It would seem appropriate since Naga generally implies a snake character.

Sharp_Coyote said:
Covered just recently ...

forum #164311

Methinks there was an implication to scalie made,
but that is it, as a naga represents a human (or humanoid ) / snake hybrid.

Ah I guess I need to learn how to better use the search on the forum here. It's not the best but I could have done better. The way I see it though is that Naga is an anthro snake. Just like we call anthro lizards, lizards.

Well, not entirely, because a naga is only one if it has an anthro upper body on top of a feral, slithering lower body. It's anthro, but only about halfway so. An anthro snake that walks on two legs isn't a naga.

So I take it Aliasing is a two way street and Naga can't just have the implication that if it's a naga it's a snake and should come up during searches for snake and not vice versa.

And to the powers at be, I want to again apologize for making a second thread on the same topic. I wish I had seen the earlier one before making this one.

Jugofthat said:
Well, not entirely, because a naga is only one if it has an anthro upper body on top of a feral, slithering lower body. It's anthro, but only about halfway so.

That's the definition of a Lamia, actually. Naga are completely reptilian/snakelike with a humanoid torso. If it's got human-like skin, face, or hair, it's a Lamia.

Furrin_Gok said:
That's the definition of a Lamia, actually. Naga are completely reptilian/snakelike with a humanoid torso. If it's got human-like skin, face, or hair, it's a Lamia.

I know, I didn't say human upper body, I said anthro.