The Brontosaurus


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

Scarab Sages

1 person marked this as a favorite.

To most a worthless topic, but I can't help but be curious why was this Sauropod chosen as a representative for the "Titanosaurs" group?

Since it isn't the dinosaur's scientific name anymore and the info about the dinosaur also sound remarkable outdated(basing it of d20 though)

All of this makes me wonder is this to "make up" the dinosaur that so many thought they knew growing up? I admit I liked the name Brontosaurus better than Apatosaurus and have grown up with it as the biggest dinosaur in Dinoriders and hearing about it's name in the Flintstones.

I'm also curious if we perhaps one day might get the heavy weight "Argentinosaurus" in pathfinder a dinosaur that going by wikipedia should be anything from 2x the size of "Brontosaurus" all the way up to 7-8 times as heavy

Silver Crusade

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I believe that for 99% of humankind, an answer to the question "can you name any dinosaurs?" would look like this:

1. T-rex
2. Triceratops
3. "Brontosaurus"
4. Velociraptor
5. Stegosaurus
6. Pterodactyl
7. That funny small running one from Jurassic Park
8. That nasty spitting one from Jurassic Park
9. Spinosaurus
10. Barney

There goes your answer.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I would also add:

11 Duck-bill dinosaur
12 Ankylosaurus.

But basically Gobacz the main reason: those are the name we know as they've been around longer (even if technically no longer accurate)

Scarab Sages

probably more of 99% of the Americans Gorbacz, for the brontosaurus however if you mean any sauropod then your probably correct for the global one.

I'm more surprised that dnd 5e also refereed to it as a brontosaurus given the book with it appearing being from last year.
Still as mentioned i find it interesting and would like to know if there was a reason behind it being chosen over other sauropod options.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Azullius Koujou wrote:

To most a worthless topic, but I can't help but be curious why was this Sauropod chosen as a representative for the "Titanosaurs" group?

Since it isn't the dinosaur's scientific name anymore and the info about the dinosaur also sound remarkable outdated(basing it of d20 though)

All of this makes me wonder is this to "make up" the dinosaur that so many thought they knew growing up? I admit I liked the name Brontosaurus better than Apatosaurus and have grown up with it as the biggest dinosaur in Dinoriders and hearing about it's name in the Flintstones.

I'm also curious if we perhaps one day might get the heavy weight "Argentinosaurus" in pathfinder a dinosaur that going by wikipedia should be anything from 2x the size of "Brontosaurus" all the way up to 7-8 times as heavy

Actually there is a Brontosaurus now. A couple years ago scientists re-examining some skeletal features of an Apatosaurus (I think that was the one) reinstated Brontosaurus as a separate genus. Brontosaurs were diplodocids, not titanosaurs and existed before they did. If I'm wrong about this, MMCJAWA is welcome to correct me on this. But I do recall reading several articles about the renaming of at least one specimen.


This is the same system that insist that Studded Leather is a viable kind of armor and Longswords are one handed AND smaller than hand and a half sword and that Falchion are two handed and... yeah, even when dealing with things from reality they dont follow it too closely.


DungeonmasterCal wrote:
Azullius Koujou wrote:

To most a worthless topic, but I can't help but be curious why was this Sauropod chosen as a representative for the "Titanosaurs" group?

Since it isn't the dinosaur's scientific name anymore and the info about the dinosaur also sound remarkable outdated(basing it of d20 though)

All of this makes me wonder is this to "make up" the dinosaur that so many thought they knew growing up? I admit I liked the name Brontosaurus better than Apatosaurus and have grown up with it as the biggest dinosaur in Dinoriders and hearing about it's name in the Flintstones.

I'm also curious if we perhaps one day might get the heavy weight "Argentinosaurus" in pathfinder a dinosaur that going by wikipedia should be anything from 2x the size of "Brontosaurus" all the way up to 7-8 times as heavy

Actually there is a Brontosaurus now. A couple years ago scientists re-examining some skeletal features of an Apatosaurus (I think that was the one) reinstated Brontosaurus as a separate genus. Brontosaurs were diplodocids, not titanosaurs and existed before they did. If I'm wrong about this, MMCJAWA is welcome to correct me on this. But I do recall reading several articles about the renaming of at least one specimen.

Actually, i remember hearing something about this too. I took my kids to a dinosaur dig and the Paleontologist there was talking about it some. He was of the opinion that they were still basically the same animal but that there were slight changes to it across the millions of years that the animal developed and he wasnt sure if it was the right place to draw the line. Really neat insights actually. But in the end, i do believe that Brontosaurus officially exists again.

That doesnt change my previous post though that the system plays very loose with things from the real world. Although i think they actually did do a good job with velociraptors being smaller and weaker than Jurassic Park would have you believe... JP used Deinonychus as Raptors, something like that?


Yeah, Velociraptors were about the size of turkeys when they existed. The raptors (a kind of catch all phrase for the whole group of them) were probably more like Deinonychus.

Verdant Wheel

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Torbyne wrote:
This is the same system that insist that Studded Leather is a viable kind of armor and Longswords are one handed AND smaller than hand and a half sword and that Falchion are two handed and... yeah, even when dealing with things from reality they dont follow it too closely.

*Eye Twitches.*


I remember hearing that the JP raptors where based on the (then) newly discovered Utahraptor. Though the utahraptor was estimated to be roughly the size of a polar bear.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Also, if we are going to change away from a popular well known name simply because it's been determined that it wasn't Real, then where's that leave us for the names of Everything else from Unicorns and Sylphs to Bearded Devils and the Terrasque?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just recently a new species of Dicynodont was discovered in Africa (I think that's where it was from). Dicynodonts were reptiles that showed some mammalian traits. They named it Bulbasaurus because of a bulbous bump on its snout.


Nitro~Nina wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
This is the same system that insist that Studded Leather is a viable kind of armor and Longswords are one handed AND smaller than hand and a half sword and that Falchion are two handed and... yeah, even when dealing with things from reality they dont follow it too closely.
*Eye Twitches.*

Oh! also, look at how few swords can be used to thrust with or that the rapier is incapable of push or pull cuts. And Scale mail and Full Plate being in use at the same time. Crossbows having less punch than bows; the ability for anyone to pick up a sling and use it accurately. Why doesnt Brigandine or other coat of plates type armor exist?


Azullius Koujou wrote:
I admit I liked the name Brontosaurus better than Apatosaurus and have grown up with it

I have felt this same way all my life. The books I had as a kid said Brontosaurus, and so I was bothered by having to call it Apatosaurus.


Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Azullius Koujou wrote:
I admit I liked the name Brontosaurus better than Apatosaurus and have grown up with it
I have felt this same way all my life. The books I had as a kid said Brontosaurus, and so I was bothered by having to call it Apatosaurus.

I'll admit I was, too... lol


For many dinosaurs (Argentinosaurus included), see this.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

we should call the brontosaurus "littlefoot"


Interesting. I might have to pick that up. I don't run dinosaurs in my homebrew as a matter of course, though I shamelessly stole the hollow world of Pellucidar from Edgar Rice Burroughs' novels. There is where you find dinosaurs.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah there have been moves to split off Brontosaurus from Apatosaurus, but personally the studies I have seen don't appear to be very convincing.


DungeonmasterCal wrote:
Just recently a new species of Dicynodont was discovered in Africa (I think that's where it was from). Dicynodonts were reptiles that showed some mammalian traits. They named it Bulbasaurus because of a bulbous bump on its snout.

I think aerodactyl has had its name immigrated into reality as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
MMCJawa wrote:
Yeah there have been moves to split off Brontosaurus from Apatosaurus, but personally the studies I have seen don't appear to be very convincing.

*imagines paleontologists tap tap taping a thagomizer in a menacing fashion at the bird for a more convincing argument*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PK the Dragon wrote:
we should call the brontosaurus "littlefoot"

yup yup yup


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Poison Dusk wrote:
I remember hearing that the JP raptors where based on the (then) newly discovered Utahraptor. Though the utahraptor was estimated to be roughly the size of a polar bear.

The timing is the other way around. The discovery of Utahraptor was announced after the filmmakers had designed their oversized velociraptors.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

The name is too cool not to use


I did not know Pathfinder had such overlap with amateur Paleontologists...


Maybe in a game were dragons exist an animal called brontosaurus exists and at the same time as scale mail and plate and we should realize it's fantasy and not a f&@%ing history lesson.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Torbyne wrote:
I did not know Pathfinder had such overlap with amateur Paleontologists...

They're all nerds and geeks. Of course there's an overlap. Like, 100%.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

DungeonmasterCal has the right of it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Torbyne wrote:
I did not know Pathfinder had such overlap with amateur Paleontologists...

Not just amateurs.


Azullius Koujou wrote:

To most a worthless topic, but I can't help but be curious why was this Sauropod chosen as a representative for the "Titanosaurs" group?

Since it isn't the dinosaur's scientific name anymore and the info about the dinosaur also sound remarkable outdated(basing it of d20 though)

#1: Because it's a cooler name.

#2: Because They recently found out it was a different species from Apatosaurus after all. (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-brontosaurus-is-back1/)


I just got a little chill reading that. I get the feeling that many archeologists also believe that brontosaurus is a cooler name than apatosaurus.


Nitro~Nina wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
This is the same system that insist that Studded Leather is a viable kind of armor and Longswords are one handed AND smaller than hand and a half sword and that Falchion are two handed and... yeah, even when dealing with things from reality they dont follow it too closely.
*Eye Twitches.*

I pretend that studded leather armor is just riveted leather and everything makes a little more sense. But then I also am roleplaying my gnome's standard leather armor as a gambeson in my Emerald Spire game right now and nobody's complained about that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

OK, studded leather can be considered a shorthand for bezainted and light brigantine armors.

The Exchange

I'm also curious if we perhaps one day might get the heavy weight "Argentinosaurus" in pathfinder a dinosaur that going by wikipedia should be anything from 2x the size of "Brontosaurus" all the way up to 7-8 times as heavy

What about the biggest dinosaur that has ever lived, amphicoelias fragilimus which can grow up to 58 meters in length.

The Exchange

Said .Azullius koujou


I like Rich Burlew's soution for introducing the brontosaurus to fantasy worlds: Order of the Stick 814, The Answer is Blowing in the Wind.

Tarquin: Welcome to the Brontosaurus Express. Beats walking back to town, huh?
Roy: Isn't a "brontosaurus" really just an apatosaurus with the head of a different dinosaur?
Tarquin: And a hippogriff is really just a horse with the head and wings of a bird, but I've still got eight squadrons mounted on the damn things.
Roy: Hmm. Fair enough.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / The Brontosaurus All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion
Gnomes in Pathfinder