THE PACK Message Boards

I'd figure that they would be treated much with more surprise, since everyone's heard of werewolves, but, other werekin seem much more far-fetched.

I figure were's would be limited to roughly, mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, and amphibians, plus possibly fish. Basically anything with a spine. Things without spines, that's going too far.

Why not? Is it any more fantastical to be able to transform into a wolf than a jellyfish? Or, with our inflated human egos, do we assume that nothing but the strongest or cleverest predetors are worthy of being werecreatures? Just because something isn't as desirable doesn't mean you should call it going to far.

I could just see someone being bitten by a flash of fur and fangs while out driving and not seeing clearly what bit them and having strange cravings for meat and having heightened senses thinking they are becoming a werewolf. Escept not harmed by silver, dogs just look at them funny and avoid them rather than bark and growl. A movie like that could write it off as "different than hollywood and folklore" the protagonist's friends think he is also becoming a werewolf and at the end when he finnally transforms he comes out as a giant were-skunk.

Kelpten wrote:Why not? Is it any more fantastical to be able to transform into a wolf than a jellyfish? Or, with our inflated human egos, do we assume that nothing but the strongest or cleverest predetors are worthy of being werecreatures? Just because something isn't as desirable doesn't mean you should call it going to far.

It isn't so much a matter of what is desirable (albeit predators do make for more interesting scripts). For me, it's a matter of relation in the animal kingdom.


Inter-genus werekin being the most believable on a biological level, and inter-kingdom being the most wildly unrealistic. Werejellyfish would be crossing over two completely different phylums (Chordata & Cndaria), whereas mammalian werekin like werewolves or werecats would only be crossing over different orders (Primate & Carnivora).

My general rule of thumb when brainstorming alternative werekin is that I stick to the class Mammalia (warm-blooded, a backbone, a neocortex, etc). For the most part, shifting from human to wolf, big cat or any other mammal would be just a change of the outer structure; the internal anatomy may be rearranged, but all the parts are still there. A shift from man to jellyfish, on the other hand, would involve changing just about everything.

It's basically a matter of balancing believability with fascination. A werechimpanzee would be the most believable form of werekin since the two are already so related, but because they are so related, it would be pretty pointless and boring to read about one. To the contrary, a human turning into a jellyfish would certainly get my attention, but it's such an extreme transformation that it would be nearly impossible to explain it without resorting to magical definitions. Inter-order transformations, primate to carnivore, rodentia, marsupial etc. are what I would consider to be the middle ground.

Inter-genus werekin? that would be boring, it would limit humans to great apes.

Class & Order changes are the most reasonable but really only limits people to all other mammals.
Humans being omnivores a change in either direction (carnivore or herbivore) would be just as extreme.
We just like the werewolf because its so familiar to us and agressive carvivores out for blood make for better (horror) which is the common although not only form around.

A were-deer is no more extreme a change than a werewolf. But which would you rather read about?

Rhuen wrote:A were-deer is no more extreme a change than a werewolf. But which would you rather read about?

Honestly? The deer. Predators have been done to death, and not very well at that. Something different might be nice for once.

Rhuen wrote:Inter-genus werekin? that would be boring, it would limit humans to great apes.

Class & Order changes are the most reasonable but really only limits people to all other mammals.
Humans being omnivores a change in either direction (carnivore or herbivore) would be just as extreme.
We just like the werewolf because its so familiar to us and agressive carvivores out for blood make for better (horror) which is the common although not only form around.

Like I said, it's a balancing act between being believable and being worth reading about. If you want to avoid magical definition, it has to be a believable transformation, but it also has to be fantastic enough to want to read about it. You could branch out into werekin birds or reptiles, but describing it without magical definition would be a much harder sell.

A were-deer is no more extreme a change than a werewolf. But which would you rather read about?

It would more or less depend on the story. Conflict is the foundation of fiction, so it's a lot easier to write about werewolves, werecats, or any other carnivorous werekin because they carry a negative stigma. An herbivorous werekin, on the other hand, wouldn't inspire the same levels of fear that a carnivorous werekin would, so you couldn't use a recycled storyline to tell a serious weredeer story.

If you go back on what I said about werewolves versus all the rest, if you accept any other kind of werekin, you can accept werewolves without any proof of such. Then building off of what I said above about how herbivorous werekin don't have the same negative associations that werewolves and other predatory werekin would, an herbivorous werekin might be more prone to sharing their secrets.

Werekin: "There's something you need to know. . . I'm a werewolf."
Human: "OMG! OMG! Stay away from me!"
Werekin: "Relax, I'm not going to hurt you. I just wanted to-"
Human: "Stay away from me! I'm warning you!"

Werekin: "There's something you need to know. . . I'm a wererabbit."
Human: "OMG! OMG! Stay away from me!"
Werekin: "For Pete's sake, I'm just a wererabbit! What could I possibly do to you? Nibble your bum?!"
Human: "Umm. . . Kay."

That would generate a lot of conflict between the werewolves and whatever herbivore they were in close proximity to.

Like I said, you'd need more than the basic werekin script to make a story about a weredeer worth reading. Personally, I'd be interested in a story about a weredeer because it would be a step away from the ordinary, but if it was just another "killer among us" story, I wouldn't expect it to be good no matter what kind of werekin it was about.

Funny thing is, its a common misconception that carnivores are more agressive than herbivores.

In reality herbivores are much more agressive (after all they are the one's afraid of being eaten) and lash out much more than predators. When was the last time you heard of a coyote jumping through someone's living room window after wandering into the sub-urbs.

The biggest killer in Africa is the Hippo. and Wildebeasts will hunt down Lion cubs and kill them if given the chance.

A predator will attack you to eat you or defend its territory if it thinks your a rival.

A herbivore will kill humans just because their standing too close to them. or can see you standing there on some occassions.

If it thinks it can take you down, it will because its instincts tell it your a danger to the herd especially as you might be a scout for a pack as far as its instincts are concerned.

I'd rather run into a werewolf than a were-deer (especially a buck) as the werewolf if it just ate may just hide away but the deer mixed with human size, the supernatural enhanced strength and such beyond the animal that most werekin have, and the mixed agression and seriously effed up instincts between these two radically different creatures. It may not stop tills its impaled you on its antlers.

>I'd rather run into a werewolf than a were-deer (especially a buck) as the werewolf if it just ate may just hide away but the deer mixed with human size, the supernatural enhanced strength and such beyond the animal that most werekin have, and the mixed agression and seriously effed up instincts between these two radically different creatures. It may not stop tills its impaled you on its antlers.

Would it be appropriate to feature were-deer later this month, during the full "Buck Moon"? See http://www.almanac.com/redletterday/2007-07-29

Kzinistzerg wrote:I'd figure that they would be treated much with more surprise, since everyone's heard of werewolves, but, other werekin seem much more far-fetched.

I figure were's would be limited to roughly, mammals, marsupials, birds, reptiles, and amphibians, plus possibly fish. Basically anything with a spine. Things without spines, that's going too far.

I agree with that. Seeing as werewolves are the basis of them all in the western culture, anything else would generate more surprise.

But it would make the story whole lot more interesting(for me, anyway) if I for once saw something else than werewolf.
Thankfully it is slightly moving to that way in the media... but oh, so slowly. And after werewolves, then comes weretigers and werebears plus maybe some
other big carnivores.

I only wait for the time when I can see a full movie(be it animated or real acting) when there are other werecreatures involved.
Because frankly, while I love werewolves, I would love to see some other for a change of pace.

Rhuen wrote:Funny thing is, its a common misconception that carnivores are more agressive than herbivores.

In reality herbivores are much more agressive (after all they are the one's afraid of being eaten) and lash out much more than predators. When was the last time you heard of a coyote jumping through someone's living room window after wandering into the sub-urbs.

The biggest killer in Africa is the Hippo. and Wildebeasts will hunt down Lion cubs and kill them if given the chance.

A predator will attack you to eat you or defend its territory if it thinks your a rival.

A herbivore will kill humans just because their standing too close to them. or can see you standing there on some occassions.

If it thinks it can take you down, it will because its instincts tell it your a danger to the herd especially as you might be a scout for a pack as far as its instincts are concerned.

I'd rather run into a werewolf than a were-deer (especially a buck) as the werewolf if it just ate may just hide away but the deer mixed with human size, the supernatural enhanced strength and such beyond the animal that most werekin have, and the mixed agression and seriously effed up instincts between these two radically different creatures. It may not stop tills its impaled you on its antlers.

Don't forget that Alice is a perfect role model for wererabbits and werehares with mean legs.

a rabbit given human size and shape could likely knock a door across a room with one kick and leap over top of a house, if we allow a proportional thing to occur like with spider-man. then again even if its not the same just using a mixed shape and design would allow for some impressive power. Alice from Bloody Roar being a great example. With her body type those legs could propel her easily over a house and send a car flying with a good strong kick. But the leg strength would be a wererabbit's only real ability.
a werewolf has claws, fangs, upper and lower body strength (not as much lower as a wererabbit but more upper) and has stamina.

different types of werecreatures would have different advantages and disadvantages in the human shape even if they are enhanced.
"maybe they should just make BloodyRoar into a movie".

Actually, on the subject of were herbivores, there are were-gazelles in Wereworld.

Just so we're clear, I never once said a weredeer or wererabbit would be less threatening. The only thing is that we, as human beings, have a natural tendency to think that way. If you told someone that there are such things as wererabbits, they might think "he could kick my head to the moon if he wanted," but they'd more likely think about Wallace & Gromit and not take it very seriously.

So even if they were more aggressive and more territorial, they wouldn't have as much reason to be secretive.

You also need to consider the fact that, no matter what kind of werekin they are, they are still half human. I personally am not too keen on the "completely lost to the beast within" definition (which is the source of many cliches mentioned in the werewolf cliche thread), so whatever werekin instincts they have should be balanced and kept in check by their human reasoning. Half of being human, after all, is being able to not act upon all instincts and urges.

If you think about it, other were- creatures could exsit. I suppose if you look at it, it is in a way possible for people to change into another form. Because evolution did the same thing in a way. Except it took a hell of a lot longer than just 5 or 120 minutes. But that is starting to make it even more complicated, comparing evolution and changing into another form, other than a human, or whatever you are.

i agrre w/ ya rosie

Comparing it to evolution doesn't work. Evolution doesn't work in the cartoons where the same animal evolves, rather through countless generations of offspring.

I will agree, however, that if you accept werewolves, you might as well accept other multi-order shapeshifters (not all shapeshifters mind you; again, that thing I said about the animal kingdom).