Do Wyverns fit in the new Feathermane family?

[Rawr]

Hippogryphs, Gryphons, Owlcats, and Wolfhawks have feathers. Owlcats, Wolfhawks, and Wyverns have manes. See everything fits now.

"Further, unlike Mammals, Wyverns lay eggs." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotreme I'm just going to leave that there, and you can't say biology has no place here then type that in.

[Valnaaros]

Except Wyverns aren't Monotremes. The young do not crawl into a pouch and nurse. They don't nurse at all. As I said, you can't bring RL biology into a fantasy world where there are things that may or may not make sense. All I was stating is that Wyverns lay eggs, which they do.

[Wain]

Except Wyverns aren't Monotremes. The young do not crawl into a pouch and nurse. They don't nurse at all. As I said, you can't bring RL biology into a fantasy world where there are things that may or may not make sense. All I was stating is that Wyverns lay eggs, which they do.

Maybe that venom spur that surviving male monotremes have has migrated to the tail in wyverns and... ok, if I stretch this idea any further the band is going to snap

[zedxrgal]

Anyways, again I'm still trying to find logic in a place it don't live...

**EDIT** Also, all in all, who gives a rats right?!? We get to fricken tame Wyverns, Griphons, Hippogyrphs, Owlcats and Wolfeagles!!!

Exactly. Logic with tamable beasts (and so many other things in WoW) was thrown out LONG LONG AGO by Blizzard. At this point I don't care what family they're in! I just want one! I've wanted Sorrow Wing since vanilla and now I will FINALLY have that chance. To quote Clark Gable "Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn" what family it's in.

What I DO hope for is that the wyverns will some how be able to keep pridewing poison as an ability along with with rest of the ferocity talents.

[Valnaaros]

There really wasn't logic to begin with. Using real life logic to explain things in a fantasy world just doesn't work

[Qraljar]

I honestly don't care either way about the family name. The more new tameable beasties, the better, in my opinion.

However, I do find it funny that the tome that grants you the ability to tame them already has the right name for the family, but they didn't use that and instead called them something else less apt. Quite amusing.

[PrimalTazza]

I think wyverns are fine in the family, several others have aspects that make them seem unfit, but the idea is that "oh man they're all weird hybrid animals!" I think. Would it be too much work to divide them up and slap them in other families but only make those certain models available if you have the tome? There's the issue of a handful of exotic pets being tamable without BM, and I recall a common bear in Ashenvale labeled as exotic despite just being an ordinary bear.

[Wain]

This topic was just split from the Tome of Hybrid Beast poll, because it wasn't related to that, and had grown into a huge (and worthwhile) discussion

For some posts that addressed multiple topics, they now appear on both threads but the content split to only that relevant to one topic or the other.

[pop]

For me it's beak vs non beaks


Beakers like Hyppogriffs and Gryphons for me are tooo different from beakless animals Wyvern or Wolfhawk.

Having said I still stand with my 'Windrunner' pet family idea if we rename them.

[Quiv]

Perhaps a family name of "Feather and/or Manes and/or Fur and/or Reptile and/or Mammals and/or Stingers and/or Wingers and/or Hybrids and/or All of the above" would be more fitting

[Takanuka]

I do not understand why anyone is complaining about the Feathermane should or should not consist of wyverns when Feathers covers the Gryphons, Hippogriffs, Owlcats, and Wolfhawks while the mane which none of those have while the wyverns does. So if those were excluded the name Feathermane would need to be changed then. But then it would conflict with the Scalehide family we gotten recently which consist of Kodos, Stegodons, and Mushans. They should merge basilisks and direhorns into that then because their hides are scales and split the clefthoof family then since a Clefthoof and a Rhino are hugely different and in no way similar. I am sure people still will complain about this or that but we can always lose a new family if people keep complaining over a technical thing like a family title. Besides if blizzard went to rewrite tiny bit of lore and just renamed the chimaeras we got now http://www.wow-petopia.com/family.php?id=chimaera into the Rylak since some how they evolve into the http://www.wow-petopia.com/look.php?id= ... dpurple_01 when draenor shattered then the term chimaera would be open and would finely suit this family since they are all composed of different things. But can we all agree on (and forget about this pointless argument over a name), that the rares in wow do kind of lack anything to distinct themselves as rares? I mean usually the rares we get are just different colors or a "ooooooooooo spectral" or in recent rares a fez hat (which they lost their chance to have the monkey hold a cup and idle animation of it dancing around with the cup like its asking for change). I mean some creative rares would be like maybe a rare bear found in the forest on Darkmoon Isle that can be tamed and it's idle animation could be that it dances like the mount, maybe its a dancing bear mount that got loose while being trained to be a mount as story for it ? Or actual unique models like a rare rhino the Embolotherium or a rare crab that could be a SPider Crab or a Coconut Crab. Maybe if they introduce Tel Abim, they could have horseshoe crabs and a rare coconut crab model on the tropical island. http://wowwiki.wikia.com/wiki/Tel_Abim

[SpiritBinder]

But then it would conflict with the Scalehide family we gotten recently which consist of Kodos, Stegodons, and Mushans. They should merge basilisks and direhorns into that then because their hides are scales and split the clefthoof family then since a Clefthoof and a Rhino are hugely different and in no way similar.

Pretty much, this is where the entire thing is a very slippery slop....

What makes sense to one person may not to another, and then what makes sense to them makes not sense to the next. Some things seem clear as day and near everyone agrees on, and yet blizzard thinks and does the opposite.

I've noticed however the biggest issue regarding family labeling have come up more of late in recent expansions. This is due to the ever popular grouping of broader family types blizzard now leans towards. This comes from a good place of "How many new and old beasts can we make tamable for hunters!".... but has the side effect of very broad brush strokes. It's these undefined broad strokes, that lead to "What makes sense to one person may not to another" The more variety they add to a family, the more room there is for opinion, and the more variety within opinions you'll get.

This never really existed before, no such family would have been added in Vanilla or potentially Wrath, etc.

We would be getting a Gryphon Family, and Wyvern Family, a Hippogryph family, etc, etc.

Doing it the way they have, allows them to add essentially jam SIX different families into one, they can just skip past the time/energy invested in creating more than one new family, and retroflag 5 older families as tamable.

But again it all comes back to, unless they actually FIX/DO something with this clarification of what a pet family even means (game-play wise), this whole classification thing is moot. They could call them Amphibious Vampire Turkeys, and it would means just as much as Feathermanes.

[Quiv]

I think the first time I ever really wondered about the pet family names was when they made Dog its own family. I get it, but it did make me go Hmmmm....

But man I would love for the appropriate devs to go indepth and talk about their philosophy behind hunter pets: how they choose new families to make tameable, how they choose what in that family becomes tameable, family names, abilities etc.

I cant imagine it'll ever happen since its one out of twelve classes, but man that would be super interesting to me. Finally put all the speculation to rest.