| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Cornucopian
Gallente
Orias Fringe Enterprises
United Freemen Alliance
   |
Posted - 2007.10.09 07:39:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Selene Le'Cotiere
Originally by: Shiodome
really?
"Chimaera who breathed raging fire, a creature fearful, great, swift-footed and strong, who had three heads, one of a grim-eyed lion; in her hinderpart, a dragon; and in her middle, a goat, breathing forth a fearful blast of blazing fire."
nope, no wings
Oh maaan...  
Busted again... But hey... the Chimera from D&D has wings.. so there... 
LOL, thats an actual translation of the latin in the Ovidius texts... very nice to see that here... could also be one of the others that used the Chimera in their texts. I used to translate that stuff in high school.
again: in her hinderpart a dragon..... one could argue that hinderpart could also incorporate the wings on the back. it is never made truly known. the hinderpart is sometimes also referred as snakelike. most images from antiquitiy do NOT contain wings.
-----------------------------------------------
"post with your main. delete your alt, you sad little exploiting metagamer."
Originally by: Royaldo
complete win by Cornucopian!
|
Deacon Ix
Ascendant Strategies Inc.
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 07:51:00 -
[32]
This thread made me smile 
A discussion about the form of mythical beasts on an online gameing forum where everyone plays in spaceships.
But just to add my 2c, most Chinise dragons DON'T have wings but European (St. George ect) are pictured with them tho the lift/mass ration of the pictured Dragons does suggest that they are possibly vistigual appendages.
Golems are animated creatures made from some sort of substance, Earth, Water, Fire, ect so I would suppose that the counjurer whilst forming the creature could put wings on it if he so wished.
Originally by: Steini OFSI
The most efficient way to get a dev response is to have the word beer somewhere in your thread.
|
Tiberius Ilex
Caldari
FireTech
Pure.
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 08:21:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Shiodome
mythical beasts? drake, manticore, rokh, phoenix, chimera, wyvern etc etc... gargoyle fits fine. they were running out of recognizable birds of prey, we'd end up with ships like "blue tit" or "canary"
Drake. A mythical beast. Wow, I must be special cos I see them all the time around the local pond...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake
 |
Ishina Fel
Caldari
Synergy.
Imperial Republic Of the North
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 08:24:00 -
[34]
The only name that's really not fitting is the Caldari Sculpture, to be honest... Gargoyle would have been much, much better, yet still hold nearly identical meaning.
A Gargoyle is a sculture... but a Sculpture is not necessarily a gargoyle!
Buff room for large link addresses in sigs plz :( |
Franga
Caldari
NQX Innovations
Southern Cross Alliance
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 08:46:00 -
[35]
I think it fits quite okay.
And to whoever wrote that the verb 'to sin' comes from this Babylonian god, is incorrect. The verb 'to sin' actually comes from it's original usage which was in archery or using a bow and arrow. 'To miss the mark' with your shot was 'to sin'.
So having a Gallente ship with the name Sin actually goes fine with their current naming convention: astarte, thanatos, nyx, etc. Would have also fit in quite nicely with the Minmatar conventions ... although I think they are more along the lines of the Scandinavian gods (bellicose, hel, etc.)
_____________________________
Eldo spanked my sig but I can't be bothered changing it just now. |
Atius Tirawa
Minmatar
Wreckless Abandon
Triumvirate.
|
Posted - 2007.10.09 08:53:00 -
[36]
I think they got a little esoteric in the naming, sin would have been perfect for a Khanid ship, not for a gallente one.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |