We Rule

[Fratricide]

Dragons always get more attention, and they make more noise ( well they are bigger and all ) but we will prove to be the Shaft that is driven through the chest of the WA.

[Tigris]

(((*in-character hat on*))

As much as it angers and upsets the drakes of Istaria, they are neither invulnerable nor all powerful, and cannot save their homes alone. A pity it has taken dragon-kind so long to realize that their hatred for us 'lesser' beings might be their undoing.

(((OOCly: Why must all our forums be denoted as "Biped"? Does this mean the dragon forums can all be denoted as "Scalebags"?)))

[Deth]

IC: Such broad judgments are what get our Lunus kin in troubles as yours will get you into. Not all Dragons hate naka.

OOC: It is the best descriptor for the wide range of races. Do you have a better Idea? I can not think of a good one my self. Besides being called a biped is not derogatory unlike "Scalebags". Just one comment on the attention noise. Yes we did because we were a unfinished class. Now that we are to the level of the average biped for being finished you will noticed the boards have quieted down about dragon issues greatly

[Tigris]

OOC: I just find being constantly referred to as "Bi-Ped" to be rather insulting and degrading. And therefore find the titling of said forum categories likewise degrading.

IC: Indeed... the greatest drakes I've known were the ones who set aside their personal disputes to work with the other races, much as we had to. After all... you don't see all the Sarii wholed up in Lesser Aradoth now do you? *eyebrow waggle and smile*

[PJ]

What matters is not the word but the intent of it. Neither term is inherently derogatory. "Scalebags" might be a term of enderment =P And while you feel "Bi-ped" is non-derogatory, I've heard some of the scaled persuasion use it as such.

As for a better idea, personally I'd rather see the Dragon Forum as a sub-forum of "The Living Races" forum, or some such similar thing.

[PJ]

no no no, not "Scalebags", the term is "Snogard"

[Menkure]

Coming from Tazoon.. and the origional release in December 2 years ago.. I have seen and heard many many rants and arguments in the past... which, for me, gave me a very sour taste in my mouth every time I saw the words "bi-ped" used.. even worse of a taste when someone used "Naka-duskael".

I know the words may not have been intended from the beginning to be deragatory or offensive to others, but for many of us, they have taken on that effect.

Much like back in history.. During and before the civil war, the "N" word, which was used to describe african-americans.. was just a name. In the origional texts of the time it was not meant to be deragatory... however, during the American Civil War, and afterwords over time, it has become one of the worst words to use to describe an african american.. and if you use it now, chances are you'll get shot for it.

There are good dragon players out there.. and then there are some dragon players who have in the past taken 'racial hatred' of bipeds to the extreme. The resentment that dragons had, (and some still do) of the bipeds.. classing all of us as "uber multiclassed out the wazoo bi-peds" also does cause some ill-feelings back.

And dragons aren't the only ones.. I know there are some bi-peds who are guilty as well. For me though, I hate being grouped in with that steriotype that all bipeds are rating 180 to 200 ubers.

That's why I cringe every time I hear the term "Naka-duskael", or "Bi-ped".. especailly when used by a dragon here on the boards.

-Menkure

[awdz]

*shrugs* i actually like the clarity of using the term 'bipeds' as opposed to dragons... though perhaps we should call them 'wyrms' ?

[Sigi]

quads?
fourlegs?

[Deth]

yea call me a Quadruped. I have no problem with it. As I said I do not see it as a bad thing and the only real way I can see calling all the different races together one thing.

[Lycaunoss]

I was thinking that I didn't like Bi-peds as a category in the forums because I tend to agree with the others that it's a bit of a derogatory identifier. I honestly can't think of a better one though. I believe that Naka Duskael actually intended to mean a lesser being than the dragon. In that context it would definitely be a bad thing. I don't think that's intended by the devs though. That's more of a usage thing by the players.

I suppose we could have Dragons and Not-Dragons as forum headings.

[Rocinante]

I don't even see why we need to talk about Dragons. Perhaps if we stop talking about them, they will get bored and fly away.

Rocinante

[Lycaunoss]

I don't even see why we need to talk about Dragons. Perhaps if we stop talking about them, they will get bored and fly away.

Rocinante

We talk about dragons because dragons are interesting to talk about. Unlike say.....elves.

[FleshRoast]

What matters is not the word but the intent of it. Neither term is inherently derogatory. "Scalebags" might be a term of enderment =P And while you feel "Bi-ped" is non-derogatory, I've heard some of the scaled persuasion use it as such.

As for a better idea, personally I'd rather see the Dragon Forum as a sub-forum of "The Living Races" forum, or some such similar thing.

I agree with this. While I understand the catagorizations of biped and dragon in terms of game-play, distinguishing between the two in different terms (number of legs v. species/race/class name) can possibly be confusing. Bipedal and quadrupedal classifications seem more appropriate as both terms use the same physical distinctions for identification (number of appendages used for ground locomotion).