Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Bronzebeard]

A Griffon is a fanciful creature which is merely the stuff of legends. They do not actually exist, appearing only in engravings as the fancy of artists, as there is no such thing as magic.

I'm wondering: were these noble creatures taken out because, otherwise, they'd serve as possible flying mounts for dwarves? Not that there are regular mounts to begin with (at least not for dwarves), but... if there were, I imagine flying ones would be a much bigger hassle to bring into use. And since when were they completely magical in nature? Arguably, a giant, flying, fire-spewing dragon is more fanciful than a half-eagle, half-lion a mere fraction of its weight.

[ungulateman]

It's a bit arbitrary, but so is everything in DF. They may appear later, who knows.

They're probably are mods that add them, now that I think about it.

[Vester]

Also, DF dragons kinda can't fly.

[Deathworks]

Hi!

Arguably, a giant, flying, fire-spewing dragon is more fanciful than a half-eagle, half-lion a mere fraction of its weight.

:) :) :) :)

I suggest you be careful with doubting dragons. :) I have seen at least one person willing to defend the theory that dragons did exist and were the divine messengers of God (angels actually being dragons), bringing forth evidence from the scriptures of various cultures and also discussing in length the physical characteristics of dragons. And that person would not desist in his defense of the honor of dragons, even if it got him banned.

Anyhow returning to the topic, as Ungulateman said, everything besides the real world things is arbitrary. And that actually makes sense - since it is not based on real life things that can prove or disprove a theory, there can be and often are various theories on such mystical things. Some think gryphons are magical, some think they are not, some consider them intelligent as humans, others see them as wild animals, ...

Or just think about Dwarf Fortress elves and their dietary habits...

So, it is always a matter of preference.

Deathworks

[Bronzebeard]

I suggest you be careful with doubting dragons. I have seen at least one person willing to defend the theory that dragons did exist and were the divine messengers of God (angels actually being dragons), bringing forth evidence from the scriptures of various cultures and also discussing in length the physical characteristics of dragons.

Sounds like... lore from Oblivion. Not that I wish to besmirch upon said person's, surely well-founded beliefs...

Either way, I did not insult or discredit dragons! I merely implied that if we were to consign certain creatures to fantasy (in a fantasy world) and thereby culling them, something with guttural fire would be at the top of the list rather than the well-known and adored gryphons of yore! Though, an oft-used explanation for their fiery ability absolves the scaly giants from magic, in that they supposedly produce and store "ichor", a substance that dragons spew outward and somehow (presumably upon hitting the air, due to a unique chemistry) combusts, resulting in a pillar of flame. Not that there needs to be an explanation behind it, I just like pondering things like this. But in the end, you're right: it's simply a creative choice on the great Toady's behalf...
Or an excuse against having airborne dwarves soaring the clouds, and smiting clueless goblins with their warhammers from above! Weeee!

[Deathworks]

Hi!

Well, suggesting that dragons are extremely unrealistic is kind of doubting their reality (^_^;;

Anyhow, I am wondering whether the relationship between dwarves and gryphons is really a fantasy standard. The first instance of it I remember is Warcraft 2, I think (^_^;;

Deathworks

[Dave Mongoose]

Anyhow, I am wondering whether the relationship between dwarves and gryphons is really a fantasy standard. The first instance of it I remember is Warcraft 2, I think

A quick google search suggests you are correct - dwarves riding griffons seems to be a Warcraft/WoW invention.

Warhammer dwarves don't use griffons, nor do classical dwarves in Tolkien's writings or in Norse legends. Not sure about D&D.

[Leperous]

I suggest you be careful with doubting dragons. I have seen at least one person willing to defend the theory that dragons did exist and were the divine messengers of God (angels actually being dragons), bringing forth evidence from the scriptures of various cultures and also discussing in length the physical characteristics of dragons.

Sounds like... lore from Oblivion. Not that I wish to besmirch upon said person's, surely well-founded beliefs...

It's more likely to be a Creationist belief from the school of Ken Ham:
http://www.answersingenesis.org/cec/docs/lesson5.asp

Warning, above link may cause brain to explode from rampant cherry-picking, lies and misconceptions.

[ungulateman]

@ Dave:

D&D mentions it as part of the DM's mounted combat rules section. (4e) It may be elsewhere.

[Intelligent Shade of Blue]

Griffon riding has been in D&D for quite a while, actually. Other "exotic" mounts include pegasi, hippogriffs, friendly dragons...

[Deathworks]

Hi!

@ Dave:

D&D mentions it as part of the DM's mounted combat rules section. (4e) It may be elsewhere.

4e - you mean the 4th edition from 2008?

I couldn't find any links between griffons and dwarves in AD&D 2nd edition or the re-issued original D&D rules. While griffons as mounts have been there for a while, there does not seem to have been the idea of having the earth-bound dwarves actually ride them. They are not mentioned in the dwarf or mountain dwarf entry of the Monstrous Manual, for example.

So, maybe Wizards of the Coast got inspired by Blizzard there?

Deathworks

[RedKing]

I seem to remember 1st edition NPC dwarf clans getting a chance of wolf-riding cavalry. Which I'd totally be down with in DF.

[Neonivek]

The Fanciful creatures are ONE of TWO things (sorry for the caps)

They are either

1) A library of creatures that are imaginary but that artists can draw upon for inspiration
-The concept of this is sound in a way.

2) Easter eggs of things to come
-Personally I think it is this one. This means that the Griffon is likely not going to be a basic creature.

[Dakk]

There's no need to go into creepy otherkin dreams and theories, toady stated before somewhere that those creatures are just in the raws to appear on engravings, and are just placeholders for future magic arc stuff.

So Neonivek's 2nd guess got it right, they're just placeholders for stuff that depend on future releases to work properly.

[G-Flex]

I suggest you be careful with doubting dragons. I have seen at least one person willing to defend the theory that dragons did exist and were the divine messengers of God (angels actually being dragons), bringing forth evidence from the scriptures of various cultures and also discussing in length the physical characteristics of dragons. And that person would not desist in his defense of the honor of dragons, even if it got him banned.

So... a single person is willing to defend a concept, so that concept is automatically valid and realistic?

You can find anyone who is willing to defend any idea, and will claim the same things about those ideas as well. That doesn't mean that they're right, or rational at all.