

[Berkilak]

Oh? Please explain how a Dracthyr is not a dragon. What can a dragon do that I dracthyr cannot do.

Be big. Take a hit. Take any shapeshifted form of their choosing. Potentially, have offspring. Have a direct dragon lineage.

They're draconic, but they're not dragons. Like drakonids or dragonspawn. They exist to give you an experience that is the closest facsimile of being a dragon that can be feasibly be made playable, but they aren't dragons. This was overtly stated as one of the first comments about Dracthyr in the announcement video. Their entire existence is a compromise. They exist specifically because Blizzard decided not to give us playable dragons.

As I suspect you know already. But it doesn't feed your narrative, so you'll dance around the semantics.

[Teriz]

Be big. Take a hit. Take any shapeshifted form of their choosing. Potentially, have offspring. Have a direct dragon lineage.

They're draconic, but they're not dragons. Like drakonids or dragonspawn. They exist to give you an experience that is the closest facsimile of being a dragon that can be feasibly be made playable, but they aren't dragons. This was overtly stated as one of the first comments about Dracthyr in the announcement video. Their entire existence is a compromise. They exist specifically because Blizzard decided not to give us playable dragons.

As I suspect you know already. But it doesn't feed your narrative, so you'll dance around the semantics.

From Blizzard;

Official Blizzard Dragonflight announcement deep dive:
“Dragonflight introduces a new race and class in one known as the dracthyr Evoker, allowing players to play as a dragon (one that can still fit in a raid without crushing your allies.)”
‘https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/ne...t-deep-dive’

Not semantics, merely the words from the creators of the game.

[Berkilak]

Timestamped:
https://youtu.be/c3nPloFgHkM?t=3309

You're taking a literalist, semantic, and selective approach to a marketing speech.

- - - Updated - - -

Not semantics, merely the words from the creators of the game.

You quoted them detailing their compromise.

Official Blizzard Dragonflight announcement deep dive:
“Dragonflight introduces a new race and class in one known as the dracthyr Evoker, allowing players to play as a dragon (one that can still fit in a raid without crushing your allies.)”

Ergo, not a literal 1:1 dragon. But a draconic humanoid. A Dracthyr.

[Teriz]

Timestamped:
https://youtu.be/c3nPloFgHkM?t=3309

You're taking a literalist, semantic, and selective approach to a marketing speech.

Nope. I'm merely posting what Blizzard stated, which is that the Evoker class allows players to play as a dragon in WoW. Based on their abilities, that appears to have been accomplished, since Evokers have abilities taken directly from various draconic characters, and have the general physiology of a dragon.

Ergo, not a literal 1:1 dragon. But a draconic humanoid. A Dracthyr.

You do understand that Blizzard couldn't allow players to be building-sized dragons correct? Also there's multiple examples of "Draconic humanoids" being dragons, as I posted above.

[Berkilak]

Nope. I'm merely posting what Blizzard stated, which is that the Evoker class allows players to play as a dragon in WoW. Based on their abilities, that appears to have been accomplished, since Evokers have abilities taken directly from various draconic characters, and have the general physiology of a dragon.

Why does the term "Dracthyr" exist? Would "Dragon" not work?

- - - Updated - - -

You do understand that Blizzard couldn't allow players to be building-sized dragons correct? Also there's multiple examples of "Draconic humanoids" being dragons, as I posted above.

100%. Therefore, Dracthyr exist. As entities that are not Dragons, proper. They're closely tied to Dragons. They are certainly Draconic. But they are no more Dragons than Drakonids or Dragonspawn. They still fulfill the playable Dragon fantasy. But they are not Dragons.

[Teriz]

Why does the term "Dracthyr" exist? Would "Dragon" not work?

The same reason we have a race called Worgen instead of Werewolf.

100%. Therefore, Dracthyr exist. As entities that are not Dragons, proper. They're closely tied to Dragons. They are certainly Draconic. But they are no more Dragons than Drakonids or Dragonspawn. They still fulfill the playable Dragon fantasy. But they are not Dragons.

Making a dragon capable of fitting into the class lineup doesn’t change the fact that they are dragons. If you disagree, feel free to find a quote from Blizzard where they say that Dracthyr aren’t dragons. They have stated that they are dragons on multiple occasions.

[Berkilak]

The same reason we have a race called Worgen instead of Werewolf.

WoW doesn't use the term "werewolf." It uses Worgen.

WoW does use the term "Dragon." Why does the term "Dracthyr" need to exist if they're already using Dragon? Why aren't they used interchangably? Is Alexstrasza a Dracthyr?

[Teriz]

WoW doesn't use the term "werewolf." It uses Worgen.

WoW does use the term "Dragon." Why does the term "Dracthyr" need to exist if they're already using Dragon? Why aren't they used interchangably? Is Alexstrasza a Dracthyr?

In order to avoid a silly semantic back and forth, simply find a quote from Blizzard where they say that Dracthyr are not dragons. I’ll even take a single quote to counter the multiple times they said the opposite.

[Berkilak]

In order to avoid a silly semantic back and forth, simply find a quote from Blizzard where they say that Dracthyr are not dragons. I’ll even take a single quote to counter the multiple times they said the opposite.

You will not answer, because in order to answer, you would have to admit that the term exists because there is a difference between Dracthyr and Dragons proper. Thus, you will continue to appeal to the authority with marketing quotes that are incredibly high level and gloss over the distinction being discussed.

Take a look at the "Dragon Pack" on sale. There is not a single Dragon in the pack. Blizzard uses the term very loosely in the marketing. In-game, though? It has a more specific meaning. And the term "Dracthyr" exists to set apart the Dracthyr from those proper Dragons.

[Boddhi]

....If players are okay turning into a Bear or whatever the hell a Moonkin is...

Moonkin a bear lmao. It's an owl / bird thing don't you have eyes.

[loras]

That doesn't make it any better.





I can show this to the average person, and they'll say its a dragon. Good luck getting anyone to say that a gnome looks like a human.



It's 4 minutes, and it can drop to 3 with an achievement. Further, the cooldown doesn't prevent a Dracthyr from flying from one end of Kalimidor to the other faster than any flying mount in the game.



That's between you and Aulcad.

More likely you'll hear either "alien" or "Are you a furry?".
It does little to resemble a dragon, even if just because dragons are commonly quadrupedal.

Mind you that this is aimed at the idea that it resembles to the common eye, as you say, "a dragon". I am not gonna bother argueing about the style again, given that my experience with pidgeons

[Teriz]

You will not answer, because in order to answer, you would have to admit that the term exists because there is a difference between Dracthyr and Dragons proper. Thus, you will continue to appeal to the authority with marketing quotes that are incredibly high level and gloss over the distinction being discussed.

Take a look at the "Dragon Pack" on sale. There is not a single Dragon in the pack. Blizzard uses the term very loosely in the marketing. In-game, though? It has a more specific meaning. And the term "Dracthyr" exists to set apart the Dracthyr from those proper Dragons.

I’m not engaging in a semantic debate because it’s silly and pointless to do so when we have the company in question literally saying what a dracthyr is on multiple occasions. Blizzard determines what is and is not a dragon in WoW.

Again, if you disagree, show us the quote where Blizzard literally says they’re not dragons.

[Berkilak]

Again, if you disagree, show us the quote where Blizzard literally says they’re not dragons.

Literally whenever they use the term "Dracthyr."

[Teriz]

Literally whenever they use the term "Dracthyr."

Semantics and opinion. Means nothing against Blizzard and the devs calling them dragons on multiple occasions.

- - - Updated - - -

Moonkin a bear lmao. It's an owl / bird thing don't you have eyes.

Reread the quote. I didn't say that moonkin is a bear.