How to Train Your Dragon 2

[Swift-13]

Okay, so I just saw the movie, and I enjoyed it. However, I quickly noticed something: when we first meet the character Valka, she's wearing a rather ornate mask. It looks rather insectoid for something in a movie full of dragons and Vikings. Then it dawned on me: it looks a heck of a lot like a Xiticix! Maybe I'm just seeing things...or maybe I'm onto something?
Do a quick google image search and see if you see what I see!

[Tor]

If you mean this one I can sorta see it, although it resembles some Wormwood masks too.

[ZINO]

How to Train Your Dragon 2 was epic dragon rider OCC is not to hard to makle IMHO

[glitterboy2098]

How to Train Your Dragon 2 was epic dragon rider OCC is not to hard to makle IMHO

any occ can become one if they have the exotic riding skill under horsemanship.

the problem is more the lack of suitable dragon-like critters... since real dragons are smart enough to find being used as a beast of burden upsetting, and powerful enough to deal with said problem.. permanently

[Tor]

The Dreamworks Dragons species aren't stupid, the riders spend a lot of time building a rapport with them.

They do find being a beast of burden upsetting if forced upon them. They are compensated for their labour, being fed and enjoying companionship and stuff.

[Zer0 Kay]

The Dreamworks Dragons species aren't stupid, the riders spend a lot of time building a rapport with them.

They do find being a beast of burden upsetting if forced upon them. They are compensated for their labour, being fed and enjoying companionship and stuff.

PB dragons don't eat. And they aren't just intelligent animals, many are superior in intellect to humans, closer to Smaug than Toothless.

[Swift-13]

I have to admit: this one went a wee bit off topic.

[Zer0 Kay]

I have to admit: this one went a wee bit off topic.

Yes but ur posting begs a simple yes or no. It is becoming more interesting. Oh and it looks like many bug masks.

[glitterboy2098]

The Dreamworks Dragons species aren't stupid, the riders spend a lot of time building a rapport with them.

They do find being a beast of burden upsetting if forced upon them. They are compensated for their labour, being fed and enjoying companionship and stuff.

PB dragons don't eat. And they aren't just intelligent animals, many are superior in intellect to humans, closer to Smaug than Toothless.

bingo. palladium dragon's might carry a rider or two if they wish, but the dragon won't be a servant to the rider. it wouldn't let the rider steer or control the flight.. the dragon would be in charge and the rider just along for the ride.

[Zer0 Kay]

The Dreamworks Dragons species aren't stupid, the riders spend a lot of time building a rapport with them.

They do find being a beast of burden upsetting if forced upon them. They are compensated for their labour, being fed and enjoying companionship and stuff.

PB dragons don't eat. And they aren't just intelligent animals, many are superior in intellect to humans, closer to Smaug than Toothless.

bingo. palladium dragon's might carry a rider or two if they wish, but the dragon won't be a servant to the rider. it wouldn't let the rider steer or control the flight.. the dragon would be in charge and the rider just along for the ride.

At best... Something like Dragon Lance.
The Thunderlizard and Hydra and other "dumb" dragons may be dumb enough, but there dumb enough to think they need food too... Human looking food.

Lol be a rider of one of the dragons in rue that set themselves on fire. Lol

[Tor]

PB dragons don't eat.

They don't NEED to, but they enjoy the taste, and may not enjoy spending the time preparing food.

And they aren't just intelligent animals, many are superior in intellect to humans, closer to Smaug than Toothless.

Aside from Mech-Genius Hiccup are we sure that the Berk residents are smarter than Toothless? I want to give Astrid a nod although I forget what her accomplishments are.

palladium dragon's might carry a rider or two if they wish, but the dragon won't be a servant to the rider.

The Berk dragons are not servants, they are mutual partners, particularly Hiccup/Toothless since Toothless is missing part of his tail so he actually can't fly properly without Hiccup's assistance.

it wouldn't let the rider steer or control the flight.. the dragon would be in charge and the rider just along for the ride.

I bet Carlotta the White would be okay letting Sir Raoul Lazarious steer her

[guardiandashi]

PB dragons don't eat.

They don't NEED to, but they enjoy the taste, and may not enjoy spending the time preparing food.

And they aren't just intelligent animals, many are superior in intellect to humans, closer to Smaug than Toothless.

Aside from Mech-Genius Hiccup are we sure that the Berk residents are smarter than Toothless? I want to give Astrid a nod although I forget what her accomplishments are.

palladium dragon's might carry a rider or two if they wish, but the dragon won't be a servant to the rider.

The Berk dragons are not servants, they are mutual partners, particularly Hiccup/Toothless since Toothless is missing part of his tail so he actually can't fly properly without Hiccup's assistance.

it wouldn't let the rider steer or control the flight.. the dragon would be in charge and the rider just along for the ride.

I bet Carlotta the White would be okay letting Sir Raoul Lazarious steer her

the how to train your dragon dragons aren't stupid (in general) but other than toothless most of their problem solving seems to top out at around smart dog level ish, of course most of the Vikings in the movies /cartoons, weren't exactly brilliant either.

Astrid does tend to think with her muscles a fair amount but frankly the only ones that were really stupid among the Vikings were the twins, and snotlout.

Astrid demonstrates she isn't exactly slow in the brains department, Hickup is more of a mad scientist/hardware type, and the fat one (can't remember his name right now) has a lot of book learning in the sense that he memorized all the books they had about dragons, and also was identifying features and likely weaknesses of the boss dragon in the 1st movie and doing similar feats in the second.

[Giant2005]

In Rifts, Dragons are to humans what humans are to rats.
A dragon being willing to be a dedicated mount to a human is just as likely as you being willing to dedicate your life to act as a personal chauffeur to a rat. It isn't impossible but it is very, very unlikely.

[Zer0 Kay]

PB dragons don't eat.

They don't NEED to, but they enjoy the taste, and may not enjoy spending the time preparing food.

And they aren't just intelligent animals, many are superior in intellect to humans, closer to Smaug than Toothless.

Aside from Mech-Genius Hiccup are we sure that the Berk residents are smarter than Toothless? I want to give Astrid a nod although I forget what her accomplishments are.

palladium dragon's might carry a rider or two if they wish, but the dragon won't be a servant to the rider.

The Berk dragons are not servants, they are mutual partners, particularly Hiccup/Toothless since Toothless is missing part of his tail so he actually can't fly properly without Hiccup's assistance.

it wouldn't let the rider steer or control the flight.. the dragon would be in charge and the rider just along for the ride.

I bet Carlotta the White would be okay letting Sir Raoul Lazarious steer her

I'm doing this on a phone so I'm not breaking up your quote. I'll respond by section.
They may not like preparing it but they can easily teleport somewhere they don't have to and have other means of acquiring it than lowering themselves to mount.

What does a Birkians intellect have to do with anything? Sure toothless may be smarter but most PFRPG dragons, heck most D&D dragons are smart enough to teach college classes in the modern world and probably have been the source of many a mage school.

No pfrpg dragon is going to become your partner to fly your but around. They don't have to worry about getting a tail torn, they'll regenerate it.

I hear Raoul Lazarious pilots by joystick.

The issue is httyd dragons are his intelligent lizards. PFRPG dragons are magic incarnate, who are born with bloodline memory.
Where as toothless may be smarter than most berkians, modern humans are far smarter than berkians and PFEPG dragons from all ages are FAR smarter than humans in the future.

[ZINO]

Not sure when I'll see it; the first movie was very good.

Plan too see it soon. That's for sure.

IMHO love the second so did my kids and they very pick about these things
let us if you see and what you think

[Tor]

No pfrpg dragon is going to become your partner to fly your but around. They don't have to worry about getting a tail torn, they'll regenerate it.

They regen damage, guess I forgot about limb regen. Any dragon species that don't regen limbs?

I hear Raoul Lazarious pilots by joystick.

Yes, Carlotta taught him how to master it.

modern humans are far smarter than berkians

I dunno about that, I don't think many could invent the contraptions Hiccup comes up with. Dat shield.

PFEPG dragons from all ages are FAR smarter than humans in the future.

Hatchling IQ can get pretty high, but it can still get low rolls, lacks the high minimums adults have.

Astrid does tend to think with her muscles a fair amount but frankly the only ones that were really stupid among the Vikings were the twins, and snotlout.

Yeah I think Astrid just may seem smart because she's compared to those three and because Hiccup likes her. Or like... I'm sure she's done smart stuff but I have a bad memory for specific events, it's easier to remember stuff like inventions.

the fat one (can't remember his name right now) has a lot of book learning in the sense that he memorized all the books they had about dragons.

Forgot about Fishlegs, good point. I think Hiccup knows the books well too, but he probably thinks outside the box and does more applied learning, the type to write books rather than rely on them.

[Zer0 Kay]

modern humans are far smarter than berkians

I dunno about that, I don't think many could invent the contraptions Hiccup comes up with. Dat shield.

Um... no one could, even an engineer, the shield like many other cartoon and movie things is only somewhat believable, like Lion-O's claw gauntlet, and the M.A.S.K. vehicles. It would be structurally unsound and ineffective in real life.

PFEPG dragons from all ages are FAR smarter than humans in the future.

Hatchling IQ can get pretty high, but it can still get low rolls, lacks the high minimums adults have.

Which is even worse for your argument because that means that they get smarter as they grow going from smart for a human to a super genius.

[Tor]

Um... no one could, even an engineer, the shield like many other cartoon and movie things is only somewhat believable, like Lion-O's claw gauntlet, and the M.A.S.K. vehicles. It would be structurally unsound and ineffective in real life.

Based on our current limited ideas of engineering, sure. Stuff in HU/Rifts/Robotech clearly enter a realm beyond that, and if Hiccup is on that level, it only makes him more of a genius. Or perhaps some kind of medieval techno-wizard/psi-mechanic.

Which is even worse for your argument because that means that they get smarter as they grow going from smart for a human to a super genius.

They don't necessarily go from "smart for a human" though. A dragon could roll a 5 for IQ and be less than half as smart as the average human, as a hatchling.

Not to mention Hydras/Woolies, although they can't fly and are pretty feral.

[Zer0 Kay]

Um... no one could, even an engineer, the shield like many other cartoon and movie things is only somewhat believable, like Lion-O's claw gauntlet, and the M.A.S.K. vehicles. It would be structurally unsound and ineffective in real life.

Based on our current limited ideas of engineering, sure. Stuff in HU/Rifts/Robotech clearly enter a realm beyond that, and if Hiccup is on that level, it only makes him more of a genius. Or perhaps some kind of medieval techno-wizard/psi-mechanic.

Which is even worse for your argument because that means that they get smarter as they grow going from smart for a human to a super genius.

They don't necessarily go from "smart for a human" though. A dragon could roll a 5 for IQ and be less than half as smart as the average human, as a hatchling.

Not to mention Hydras/Woolies, although they can't fly and are pretty feral.

OMG Tor.
1 HtTYD dragons aren't as intelligent as people they are highly intelligent cunning animals close to dolphins.
2 Almost every machine design in anime is sound from an engineering perspective, that is why toys can be made that so closely mimic form and function
3 Hiccups shield couldn't be made into a toy with all its functions, it has nothing to do with our engineering now it has to do with American cartoon engineering vs. Anime engineering. One wants you to believe it's possible the other doesn't care as long as it looks cool and will sell toys that don't even do everything the one in the cartoon does
4 unless the dragon is into S&M, like Carlotta probably is, the intelligent variety isn't going to let themselves be saddled up. The may let someone ride them bareback but that is because they want to take them somewhere and its easier than carying them in hand. They aren't going to let them take reigns and likely won't listen to directions since a dragons arrogance wouldn't accept a flightless monkey would know how to fly better.

[glitterboy2098]

ignoring the debate over dragon IQ..

ultimately it comes down to "dragons in palladium are a player character class, while the rider is a player character class as well. and most GM's don't want one player playing two characters at the same time."

if you want a dragon rider in PB, you either need two players (one playing a dragon, the other its would be rider) willing to work very closely together... or you need to invent some dragon like non-sapient animals.

[Nightmask]

ignoring the debate over dragon IQ..

ultimately it comes down to "dragons in palladium are a player character class, while the rider is a player character class as well. and most GM's don't want one player playing two characters at the same time."

if you want a dragon rider in PB, you either need two players (one playing a dragon, the other its would be rider) willing to work very closely together... or you need to invent some dragon like non-sapient animals.

Well it's not like there aren't examples of heroes (and villains) who actually ride dragons and the dragon's actually submissive to the rider rather than being dominant in spite of being equal or greater in intelligence and power.

[Zer0 Kay]

ignoring the debate over dragon IQ..

ultimately it comes down to "dragons in palladium are a player character class, while the rider is a player character class as well. and most GM's don't want one player playing two characters at the same time."

if you want a dragon rider in PB, you either need two players (one playing a dragon, the other its would be rider) willing to work very closely together... or you need to invent some dragon like non-sapient animals.

Well it's not like there aren't examples of heroes (and villains) who actually ride dragons and the dragon's actually submissive to the rider rather than being dominant in spite of being equal or greater in intelligence and power.

Can we name cannon one in game?

[Zer0 Kay]

lobotomized dragons that have a mass of regeneration inhibiting material where the portion of brain should be.
Of course this assumes that dragons have organs and aren't just canvas and frame wrapped around seething magic energy.

[Nightmask]

ignoring the debate over dragon IQ..

ultimately it comes down to "dragons in palladium are a player character class, while the rider is a player character class as well. and most GM's don't want one player playing two characters at the same time."

if you want a dragon rider in PB, you either need two players (one playing a dragon, the other its would be rider) willing to work very closely together... or you need to invent some dragon like non-sapient animals.

Well it's not like there aren't examples of heroes (and villains) who actually ride dragons and the dragon's actually submissive to the rider rather than being dominant in spite of being equal or greater in intelligence and power.

Can we name cannon one in game?

I've no idea if there are any NPC canon to the game, there don't have to be, only examples in fiction where it's been known to happen. Given the examples do exist (the dragons of Pern for example, or in the anime Dragon Rider, as well as one of the novels in the Wizard In Rhyme series shows a group of antagonists who ride fully sentient dragons) there's no reason to think that there can't be at least one Palladium dragon that would submit to such a relationship with a humanoid. All it takes is a non-dragon/dragon relationship where the dragon is willing and given dragons are sentient beings and capable of actually making decisions for themselves and a full range of emotions available to them it's certainly a possibility. That one NPC dragon in the South America books for example, if his rescuer had been a human instead of a more abomination-style non-humanoid would gladly allow itself to be ridden by it because it's slavishly loyal and grateful for being saved (personally mind you) by it from the tortures it had been subjected to by another dragon for decades.

[Tor]

HtTYD dragons aren't as intelligent as people they are highly intelligent cunning animals close to dolphins.

I'm saying this depends on the dragon and the person in question. Even if on average humans were smarter, surely Toothless is smarter than Meatlug? Heck, his own fire-mount outsmarts him all the time when wrestling and stuff. Applying their intelligence in different ways to different challenges doesn't make them dumber.

You bring up Dolphins, Palladium canon per Rifts Underseas page 77 is that: their minimum IQ is double ours: their average IQ is 1/2 a point higher. Humans only win on maximum possible IQ. Same applies to Killer/Sperm Whales (Humpbacks are even smarter).

Hiccups shield couldn't be made into a toy with all its functions, it has nothing to do with our engineering now it has to do with American cartoon engineering vs. Anime engineering. One wants you to believe it's possible the other doesn't care as long as it looks cool and will sell toys that don't even do everything the one in the cartoon does

Toys frequently full short of achieving everything something does, that's okay.

4 unless the dragon is into S&M, like Carlotta probably is, the intelligent variety isn't going to let themselves be saddled up. The may let someone ride them bareback but that is because they want to take them somewhere and its easier than carying them in hand. They aren't going to let them take reigns and likely won't listen to directions since a dragons arrogance wouldn't accept a flightless monkey would know how to fly better.

I think we're looking at this too narrowly, a confident dragon isn't going to be defensive about how they look saddled. A dragon secure in their dragoniness would probably just maul anyone who mocked them for it if it came down to it. I mean, think about how adult humans wear those things for carrying babies or small dogs strapped to their chest. Surely a dragon might look at it in that capacity. It's to keep their pet safe.

Can we name cannon one in game?

I consider the cover of Dragons and Gods to be canon. Shadow dragons can usually only be created by experienced/powerful/knowledgeable dragons, and one is being ridden. Sure, it's by a godly-looking guy, and dragons might be freer about using their shades as mounts than their main body... but there we go.

in the anime Dragon Rider

I like where this thread is headed!

one of the novels in the Wizard In Rhyme series shows a group of antagonists who ride fully sentient dragons) there's no reason to think that there can't be at least one Palladium dragon that would submit to such a relationship with a humanoid.

There are some dragon-riders in Fire Emblem (rivals to Pegasi riders) but off-hand I can't recall if they're sentient or not since I only played the first 2 chapters of 1 game.

[Zer0 Kay]

ignoring the debate over dragon IQ..

ultimately it comes down to "dragons in palladium are a player character class, while the rider is a player character class as well. and most GM's don't want one player playing two characters at the same time."

if you want a dragon rider in PB, you either need two players (one playing a dragon, the other its would be rider) willing to work very closely together... or you need to invent some dragon like non-sapient animals.

Well it's not like there aren't examples of heroes (and villains) who actually ride dragons and the dragon's actually submissive to the rider rather than being dominant in spite of being equal or greater in intelligence and power.

Can we name cannon one in game?

I've no idea if there are any NPC canon to the game, there don't have to be, only examples in fiction where it's been known to happen. Given the examples do exist (the dragons of Pern for example, or in the anime Dragon Rider, as well as one of the novels in the Wizard In Rhyme series shows a group of antagonists who ride fully sentient dragons) there's no reason to think that there can't be at least one Palladium dragon that would submit to such a relationship with a humanoid. All it takes is a non-dragon/dragon relationship where the dragon is willing and given dragons are sentient beings and capable of actually making decisions for themselves and a full range of emotions available to them it's certainly a possibility. That one NPC dragon in the South America books for example, if his rescuer had been a human instead of a more abomination-style non-humanoid would gladly allow itself to be ridden by it because it's slavishly loyal and grateful for being saved (personally mind you) by it from the tortures it had been subjected to by another dragon for decades.

So, what your saying is your previous statement of heroes and villains riding dragons has as much to do with Rifts as claiming that Worms of Taut can can be attracted by thumpers because tremors and dune does it AND since dune worms produce sand trout which capture water and produce spice. So because worms of Taut are like Shai Halud then Rifts Earth is Arrakis. What does that really have to do with Rifts? The same thing lots of examples of heroes and villains riding dragons does... Nothing.

Now if a rider from dragon lance or somewhere came in ya could have a dragon willing to be ridden that is smart... That would get slapped around by PB dragons for being such a puts.

[Zer0 Kay]

HtTYD dragons aren't as intelligent as people they are highly intelligent cunning animals close to dolphins.

I'm saying this depends on the dragon and the person in question. Even if on average humans were smarter, surely Toothless is smarter than Meatlug? Heck, his own fire-mount outsmarts him all the time when wrestling and stuff. Applying their intelligence in different ways to different challenges doesn't make them dumber.

You bring up Dolphins, Palladium canon per Rifts Underseas page 77 is that: their minimum IQ is double ours: their average IQ is 1/2 a point higher. Humans only win on maximum possible IQ. Same applies to Killer/Sperm Whales (Humpbacks are even smarter).

Hiccups shield couldn't be made into a toy with all its functions, it has nothing to do with our engineering now it has to do with American cartoon engineering vs. Anime engineering. One wants you to believe it's possible the other doesn't care as long as it looks cool and will sell toys that don't even do everything the one in the cartoon does

Toys frequently full short of achieving everything something does, that's okay.

4 unless the dragon is into S&M, like Carlotta probably is, the intelligent variety isn't going to let themselves be saddled up. The may let someone ride them bareback but that is because they want to take them somewhere and its easier than carying them in hand. They aren't going to let them take reigns and likely won't listen to directions since a dragons arrogance wouldn't accept a flightless monkey would know how to fly better.

I think we're looking at this too narrowly, a confident dragon isn't going to be defensive about how they look saddled. A dragon secure in their dragoniness would probably just maul anyone who mocked them for it if it came down to it. I mean, think about how adult humans wear those things for carrying babies or small dogs strapped to their chest. Surely a dragon might look at it in that capacity. It's to keep their pet safe.

Can we name cannon one in game?

I consider the cover of Dragons and Gods to be canon. Shadow dragons can usually only be created by experienced/powerful/knowledgeable dragons, and one is being ridden. Sure, it's by a godly-looking guy, and dragons might be freer about using their shades as mounts than their main body... but there we go.

in the anime Dragon Rider

I like where this thread is headed!

one of the novels in the Wizard In Rhyme series shows a group of antagonists who ride fully sentient dragons) there's no reason to think that there can't be at least one Palladium dragon that would submit to such a relationship with a humanoid.

There are some dragon-riders in Fire Emblem (rivals to Pegasi riders) but off-hand I can't recall if they're sentient or not since I only played the first 2 chapters of 1 game.

A more realistic shield for a dragon rider would be van's from Escaflowne.

As for riding a shadow dragon... That's like you worrying about someone being seen riding you when they're riding a drawing of you that you made that know one knows you made. Or better a shadow self of you that no one knew you made.
As for the saddle on a real dragon instead of a shadow dragon. Talk to me when you let your dog saddle you up and ride you in public. Being insecurity is usually synonymous with egotism and I don't know many things more egotistical than a dragon.

[Nightmask]

ignoring the debate over dragon IQ..

ultimately it comes down to "dragons in palladium are a player character class, while the rider is a player character class as well. and most GM's don't want one player playing two characters at the same time."

if you want a dragon rider in PB, you either need two players (one playing a dragon, the other its would be rider) willing to work very closely together... or you need to invent some dragon like non-sapient animals.

Well it's not like there aren't examples of heroes (and villains) who actually ride dragons and the dragon's actually submissive to the rider rather than being dominant in spite of being equal or greater in intelligence and power.

Can we name cannon one in game?

I've no idea if there are any NPC canon to the game, there don't have to be, only examples in fiction where it's been known to happen. Given the examples do exist (the dragons of Pern for example, or in the anime Dragon Rider, as well as one of the novels in the Wizard In Rhyme series shows a group of antagonists who ride fully sentient dragons) there's no reason to think that there can't be at least one Palladium dragon that would submit to such a relationship with a humanoid. All it takes is a non-dragon/dragon relationship where the dragon is willing and given dragons are sentient beings and capable of actually making decisions for themselves and a full range of emotions available to them it's certainly a possibility. That one NPC dragon in the South America books for example, if his rescuer had been a human instead of a more abomination-style non-humanoid would gladly allow itself to be ridden by it because it's slavishly loyal and grateful for being saved (personally mind you) by it from the tortures it had been subjected to by another dragon for decades.

So, what your saying is your previous statement of heroes and villains riding dragons has as much to do with Rifts as claiming that Worms of Taut can can be attracted by thumpers because tremors and dune does it AND since dune worms produce sand trout which capture water and produce spice. So because worms of Taut are like Shai Halud then Rifts Earth is Arrakis. What does that really have to do with Rifts? The same thing lots of examples of heroes and villains riding dragons does... Nothing.

Now if a rider from dragon lance or somewhere came in ya could have a dragon willing to be ridden that is smart... That would get slapped around by PB dragons for being such a puts.

No that wasn't what I was saying at all, that's what you're trying to strawman it to say because it's not something you'd want to allow in a game and want to claim can't be done ever even when it can in fact be done. Just because some or even most dragons wouldn't be amenable to it doesn't even remotely mean all of them without exception wouldn't be. Dragons aren't robots, they have free will and life experiences (like with the CANON NPC I mentioned) could easily lead to a dragon submitting to someone else as their mount rather than being the one in charge.

[Tor]

as much to do with Rifts as claiming that Worms of Taut can can be attracted by thumpers because tremors and dune does it AND since dune worms produce sand trout which capture water and produce spice. So because worms of Taut are like Shai Halud then Rifts Earth is Arrakis.

I know there were some Dune computer strategy games in the 90s but other than that, am not aware of franchise getting much material. That would sure make an awesome Dimension Book if Palladium ever got the rights to it.

Talk to me when you let your dog saddle you up and ride you in public. Being insecurity is usually synonymous with egotism and I don't know many things more egotistical than a dragon.

Am not accepting this dog comparison, humans are more mentally dragon-like than dogs are mentally human-like. Humans and dragons can carry on conversations, both can learn magic, this is worlds apart from dogs.

[Giant2005]

Talk to me when you let your dog saddle you up and ride you in public. Being insecurity is usually synonymous with egotism and I don't know many things more egotistical than a dragon.

Am not accepting this dog comparison, humans are more mentally dragon-like than dogs are mentally human-like. Humans and dragons can carry on conversations, both can learn magic, this is worlds apart from dogs.[/quote]
Do you think a Dragon would agree with you? I think a Dragon would absolutely agree with the human/dog comparison and their opinion is the one that counts.

[guardiandashi]

Talk to me when you let your dog saddle you up and ride you in public. Being insecurity is usually synonymous with egotism and I don't know many things more egotistical than a dragon.

Am not accepting this dog comparison, humans are more mentally dragon-like than dogs are mentally human-like. Humans and dragons can carry on conversations, both can learn magic, this is worlds apart from dogs.

Do you think a Dragon would agree with you? I think a Dragon would absolutely agree with the human/dog comparison and their opinion is the one that counts.[/quote]

essentially it comes down to who exactly is the "owner" and the "pet" in the scenario I am pretty sure the dragon is convinced the person is the "pet" and I don't know about anyone else but when I am walking my dog she does influence where (to some extent) and what speed we walk at.

[Nightmask]

Talk to me when you let your dog saddle you up and ride you in public. Being insecurity is usually synonymous with egotism and I don't know many things more egotistical than a dragon.

Am not accepting this dog comparison, humans are more mentally dragon-like than dogs are mentally human-like. Humans and dragons can carry on conversations, both can learn magic, this is worlds apart from dogs.

Do you think a Dragon would agree with you? I think a Dragon would absolutely agree with the human/dog comparison and their opinion is the one that counts.[/quote]

The problem with this is the 'all dragons are the same' premise, which is flawed. All dragons aren't the same, all dragons aren't going to come to come to that conclusion, some if not many may but not all will.

[Tor]

Do you think a Dragon would agree with you?

Some might, some might not.

I think a Dragon would absolutely agree with the human/dog comparison and their opinion is the one that counts.

Opinions can vary.

Keep in mind that even inter-human racism leads to demeaning opinions like this, and it has been overcome.

Dolphins, who statistically exceed all but our maximum potential in IQ (per Palladium ruling) allow humans to ride them, why not dragons?

Particularly kid dragons who may have higher raw IQ averages but less acquired experience than adult humans.

There's a point when you can have so much confidence that it isn't demeaning at all to give smaller weaker creatures a ride.

Consider how humans give each other piggy-back rides.

Do you think Styphon would care how he looks with a human riding him? He might do it for the lulz and then do a barrel roll.

[Zer0 Kay]

Talk to me when you let your dog saddle you up and ride you in public. Being insecurity is usually synonymous with egotism and I don't know many things more egotistical than a dragon.

Am not accepting this dog comparison, humans are more mentally dragon-like than dogs are mentally human-like. Humans and dragons can carry on conversations, both can learn magic, this is worlds apart from dogs.

Do you think a Dragon would agree with you? I think a Dragon would absolutely agree with the human/dog comparison and their opinion is the one that counts.

The problem with this is the 'all dragons are the same' premise, which is flawed. All dragons aren't the same, all dragons aren't going to come to come to that conclusion, some if not many may but not all will.[/quote]

Nope I'm going to say this is Palladium and MANY sweeping statements for higher species have been made. Demons are evil, vampires treat humans as cattle, even an elemental or good AI could be seen as evil because of their callousness toward human plight.

How's this for a sweeping statement. A dragon is likely closer to an A.I. or elemental than they are a human, with the exception that they learn to emulate the beings they're around. Though one of you may point out that if they chose to grow up in a mount community then they'd accept that they're meant to be ridden... only problem with that is they seek out intelligent beings I think the RMB gave a criteria of people they usually are drawn to, I'm pretty sure it doesn't say subserviant mount race or even for you misguided diehard HTTYD fanboys and girls lower partner species... Since horses and elephants and mules never act like the dragons and refuse a rider to mount pr give directions. This act doesn't make the animal smart it makes them I, stubborn, even displeased, and instinctive, but no one ever claims its because they're smart unless they're one of those people who like transposing aspects of people onto animals.

[Swift-13]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/M ... eDifferent

I'm sure most of y'all have seen this.

[Nightmask]

The problem with this is the 'all dragons are the same' premise, which is flawed. All dragons aren't the same, all dragons aren't going to come to come to that conclusion, some if not many may but not all will.

Nope I'm going to say this is Palladium and MANY sweeping statements for higher species have been made. Demons are evil, vampires treat humans as cattle, even an elemental or good AI could be seen as evil because of their callousness toward human plight.

How's this for a sweeping statement. A dragon is likely closer to an A.I. or elemental than they are a human, with the exception that they learn to emulate the beings they're around. Though one of you may point out that if they chose to grow up in a mount community then they'd accept that they're meant to be ridden... only problem with that is they seek out intelligent beings I think the RMB gave a criteria of people they usually are drawn to, I'm pretty sure it doesn't say subserviant mount race or even for you misguided diehard HTTYD fanboys and girls lower partner species... Since horses and elephants and mules never act like the dragons and refuse a rider to mount pr give directions. This act doesn't make the animal smart it makes them I, stubborn, even displeased, and instinctive, but no one ever claims its because they're smart unless they're one of those people who like transposing aspects of people onto animals.

Except that when it comes to your examples vampires aren't much beyond corpses animated by an AI making such sweeping statements valid for them just as they are for golems or mummies, elementals are truly alien in nature so again such sweeping statements are valid and demons again are inherently evil whereas dragons aren't. Dragons aren't emulating what they see around them they're LEARNING and making decisions and can change and develop over time. So the rules regarding them don't have to say 'subservient mount race' because they don't have to because it's not required. They can, for one reason or another, CHOOSE to be someone's mount. Heck if you go for the diabolic origin of it they could be or have originated in dragons that had been captured and mindraped by spells (like the Someone Makes Them ritual from Nightbane) so that the particular dragons originated as such victims and it's simply carried forward from that point until no one remembers how it started.

[Zer0 Kay]

Keep in mind that even inter-human racism leads to demeaning opinions like this, and it has been overcome.

I get the feeling you believe that the government's job is to take care of people rather than people taking care of people and the government protecting your freedoms and its boarders. And that there should be a special category of crimes that are defined as hate crimes when it shouldn't matter because in order to truly deal with inequality we need to make laws equal for all. I've never seen a murder that wasn't influenced by hate. I've never seen someone who hates someone accidentally kill the person (manslaughter).

Dolphins, who statistically exceed all but our maximum potential in IQ (per Palladium ruling) allow humans to ride them, why not dragons?

Okay we need to decide if we are using real world or game world WE keep going back and forth too much. So RW dolphins let people ride them because they enjoy interaction with people, this does not mark them as smart or dumb. They do not, as far as I know, let people ride them not in play, but as a mount. Dolphins are still animals, they learn by repetition. Though humans can learn by repetition, we also have many other ways of learning which no animals can do. In game... the freaking dolphins your talking about can TALK!!!! Kinda, messed up assuming they're the same. As for dragons IRL... uh they're aren't any, and no Komodos don't count.

Particularly kid dragons who may have higher raw IQ averages but less acquired experience than adult humans.

ARGH. They don't just have raw IQ per cannon they are born with knowledge that is genetically granted to them from their parents. Compared to HTTYD dragons... they're gods while the HTTYD dragons are not but mere lizards.

There's a point when you can have so much confidence that it isn't demeaning at all to give smaller weaker creatures a ride.

It's not confidence it is egotism. They are, at least the adults certain that they are greater than humans. They don't just think they're bigger. They know they're bigger and smarter and more ancient and to them the age of their species gives them the rights to the world. The knowledge that it is because of their species that the Great Old Ones now lay in slumber. They also know that humans are more ancient than both Elves and Dwarves but were minions of the Great Old Ones along with the Minotaur. How can one know this and still be benevolent? I'm sure its difficult. BTW the Elves and Dwarves don't historically don't like each other but both favor humans. That also started because the humans were the oldest civilization but the Elves and Dwarves don't favor humans because they take pity on the short lived humans, it started because those who know felt sorry for causing the collapse of the civilization causing the entire race to be less than they could be.

Consider how humans give each other piggy-back rides.

Uh you mean cuz we're playing, cuz it's a close relationship, cuz they're our young? You won't usually find someone who gives a stranger they don't like a piggyback because it's they're job.

Do you think Styphon would care how he looks with a human riding him? He might do it for the lulz and then do a barrel roll.

Nope not at all... because he would never let a human ride him, he'd eat him first. Because we're tasty with ketchup. It is rude for one to play with their food... even if you don't need to eat.

[Giant2005]

Talk to me when you let your dog saddle you up and ride you in public. Being insecurity is usually synonymous with egotism and I don't know many things more egotistical than a dragon.

Am not accepting this dog comparison, humans are more mentally dragon-like than dogs are mentally human-like. Humans and dragons can carry on conversations, both can learn magic, this is worlds apart from dogs.

Do you think a Dragon would agree with you? I think a Dragon would absolutely agree with the human/dog comparison and their opinion is the one that counts.

The problem with this is the 'all dragons are the same' premise, which is flawed. All dragons aren't the same, all dragons aren't going to come to come to that conclusion, some if not many may but not all will.

I actually agree with you.
Most Dragons would consider the notion of being lowered to being someone's mount a huge insult but it isn't likely for that to be true of all Dragons. Dragon Hatchlings are very malleable creatures - I find it very believable that someone could mold one into being a willing mount if encountered early enough and they were able to limit the dragon's exposure solely to the Dragon's trainer and like-minded people. It wouldn't be what I consider ethical but it wouldn't be particularly difficult either.

[Zer0 Kay]

The problem with this is the 'all dragons are the same' premise, which is flawed. All dragons aren't the same, all dragons aren't going to come to come to that conclusion, some if not many may but not all will.

Nope I'm going to say this is Palladium and MANY sweeping statements for higher species have been made. Demons are evil, vampires treat humans as cattle, even an elemental or good AI could be seen as evil because of their callousness toward human plight.

How's this for a sweeping statement. A dragon is likely closer to an A.I. or elemental than they are a human, with the exception that they learn to emulate the beings they're around. Though one of you may point out that if they chose to grow up in a mount community then they'd accept that they're meant to be ridden... only problem with that is they seek out intelligent beings I think the RMB gave a criteria of people they usually are drawn to, I'm pretty sure it doesn't say subserviant mount race or even for you misguided diehard HTTYD fanboys and girls lower partner species... Since horses and elephants and mules never act like the dragons and refuse a rider to mount pr give directions. This act doesn't make the animal smart it makes them I, stubborn, even displeased, and instinctive, but no one ever claims its because they're smart unless they're one of those people who like transposing aspects of people onto animals.

Except that when it comes to your examples vampires aren't much beyond corpses animated by an AI making such sweeping statements valid for them just as they are for golems or mummies, elementals are truly alien in nature so again such sweeping statements are valid and demons again are inherently evil whereas dragons aren't. Dragons aren't emulating what they see around them they're LEARNING and making decisions and can change and develop over time. So the rules regarding them don't have to say 'subservient mount race' because they don't have to because it's not required. They can, for one reason or another, CHOOSE to be someone's mount. Heck if you go for the diabolic origin of it they could be or have originated in dragons that had been captured and mindraped by spells (like the Someone Makes Them ritual from Nightbane) so that the particular dragons originated as such victims and it's simply carried forward from that point until no one remembers how it started.

Okay good point for wild vampire but the other two can still impose will and either way it still an argument toward A.I.s Uh, I thought mummies were autonomous rather than created undead. Golems are nothing more than mystical automata. As for arguing that elementals are truly alien in nature... show me dragon in real life and I'll agree they aren't alien... and again Komodos don't count. If magic were an element then Dragons would be elementals. They're emulating the same way a child with Asperger's and in some cases other children at various other points on the Autism spectrum LEARN to EMULATE "normal" social responses. Human's emulate too. In a healthy environment we grow up thinking the way our parents act toward each other is the way men and women in a relationship are supposed to act toward each other, we emulate this when we enter a relationship. I'm not trying to say emulation is an animal thing. I'm trying to say that dragons learn how to act from whatever group they choose to be in. If they decide that the group acts poorly in many ways a prudent dragon would likely leave the group and find another an instinctual dragon would likely just accept it as normal. But your argument that demons are inherently evil... well dragons are inherently arrogant which again makes them unlikely to act as a mount. I'd consider acquiescing on Hatchlings, they may be ignorant enough to allow someone dominance, which is an integral part of being a mount as you are ridden and forced/guided to go wherever the rider wants you to. They're ignorant because they haven't received the epiphany all dragons receive upon becoming adults. They don't know yet that they're species was enslaved and do not yet have the distaste for someone else being in control of them.

Basically I think my issue is the word.
Mount equals riding beast controlled by its rider, who succumbs to the will and desired direction of its rider

While a dragon may allow someone to ride it, like TOR tried pointing out with humans giving piggy back rides. It isn't as a mount, it isn't a riding beast and the rider IS NOT in control.

[Zer0 Kay]

Talk to me when you let your dog saddle you up and ride you in public. Being insecurity is usually synonymous with egotism and I don't know many things more egotistical than a dragon.

Am not accepting this dog comparison, humans are more mentally dragon-like than dogs are mentally human-like. Humans and dragons can carry on conversations, both can learn magic, this is worlds apart from dogs.

Do you think a Dragon would agree with you? I think a Dragon would absolutely agree with the human/dog comparison and their opinion is the one that counts.

The problem with this is the 'all dragons are the same' premise, which is flawed. All dragons aren't the same, all dragons aren't going to come to come to that conclusion, some if not many may but not all will.

I actually agree with you.
Most Dragons would consider the notion of being lowered to being someone's mount a huge insult but it isn't likely for that to be true of all Dragons. Dragon Hatchlings are very malleable creatures - I find it very believable that someone could mold one into being a willing mount if encountered early enough and they were able to limit the dragon's exposure solely to the Dragon's trainer and like-minded people. It wouldn't be what I consider ethical but it wouldn't be particularly difficult either.

I also agree with him, at the same time I think my statement is fair One can say all dragons are too arrogant to allow themselves to be ridden just as one can say that all A.I. including good A.I. are so alien to human thought that humans may perceive them as evil.
As I just said I may agree on the hatchlings not just because they're malleable but because they haven't received the racial epiphany, that all dragons (according to Dragons & Gods) receive upon becoming adults, which among other things includes the racial knowledge that they have been slaves of the great old ones. Which besides their arrogance would be a great deterrent to their willingness to become subjugated to anyone, ever. So even though you may teach a hatchling to be a mount but upon reaching 200-300 and becoming an adult it would likely throw off its chains of bondage, or in this case saddle of bondage, and retaliate if it was treated badly or with disdain and alienation if it is a good dragon and treated well. Of course if it is an evil dragon that was treated well it may only kill the rider but if treated poorly it would probably be one of those epic revenge stories, destroying the family and friend of the rider or maybe killing off all but one survivor in each family and then doing the same to each descendant for the next 3,000-10,000 years.

[Giant2005]

I also agree with him, at the same time I think my statement is fair One can say all dragons are too arrogant to allow themselves to be ridden just as one can say that all A.I. including good A.I. are so alien to human thought that humans may perceive them as evil.
As I just said I may agree on the hatchlings not just because they're malleable but because they haven't received the racial epiphany, that all dragons (according to Dragons & Gods) receive upon becoming adults, which among other things includes the racial knowledge that they have been slaves of the great old ones. Which besides their arrogance would be a great deterrent to their willingness to become subjugated to anyone, ever. So even though you may teach a hatchling to be a mount but upon reaching 200-300 and becoming an adult it would likely throw off its chains of bondage, or in this case saddle of bondage, and retaliate if it was treated badly or with disdain and alienation if it is a good dragon and treated well. Of course if it is an evil dragon that was treated well it may only kill the rider but if treated poorly it would probably be one of those epic revenge stories, destroying the family and friend of the rider or maybe killing off all but one survivor in each family and then doing the same to each descendant for the next 3,000-10,000 years.

That just sounds like a failed attempt at indoctrination!
That Dragon should never feel subjugated or subjected to any form of bondage - with proper indoctrination, it should forever believe that it is acting upon its own will and doing what it wants to do. It would be different to what their race suffered at the hands of the Old Ones because the Dragon would believe that it was still in control.

[Zer0 Kay]

Do you think a Dragon would agree with you?

Some might, some might not.

I think a Dragon would absolutely agree with the human/dog comparison and their opinion is the one that counts.

Opinions can vary.

Keep in mind that even inter-human racism leads to demeaning opinions like this, and it has been overcome.

Dolphins, who statistically exceed all but our maximum potential in IQ (per Palladium ruling) allow humans to ride them, why not dragons?

Particularly kid dragons who may have higher raw IQ averages but less acquired experience than adult humans.

There's a point when you can have so much confidence that it isn't demeaning at all to give smaller weaker creatures a ride.

Consider how humans give each other piggy-back rides.

Do you think Styphon would care how he looks with a human riding him? He might do it for the lulz and then do a barrel roll.

After thinking about it... your nuts.

Inter-human racism... first of racism is within a species so you can just say human racism, otherwise it is speciism. I'm pretty sure that thinking that your good enough to use another person as a riding animal is speciism and I'm fairly certain that riding other humans has never been overcome as demeaning, as the act itself is demeaning and frequently considered taboo, in the realm of S&M. One may be given a ride on another persons back but unless the people doing this are deviants it is NEVER as a riding animal.

[Zer0 Kay]

I also agree with him, at the same time I think my statement is fair One can say all dragons are too arrogant to allow themselves to be ridden just as one can say that all A.I. including good A.I. are so alien to human thought that humans may perceive them as evil.
As I just said I may agree on the hatchlings not just because they're malleable but because they haven't received the racial epiphany, that all dragons (according to Dragons & Gods) receive upon becoming adults, which among other things includes the racial knowledge that they have been slaves of the great old ones. Which besides their arrogance would be a great deterrent to their willingness to become subjugated to anyone, ever. So even though you may teach a hatchling to be a mount but upon reaching 200-300 and becoming an adult it would likely throw off its chains of bondage, or in this case saddle of bondage, and retaliate if it was treated badly or with disdain and alienation if it is a good dragon and treated well. Of course if it is an evil dragon that was treated well it may only kill the rider but if treated poorly it would probably be one of those epic revenge stories, destroying the family and friend of the rider or maybe killing off all but one survivor in each family and then doing the same to each descendant for the next 3,000-10,000 years.

That just sounds like a failed attempt at indoctrination!
That Dragon should never feel subjugated or subjected to any form of bondage - with proper indoctrination, it should forever believe that it is acting upon its own will and doing what it wants to do. It would be different to what their race suffered at the hands of the Old Ones because the Dragon would believe that it was still in control.

Nope, per the dragon book their entire way of thinking changes on a biological level when they become adults. Indoctrination can only be successful if your messing with a beasty who's brain stays the same. Only a wooly would think that it was in control when someone is pulling reigns and digging in spurs. Besides indoctrination assumes the people doing the indoctrination understand the psychology of the creature. Understanding that the hatchling is malleable and therefore can be subjugated the rest of its life... "roll" through indoctrination, is like assuming that entering your name and changing your stats at the beginning of an RPG video game means that someone (who doesn't know about coding or about trainers and cheat codes) thinks they can control every outcome within the game after the character creation portion. The hatchling is in learning mode and may or may not integrate what it has learned into its adult way of thinking. But the adult dragon is almost a different creature than the hatchling it grew from almost like a intellectual version of a diving beetles change from Tiger Nymph to Adult Beetle. Not so many stages but such a drastic change where the original is essentially unrecognizable from the complete being.

[Nightmask]

The problem with this is the 'all dragons are the same' premise, which is flawed. All dragons aren't the same, all dragons aren't going to come to come to that conclusion, some if not many may but not all will.

Nope I'm going to say this is Palladium and MANY sweeping statements for higher species have been made. Demons are evil, vampires treat humans as cattle, even an elemental or good AI could be seen as evil because of their callousness toward human plight.

How's this for a sweeping statement. A dragon is likely closer to an A.I. or elemental than they are a human, with the exception that they learn to emulate the beings they're around. Though one of you may point out that if they chose to grow up in a mount community then they'd accept that they're meant to be ridden... only problem with that is they seek out intelligent beings I think the RMB gave a criteria of people they usually are drawn to, I'm pretty sure it doesn't say subserviant mount race or even for you misguided diehard HTTYD fanboys and girls lower partner species... Since horses and elephants and mules never act like the dragons and refuse a rider to mount pr give directions. This act doesn't make the animal smart it makes them I, stubborn, even displeased, and instinctive, but no one ever claims its because they're smart unless they're one of those people who like transposing aspects of people onto animals.

Except that when it comes to your examples vampires aren't much beyond corpses animated by an AI making such sweeping statements valid for them just as they are for golems or mummies, elementals are truly alien in nature so again such sweeping statements are valid and demons again are inherently evil whereas dragons aren't. Dragons aren't emulating what they see around them they're LEARNING and making decisions and can change and develop over time. So the rules regarding them don't have to say 'subservient mount race' because they don't have to because it's not required. They can, for one reason or another, CHOOSE to be someone's mount. Heck if you go for the diabolic origin of it they could be or have originated in dragons that had been captured and mindraped by spells (like the Someone Makes Them ritual from Nightbane) so that the particular dragons originated as such victims and it's simply carried forward from that point until no one remembers how it started.

Okay good point for wild vampire but the other two can still impose will and either way it still an argument toward A.I.s Uh, I thought mummies were autonomous rather than created undead. Golems are nothing more than mystical automata. As for arguing that elementals are truly alien in nature... show me dragon in real life and I'll agree they aren't alien... and again Komodos don't count. If magic were an element then Dragons would be elementals. They're emulating the same way a child with Asperger's and in some cases other children at various other points on the Autism spectrum LEARN to EMULATE "normal" social responses. Human's emulate too. In a healthy environment we grow up thinking the way our parents act toward each other is the way men and women in a relationship are supposed to act toward each other, we emulate this when we enter a relationship. I'm not trying to say emulation is an animal thing. I'm trying to say that dragons learn how to act from whatever group they choose to be in. If they decide that the group acts poorly in many ways a prudent dragon would likely leave the group and find another an instinctual dragon would likely just accept it as normal. But your argument that demons are inherently evil... well dragons are inherently arrogant which again makes them unlikely to act as a mount. I'd consider acquiescing on Hatchlings, they may be ignorant enough to allow someone dominance, which is an integral part of being a mount as you are ridden and forced/guided to go wherever the rider wants you to. They're ignorant because they haven't received the epiphany all dragons receive upon becoming adults. They don't know yet that they're species was enslaved and do not yet have the distaste for someone else being in control of them.

Basically I think my issue is the word.
Mount equals riding beast controlled by its rider, who succumbs to the will and desired direction of its rider

While a dragon may allow someone to ride it, like TOR tried pointing out with humans giving piggy back rides. It isn't as a mount, it isn't a riding beast and the rider IS NOT in control.

You're really not going to meet the burden of proof that dragons are just as alien and unfathomable as elementals because they aren't. They aren't emulating anything they're learning and exhibiting the behavior that developed from their environment just like every other sentient being. You're trying to argue that dragons aren't actually sentient and in spite of behaving in a completely understandable fashion with completely understandable goals like every other sentient race around including humans that dragons are just 'faking it', without any means of proving that dragons unlike the rest aren't acting just like the rest.

We also have the evidence of at least one dragon tortured and left totally subservient to its rescuer, something impossible by your argument yet he clearly exists. If he'd been rescued by a humanoid (say a godling) he'd gladly serve as its mount because he was so mentally broken down and grateful to his rescuer. There's also one HLS that refers to a universe where the dragons are highly civilized and quite unlike the standard dragon and would be quite likely to stage an 'intervention' to teach their arrogant brethren to behave more civilly and morally, so more justification for dragons not being cookie-cutter stamped so they all have an immutable nature where they'd never submit to being someone's mount. It's just a trait, but it's not a psychosis/mental disorder that they're rigidly required to have.

[Tor]

Keep in mind that even inter-human racism leads to demeaning opinions like this, and it has been overcome.

I get the feeling you believe that the government's job is to take care of people rather than people taking care of people and the government protecting your freedoms and its boarders. And that there should be a special category of crimes that are defined as hate crimes when it shouldn't matter because in order to truly deal with inequality we need to make laws equal for all. I've never seen a murder that wasn't influenced by hate. I've never seen someone who hates someone accidentally kill the person (manslaughter).

I am confused at your response and how it relates to this discussion... if you're reacting to my comment as if it meant I thought racism was absent in humanity, let me assure you that I only realistically mean it has been overcome to a certain degree in certain circumstances.

we need to decide if we are using real world or game world WE keep going back and forth too much.

Even IRL, do you have evidence that dolphins are dumber than us? IQ doesn't necessarily mean you're motivated to form civilizations or interact and make technology.

RW dolphins let people ride them because they enjoy interaction with people, this does not mark them as smart or dumb.

I don't recall saying it did. Rather that dolphins are smart, so it's evidence that smart things can let themselves be ridden without getting all bent out of shape about it.

They do not, as far as I know, let people ride them not in play, but as a mount.

That's all about how they perceive a situation, and how much time is spent building a relationship with them. An unbroken horse doesn't exactly let people mount them into battles either.

Dolphins are still animals, they learn by repetition.

As are humans.

Though humans can learn by repetition, we also have many other ways of learning which no animals can do.

You can't prove this statement. Rather, there are methods of learning that we only have evidence of humans applying, but that is not proof that other species aren't capable of it, just that we haven't proven they can do it.

In game... the freaking dolphins your talking about can TALK!!!! Kinda, messed up assuming they're the same.

Problem? We can't exactly prove they CAN'T speak IRL. Maybe there's just been more time to learn it on Rifts Earth, centuries have passed since humans began trying to teach their language to dolphins, after all, the concepts could have been spread among their species.

As for dragons IRL... uh they're aren't any, and no Komodos don't count.

IRL comparisons don't really matter here.

The point is moreso that dolphins in Palladium can let humans ride them, so can other intelligent creatures like Dragon-Cats, so a dragon could certainly also do it. Plus humans themselves give other humans rides.

they are born with knowledge that is genetically granted to them from their parents.

True... or genes in combination with psionic contact during the womb/egg, who knows... but they're still relatively unworldly. You can have skills without knowing your place, like in the Bourne Identity, minus the hints on how to rebuild your life.

It's not confidence it is egotism. They are, at least the adults certain that they are greater than humans. They don't just think they're bigger. They know they're bigger and smarter and more ancient and to them the age of their species gives them the rights to the world.

I feel the same way towards dogs and cats, but I will still carry them around. I'd let them ride on my back for fun if they had the intelligence to stand still for it and not dig their claws into my neck.

They also know that humans are more ancient than both Elves and Dwarves but were minions of the Great Old Ones along with the Minotaur.

This is news to me, I need to brush up on PF world books clearly.

How can one know this and still be benevolent? I'm sure its difficult.

Being incredibly powerful in comparison to your pet helps.

BTW the Elves and Dwarves don't historically don't like each other but both favor humans. That also started because the humans were the oldest civilization

I seem to recall humans being presented as one of the NEWER species to the Palladium world... this information is confusing me.

Consider how humans give each other piggy-back rides.

Uh you mean cuz we're playing, cuz it's a close relationship, cuz they're our young? You won't usually find someone who gives a stranger they don't like a piggyback because it's they're job.

I'm not arguing that dragons will give random humans piggybacks, I'm saying they can make friends with humans and give those friends a ride. Obviously a dragon's not going to be inclined to give a human they don't like a ride (although I could see them doing it as an easy way to make money, though if the human had any dangerous weapons, the dragon might wisely require them to deposit the items in a bag held by the dragon until the ride is over). If humans can operate a rickshaw business then dragons can operate as mounts.

I mean heck, mulling this over in my head, I'm remembering now that dragons are referenced as being beasts of burden withing the Siege on Tolkeen conflict. Check out the first book (Sedition) page 73, in the left column TW Floaters are described as being drawn through the air by flying beings like Gargoyles, Dragondactyls, Pegasi, demons and dragons. This is reiterated in the right column when creature categories are given, being animals, slaves/servants and teammates/friends/allies. Dragons are classed in the last category along with the Sphinx, another winged creature of magic who could use their flight to help transport allies.

he would never let a human ride him, he'd eat him first. Because we're tasty with ketchup.

I don't see where we should conclude Styphon to be so inflexible that he'd never let himself be ridden. Sure, he might eat them after, but I think occasionally he might mess around. Betrayal has an interesting flavor.

RMB gave a criteria of people they usually are drawn to, I'm pretty sure it doesn't say subserviant mount race or even for you misguided diehard HTTYD fanboys and girls lower partner species...

I think the dragons just like how humans gather food for them, and enjoy the non-threatening companionship.

horses and elephants and mules never act like the dragons and refuse a rider to mount

Not sure what you mean here, horses can definitely buck off riders or refuse a mount...

After thinking about it... your nuts.

You're capable of replying without calling me chipmunk food bro.

Inter-human racism... first of racism is within a species so you can just say human racism, otherwise it is speciism.

"Race" is a flexible term. It is sometimes used interchangeably with species (ie "I'm a member of the human race") rather than ethnic sub-groups within one.

pretty sure that thinking that your good enough to use another person as a riding animal is speciism

I don't believe so, one person just may be more capable of movement than you are. A human resolving to ride a dragon doesn't necessarily think they're better, they may just want to experience flight and appreciate the FAVOR from a FRIEND.

I'm fairly certain that riding other humans has never been overcome as demeaning, as the act itself is demeaning and frequently considered taboo, in the realm of S&M.

It's a matter of context. See for example this scene from Naruto or perhaps this scene from Nisekoi. Giving someone in need a ride can be heroic, and often it's the person getting the ride who might feel demeaned or embarassed by the experience.

One may be given a ride on another persons back but unless the people doing this are deviants it is NEVER as a riding animal.

I'm confused what you mean by 'riding animal' here. Humans who give rides to humans or to pets ARE riding animals. We're just not often called that because humans have a tendency to abhor being acknowledged as animals.

I imagine a dragon giving a ride would abhor being given reins or a bit. It'd be one thing for a human to aid in giving directions but they would probably prefer getting those verbally.

Although... since it might be hard to hear a human (wind could carry the sound back, particularly at higher speeds, and some humans might need to wear helmets for protection) a dragon secure in itself might actually be okay using reins to get an indication of which way a human wants to turn, unless some other way of signalling could be devised, like spurs, if dragons have an acute enough sense of touch to feel SDC spurs that is.

[Zer0 Kay]

The problem with this is the 'all dragons are the same' premise, which is flawed. All dragons aren't the same, all dragons aren't going to come to come to that conclusion, some if not many may but not all will.

Nope I'm going to say this is Palladium and MANY sweeping statements for higher species have been made. Demons are evil, vampires treat humans as cattle, even an elemental or good AI could be seen as evil because of their callousness toward human plight.

How's this for a sweeping statement. A dragon is likely closer to an A.I. or elemental than they are a human, with the exception that they learn to emulate the beings they're around. Though one of you may point out that if they chose to grow up in a mount community then they'd accept that they're meant to be ridden... only problem with that is they seek out intelligent beings I think the RMB gave a criteria of people they usually are drawn to, I'm pretty sure it doesn't say subserviant mount race or even for you misguided diehard HTTYD fanboys and girls lower partner species... Since horses and elephants and mules never act like the dragons and refuse a rider to mount pr give directions. This act doesn't make the animal smart it makes them I, stubborn, even displeased, and instinctive, but no one ever claims its because they're smart unless they're one of those people who like transposing aspects of people onto animals.

Except that when it comes to your examples vampires aren't much beyond corpses animated by an AI making such sweeping statements valid for them just as they are for golems or mummies, elementals are truly alien in nature so again such sweeping statements are valid and demons again are inherently evil whereas dragons aren't. Dragons aren't emulating what they see around them they're LEARNING and making decisions and can change and develop over time. So the rules regarding them don't have to say 'subservient mount race' because they don't have to because it's not required. They can, for one reason or another, CHOOSE to be someone's mount. Heck if you go for the diabolic origin of it they could be or have originated in dragons that had been captured and mindraped by spells (like the Someone Makes Them ritual from Nightbane) so that the particular dragons originated as such victims and it's simply carried forward from that point until no one remembers how it started.

Okay good point for wild vampire but the other two can still impose will and either way it still an argument toward A.I.s Uh, I thought mummies were autonomous rather than created undead. Golems are nothing more than mystical automata. As for arguing that elementals are truly alien in nature... show me dragon in real life and I'll agree they aren't alien... and again Komodos don't count. If magic were an element then Dragons would be elementals. They're emulating the same way a child with Asperger's and in some cases other children at various other points on the Autism spectrum LEARN to EMULATE "normal" social responses. Human's emulate too. In a healthy environment we grow up thinking the way our parents act toward each other is the way men and women in a relationship are supposed to act toward each other, we emulate this when we enter a relationship. I'm not trying to say emulation is an animal thing. I'm trying to say that dragons learn how to act from whatever group they choose to be in. If they decide that the group acts poorly in many ways a prudent dragon would likely leave the group and find another an instinctual dragon would likely just accept it as normal. But your argument that demons are inherently evil... well dragons are inherently arrogant which again makes them unlikely to act as a mount. I'd consider acquiescing on Hatchlings, they may be ignorant enough to allow someone dominance, which is an integral part of being a mount as you are ridden and forced/guided to go wherever the rider wants you to. They're ignorant because they haven't received the epiphany all dragons receive upon becoming adults. They don't know yet that they're species was enslaved and do not yet have the distaste for someone else being in control of them.

Basically I think my issue is the word.
Mount equals riding beast controlled by its rider, who succumbs to the will and desired direction of its rider

While a dragon may allow someone to ride it, like TOR tried pointing out with humans giving piggy back rides. It isn't as a mount, it isn't a riding beast and the rider IS NOT in control.

You're really not going to meet the burden of proof that dragons are just as alien and unfathomable as elementals because they aren't. They aren't emulating anything they're learning and exhibiting the behavior that developed from their environment just like every other sentient being. You're trying to argue that dragons aren't actually sentient and in spite of behaving in a completely understandable fashion with completely understandable goals like every other sentient race around including humans that dragons are just 'faking it', without any means of proving that dragons unlike the rest aren't acting just like the rest.

We also have the evidence of at least one dragon tortured and left totally subservient to its rescuer, something impossible by your argument yet he clearly exists. If he'd been rescued by a humanoid (say a godling) he'd gladly serve as its mount because he was so mentally broken down and grateful to his rescuer. There's also one HLS that refers to a universe where the dragons are highly civilized and quite unlike the standard dragon and would be quite likely to stage an 'intervention' to teach their arrogant brethren to behave more civilly and morally, so more justification for dragons not being cookie-cutter stamped so they all have an immutable nature where they'd never submit to being someone's mount. It's just a trait, but it's not a psychosis/mental disorder that they're rigidly required to have.

I didn't say they were the same. I said they're closer to A.I. s than humans

[Zer0 Kay]

Keep in mind that even inter-human racism leads to demeaning opinions like this, and it has been overcome.

I get the feeling you believe that the government's job is to take care of people rather than people taking care of people and the government protecting your freedoms and its boarders. And that there should be a special category of crimes that are defined as hate crimes when it shouldn't matter because in order to truly deal with inequality we need to make laws equal for all. I've never seen a murder that wasn't influenced by hate. I've never seen someone who hates someone accidentally kill the person (manslaughter).

I am confused at your response and how it relates to this discussion... if you're reacting to my comment as if it meant I thought racism was absent in humanity, let me assure you that I only realistically mean it has been overcome to a certain degree in certain circumstances.

we need to decide if we are using real world or game world WE keep going back and forth too much.

Even IRL, do you have evidence that dolphins are dumber than us? IQ doesn't necessarily mean you're motivated to form civilizations or interact and make technology.

RW dolphins let people ride them because they enjoy interaction with people, this does not mark them as smart or dumb.

I don't recall saying it did. Rather that dolphins are smart, so it's evidence that smart things can let themselves be ridden without getting all bent out of shape about it.

They do not, as far as I know, let people ride them not in play, but as a mount.

That's all about how they perceive a situation, and how much time is spent building a relationship with them. An unbroken horse doesn't exactly let people mount them into battles either.

Dolphins are still animals, they learn by repetition.

As are humans.

Though humans can learn by repetition, we also have many other ways of learning which no animals can do.

You can't prove this statement. Rather, there are methods of learning that we only have evidence of humans applying, but that is not proof that other species aren't capable of it, just that we haven't proven they can do it.

In game... the freaking dolphins your talking about can TALK!!!! Kinda, messed up assuming they're the same.

Problem? We can't exactly prove they CAN'T speak IRL. Maybe there's just been more time to learn it on Rifts Earth, centuries have passed since humans began trying to teach their language to dolphins, after all, the concepts could have been spread among their species.

As for dragons IRL... uh they're aren't any, and no Komodos don't count.

IRL comparisons don't really matter here.

The point is moreso that dolphins in Palladium can let humans ride them, so can other intelligent creatures like Dragon-Cats, so a dragon could certainly also do it. Plus humans themselves give other humans rides.

they are born with knowledge that is genetically granted to them from their parents.

True... or genes in combination with psionic contact during the womb/egg, who knows... but they're still relatively unworldly. You can have skills without knowing your place, like in the Bourne Identity, minus the hints on how to rebuild your life.

It's not confidence it is egotism. They are, at least the adults certain that they are greater than humans. They don't just think they're bigger. They know they're bigger and smarter and more ancient and to them the age of their species gives them the rights to the world.

I feel the same way towards dogs and cats, but I will still carry them around. I'd let them ride on my back for fun if they had the intelligence to stand still for it and not dig their claws into my neck.

They also know that humans are more ancient than both Elves and Dwarves but were minions of the Great Old Ones along with the Minotaur.

This is news to me, I need to brush up on PF world books clearly.

How can one know this and still be benevolent? I'm sure its difficult.

Being incredibly powerful in comparison to your pet helps.

BTW the Elves and Dwarves don't historically don't like each other but both favor humans. That also started because the humans were the oldest civilization

I seem to recall humans being presented as one of the NEWER species to the Palladium world... this information is confusing me.

Consider how humans give each other piggy-back rides.

Uh you mean cuz we're playing, cuz it's a close relationship, cuz they're our young? You won't usually find someone who gives a stranger they don't like a piggyback because it's they're job.

I'm not arguing that dragons will give random humans piggybacks, I'm saying they can make friends with humans and give those friends a ride. Obviously a dragon's not going to be inclined to give a human they don't like a ride (although I could see them doing it as an easy way to make money, though if the human had any dangerous weapons, the dragon might wisely require them to deposit the items in a bag held by the dragon until the ride is over). If humans can operate a rickshaw business then dragons can operate as mounts.

I mean heck, mulling this over in my head, I'm remembering now that dragons are referenced as being beasts of burden withing the Siege on Tolkeen conflict. Check out the first book (Sedition) page 73, in the left column TW Floaters are described as being drawn through the air by flying beings like Gargoyles, Dragondactyls, Pegasi, demons and dragons. This is reiterated in the right column when creature categories are given, being animals, slaves/servants and teammates/friends/allies. Dragons are classed in the last category along with the Sphinx, another winged creature of magic who could use their flight to help transport allies.

he would never let a human ride him, he'd eat him first. Because we're tasty with ketchup.

I don't see where we should conclude Styphon to be so inflexible that he'd never let himself be ridden. Sure, he might eat them after, but I think occasionally he might mess around. Betrayal has an interesting flavor.

RMB gave a criteria of people they usually are drawn to, I'm pretty sure it doesn't say subserviant mount race or even for you misguided diehard HTTYD fanboys and girls lower partner species...

I think the dragons just like how humans gather food for them, and enjoy the non-threatening companionship.

horses and elephants and mules never act like the dragons and refuse a rider to mount

Not sure what you mean here, horses can definitely buck off riders or refuse a mount...

After thinking about it... your nuts.

You're capable of replying without calling me chipmunk food bro.

Inter-human racism... first of racism is within a species so you can just say human racism, otherwise it is speciism.

"Race" is a flexible term. It is sometimes used interchangeably with species (ie "I'm a member of the human race") rather than ethnic sub-groups within one.

pretty sure that thinking that your good enough to use another person as a riding animal is speciism

I don't believe so, one person just may be more capable of movement than you are. A human resolving to ride a dragon doesn't necessarily think they're better, they may just want to experience flight and appreciate the FAVOR from a FRIEND.

I'm fairly certain that riding other humans has never been overcome as demeaning, as the act itself is demeaning and frequently considered taboo, in the realm of S&M.

It's a matter of context. See for example this scene from Naruto or perhaps this scene from Nisekoi. Giving someone in need a ride can be heroic, and often it's the person getting the ride who might feel demeaned or embarassed by the experience.

One may be given a ride on another persons back but unless the people doing this are deviants it is NEVER as a riding animal.

I'm confused what you mean by 'riding animal' here. Humans who give rides to humans or to pets ARE riding animals. We're just not often called that because humans have a tendency to abhor being acknowledged as animals.

I imagine a dragon giving a ride would abhor being given reins or a bit. It'd be one thing for a human to aid in giving directions but they would probably prefer getting those verbally.

Although... since it might be hard to hear a human (wind could carry the sound back, particularly at higher speeds, and some humans might need to wear helmets for protection) a dragon secure in itself might actually be okay using reins to get an indication of which way a human wants to turn, unless some other way of signalling could be devised, like spurs, if dragons have an acute enough sense of touch to feel SDC spurs that is.

All right, were going to have to agree to disagree. In your game dragons are selfless and have a low ehotism but high confidence and would rather make friends than eat them. I still think your nuts but it'ss your game. In mine I will continue to use the classic dragon who would rather eat a person than Cary one into a battle it has no interest in. Though they can be ridden and may allow a friend or wounded compatriot it is them varying the other not them being ridden. It is a difference of who is in control.

[Tor]

were going to have to agree to disagree. In your game dragons are selfless and have a low ehotism but high confidence and would rather make friends than eat them.

Um, no. Don't misrepresent me here. I'm saying that SOME dragons CAN be this way. Your summary sounds like a blanket statement, as if I think dragons would be inclined to act this way. I don't know what proportion would, it may be a minority.

I will continue to use the classic dragon who would rather eat a person than Cary one into a battle it has no interest in.

More straw 0, I never said they'd help out in battles they're not interested in. But dragons CAN be interested in battles.

You can also play both types of characters. Dragons run a variety of alignments.

Though they can be ridden and may allow a friend or wounded compatriot it is them varying the other not them being ridden. It is a difference of who is in control.

Riding something does not inherently mean you are controlling that thing. Thus why people can say stuff like "I'll give you a ride".

[Prysus]

They also know that humans are more ancient than both Elves and Dwarves but were minions of the Great Old Ones along with the Minotaur.

This is news to me, I need to brush up on PF world books clearly.

BTW the Elves and Dwarves don't historically don't like each other but both favor humans. That also started because the humans were the oldest civilization

I seem to recall humans being presented as one of the NEWER species to the Palladium world... this information is confusing me.

Greetings and Salutations. Wow ... um ... okay, as a huge PF fan, I'd just like to say the information presented is inaccurate (or would be news to even me). At the end of the post, I'll address my views on dragons and riders though (just to stay moderately on topic).

-----

Humans did NOT exist during the Chaos War (war with the Old Ones). Neither did Dwarves. Dragons, Titans, and Elves are the main races noted as having survived it (some others did, but they more came out in later sourcebooks such as the Danzi from Eastern Territory, or were minions, such as the Minotaur). Changelings are a big question mark (some sources say minions of the Old Ones, and some say they didn't come into being until after). Regardless, Humans are not among the "ancient races" (those that survived the Age of Chaos).

Now, with that said, Humans did have the oldest civilization. You can find this in Yin-Sloth Jungles. However, this has nothing to do with Elves and Dwarves befriending them. Elves, Dwarves, Humans, and basically everyone else have no knowledge of this civilization. The civlization was wiped out in the Battle of the Gods (and didn't involve the mortal races), and took Humans about 70,000 years to start making a world presence again. From what I can tell, this is the start of Dragonwright, and other gods saw this upcoming race and starting vying for attention. Big godly battle on a mortal plane and ... well, they laid waste to what they fought over. The gods feel pity and regret, but this has nothing whatsoever to do with Elves and Dwarves (who have no knowledge of this event). If you even look at the PF2 main book (in the history summary about the Battle of the Gods), they even mention how the battle itself is considered a "myth" and that it's "unknown" that it was Humans.

-----

Dragons and Riders:

I do believe it's highly unlikely for a dragon to be subservient to a mortal rider. Palladium does present their dragons as extremely arrogant. Letting a mortal ever tell it what to do is ... well, I'll leave it as highly unlikely. There might be cases (though exceptionally rare) where a dragon would be subservient to a rider. This could be an honorable dragon living up to an oath (for whatever reason), or having been tricked by a mortal but still honoring his/her agreement. Note: The dragon probably wouldn't even consider a single mortal servant the worst thing either. Though undesireable, dragons live a long time and view things differently. The same way a dragon might let revenge on a mortal slide (time will sort the matter out for them), they might let this brief stint as a minor footnote in their lives (something that'll pass soon enough).

As someone else mentioned (again, exceptionally rare), tricking a hatchling into thinking this is common/accepted could work (trained from very young and kept in an isolated environment). However, I imagine this would ultimately end up badly for the mortal trickster. I'm having more of a flash from The Last Unicorn (1982), the witch who captured the unicorn and the harpy (knowing it'll ultimately mean her death, but gloating in the knowledge that this long lived creature would always remember being held captive/owned by this mortal). Enjoy the power/advantage while you can, but knowing it'll ultimately mean you're undoing, and reveling in the fact this dragon will never forget that you owned it (even if for a brief time).

A partnership, maybe. Not common at all (more common than the above scenarios, but that's still not very common at all), but I imagine a few might find uses for a mortal rider. Though I'd consider the dragon the one in charge with the human more subservient (even if the human didn't think that the case and tried to give orders or argued incessantly). In this case, I see it more like someone else mentioned earlier where when you walk your dog it can set the pace and direction. With the dragon, it would be more like a little kid on his back. Rider: "Faster! Go this way." Dragon: *Roll eyes.* "Fiiiine." *Humors the tiny small minded pet, but if it ever wants to put its foot down ... not much the human can do and it's time the rider gets a time-out.*

Anyways. that's all for now. Thank you for your time and patience, please have a nice day. Farewell and safe journeys to all.

[Zer0 Kay]

They also know that humans are more ancient than both Elves and Dwarves but were minions of the Great Old Ones along with the Minotaur.

This is news to me, I need to brush up on PF world books clearly.

BTW the Elves and Dwarves don't historically don't like each other but both favor humans. That also started because the humans were the oldest civilization

I seem to recall humans being presented as one of the NEWER species to the Palladium world... this information is confusing me.

Greetings and Salutations. Wow ... um ... okay, as a huge PF fan, I'd just like to say the information presented is inaccurate (or would be news to even me). At the end of the post, I'll address my views on dragons and riders though (just to stay moderately on topic).

-----

Humans did NOT exist during the Chaos War (war with the Old Ones). Neither did Dwarves. Dragons, Titans, and Elves are the main races noted as having survived it (some others did, but they more came out in later sourcebooks such as the Danzi from Eastern Territory, or were minions, such as the Minotaur). Changelings are a big question mark (some sources say minions of the Old Ones, and some say they didn't come into being until after). Regardless, Humans are not among the "ancient races" (those that survived the Age of Chaos).

Now, with that said, Humans did have the oldest civilization. You can find this in Yin-Sloth Jungles. However, this has nothing to do with Elves and Dwarves befriending them. Elves, Dwarves, Humans, and basically everyone else have no knowledge of this civilization. The civlization was wiped out in the Battle of the Gods (and didn't involve the mortal races), and took Humans about 70,000 years to start making a world presence again. From what I can tell, this is the start of Dragonwright, and other gods saw this upcoming race and starting vying for attention. Big godly battle on a mortal plane and ... well, they laid waste to what they fought over. The gods feel pity and regret, but this has nothing whatsoever to do with Elves and Dwarves (who have no knowledge of this event). If you even look at the PF2 main book (in the history summary about the Battle of the Gods), they even mention how the battle itself is considered a "myth" and that it's "unknown" that it was Humans.

-----

Dragons and Riders:

I do believe it's highly unlikely for a dragon to be subservient to a mortal rider. Palladium does present their dragons as extremely arrogant. Letting a mortal ever tell it what to do is ... well, I'll leave it as highly unlikely. There might be cases (though exceptionally rare) where a dragon would be subservient to a rider. This could be an honorable dragon living up to an oath (for whatever reason), or having been tricked by a mortal but still honoring his/her agreement. Note: The dragon probably wouldn't even consider a single mortal servant the worst thing either. Though undesireable, dragons live a long time and view things differently. The same way a dragon might let revenge on a mortal slide (time will sort the matter out for them), they might let this brief stint as a minor footnote in their lives (something that'll pass soon enough).

As someone else mentioned (again, exceptionally rare), tricking a hatchling into thinking this is common/accepted could work (trained from very young and kept in an isolated environment). However, I imagine this would ultimately end up badly for the mortal trickster. I'm having more of a flash from The Last Unicorn (1982), the witch who captured the unicorn and the harpy (knowing it'll ultimately mean her death, but gloating in the knowledge that this long lived creature would always remember being held captive/owned by this mortal). Enjoy the power/advantage while you can, but knowing it'll ultimately mean you're undoing, and reveling in the fact this dragon will never forget that you owned it (even if for a brief time).

A partnership, maybe. Not common at all (more common than the above scenarios, but that's still not very common at all), but I imagine a few might find uses for a mortal rider. Though I'd consider the dragon the one in charge with the human more subservient (even if the human didn't think that the case and tried to give orders or argued incessantly). In this case, I see it more like someone else mentioned earlier where when you walk your dog it can set the pace and direction. With the dragon, it would be more like a little kid on his back. Rider: "Faster! Go this way." Dragon: *Roll eyes.* "Fiiiine." *Humors the tiny small minded pet, but if it ever wants to put its foot down ... not much the human can do and it's time the rider gets a time-out.*

Anyways. that's all for now. Thank you for your time and patience, please have a nice day. Farewell and safe journeys to all.

I was going to interrupt with Yin Sloth. but you covered. Where have you been every other time I bring that up about humans being the eldest?

Did I say they were in the war with the elves and stuff or did I just claim the elves and dwarves caused the fall? Thanks for setting the PF story straight.

I endorse this message

*This message paid for by Dragonwright*

Not that it's of much value but I agree with your scenarios.