Should Werewolves Have Tails?

Blade-of-the-Moon · Post by **Blade-of-the-Moon** » Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:34 pm

Figarou wrote:
Silverfang wrote:In my opinion, the tail is essenial, ok when a werewolf is standing on 2 paws it may not affect its sence of balance as much but when he / she is on all fours , then it helps in changing directions faster when running. Also it's used in comunications in wolf packs.

Of course.

The tail is not used to maintain balance for standing on 2 legs.

Now, let me ask you this.

Would the tail have the opposite effect if he wagged it? Would it throw him to the ground? Of course not. If it was used to keep him balanced, then that tail would have to be big and heavy.

I don't see how I can explain this any better without showing you. Big doesn't always mean heavy. I said it before the tail would be heavier than a wolf's tail but not so heavy a human couldn't easily lift it. Length can make up for weight as well, the tail would be larger for a werewolf anyway since it is so large in the first place. Look at your figure of Talbain for an example of a larger tailed werewolf, now a real one wouldn't have to be that big but it sort of shows my point. The tail does help to maintain a semi-hunched over position, the larger leg muscles also help it.

Stone Wolf · Post by **Stone Wolf** » Tue Feb 22, 2005 12:02 pm

Good show Blade-of-the-Moon.

Feral · Post by **Feral** » Thu Feb 24, 2005 5:59 am

Of course they should have tails! i'm glad there's such a consensus on this. in "american werewolf in paris" *shudder* they looked like some sort of disgusting monkey things. i picture a hybrid wolf/human form as standing and probably walking on two legs, but running on all fours (or at least leaning far forward when they run) which is where the tail would come in handy. It would also be useful if their walking gait leans forward.

As has been said, the tail doesn't have to be "heavy" -- its length gives it leverage, even though it's relatively light. Maybe the effect would be barely noticeable if the creature were just standing, but if he's sprinting at a full tilt, trying to keep up with a zig-zagging deer, the slight increase in turning power could be a life saver (not for the deer, of course).

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:01 pm

I bet there is a reason why hollywood doesn't include a tail. What exactly does the tail do when reverting back to a human form?

Does it...

1 Fall off.

2 revert back inside the body? Or

3. still there but it hairless form?

Having a tail in hairless form will be uncomfortable while wearing clothes. One could just "tuck it in."

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Thu Mar 17, 2005 5:22 pm

Well, when I revert back, it shrinks back inside my body

I think that is the most realistic of them.
Maybe their could be some werewolf disorders were the tail just looses fur and stays their in human form. Not something you would want to develop. A little akward to have, especially if you could still wag it and such. It would go numb and sore it cramed in your pants after a while

Timberwolf · Post by **Timberwolf** » Tue Mar 29, 2005 4:24 pm

Hey all, just joined up.

And yes, I agree, a tail is a must have.

Khuwwa · Post by **Khuwwa** » Fri Sep 15, 2006 5:10 pm

Hello as well, I realize this is all way too late for the purposes of movie feedback, but just figured to put it because this place is staying active afterwards.
Yes, I think tails are essential. I like them long too, but think it would be more realistic to have a shortened tail, in half-way point (Gestalt, I hear you calling it). Full-length in full wolf form.
I don't think there should be any difference between male and female, though. That's just weird.
And as for the transformation back to human... I think the tail would just shrink back, exactly the way it grew, but backwards.
But just another blurb: Everyone's saying the tail would be hairless if it remained in human form. But wasn't the 10th Kingdom fun?

MoonKit · Post by **MoonKit** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 7:47 am

Z wrote:I've always hated movies that depicted werewolves without tails. humans already have tailbones to begin with but no muzzle to speak of, yet the movie creators think we'd grow a long muzzle out of nowhere and yet no tail? we would sooner grow a tail then a muzzle since we always have the base for one, and since some poeple are born with tails, but nobody has ever been born with a muzzle.

You make an excellent point.

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:46 am

I find it more than a little amusing that the poll has truned out so heavily in the favor of Werewolves with Tails. 72 votes YES, Zero votes for NO, and only 1 ,'I Don't Care'.

If you asked ANY Hollywood film dirrector, they NEVER would have predicted that outcome.

Werewolf fans are clearly of a very different breed.

White Paw · Post by **White Paw** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 11:48 am

how can we not want the tail...its an essential part to the way the wolf/werewolf looks......plus it looks cute also

a werewolf without a tail is like an airplane without wings.....

Vuldari · Post by **Vuldari** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:04 pm

White Paw wrote:how can we not want the tail...its an essential part to the way the wolf/werewolf looks......plus it looks cute also

a werewolf without a tail is like an airplane without wings.....

No argument here.

I am the one who created the "Tail Wag" animation after all.

(Shameless Self-Plug)

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 12:26 pm

Tails are sexy! Especially big floofy ones! :}

Fang · Post by **Fang** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 2:53 pm

MattSullivan wrote:Tails are sexy! Especially big floofy ones! :}

looks like someone has a tail fetish J/K

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:32 pm

Yes. Yes i do :}

Fang · Post by **Fang** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:34 pm

lupine · Post by **lupine** » Thu Sep 21, 2006 8:48 pm

Don't really mind either way, Iv'e been through this with shadow wulf on another thread, and to be honest, it's not something I've really noticed. I think mainly because, with a lot of movies your distracted by the action sequences too much to get a good look. Obviously there are exceptions to this, ie. Underworld and Van Helsing, but even then I honestly have never taken much notice. I think if done right, the tail can look good but did the Wolf in American werewolf in London have a tail? Not sure it did, but did it detract from the werewolf design? That said, the werewolves in the sequel didn't have tails and they just ended up looking like pi**ed off monkeys (the facial features didn't help tho).

Moonstalker · Post by **Moonstalker** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:32 am

Yes, they should have tails

Figarou · Post by **Figarou** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 4:34 am

MattSullivan wrote:Tails are sexy! Especially big floofy ones! :}

Moonstalker · Post by **Moonstalker** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:31 am

Figarou wrote:
MattSullivan wrote:Tails are sexy! Especially big floofy ones! :}

Yeah, I like them too

Fang · Post by **Fang** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 5:36 am

Tails, HELL YES

Set · Post by **Set** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 12:37 pm

MattSullivan wrote:Yes. Yes i do :}

......................

You just won some cool points.

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 1:50 pm

hehe. Thanks Set.

Silverclaw · Post by **Silverclaw** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 2:05 pm

Tails are sexy! Especially big floofy ones! :}

Agreed.

Lukas · Post by **Lukas** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 2:31 pm

there cool, maybe sexy but who the hell knows? im open minded on this one

MattSullivan · Post by **MattSullivan** » Fri Sep 22, 2006 7:14 pm

If I had a big ol floofy tail, I'dshove it in people's faces and tell them "I use Perm! no fancy-a** product for my butt-extension, nosirree!"