I looked at some of the un-tamable beast and I thought it would just go to waste if hunters can use them so here are my suggestions.
Shoveltusk
Shoveltusks are now grouped with boar as 'boar'.
Clefthoof
Clefthooves are now grouped as rhino in the rhino family. Their new family skill is stampede; stuns the enemy, while their exotic remains the same.
Gyreworm
Gyreworm are now grouped with shale spiders in a new group of beast call "Elemental beast" or "Mineroid". With this change, 'Embrace of the shale spider' will be known as "Embrace of the Stonemother"[exotic]. Their family skill is "crumble"; armor reduction.
I initially had the same idea of making the demon dogs as dogs and I thought to myself since blizzard has already implemented that on beta, I think this would well with other beasts as well. What do you guys think?
Last edited by pop on Mon Nov 01, 2010 1:11 pm, edited 6 times in total.
pop wrote:I looked at some of the un-tamable beast and I thought it would just go to waste if hunters can use them so here are my suggestions.
Shoveltusk
Shoveltusks are now grouped with boar as 'boar'.
Clefthoof
Clefthooves are now grouped as rhino in the rhino family.
Gyreworm
Gyreworm are now grouped with shale spiders in a new group of beast call "Elemental beast" or "Mineroid". With this change, 'Embrace of the shale spider' will be known as "Embrace of the Stonemother".
I initially had the same idea of making the demon dogs as dogs and I thought to myself since blizzard has already implemented that on beta, I think this would well with other beasts as well. What do you guys think?
Hmm.
HMMMMM.
You know I like all of those, alot. For some reason shovel tusks actually appeal to me as additions to the boar family.
/signed
EDIT: I've always been a fan of having fewer families with more members, as it's easier to justify making more things tamable if it doesn't force developers to come up with- / test new- abilities every time.
pop wrote:
Gyreworm
Gyreworm are now grouped with shale spiders in a new group of beast call "Elemental beast" or "Mineroid". With this change, 'Embrace of the shale spider' will be known as "Embrace of the Stonemother".
Ooo, even without including the gyreworms, Stonemother huggles sound a lot better then spider huggles.
Nice idea.
Proud owner of Nyx; an Original Grimtotem Spirit Guide.
Avatar and Signature Wolf by the inimitable Ket Shi. My Squiby Eggs!
pop wrote:
Gyreworm
Gyreworm are now grouped with shale spiders in a new group of beast call "Elemental beast" or "Mineroid". With this change, 'Embrace of the shale spider' will be known as "Embrace of the Stonemother".
Ooo, even without including the gyreworms, Stonemother huggles sound a lot better then spider huggles.
Nice idea.
The little ant guys share a diet with silithids now, I think - unless I misread. But I am strongly hoping that means that they will move into that family.
Tripods/Fen Walkers are now grouped with Sporebats as "Sporebeasts" ?
Kodos to join Clefthooves in the Rhino family?
Diemetrodons added to the Crocalisk family?
Those little ant guys added to the Silithid family?
(whilst we're indulging in some justifiable wishful thinking)
The only problem I have with yours is kodos are reptiles while rhinos are mammals. I think kodos, thunder lizards and stegadon should be their own exotic family; Thunder Lizard. Their exotic skill is 'Devour'. Devour is a skill where they would literally devour the target causing dot damage and preventing any action from the target. If the target dies while being devoured, return X% life to the pet.
I also consider Kodos as mammals. Though it's true they might have a scaly appearance, I think it's more a leathery hide like rhinos. The models with fur lend to that as well, also their babies are called calves.
Dvatori wrote:Kodos are reptiles? They always struck me as pretty mammal-y what with the fur and the calfs and all.
during the time of wc3 i remembered reading from somewhere that kodo beasts are related to thunder lizards but I seem to be unable to trace the source anymore.
excerpts from wowwiki Kodo are massive reptiles with thick leathery skin that ranges in color from sandy brown to black. http://www.wowwiki.com/Kodo
In Mulgore, kodo beasts' nests are particular targets. Much of the murder will caw and raise a commotion above the kodo beasts' heads while one or two storm crows try to grab the eggs and fly away http://www.wowwiki.com/Storm_crow
Vephriel wrote:I also consider Kodos as mammals. Though it's true they might have a scaly appearance, I think it's more a leathery hide like rhinos. The models with fur lend to that as well, also their babies are called calves.
I somehow never considered them reptiles. I thought their hide was more like the wrinkled, tough hide of elephants, rather than scaly. In fact, up close in a model viewer, that's pretty much how it looks.
*nods* Though the WoWwiki does make reference to them being reptiles, I just can't change my inner view of them being more akin to rhinos/elephants. They also seem like the type of creature who would give live birth, I've never heard of Kodo eggs, hehe.
Vephriel wrote:*nods* Though the WoWwiki does make reference to them being reptiles, I just can't change my inner view of them being more akin to rhinos/elephants. They also seem like the type of creature who would give live birth, I've never heard of Kodo eggs, hehe.
the article on stormcrow pretty much reveals they do in fact lay eggs
Welcome to the blight of the zoologist. Many of the lines defines species, families, or even orders have become, and are becoming further still, blurred as other evidence, especially DNA, is taken into account. In-depth studying of skeletal structures reverses previous thoughts about relations between different animals. For example, Australian moles are not related to American moles at all. In fact, the Australian mole is a marsupial to that removes it by quite a ancestral distance. Birds are now classified as a subset of reptiles or dinosaurs are not considered reptiles while "reptile" now refers to a different level of nomenclature because it is currently held that birds evolved from dinosaurs and you cannot exclude them, in that case, from the reptile family. Other oddities occur through convergent evolution (where animals develop similar visual characteristics not through shared ancestry and genetics but rather through natural selection in similar niches. While the obvious may be that whales and dolphins appear very similar to fish, they are still mammals due to many other key traits and genetics. Greater oddities exist such as proto-dinosaurs that seem rather like a cross between mammals and reptiles while predating dinosaurs. These reptilian beasts are covered in fur. Some snakes give birth to live young (without eggs), and platypi, Gods favor joke on mankind's assumptions, are venomous (in males), egg-laying, duck-billed mammals that swim. And I am sure many of us have seen feathered "dinosaur" remains in the news. Even the concept of species is loosely defined and falling apart at the seams. One of the determinants is supposed to be geographical separation where these two different species will never have a chance to reproduce. Or temporally, where the two animals live in the same area, and are genetically viable, but mate in spring and fall, respectively. These seem like somewhat indistinct standards at times. The most clarifying example I was given in college was in my biology class freshman year. The professor described 12 separate types of birds that lived around a central mountain range like the numbers on the clock. It was obvious that 12 and 6 had diverged so much over time that even if introduced to each other, no viable offspring could be possible. It was just as possible 12 had diverged too far from 3 to reproduce. But 12 could reproduce with 1, maybe even 2 'o' clock. And 1 with 2, 2 with 3....and so on. So in a continuous circle, they could all reproduce with each other but the differences between adjacent bird populations were so minimal they couldn't genetically be distinguished as unique. Where then do you draw the line? Which are separate species? The old maxim becomes useless, even false. What is a species? That being said, shoveltusks have no place being lumped in with boars. They're probably closer to clefthooves, and therefore rhinos, than they are swine, assuming no convergent evolution. Admittedly I have no clue what to do about Elekks and Mammoths. They now have both in the game and I can only assume convergent evolution of an animal from the Draenie homeworld to look like an elephant while having no relation whatsoever to elephants or mammoths of Northrend. There's your perfect in-game example of FUBAR for species.
Darkcrow wrote:Welcome to the blight of the zoologist. Many of the lines defines species, families, or even orders have become, and are becoming further still, blurred as other evidence, especially DNA, is taken into account. In-depth studying of skeletal structures reverses previous thoughts about relations between different animals. For example, Australian moles are not related to American moles at all. In fact, the Australian mole is a marsupial to that removes it by quite a ancestral distance. Birds are now classified as a subset of reptiles or dinosaurs are not considered reptiles while "reptile" now refers to a different level of nomenclature because it is currently held that birds evolved from dinosaurs and you cannot exclude them, in that case, from the reptile family. Other oddities occur through convergent evolution (where animals develop similar visual characteristics not through shared ancestry and genetics but rather through natural selection in similar niches. While the obvious may be that whales and dolphins appear very similar to fish, they are still mammals due to many other key traits and genetics. Greater oddities exist such as proto-dinosaurs that seem rather like a cross between mammals and reptiles while predating dinosaurs. These reptilian beasts are covered in fur. Some snakes give birth to live young (without eggs), and platypi, Gods favor joke on mankind's assumptions, are venomous (in males), egg-laying, duck-billed mammals that swim. And I am sure many of us have seen feathered "dinosaur" remains in the news. Even the concept of species is loosely defined and falling apart at the seams. One of the determinants is supposed to be geographical separation where these two different species will never have a chance to reproduce. Or temporally, where the two animals live in the same area, and are genetically viable, but mate in spring and fall, respectively. These seem like somewhat indistinct standards at times. The most clarifying example I was given in college was in my biology class freshman year. The professor described 12 separate types of birds that lived around a central mountain range like the numbers on the clock. It was obvious that 12 and 6 had diverged so much over time that even if introduced to each other, no viable offspring could be possible. It was just as possible 12 had diverged too far from 3 to reproduce. But 12 could reproduce with 1, maybe even 2 'o' clock. And 1 with 2, 2 with 3....and so on. So in a continuous circle, they could all reproduce with each other but the differences between adjacent bird populations were so minimal they couldn't genetically be distinguished as unique. Where then do you draw the line? Which are separate species? The old maxim becomes useless, even false. What is a species? That being said, shoveltusks have no place being lumped in with boars. They're probably closer to clefthooves, and therefore rhinos, than they are swine, assuming no convergent evolution. Admittedly I have no clue what to do about Elekks and Mammoths. They now have both in the game and I can only assume convergent evolution of an animal from the Draenie homeworld to look like an elephant while having no relation whatsoever to elephants or mammoths of Northrend. There's your perfect in-game example of FUBAR for species.
I think my iq had been raised by 6 points after reading your post. Thanks for sharing such awesome new knowledge.
Vephriel wrote:*nods* Though the WoWwiki does make reference to them being reptiles, I just can't change my inner view of them being more akin to rhinos/elephants. They also seem like the type of creature who would give live birth, I've never heard of Kodo eggs, hehe.
the article on stormcrow pretty much reveals they do in fact lay eggs
Unfortunately the reptile assertion in that article isn't referenced and could just as easily be an assumption on the part of the (non-Blizzard, not-official) author. Damn, I was hoping for some official evidence. Even laying eggs isn't enough proof. They could be monotremes
