Welcome

Please register for Total War Access to use the forums. If you're an existing user, your forum details will be merged with Total War Access if you register with the same email or username. For more information please read our FAQ’s here.

Categories

What's a Wyrm?

lucibuislucibuis Posts: 2,495Registered Users
I know drakes dragons and wyvers, never heard of wyrms?
«1

Comments

  • RandomTagRandomTag Posts: 1,479Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    Wyrm is worm, the Germanic equivalent of Latin draco. Both of them mean "giant serpent". Since Norscans are vikings, using wyrm for their dragon is appropriate.
    P.S. Wrong subforum, this should be in general discussion
    edit:typo
  • EizoEizo Posts: 1,006Registered Users
    a Wyrm in fantasy is usual a sea serpent or a worm like dragon with no wings
    here a model of a Wyrm by GW



    so yeah they may not have given the Norcan frost dragon the best name
    also I think this should have been in the General Discussion board
  • TalmoreanTalmorean Posts: 1,434Registered Users
    A wrym is a flightless, long bodied Fire Drake in most mythologies.

    Sigurd slew a Wyrm Fafnir in the Norse legend.

    Glaurung was a Wrym from the 1st age of Tolkien's Silmarillion. As was Scatha the last Wrym, whom Fram (Ancestor of Theoden and Eomer) slew in the north of Middle Earth.

    While Chinese dragons fly via their magic, they are long legged snake like dragons very similar to the Wyrm of western mythologies.
  • GrinnerzGrinnerz Junior Member Posts: 68Registered Users
    In addition to what others have said, in D&D and related games Wyrm is the term used for "really old and powerful dragon".
  • NemoxNemox Posts: 2,691Registered Users
    Every fantasy has its own use of Dragon names. It is like the silliness of the "Dragons have 4 legs! wyverns have 2!".

  • SultschiemSultschiem Posts: 1,641Registered Users
    Technically its not a wyrm...its in fact an Ice Dragon that also appears to be chaos corrupted (2 heads)...
    It could also be that it is in fact a mutated frost wyrm that grew wings.
  • GaataGaata Posts: 42Registered Users
    Lorewise, Only Galrauch and Galrauch's children should have 2 heads. Galrauch's head only got split because he was possesed by the greater daemon Fateclaw. I guess that's not to say that other chaos infected dragons can't grow more heads, but it is strange that CA went that route for the frost dragons, since they should be a separate species.
  • SindrissSindriss Posts: 399Registered Users
    Gaata said:

    it is strange that CA went that route for the frost dragons, since they should be a separate species.

    Is it possible the Frost-Wyrm is only available after completing one of their beast hunter quests? That would make more sense than just having it recruited out of a Wyrm lair building.

  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Posts: 6,042Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    Nemox said:

    Every fantasy has its own use of Dragon names. It is like the silliness of the "Dragons have 4 legs! wyverns have 2!".

    Particularly since, if you look at mythology books, wyverns are generally described as "a type of dragon, characterised by having two legs and wings". This concept that a wyvern isn't a "true" dragon, and that 'true' dragons have four legs and wings, is purely out of D&D.

    From the same prespective, the term 'wyrm' or 'worm', as applied to dragons, is typically applied to wingless, serpentine dragons, which may or may not have legs but are still long and serpentine even if they do (the Scandinavian linnorm, for instance, had forelegs but still mostly slithered as a form of locomotion). That said, it probably does come from the Germanic "orm" which, as RandomTag said, is essentially their equivalent of the Greek "drakon". It's just typically associated with dragons of a particular type because most dragons in Scandinavian myth are of that type. (Which contrasts to 'wyvern', which pretty much always applied to a two-legged and winged morphology.)
  • lucibuislucibuis Posts: 2,495Registered Users
  • FungusHoundFungusHound Posts: 2,459Registered Users
    Meh Wyrm means completely different things in different settings. Originally it is just another name for a dragon. Some use it for wingless dragons. Some for really old and powerful dragons.

    It really doen't mean much
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Posts: 6,042Registered Users
    lucibuis said:

    i found this



    From a mythological perspective, they're all dragons.

    Heraldry tends to use the term 'dragon' to refer to the fourth, since the others all have specific terms. For this reason, I've sometimes seen the term 'heraldic dragon' used when it's necessary to specify the four-legged, winged morphology.

    The term 'drake' also, technically, encompasses the heraldic dragon. Drakes refer to the more lizard-like dragons regardless of whether they have wings or not. The use of 'drake' to refer to a smaller, weaker dragon is a usage which has cropped up in fantasy gaming in the last couple of decades, but outside of fantasy gaming a 'drake' carries with it no such assumption. Tolkein's Smaug, for instance, is categorised as a "winged firedrake", and winged firedrakes were the most dangerous dragons of Middle-Earth.
  • RandomTagRandomTag Posts: 1,479Registered Users
    Just a reference:
    Both Drake and Dragon derive from draco, Wyvern from vipera, Wyrm is just worm.
  • Nuke2099Nuke2099 Posts: 111Registered Users
    Draxynnic said:

    Nemox said:

    Every fantasy has its own use of Dragon names. It is like the silliness of the "Dragons have 4 legs! wyverns have 2!".

    Particularly since, if you look at mythology books, wyverns are generally described as "a type of dragon, characterised by having two legs and wings". This concept that a wyvern isn't a "true" dragon, and that 'true' dragons have four legs and wings, is purely out of D&D.

    From the same prespective, the term 'wyrm' or 'worm', as applied to dragons, is typically applied to wingless, serpentine dragons, which may or may not have legs but are still long and serpentine even if they do (the Scandinavian linnorm, for instance, had forelegs but still mostly slithered as a form of locomotion). That said, it probably does come from the Germanic "orm" which, as RandomTag said, is essentially their equivalent of the Greek "drakon". It's just typically associated with dragons of a particular type because most dragons in Scandinavian myth are of that type. (Which contrasts to 'wyvern', which pretty much always applied to a two-legged and winged morphology.)
    Wyverns are to dragons what monkeys are to apes.

    Also a wyrm is a very old often ancient dragon. The term wurm is used for a massive worm or dragon like worm.

    In Monster Hunter wyverns aren't counted as dragons but are seen as lesser cousins which is what a wyvern is.
  • NemoxNemox Posts: 2,691Registered Users
    Nuke2099 said:

    Draxynnic said:

    Nemox said:

    Every fantasy has its own use of Dragon names. It is like the silliness of the "Dragons have 4 legs! wyverns have 2!".

    Particularly since, if you look at mythology books, wyverns are generally described as "a type of dragon, characterised by having two legs and wings". This concept that a wyvern isn't a "true" dragon, and that 'true' dragons have four legs and wings, is purely out of D&D.

    From the same prespective, the term 'wyrm' or 'worm', as applied to dragons, is typically applied to wingless, serpentine dragons, which may or may not have legs but are still long and serpentine even if they do (the Scandinavian linnorm, for instance, had forelegs but still mostly slithered as a form of locomotion). That said, it probably does come from the Germanic "orm" which, as RandomTag said, is essentially their equivalent of the Greek "drakon". It's just typically associated with dragons of a particular type because most dragons in Scandinavian myth are of that type. (Which contrasts to 'wyvern', which pretty much always applied to a two-legged and winged morphology.)
    Wyverns are to dragons what monkeys are to apes.

    Also a wyrm is a very old often ancient dragon. The term wurm is used for a massive worm or dragon like worm.

    In Monster Hunter wyverns aren't counted as dragons but are seen as lesser cousins which is what a wyvern is.
    You're applying rules that differ from fantasy to fantasy. Even Mythology of cultures contradict it. Chinese dragons being wingless, even some old Medieval artwork of dragons had only 2 legs for example.
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Posts: 6,042Registered Users
    Nuke2099 said:

    Wyverns are to dragons what monkeys are to apes.

    And which fantasy game did you get that from?

    That's a concept that derives from D&D making wyverns into a weaker, less intelligent form without the magical abilities of the "true dragons" of D&D.

    In terms of characterising mythological creatures, wyverns are the type of dragon that has wings and legs - nothing more, nothing less. In fact, in mythology wyverns were among the larger dragons, and I've seen games that went with this approach in the days before D&D tropes were quite so pervasive.
  • TheGuardianOfMetalTheGuardianOfMetal Senior Member Posts: 10,168Registered Users
    Draxynnic said:

    Nuke2099 said:

    Wyverns are to dragons what monkeys are to apes.

    And which fantasy game did you get that from?

    That's a concept that derives from D&D making wyverns into a weaker, less intelligent form without the magical abilities of the "true dragons" of D&D.

    In terms of characterising mythological creatures, wyverns are the type of dragon that has wings and legs - nothing more, nothing less. In fact, in mythology wyverns were among the larger dragons, and I've seen games that went with this approach in the days before D&D tropes were quite so pervasive.
    also: iirc from the Saint George slays the dragon painitng there are variations that show the Dragon with 2 legs and 2 wings or 4 legs and 2 wings... so...
    Every wrong is recorded. Every slight against us, page after page, ETCHED IN BLOOD! Clan Gunnisson! Karak Eight Peaks! JOSEF BUGMAN!"

    CA hates the Empire confirmed. The FLC LL for the new Lord Pack is Gor-Rok. Meaning the Empire still hasn't gotten their FLC LL. And no, moving Balthasar Gelt from Reikland, where he should be, DOES NOT COUNT. If they wanted a LL in the Southern Empire: Marius Leitdorf of Averland or maybe Elspeth von Draken in Nuln...

    Where is Boris Todbringer? Have you seen him?

    GHAL MARAZ IS THE WEAPON OF THE SETTING! YET SOME BRETONNIAN SWORD IS MORE POTENT?! BUFF GHAL MARAZ IN SIGMAR'S NAME!
  • Nuke2099Nuke2099 Posts: 111Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    Draxynnic said:

    Nuke2099 said:

    Wyverns are to dragons what monkeys are to apes.

    And which fantasy game did you get that from?

    That's a concept that derives from D&D making wyverns into a weaker, less intelligent form without the magical abilities of the "true dragons" of D&D.

    In terms of characterising mythological creatures, wyverns are the type of dragon that has wings and legs - nothing more, nothing less. In fact, in mythology wyverns were among the larger dragons, and I've seen games that went with this approach in the days before D&D tropes were quite so pervasive.
    It's a concept that comes from Tolkien that predates D&D and what Warhammer is influenced by...and pretty much what all "medieval" fantasy based itself off.
    Nemox said:

    Nuke2099 said:

    Draxynnic said:

    Nemox said:

    Every fantasy has its own use of Dragon names. It is like the silliness of the "Dragons have 4 legs! wyverns have 2!".

    Particularly since, if you look at mythology books, wyverns are generally described as "a type of dragon, characterised by having two legs and wings". This concept that a wyvern isn't a "true" dragon, and that 'true' dragons have four legs and wings, is purely out of D&D.

    From the same prespective, the term 'wyrm' or 'worm', as applied to dragons, is typically applied to wingless, serpentine dragons, which may or may not have legs but are still long and serpentine even if they do (the Scandinavian linnorm, for instance, had forelegs but still mostly slithered as a form of locomotion). That said, it probably does come from the Germanic "orm" which, as RandomTag said, is essentially their equivalent of the Greek "drakon". It's just typically associated with dragons of a particular type because most dragons in Scandinavian myth are of that type. (Which contrasts to 'wyvern', which pretty much always applied to a two-legged and winged morphology.)
    Wyverns are to dragons what monkeys are to apes.

    Also a wyrm is a very old often ancient dragon. The term wurm is used for a massive worm or dragon like worm.

    In Monster Hunter wyverns aren't counted as dragons but are seen as lesser cousins which is what a wyvern is.
    You're applying rules that differ from fantasy to fantasy. Even Mythology of cultures contradict it. Chinese dragons being wingless, even some old Medieval artwork of dragons had only 2 legs for example.
    A dragon doesn't need wings to be a dragon. A dragon has four legs and can be with or without wings.

    Draxynnic said:

    Nuke2099 said:

    Wyverns are to dragons what monkeys are to apes.

    And which fantasy game did you get that from?

    That's a concept that derives from D&D making wyverns into a weaker, less intelligent form without the magical abilities of the "true dragons" of D&D.

    In terms of characterising mythological creatures, wyverns are the type of dragon that has wings and legs - nothing more, nothing less. In fact, in mythology wyverns were among the larger dragons, and I've seen games that went with this approach in the days before D&D tropes were quite so pervasive.
    also: iirc from the Saint George slays the dragon painitng there are variations that show the Dragon with 2 legs and 2 wings or 4 legs and 2 wings... so...
    That's up to artistic representation.

    Anyway the term wyrm means old dragon.
  • NemoxNemox Posts: 2,691Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    There is no "Dragon must have 4 legs". A dragon can have 2 legs or 4. Wings or no wings. If the fantasy wants it to be a dragon, it can be.

    As for Wyrm - "Wyrm is the Old English (Anglo-Saxon) that means “serpent” and may share an Indo-European root with the Latin vermis (worm). Draca is another Latin import into Old English that carries a similar meaning, “large serpent.”

    Edit: This just further highlights the silliness of the debate anyway :P. We are trying to categorize mythological beasts. Fantasies create their own rules with these creatures, and mythology is open to many interpretations for them.

  • Nuke2099Nuke2099 Posts: 111Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    Nemox said:

    There is no "Dragon must have 4 legs". A dragon can have 2 legs or 4. Wings or no wings. If the fantasy wants it to be a dragon, it can be.

    As for Wyrm - "Wyrm is the Old English (Anglo-Saxon) that means “serpent” and may share an Indo-European root with the Latin vermis (worm). Draca is another Latin import into Old English that carries a similar meaning, “large serpent.”

    Well regardless of that wyrm also means old dragon. Does the frost wyrm look like a serpent to you? No of course it doesn't. Maybe it's body does but that's about it.

    Also saying "if the fantasy wants it to be a dragon, it can be" is the same as saying that everything and nothing is a dragon. If that's the case then Orcs are dragons. :P
  • TheGuardianOfMetalTheGuardianOfMetal Senior Member Posts: 10,168Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    Nuke2099 said:


    also: iirc from the Saint George slays the dragon painitng there are variations that show the Dragon with 2 legs and 2 wings or 4 legs and 2 wings... so...

    That's up to artistic representation.


    yes... which means that for the middle ages a Wyvern simply was the same as a dragon just with 2 legs missing... otherwise Wyvern and Dragons wouldn't have been used so interchangable...

    also
    "The wyvern has often been confused with the dragon, due to the similarities between them and due to the wyvern being a lesser-known mythical creature. In the Middle Ages, no clear distinction was made between the two. Since the sixteenth century, in English, Scottish, and Irish heraldry, the key distinction has been that a wyvern has two legs, whereas a dragon has four; however, this distinction is not generally observed in the heraldry of other European countries, where two-legged dragons are entirely acceptable.[4]"

    and if you bring up tolkien, my dear...
    The Cold Drakes: Flying "Lesser Dragons" (BUT STILL DRAGONS!) without the ability to breath fire, but it's likely that they were as intelligent as the other dragons, since it's afaik never mentioned that they were less cunning than the others...
    Then, there are the Uroloki, the Fire-drakes, Wyrm/wurm/worm/Lindwurm/whatever crawling on four legs, breathing fire. Examples: Scatha and Glaurung. OR the classical Dragon, Smaug, Ancalagon the Black, with 4 legs and wings
    Nuke2099 said:



    Also saying "if the fantasy wants it to be a dragon, it can be" is the same as saying that everything and nothing is a dragon. If that's the case then Orcs are dragons. :P





    (still best movie Dragon ever :tongue: )

    also: if the fantasy setting in question has dragons that look like orcs...y es they are orcs... if it doesn't have dragons looking like orcs then tehy are not....
    Nuke2099 said:


    Well regardless of that wyrm also means old dragon. Does the frost wyrm look like a serpent to you? No of course it doesn't. Maybe it's body does but that's about it.

    no it simply means dragon....

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindworm
    Generally, the word lindwyrm stood for the Latin word draco (whence Norse dreki), and thus could refer to any draconic creature, from a real-life constrictor snake to a legendary dragon. In European mythology and folklore, creatures identified as a "lindwyrm" may be winged or wingless, and quadrupedal, bipedal or limbless.

    interestlingly, Wikipedia also gives following disambiguations for Wyrm:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wyrm
    Wyrm may refer to:

    Sea serpent

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea_serpent

    it doesn't mean "old dragon"... it means dragon... and is oftenused for flightless dragons infact, or serpentine looking dragons

    btw... I've the feeling that we had this discussion atleast once already....
    Every wrong is recorded. Every slight against us, page after page, ETCHED IN BLOOD! Clan Gunnisson! Karak Eight Peaks! JOSEF BUGMAN!"

    CA hates the Empire confirmed. The FLC LL for the new Lord Pack is Gor-Rok. Meaning the Empire still hasn't gotten their FLC LL. And no, moving Balthasar Gelt from Reikland, where he should be, DOES NOT COUNT. If they wanted a LL in the Southern Empire: Marius Leitdorf of Averland or maybe Elspeth von Draken in Nuln...

    Where is Boris Todbringer? Have you seen him?

    GHAL MARAZ IS THE WEAPON OF THE SETTING! YET SOME BRETONNIAN SWORD IS MORE POTENT?! BUFF GHAL MARAZ IN SIGMAR'S NAME!
  • Nuke2099Nuke2099 Posts: 111Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    We have and you got some of your quoting messed up because you have me saying what you said. About the "cold" drakes I'm not sure if it's ever mentioned specifically if they had some other breath weapon (ice?). He simply called them "cold". I know the wiki's say they couldn't breath fire but I'm pretty sure the part where Tolkien mentioned it he doesn't make clear.

    Edit: And now for some reason my quoting was all messed up....lol

    Still regardless of really old real world mythology. Wyrms now are very old ancient dragons in fantasy depending on the setting but in most recent settings that's the case. I also like the change of wyverns not really being dragons and it's why I like Monster Hunter even if some of it's categories are messed up or make zero sense to those not familiar with it.

    Like Elder Dragon simply being a category for animals that don't have a category and all of them cause cataclysmic events. and not all of them are actually dragons. Kirin is a Elder Dragon even though it's a unicorn.
  • DraxynnicDraxynnic Posts: 6,042Registered Users
    Nuke2099 said:

    Draxynnic said:

    Nuke2099 said:

    Wyverns are to dragons what monkeys are to apes.

    And which fantasy game did you get that from?

    That's a concept that derives from D&D making wyverns into a weaker, less intelligent form without the magical abilities of the "true dragons" of D&D.

    In terms of characterising mythological creatures, wyverns are the type of dragon that has wings and legs - nothing more, nothing less. In fact, in mythology wyverns were among the larger dragons, and I've seen games that went with this approach in the days before D&D tropes were quite so pervasive.
    It's a concept that comes from Tolkien that predates D&D and what Warhammer is influenced by...and pretty much what all "medieval" fantasy based itself off.
    There isn't anything called a 'wyvern' in Middle-Earth. There are Cold-drakes, Firedrakes, and Winged Firedrakes. All have four legs.

    The winged mounts of the Nazgul are often depicted as wyvern-like, but Tolkein doesn't use the term, and I have my doubts about that depiction (in the Battle of Pelennor Fields, the mount is described as attacking with a beak, but Tolkein does use the term 'beak' loosely).

    Even if we do consider them to be wyverns, though, they're just one example - Tolkein himself was drawing from older sources. I've seen sources where wyverns are the most powerful of dragons, and there's nothing in mythological sources to refute this.
  • TheGuardianOfMetalTheGuardianOfMetal Senior Member Posts: 10,168Registered Users
    for the fell beasts/Winged shadows/Nazgul steeds:
    Inspiration

    Asked about the nature of the "steed of the Witch-king", Tolkien replied that the fell beast was not intended to be pterodactylic, but hesitantly acknowledges that it resembles a pterosaur and may have been a survivor of older geological eras.[6]

    http://tolkiengateway.net/wiki/Fell_beasts
    Every wrong is recorded. Every slight against us, page after page, ETCHED IN BLOOD! Clan Gunnisson! Karak Eight Peaks! JOSEF BUGMAN!"

    CA hates the Empire confirmed. The FLC LL for the new Lord Pack is Gor-Rok. Meaning the Empire still hasn't gotten their FLC LL. And no, moving Balthasar Gelt from Reikland, where he should be, DOES NOT COUNT. If they wanted a LL in the Southern Empire: Marius Leitdorf of Averland or maybe Elspeth von Draken in Nuln...

    Where is Boris Todbringer? Have you seen him?

    GHAL MARAZ IS THE WEAPON OF THE SETTING! YET SOME BRETONNIAN SWORD IS MORE POTENT?! BUFF GHAL MARAZ IN SIGMAR'S NAME!
  • HoneyBunHoneyBun Senior Member Posts: 4,501Registered Users
    Nemox said:

    Every fantasy has its own use of Dragon names. It is like the silliness of the "Dragons have 4 legs! wyverns have 2!".

    This is much less silly if you happen to be a dragon.

    #DraconicLivesMatter

    They are making an FPS. Who knew a company could have a mid-life crisis ...

  • TheGuardianOfMetalTheGuardianOfMetal Senior Member Posts: 10,168Registered Users
    HoneyBun said:

    Nemox said:

    Every fantasy has its own use of Dragon names. It is like the silliness of the "Dragons have 4 legs! wyverns have 2!".

    This is much less silly if you happen to be a dragon.

    #DraconicLivesMatter

    Every wrong is recorded. Every slight against us, page after page, ETCHED IN BLOOD! Clan Gunnisson! Karak Eight Peaks! JOSEF BUGMAN!"

    CA hates the Empire confirmed. The FLC LL for the new Lord Pack is Gor-Rok. Meaning the Empire still hasn't gotten their FLC LL. And no, moving Balthasar Gelt from Reikland, where he should be, DOES NOT COUNT. If they wanted a LL in the Southern Empire: Marius Leitdorf of Averland or maybe Elspeth von Draken in Nuln...

    Where is Boris Todbringer? Have you seen him?

    GHAL MARAZ IS THE WEAPON OF THE SETTING! YET SOME BRETONNIAN SWORD IS MORE POTENT?! BUFF GHAL MARAZ IN SIGMAR'S NAME!
  • FakeEmperorFakeEmperor Posts: 592Registered Users
    It's not about the number of legs... In almost every fantasy setting i've read/played/seen wyvern are often represented like wild creatures, beasts with no more brain than a wild animal. Thet may be related to dragon specie in some settings while in others may not. For example in Witcher saga they resemble more likely bird-related.

    Dragons can be ferocious beasts aswell, but they are often portrayed as ancient supernatural beings, countless years old, with great intellect and wisdom, capable of speaking. An example of this is Talkien's Smaug.

  • GettoGeckoGettoGecko Posts: 801Registered Users
    Draxynnic said:

    I've seen sources where wyverns are the most powerful of dragons, and there's nothing in mythological sources to refute this.

    Than you can easily show us these sources instead of ignoring the many times given linguistical answer that one word origin from the lizard like and the other one from the snake like explanation for how people can imagine what a dragon could be.
  • NemoxNemox Posts: 2,691Registered Users
    Nuke2099 said:

    Nemox said:

    There is no "Dragon must have 4 legs". A dragon can have 2 legs or 4. Wings or no wings. If the fantasy wants it to be a dragon, it can be.

    As for Wyrm - "Wyrm is the Old English (Anglo-Saxon) that means “serpent” and may share an Indo-European root with the Latin vermis (worm). Draca is another Latin import into Old English that carries a similar meaning, “large serpent.”

    Well regardless of that wyrm also means old dragon. Does the frost wyrm look like a serpent to you? No of course it doesn't. Maybe it's body does but that's about it.

    Also saying "if the fantasy wants it to be a dragon, it can be" is the same as saying that everything and nothing is a dragon. If that's the case then Orcs are dragons. :P
    Except each Fantasy has its own rules. Take Skyrim/Elder Scrolls - Those dragons have 2 legs - but they are shards of Akatosh (There is no development beyond that they are born as they appear - old age and all). An Orc in Skyrim cannot be a dragon because there is already a dragon in its universe with its own rules.

    I was just pointing out the sillyness of "What this means in this fantasy, must mean the same in this". It doesn't. What is a dragon in Warhammer has already been set. Orcs are Orcs. Dragons are Dragons. They want to be called Wyrms? That is what the Norsca call them. Just like the Dwarfs have a different name for Orcs & Goblins. It adds depth to the world.

    The history of Dragons in mythology is very complicated. The evolution of language alone has made considerable changes. But it also allows Fantasy worlds to take these words and apply them how it sees fit. There is no golden standard that a Dragon is 4 legs with wings and a Wyvern is a Dragon that cannot breath fire for example.

    tl;dr to the OP. Wyrm is in this instance used by Norsca as their term for a Dragon. Like Dwarfs referring to Orcs as Urks.
  • Nuke2099Nuke2099 Posts: 111Registered Users
    edited July 2017
    Nemox said:

    Nuke2099 said:

    Nemox said:

    There is no "Dragon must have 4 legs". A dragon can have 2 legs or 4. Wings or no wings. If the fantasy wants it to be a dragon, it can be.

    As for Wyrm - "Wyrm is the Old English (Anglo-Saxon) that means “serpent” and may share an Indo-European root with the Latin vermis (worm). Draca is another Latin import into Old English that carries a similar meaning, “large serpent.”

    Well regardless of that wyrm also means old dragon. Does the frost wyrm look like a serpent to you? No of course it doesn't. Maybe it's body does but that's about it.

    Also saying "if the fantasy wants it to be a dragon, it can be" is the same as saying that everything and nothing is a dragon. If that's the case then Orcs are dragons. :P
    Except each Fantasy has its own rules. Take Skyrim/Elder Scrolls - Those dragons have 2 legs - but they are shards of Akatosh (There is no development beyond that they are born as they appear - old age and all). An Orc in Skyrim cannot be a dragon because there is already a dragon in its universe with its own rules.

    I was just pointing out the sillyness of "What this means in this fantasy, must mean the same in this". It doesn't. What is a dragon in Warhammer has already been set. Orcs are Orcs. Dragons are Dragons. They want to be called Wyrms? That is what the Norsca call them. Just like the Dwarfs have a different name for Orcs & Goblins. It adds depth to the world.

    The history of Dragons in mythology is very complicated. The evolution of language alone has made considerable changes. But it also allows Fantasy worlds to take these words and apply them how it sees fit. There is no golden standard that a Dragon is 4 legs with wings and a Wyvern is a Dragon that cannot breath fire for example.

    tl;dr to the OP. Wyrm is in this instance used by Norsca as their term for a Dragon. Like Dwarfs referring to Orcs as Urks.
    Wyrm isn't the Norsca term for dragon. It's used in Warhammer for a very old dragon. The Imperial dragon is a wyrm too. As are many of the Moon and Star dragons. In modern fantasy wyrm is used differently to real world mythology depending on the fantasy setting.

    In Skyrim I don't count those as dragons. Those are wyverns. :P It was more difficult to animate with four legs and wings which is why they went with their design choice which seems to be the case with a lot of TV/movie/game "dragons".
Sign In or Register to comment.