jpariury said:And mythological creatures.
Agahi said:I always considered the diffrence as mythological being in the magical beast catagory from dnd 3.5, and animals being in the animal type. The seperation was that mytholgical creatures have near, equal, or greater than human intelligence, while animals are capped at 3.
also..mythological creatures never existed on RL earth only fantasy earth. Do not see any reason extinct would lead to mythological though i've never been a fan of slippery slope arguments either so..eh I dunno. What if say dogs suddenly went extinct, would dogkyn not be able to be played anymore?
Inaryn said:Agahi said:I always considered the diffrence as mythological being in the magical beast catagory from dnd 3.5, and animals being in the animal type. The seperation was that mytholgical creatures have near, equal, or greater than human intelligence, while animals are capped at 3.
also..mythological creatures never existed on RL earth only fantasy earth. Do not see any reason extinct would lead to mythological though i've never been a fan of slippery slope arguments either so..eh I dunno. What if say dogs suddenly went extinct, would dogkyn not be able to be played anymore?
I think if it's something we have recent (read last 200ish years) documentation and study of, that's one thing. But tell me what the prey, attitude, and social habits of a Leptarctus were.
prashka said:So....No Woolly-Mammoth-kin? Too bad, the tusks could be cool...
Inaryn said:Agahi said:I always considered the diffrence as mythological being in the magical beast catagory from dnd 3.5, and animals being in the animal type. The seperation was that mytholgical creatures have near, equal, or greater than human intelligence, while animals are capped at 3.
also..mythological creatures never existed on RL earth only fantasy earth. Do not see any reason extinct would lead to mythological though i've never been a fan of slippery slope arguments either so..eh I dunno. What if say dogs suddenly went extinct, would dogkyn not be able to be played anymore?
I think if it's something we have recent (read last 200ish years) documentation and study of, that's one thing. But tell me what the prey, attitude, and social habits of a Leptarctus were.
from what i've read, it's just like any number of ground-scurrying scavenger (small 's'). beyond that, the pc would be at her whim to make it up. besides, it's not as though there are any ARB based RP-police who guide and rebuke people for misROLEplaying their kin (plenty of opinionated prattlers, but nothing Rules-based). it's really impossible to say, "You're playing that turducken WRONG! You can't do it anymore" as the very concept of the Wylderkin is anthropomorphized nonsense to begin with. as long as the pc follows the racial Advantages/Disadvantages, everything else is flavour textInaryn said:Agahi said:I always considered the diffrence as mythological being in the magical beast catagory from dnd 3.5, and animals being in the animal type. The seperation was that mytholgical creatures have near, equal, or greater than human intelligence, while animals are capped at 3.
also..mythological creatures never existed on RL earth only fantasy earth. Do not see any reason extinct would lead to mythological though i've never been a fan of slippery slope arguments either so..eh I dunno. What if say dogs suddenly went extinct, would dogkyn not be able to be played anymore?
I think if it's something we have recent (read last 200ish years) documentation and study of, that's one thing. But tell me what the prey, attitude, and social habits of a Leptarctus were.
Mobius said:from what i've read, it's just like any number of ground-scurrying scavenger (small 's'). beyond that, the pc would be at her whim to make it up. besides, it's not as though there are any ARB based RP-police who guide and rebuke people for misROLEplaying their kin (plenty of opinionated prattlers, but nothing Rules-based). it's really impossible to say, "You're playing that turducken WRONG! You can't do it anymore" as the very concept of the Wylderkin is anthropomorphized nonsense to begin with. as long as the pc follows the racial Advantages/Disadvantages, everything else is flavour text
i hear what you're saying about the "real" behaviours of animals and how it's impossible to know, for sure, how extinct animals acted, but that kind of accuracy is totally irrelevant anyways. a Cowkin bears no more resemblance to a milking shorthorn than a great white does to Jaws - both are fabrications based on an individual's imagining of what 'could' be. i don't see why developing taxonomy for an extinct-kin would be any different
Agahi said:I didnt speculate. Scientists classify it as a mustelidae...which is pretty much a weasle, so give it weasle racials, and the roleplay is not a rule, it is a chapter based thing so it honestly can be w/e you want it too just write it up and get it approved.