Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nivenus" data-source="post: 6395175" data-attributes="member: 71756">To be fair, I think the lore's wildly inconsistent there. In the Draconomicon (for 3rd edition) the lore said dragons weren't reptiles. Even though dragons and related creatures like kobolds were classified as reptilian by a lot of other books. So, you know... you mileage may vary.Also, as I stated earlier, the entire category of &quot;reptile&quot; is now up for debate IRL, considering we now know that birds and crocodiles really represent a different (and more closely related) clade than lizards and snakes (or turtles or tuataras for that matter). Modern taxonomists are more likely to classify crocodiles as archosaurs and snakes as lepidosaurs than either one of them as reptiles.Likewise, while mammals used to represent an entirely independent clade from reptiles, they and mammal-like reptiles (such as the frequently misidentified dimetrodon) are now considered to all be part of a single clade, Synapsida.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nivenus, post: 6395175, member: 71756"] To be fair, I think the lore's wildly inconsistent there. In the [I]Draconomicon [/I](for 3rd edition) the lore said dragons weren't reptiles. Even though dragons and related creatures like kobolds were classified as reptilian by a lot of other books. So, you know... you mileage may vary. Also, as I stated earlier, the entire category of "reptile" is now up for debate IRL, considering we now know that birds and crocodiles really represent a different (and more closely related) clade than lizards and snakes (or turtles or tuataras for that matter). Modern taxonomists are more likely to classify crocodiles as archosaurs and snakes as lepidosaurs than either one of them as reptiles. Likewise, while mammals used to represent an entirely independent clade from reptiles, they and mammal-like reptiles (such as the frequently misidentified dimetrodon) are now considered to all be part of a single clade, Synapsida. [/QUOTE]

Verification