No, that would be far too easy :) The rule isn't so much 'can they?', but 'do they?' Which is always iffy where the ranges don't overlap anyway. Hence the genetic analysis; if the gene pools are clearly distinct you can call them separate species, even if (like, say, wolves and coyotes) they can produce fertile offspring with each other.
Anyway, as Ian says, there's ring species, which is nature's way of sticking two fingers up to anyone who thinks there even can be an unequivocal definition of species (and thus fun to taunt creationists with). For anyone who doesn't know, this is what happens when you get three (or more, but let's stick with three) groups of animals; A, B & C. A and B can, and frequently do, interbreed to produce fertile offspring. So do B and C. A and C, however, cannot interbreed at all. So... how many species is that, exactly?
Being defined by myth, I suspect its somewhat different in Glorantha. Sometimes you have two similar-looking animals that have totally different mythic origins. The alynx and the bobcat form one such pairing, but sometimes there are even less clear distinctions - dogs have probably been created more than once, for instance. And, in the God Time, some things that clearly shouldn't have been able to cross-breed actually did - owls and pumas, for instance. So we can't always rely on real-world rules!
-- Trotsky Gamer and Skeptic ------------------------------------------------------ Trotsky's RPG website: http://www.ttrotsky.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/
Powered by hypermail