<<<< predominantly American character of the Prax fauna. >>
I would disagree with this; it is predominantly African with the exception
of
Bison (which I would view as a Wildebeest substitute), High Llama (which are
a
prehistoric animal but, admittedly originated in America (I think),>>
Yup.
<< although they are probably more similar to Giraffes and camels than modern
llamas) Bolo Lizards (?origin unknown), Lopers (?) Nosehorns (?) Clawfooters
(?) Longnoses (?). Sables, Impalas, Rhinos, Ostriches, Hyenas- all African.>>
Seems to me that the RW living animals found in Prax are all African, while the RW extinct ones are all North American. If a clawfooter is a Chalicotherium, then that's an exception, but as the Loper is known to be the very similar beast Moropus, then I'm not so sure that's actually the case (though it obviously isn't impossible). The other exception is, as Keith points out:
<< I'm not sure if there are tapirs in Africa so I may be wrong on these but,
hey, they cheated anyway.>>
Tapirs are mostly South American, although the picture on p30 of Glorantha Bestiary is clearly of the one exception: the Malayan Tapir of SE Asia. OTOH, the one on the cover is equally clearly an American species; probably Baird's Tapir of Mexico, C America, Columbia and Ecuador. Presumably there isn't a single parallel - and why should there be?
Andre:
<<Greg saied nothing about the family of the Moropus, only the fact that a
Loper is like a Moropus. In a (german) Book for prehistoric animals the
Moropus appears in the pages of the Tapir-family related animals. >>
Like I say, they are related.
<<If it is wrong, who cares. I wanted to know what a Loper looked like, and i
got my answed from Greg, that is all that counts for me. >>
Quite, I must have failed my 'avoid pedantry' roll yet again (as I suspect I have in the earlier parts of this post, come to think of it). At least I didn't start talking about cladistics :-)
Forward the glorious Red Army!
Trotsky
Powered by hypermail