Something about the predatory nature of dragons

[Skybreaker Sin K'al]

So in my setting, which I have named Taldor, I've been thinking about dragons, their abilities in regards to fire-breathing, and biology.

My dragons have a very large chest cavity, which is fireproof thanks to a special type of mucus that outlines the chest. Instead of respiring, dragons will physically burn raw materials inside this cavity to give themselves energy, which is distributed through spines on the dragon's back. Since combustion is very fast compared to regular respiration, I thought dragons might like to raid wheat fields for carbs?

What interest would it be to these dragons to kill people? I need them to be fearsome, so can you guys think of any solutions to this?

 

[Heliotrope]

I was under the impression that dragons were carnivores, so like predatory animals, such as cats, they do not have the ability to derive energy from carbs. They don't have the ability to digest carbs, so instead they get all of their energy from ketones, which come from protein and fat.

Maybe, if your dragons are more omnivores, they can burn up carbs from wheat fields... but I image those would burn up very quickly and would be a very quick form of energy. Eventually they would need a food source that is high in fat, which would create a slower burn (like how rendered fat was used for candles for thousands of years.)

 

[Skybreaker Sin K'al]

Many thanks, I'll look into it. These dragons often don't live very long thanks to their dietary requirements.

 

[skip.knox]

To me, once we start talking ketones and carbohydrates, we aren't writing fantasy any more, we're writing science fiction. My dragons breathe fire because dragons breathe fire. No further explanation needed.

 

[Miles Lacey]

I always thought that dragons were reptiles so their biological insides would be the same as a reptile. As for the fire breathing part I would presume they produce and spit fire in a similar manner to venomous snakes. In my WIP dragons only breathe fire as a defensive mechanism and to ward off other dragons, particularly males scaring off rival mates and females defending nesting areas. They go for goats, sheep and giant bison but will occasionally go for cattle if humans aren't present. The level of development in my world is the 1930s so humanoids have things like anti-aircraft guns, artillery, bombers and flamethrowers so dragons avoid them. Besides humanoids are supposed to taste like pork and dragons in my world tend to be kosher.

 

[Skybreaker Sin K'al]

To me, once we start talking ketones and carbohydrates, we aren't writing fantasy any more, we're writing science fiction. My dragons breathe fire because dragons breathe fire. No further explanation needed.

Yeah, I get what you mean, but since my setting is only slightly less scientifically advanced than Lacey's, I think they would need an adequate explanation for the abilities of their animals, right? Besides, this is essentially what sets dragons apart from their animal counterparts: they are unique in the world, and I think I'm trying to emphasize that.

 

[skip.knox]

>I think they would need an adequate explanation for the abilities of their animals, right?

Not for me, but that in no way means I think you ought not. Speaking entirely for myself, I'm quite content without "scientific" explanations. If the author does start explaining, though, the explanation had better work. Otherwise, it's like a mystery story where the reader doesn't buy the solution. That said, I have a fair amount of pseudo-science in Altearth. So far I've mainly danced around it--proceeding by hints and intimations--precisely because I fear to be too explicit, lest I trip over my own feet. As I told someone else once, I know just enough about architecture to know not to try to build a house.

 

[Skybreaker Sin K'al]

Following Brandon Sanderson's iceberg ideas in regards to this type of worldbuilding would probably work quite well for me; this won't need to be mentioned, just known.

 

[skip.knox]

Yeah, the problem I have with that one is that there's no guidance as to what 10% is visible. Nice as a metaphor--and I never met a four I didn't like--but not useful in a practical way. Much like my flashlight analogy.

 

[Skybreaker Sin K'al]

I think the 10% is what is relevant to the story; the other 90% is history, and that kind of thing. We sometimes get a glimpse of this, but not much.