Jump to content
angelicdragonpuppy

Differentiate between Draks and Drakes

Recommended Posts

How would that work incave, though? Do all Dove's drakes get "Dove's" attached before their name (Dove's Ochredrakes, Dove's Night/Dayglorydrakes)?

 

I kind of want to call Dove's drakes faedrakes now.

I don't think a rename needs to happen, personally.

 

If there's any concern about confusion over "Dove's Drakes" not being able to breed with "normal drakes", then a small note could be added into the breed descriptions nothing that these specific drakes are a type called "Dove's Drakes" in honor of the dragon keeper to discover them or something.

 

There would be no need to rename the existing ones, just a need to allow more flexibility when it comes to the name for future use of the word drake.

Share this post


Link to post

I call the non 'dove's drakes' as True Drakes, which is basically a wingless dragon with the build of a western

 

We tried to get TJ to call Dove's Drakes as Draks (i think that was the word used) but he wouldn't change it lol

 

Edit: Also, Dove's drakes are as intellegent as a dog but not higher than that =)

Edited by Dolphinsong

Share this post


Link to post
I find this entire thread fascinating in a purely Orwellian sense.

/always thought of drake as a young male dragon

Lol yea, except I always thought of drakes as just male dragons (young or old). Except for on dragon cave and people going nuts over the whole "Dove's Drake" thing, I've never heard of the traditional definition of "drake" being wingless dumb dragons.

 

However... I would support calling them small dumb dragon-like critters that can't interbreed with regular dragons.

 

Cheers!

C4.

Share this post


Link to post

If everyone wants to get technical about the term drake, it is a male duck.

But, the fantasy meaning I grew up with means a smaller cousin of the dragon. Drakes can have wings, or no wings. I guess they would be similar to the "pygmy" species from here:

 

"General Drake Information

 

A drake is a carnivorous reptile that has a fanged mouth, clawed digits, and a serpentine tail. Some drakes move on twolegs, keeping their forelimbs off the ground, while others walk on all fours. A few kinds of drakes have wings, and a number of them are capable of using their handlike claws to manipulate objects. Savage drakes attack prey on sight, while domesticated drakes only attack if provoked or commanded. Trained drakes serve as guards, hunting companions, military animals, mounts, messengers, and even beasts of burden. Drakes do not speak but communicate using chirps, whistles, growls, and roars."

 

So, I think "Dove's Drakes" should be their own species, not the guideline for every drake created.

Share this post


Link to post

I may be missing something here but why don't people who want to make d**ks that apparently don't fit something call THEIRS draks ? This all seems a terrible lot of knickertwisting over a word huh.gif

Share this post


Link to post
I may be missing something here but why don't people who want to make d**ks that apparently don't fit something call THEIRS draks ? This all seems a terrible lot of knickertwisting over a word huh.gif

I'd assume that it's because drake is a traditional term, and they don't want to have to resort to a new term when there's a traditional term that's been appropriated by a new creation.

 

I'd be rather pissed myself if I wasn't able to use a traditional word for my creation because somebody else's creation completely took over the term, redefining it to be applicable ONLY to this new creation and blocking those that fit a more traditional meaning of the term from using it.

Share this post


Link to post
I'd assume that it's because drake is a traditional term, and they don't want to have to resort to a new term when there's a traditional term that's been appropriated by a new creation.

 

I'd be rather pissed myself if I wasn't able to use a traditional word for my creation because somebody else's creation completely took over the term, redefining it to be applicable ONLY to this new creation and blocking those that fit a more traditional meaning of the term from using it.

 

 

 

I must say that I'm with KageSora.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I'd assume that it's because drake is a traditional term, and they don't want to have to resort to a new term when there's a traditional term that's been appropriated by a new creation.

 

I'd be rather pissed myself if I wasn't able to use a traditional word for my creation because somebody else's creation completely took over the term, redefining it to be applicable ONLY to this new creation and blocking those that fit a more traditional meaning of the term from using it.

Well, from this thread I'm getting the feeling that, Dove's Drakes out of the mix for a moment, there's no real consensus on what a "Drake" actually is. So are we freeing up the "Drake" name so that it can be used by whoever wants to, or is it that we should have Dove's Drakes be X while all other "Drakes" in general are Y.

 

I guess what I'm asking is, if we made the change, could anyone submit a concept and call it a "Something-or-other Drake" and it would be okay, or would their concept have to meet some new "Drake" standard?

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not 100% sure myself.

 

But, either way, I think that the term "drake" needs to be freed from being exclusively tied to Dove's Drakes.

 

If we decide to have a new specific term for drake, or if we decide it's just a general term is important, but either way I just feel that we need to not have Dove's Drakes be the exclusive users of the drake term when it's a term that has existed long since before Dove created her drakes.

 

But it would help to have a consensus on what a drake is. Is it an interchangeable term for dragon? Does it specifically refer to male dragons? Does it have a specific body type?

 

 

There seem to be conflicting ideas, so which is "right"? I guess it'd be better to figure out which idea has the most support--either from the population, or if people could source where they've seen the term used to refer to what they feel it should mean so we know what the general usage of the term is.

Share this post


Link to post
Or, as I said, just relax the definition of drake to be smaller, dumb dragons. Presence of wings wouldn't matter.

I like this definition. smile.gif

Share this post


Link to post

I'm not 100% sure myself.

 

But, either way, I think that the term "drake" needs to be freed from being exclusively tied to Dove's Drakes.

 

If we decide to have a new specific term for drake, or if we decide it's just a general term is important, but either way I just feel that we need to not have Dove's Drakes be the exclusive users of the drake term when it's a term that has existed long since before Dove created her drakes.

 

But it would help to have a consensus on what a drake is.  Is it an interchangeable term for dragon?  Does it specifically refer to male dragons?  Does it have a specific body type?

 

 

There seem to be conflicting ideas, so which is "right"?  I guess it'd be better to figure out which idea has the most support--either from the population, or if people could source where they've seen the term used to refer to what they feel it should mean so we know what the general usage of the term is.

And that's where, as Ruby pointed out, I think TJ's idea comes in.

 

Because if there's no consensus on what a Drake actually is, then anything we come up with is still going to be a DC specific version of a "drake"...which is exactly where we're at right now.

 

So unless we're going to say that "drake" should simply be interchangeable with "dragon", which doesn't really seem to serve a larger purpose, then just expanding the current DC use to be somewhat more inclusive would seem to address the problem. That way we don't have to rename one DC specific concept just to create a different DC specific concept, and people will have more leeway when creating DC drakes given the relaxed definition.

Share this post


Link to post

Last post got eaten by browser crash, so let's try again:

 

I am from europe, german speaking. I have never before seen drakes like in the wikipedia description that TJ dug up before, and i am an avid reader of fantasy, myths, fables and folk tales. Also, that entry is based on a single blog entry. It probably should be deleted entirely. Also, its strange that there is no german counterpart on this, if it is supposed to be a german-folk-tale.

 

From what i gathered in my last 25 years of fantasy and myth reading though, is that drakes are usually the inferior dragon species.

that's common to all. Which inferiority it is to full-fledged dragons varies, but most of the time it is either:

  • physically
  • mentally
  • the attitude
So I'm all for DC adapting this as definiton for drakes, because the current definition is far to limiting AND not similar to what is "usually" used as the definitions for drake in common fantasy.

 

I accept that DC has its own lore - but why then are the dragons still westerns, easterns, wyverns etc according to general lore outside of DC but drakes are not? Just doesn't make sense to me.

Edited by whitebaron

Share this post


Link to post

I'd only support TJ's change if it's either the special drake wings or no wings. To me what makes drakes special are the awesome wings. It wouldn't be the same if any old wing design could be slapped onto a drake, there wouldn't be anything physical to differentiate them from a normal dragon.

Share this post


Link to post
I'd only support TJ's change if it's either the special drake wings or no wings. To me what makes drakes special are the awesome wings. It wouldn't be the same if any old wing design could be slapped onto a drake, there wouldn't be anything physical to differentiate them from a normal dragon.

That's why I figure we could keep "Dove's Drakes" as a very specific sub-type or specific category of dragon, but we could have drake also be freed up for use in other situations.

 

"Dove's Drakes" would still be listed in the guidelines for those who want to make that specific style of dragon, but other people would be allowed to make dragons and use drake in the name.

Share this post


Link to post
In DC those are legless serpentine dragons.

 

 

 

 

 

If a change must be made, and it can't be the wingless dragon, I guess "Dove's Drakes" is ok, but it is still annoyingly similar. If I'm looking for drakes in the completed list I'd still have to pick through all the wingless ones, since it would be called "Dove's rainbow drake" or whatever, not something I'd be able to qualify in my search.

 

But really, I agree with Kage. Why do they even need to be called anything at all? The dragons that fit the "drake" definition already in cave are called dragons. Why can't new ones made be called dragons too?

Why not call them 'Dovedrakes'? One word. Or 'Dovedraks'. As a specific category of dragon apart from regular drakes, along the same lines as 'Wyverns' or 'Ampitheres.' I think there would be no need to rename already-existing breeds (the Ochredrake et al.) but rather add a snippet in the description that they fall under the category of 'Dovedrake'.

Share this post


Link to post

How about we not worry about it because DC is a shared fantasy setting that TJ's got ultimate creative control over.

 

Drakes are defined as a specific breeding group with specific features, per DC.

 

If we start admitting every definition of a word for "dragon" or every description of a dragon from any cultural source, ever, because people happen to like it, all reds would be chaotic evil, silvers would need to be remade with a winged sprite, grays are now by definition scaleless, and you could only get a gold on your scroll if you verified the fact you've got two X chromosomes IRL.

 

But because this is not D&D, Krynn, the Age of Fire, or Pern, we're allowed to define dragons how we want, and that is cool--but that means there's got to be some kind of limit on what counts as what kind of dragon subtype, and it's ultimately up to TJ as site administrator to declare DC canon.

 

Drakes are little dumb dragons that can only breed with other drakes on DC regardless of what they are elsewhere.

 

ETA: whoa missed an important negation there

Edited by Coronaviridae

Share this post


Link to post

Drakes are little dumb dragons that can only breed with other drakes on DC regardless of what they are elsewhere.

 

ETA: whoa missed an important negation there

The problem is, that this is NOT the current DC definition of drakes. But It probably should be, and that's what this thread is all about.

Edited by whitebaron

Share this post


Link to post

Uh, PF? The Ochredrakes and the Day/Night Glories have completely different styles of wings. The ochredrakes have a bunch of "fingers", and the Ochres have 1 finger. I suppose you would want it to be such that any dragon with "cool wings" would be a drake, then? Because that's how your post comes across to me.

Perhaps the issue could be resolved by just doing away with the 'standards for a Drake' as proposed by Dove when she designed hers- if there is no trace of a list anywhere saying "it requires antlers and three toes and special wings" how will anyone hold you to that?

 

The Ocher/Night/Day drakes can simply be considered a subclassification of the Drake breed as a whole if they are more closely related to Drakes than Dragons, even though they have wings.

 

That would be the easy way to get around renaming things and would still open the field for new Drake (in the more traditional AND Dove style) concepts to be put forth.

 

That's my two cents, g'night :3

 

I agree with this. I think just loosening up the guidelines would do it, amybe with an announcement in the News thread.

Share this post


Link to post
*sigh* That's because the glories didn't do it right. The ochres have proper drake wings.

How did you determine what's proper?

taking dove's guidelines I guess?

 

Art that becomes that restricted, will soon only be mass-production. That alone is a good reason to put few, basic restrictions. From what I see, only Drakes break that with their overly complex definition, and only there is a reference that someone "invented" them. Well, that can't be true either, drakes have been around in,fantasy before DC, as have all the other terms being used.

Share this post


Link to post
The problem is, that this is NOT the current DC definition of drakes. But It probably should be, and that's what this thread is all about.

Except it is, because it's the only type of drakes that exist in DC canon.

 

Stuff in the dragon request forum isn't canonical yet. Much of it may never be. Ochre and glorydrakes both fit that definition and they're the only approved drakes.

Share this post


Link to post

The etymology of thew words dragon and drake are quite interesting.

 

Point being for the purposes of this discussion is that no singular person - artist or whatever - invented the word drake.

 

On a site that is soooo big on copyright issues, I would have thought that giving sole use of a generic name to one artist would not be on the cards at all.

 

*sigh* That's because the glories didn't do it right. The ochres have proper drake wings.

Well that leaves the poor old glories out in the cold I guess blink.gif

 

Proper drake wings are so unique and lovely.

Umm.... don't agree. * Doves drake wings are so unique and lovely* might be an acceptable thing to say.

 

Share this post


Link to post
The etymology of thew words dragon and drake are quite interesting.

 

Point being for the purposes of this discussion is that no singular person - artist or whatever - invented the word drake.

 

On a site that is soooo big on copyright issues, I would have thought that giving sole use of a generic name to one artist would not be on the cards at all.

 

 

Well that leaves the poor old glories out in the cold I guess blink.gif

 

 

Umm.... don't agree. * Doves drake wings are so unique and lovely* might be an acceptable thing to say.

That made me think of shivering, blue US Flags. Lol.

 

Anyway, I agree with Shamiir- perhaps the wings being like Dove's are an optional thing?

Share this post


Link to post
Except it is, because it's the only type of drakes that exist in DC canon.

 

Stuff in the dragon request forum isn't canonical yet. Much of it may never be. Ochre and glorydrakes both fit that definition and they're the only approved drakes.

The guidekines that ecist in dragon,requests are there for a reason: to make sure new submitted dragons,are not outside of dc canon. Drakes there have like more restricting features than anything else put together.

 

To me, saying "Dove created Drakes" is just faulty. It would be akin to saying "Corteo created Lindwurms" and so demanding that every lindwurm has to have freen or blue as a major color.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.