THE PACK Message Boards

Apokryltaros wrote: And my problem is that goat is still on my list of "Things I want to eat before I die."

Goat taste pretty good.

Apokryltaros wrote:And my problem is that goat is still on my list of "Things I want to eat before I die."

Heh, I need a list like that.

Figarou wrote:

Apokryltaros wrote: And my problem is that goat is still on my list of "Things I want to eat before I die."

You have a list?

Yes.
The really big entries include goat, wolf, rambutan, mangosteen, babirusa, warthog, buffalo, durian, cotinga, and flamingo.

Ancient wrote: Goat taste pretty good.

You don't suppose I could get (some of) your goat?

Lupin wrote: Heh, I need a list like that.

Although it's very convient to have such a list, it's also helped me earn a prominent spot on Greenpeace's blacklist.
I eat one, one baby seal, and they make it look like I'm "Ivan the Really Terrible."

[quote="Apokryltaros] You don't suppose I could get (some of) your goat?
[quote]


Oh wow that was pretty random. But I swear I have no idea where the goat I was going to give you went.

Anubis wrote:It sounds like most of use would be Okay with it as long its an animal of a preditory nature.

Which makes me wonder, what's wrong with being a were-deer? Those instincts people are so afraid of could come in handy. Prey animals only survive by outrunning, outclimbing, outswimming, outwiting, or otherwise being better than their predators at something. A deer could not live if it wasn't capable of getting away from a wolf. If ever there was a need to escape being a prey animal would be far more useful than being a predatory one.

And some of those "snacks" are damn dangerous to boot. A giraffe has hooves the size of dinner plates that can crush a skull, ostriches can disembowel lions with a single kick, horned animals can gore you to death, and most all of them can kill you via trampling. I wouldn't mind being a prey animal so long as it's one that appeals to me. I want to be dangerous, but that doesn't mean I have to be ugly.

Reilune wrote:Which makes me wonder, what's wrong with being a were-deer? Those instincts people are so afraid of could come in handy. Prey animals only survive by outrunning, outclimbing, outswimming, outwiting, or otherwise being better than their predators at something.

Do note that predators have to do all of the same things to catch ther prey.

Lupin wrote:

Reilune wrote:Which makes me wonder, what's wrong with being a were-deer? Those instincts people are so afraid of could come in handy. Prey animals only survive by outrunning, outclimbing, outswimming, outwiting, or otherwise being better than their predators at something.

Do note that predators have to do all of the same things to catch ther prey.

I'm well aware of that. But pack hunters, when hunting alone, are nowhere near as sucessful in taking down said prey. They are almost completely dependant on the pack for food. Now a were___ would probably find it a bit difficult finding a big group of others like it depending on the rarity of weres both in the world and their specific area. Success rates are somewhat dependant on the numbers factor. The rest comes down to skill, intellegence, and abilities provided by species. The best kill rate in the world for pack hunters is the African "painted wolf" at 90%. However...even the lion, which was in the top five, only has a kill rate of 60%. And this is as a group. They do far worse on their own.

As for solitary hunters they tend to be specialists, honing a particular skill based on enviornment. For example: the cheetah is good at running...but only in quick sprints. So long as the antelope can run for longer than the cheetah it doesn't have to outclass it in speed. Crocodiles are ambush hunters, falcons rely on quick dives, snakes constrict or use poison, spiders spin webs, ect. Specialists are good at what they do but with the right technique can be foiled without an extreme amount of effort.

So really...don't underestimate the power of prey animals. Living with them changes your whole outlook on those "helpless, weak little things".

Reilune wrote:

Anubis wrote:It sounds like most of use would be Okay with it as long its an animal of a preditory nature.

Which makes me wonder, what's wrong with being a were-deer? Those instincts people are so afraid of could come in handy. Prey animals only survive by outrunning, outclimbing, outswimming, outwiting, or otherwise being better than their predators at something. A deer could not live if it wasn't capable of getting away from a wolf. If ever there was a need to escape being a prey animal would be far more useful than being a predatory one.

And some of those "snacks" are damn dangerous to boot. A giraffe has hooves the size of dinner plates that can crush a skull, ostriches can disembowel lions with a single kick, horned animals can gore you to death, and most all of them can kill you via trampling. I wouldn't mind being a prey animal so long as it's one that appeals to me. I want to be dangerous, but that doesn't mean I have to be ugly.

A were-Irish Elk would be awesome to behold.

The more this discussion goes on about preditors vs. prey, the more that I realise that a Prey species really is far more compatable with my own personality. I have absolutely no predetory impulses or instincts whatsoever.

I actually act very much like a succesful Prey species, consistantly being too fast, too strong, or too clever to become the victim of a predator.

Indeed....a Were-Elk, etc. would look quite fantastic. Even a Were-WhiteTail would be something to behold. My only problem with that is that I seem to have a natural opposition to hooves. I'm not fond of the idea of being without any fingers or toes. Hooves are too specialized, and not versitile enough for my taste. ...though the idea of becoming a Were-ArabianHorse, or a Were-Deer does catch my interest regardless.

Unfortunately (for me) the only non-predetory creatures that equal the great predetors (Wolf, Lion, Tiger, Eagle, etc.) in majestic beauty seem to be of the hooved variety (Elk, Deer, Antelope, Horses, etc.).


Honestly...this topic is really beginning to make me wonder if I really would appreciate becoming a WereWOLF. Suddenly gaining preditory instincts and impulses would result in a not-too-plesant emotional conflict in my personal case.

On the other hand, would you really want to go out of your way to simply chew your own cud each full moon?

...uhhh...





[Edit:]Um...yeah...one more reason not to like the hooved herbavores I guess.



On another ontopic thought...

Somthing like a Were-domesticated dog breed (Dalmation, Collie, Labrador, PitBull, etc.) would be...weird. ...but depending on the breed, maybe not so bad...or sickeningly awful.


...housecat might actually be fun...


A WereMutt (mixed canine breeds) would likely give the person most or all of the physical benefiets and senses of a werewolf, but would also alienate them, making it a little more difficult to fit into a "Pack", being not-quite a werewolf, but almost, and therefore a sort of a walking joke.

A bittersweet mixed blessing for someone who Wanted to be a werewolf, but got bitten by the Wrong Lycanthrope. ...and a nightmare for someone who didn't want it at all. A monster to humans...and a living joke mascot pet to the local Lycanthrope Pack.

Reilune wrote:\I'm well aware of that. But pack hunters, when hunting alone, are nowhere near as sucessful in taking down said prey. They are almost completely dependant on the pack for food. Now a were___ would probably find it a bit difficult finding a big group of others like it depending on the rarity of weres both in the world and their specific area. Success rates are somewhat dependant on the numbers factor. The rest comes down to skill, intellegence, and abilities provided by species. The best kill rate in the world for pack hunters is the African "painted wolf" at 90%. However...even the lion, which was in the top five, only has a kill rate of 60%. And this is as a group. They do far worse on their own.

As for solitary hunters they tend to be specialists, honing a particular skill based on enviornment. For example: the cheetah is good at running...but only in quick sprints. So long as the antelope can run for longer than the cheetah it doesn't have to outclass it in speed. Crocodiles are ambush hunters, falcons rely on quick dives, snakes constrict or use poison, spiders spin webs, ect. Specialists are good at what they do but with the right technique can be foiled without an extreme amount of effort.

So really...don't underestimate the power of prey animals. Living with them changes your whole outlook on those "helpless, weak little things".

Do note that while wolves etc. may prefer to hunt in a pack, when alone they don't need to take down the large prey species you mention, but get along happily on much smaller and easier to catch things.

Ralith wrote:

Reilune wrote:\I'm well aware of that. But pack hunters, when hunting alone, are nowhere near as sucessful in taking down said prey. They are almost completely dependant on the pack for food. Now a were___ would probably find it a bit difficult finding a big group of others like it depending on the rarity of weres both in the world and their specific area. Success rates are somewhat dependant on the numbers factor. The rest comes down to skill, intellegence, and abilities provided by species. The best kill rate in the world for pack hunters is the African "painted wolf" at 90%. However...even the lion, which was in the top five, only has a kill rate of 60%. And this is as a group. They do far worse on their own.

As for solitary hunters they tend to be specialists, honing a particular skill based on enviornment. For example: the cheetah is good at running...but only in quick sprints. So long as the antelope can run for longer than the cheetah it doesn't have to outclass it in speed. Crocodiles are ambush hunters, falcons rely on quick dives, snakes constrict or use poison, spiders spin webs, ect. Specialists are good at what they do but with the right technique can be foiled without an extreme amount of effort.

So really...don't underestimate the power of prey animals. Living with them changes your whole outlook on those "helpless, weak little things".

Do note that while wolves etc. may prefer to hunt in a pack, when alone they don't need to take down the large prey species you mention, but get along happily on much smaller and easier to catch things.

Like voles and mice, for example.

Ralith wrote:I'd be kinda pissed if anything other than a werewolf bit me, but I'd be able to put up with werecat at least until I found a way to change. Fox might not be so bad either. Other than those, though...

Yeah, a fox or tiger wouldn't be too bad... I'd much rather be a wolf though.

Vuldari wrote:A bittersweet mixed blessing for someone who Wanted to be a werewolf, but got bitten by the Wrong Lycanthrope. ...and a nightmare for someone who didn't want it at all. A monster to humans...and a living joke mascot pet to the local Lycanthrope Pack.

What do you mean by "wrong" in this case?

Lupin wrote:

Vuldari wrote:A bittersweet mixed blessing for someone who Wanted to be a werewolf, but got bitten by the Wrong Lycanthrope. ...and a nightmare for someone who didn't want it at all. A monster to humans...and a living joke mascot pet to the local Lycanthrope Pack.

What do you mean by "wrong" in this case?

Lets say you wanted to be bitten by a werewolf. But got punched instead. Wait...thats another story. But you got bitten by weregoat instead.

Thats what he means by "wrong" werecreature.

Figarou wrote:Thats what he means by "wrong" werecreature.

Do note that all lycantrhropes are werecreatures, but not all werecreatures are lycanthropes.

Lupin wrote:

Figarou wrote:Thats what he means by "wrong" werecreature.

Do note that all lycantrhropes are werecreatures, but not all werecreatures are lycanthropes.

Oh good grief. Not again.

I know that.

Let me fix my last post.

Fine. But it is a very specific word.

Lupin wrote:Fine. But it is a very specific word.

yes...I know. I made a mistake in my post. I know a werelion is not called a lycanthrope.

Let's take note that lycanthrope doesn't cover dogs either, though.

Figarou wrote:yes...I know. I made a mistake in my post. I know a werelion is not called a lycanthrope.

Well he also said 'lycanthrope', and Vuldari isn't one to mince words, so I don't really think that's it.

Ralith wrote:Let's take note that lycanthrope doesn't cover dogs either, though.

Well some people do classify the dog as a subspecies of the wolf. So with extreme amounts of fudging, you could call it one.


Try it in front of me and I'll slap you with Cluebringer though.

I thought the original dog was the result of crossbreeding between the wolf and something else?

Whatever their origins, I wouldn't really classify dogs as a subspecies of anything with all the (in)breeding that's been done.

Well most of it was a whole bunch of what I like to call "unnatural selection"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolf#Class ... to_the_dog
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog#Ancest ... estication

Oh good grief...all this fuss about my choice of words.

I know that Lycanthrope is almost unanimously considered to only pertain to WereWOLVES. It was supposed to be a semi-sarcastic comment, as in, the werecreature in question was mistaken for a "true" lycathrope, or rather, just a cheeky way of saying that it wasn't.

I was not trying to start a linguistic debate about the word. ...it's just that sarcasm does not usually come through clearly in text vs. speaking, where the variances in speaking tone can be distinguished.

Sorry.