Alternative Shapeshifters

[Vuldari]

(this post appears in two different threads because it fits in both)

here is a thought

what is the difference between a

Werewolf
&
a Wolf-Shifter

the answer to me is control over the animal side.

a werewolf becomes like a wolfdog, a mix of instincts, this time between such radically different species as a human and a wolf so we get something that is basically suffering from insanity.

a Wolf-Shifter would be a special ability where the person assumes the shape, likeness, and proportional powers of a wolf-human hybrid but aside from maybe a few manirism changes is still in control and human underneath.

Thats certainly one possible way to create a distinction.

Personally, I think that a "Werewolf" is this really scary and dangerous creature that earlier cultures had Good Reason to be telling primarily HORROR stories about...

...but that there may be Other ways for humans to have the ability to transform into a wolf, without necessarily becoming links in that particular chain/lineage of creatures. ...some of which may parallel the attributes of the actual Werewolf in enough ways that they may often become confused as one and the same, and called by the same name.


Like Polar Bears and Koala Bears.


In other words...not all "WereWolves", (as they all inevitably end up being called), are created equal ... or are even really the same thing.

[Kelpten]

Couldn't keeping a werewolf evil have a negative effect on wolves though? I mean, we tell our children the stories of little red riding hood, the three little pigs, the boy who cried wolf, ext. and may have ingrained a fear of wolves which is hurting their support. I like horror movies, but even if you keep telling yourself it's fiction, seeing a wolf-like creature tear a human apart is going to produce some negative effect on their image in your mind. Most people can keep them seperate, but a few people in high places that have a subconcious prejiduce of wolves born of old stories could do a lot of harm. Just saying this for the sake of argument...

[Vuldari]

Couldn't keeping a werewolf evil have a negative effect on wolves though? I mean, we tell our children the stories of little red riding hood, the three little pigs, the boy who cried wolf, ext. and may have ingrained a fear of wolves which is hurting their support. I like horror movies, but even if you keep telling yourself it's fiction, seeing a wolf-like creature tear a human apart is going to produce some negative effect on their image in your mind. Most people can keep them seperate, but a few people in high places that have a subconcious prejiduce of wolves born of old stories could do a lot of harm. Just saying this for the sake of argument...

Isn't telling stories about HUMANS who kill people and do really evil things and enslave people, and look really, really scary put a negative image of the Human race into our children's minds? Jason...Freddy...Hannibal...Jack the Ripper...

Monster stories are about the WORST possible personality a person or creature could have. It is a sad fact that some humans ARE as evil as Hannibal Lecter or Jack the Ripper, but obviously not ALL of us are.

It works the other way around too. Even though most Wild Wolves are not EVIL creatures...sometimes Wolves can go bad too. Wolves have as varied personalities as we do. A true story about a Wolf attacking a human or their cattle might be because the wolf was starving or threatened due to the peoples intrusion...or it might just be because that particular Wolf was a ****ing JERK.


I understand what you are trying to do, but Werewolves are not Wolves. ...fictional characters, especially "Monsters", don't need an anti-racism/racial profiling activist group. We are all going to end up looking pretty stupid if we start behaving as if we are.


Some people are going to make up reasons to hate certain people and animals as an excuse to get rid of them and take what they have, regardless of what any of us say or do.


Rather than try to hide the truth from ourselves and pretend evil things don't exist, I think a more effective strategy would be to teach our children the value and meaning of the 'Circle of Life', and help them see that when a Wild Wolf viciously kills a baby deer, or a bunny rabbit for food, it really isn't as evil as it looks. ...that there is a difference between hunting for food, and killing for pleasure, hatred or greed...

[Silver]

Just got hit by an image:

Little kids camping out in the living room in the winter, fire going and Dad tellng a story. It's about the Big Bad Werewolf. The Dad starts to morph at the scary part and the little ones howl with delight, eyes big as they cling to each other. BoogeyWolf!

IMHO Part 1:

Serously, I think there have been some good ideas here. It's true that there are definitely different ideas on the werewolf - though some of the 'traditional' views are only 40 or 50 years old. Since the legends go back thousands of years in many cultures, there's a wide range of views as well.

I would agree that classifying the 'traditional' view would be worthwhile. Now, how to get an agreement on what that is? I think just calling it Traditional would work - people would have to understand that it means traditional for our culture today. It'd give us a clear frame of reference.

As for the non traditional views - why not just call them that? Anything that becomes a secondary creature with regularity is classified as Were (something), especially if the change is triggered by something. If they just assume the shape of something, that's a different classification. Here's how I see the list going:

Traditional Werewolf
Were animal
Were creature
Non Traditional Werewolf
Multi-were
Shapeshifter



IMHO Part 2:

I very much agree that they don't have to be evil...

And the point of teaching young that killing things is not always evil - is very practical. It bothers me a lot that most people don't look at the meat they eat every day, and realize someone killed it. Not Jason or Freddie. As a kid on a farm, I killed chickens, skined and gutted fish, rabbits, small game - helped process deer and pigs...I know the things we eat were once living, with the ability to be happy or sad. That it's not evil to need to eat .


If one being deliberately kills another, to cause pain, fear, or sadness, if that death is for no other reason and if it is done for the pleasure of killing, I would consider that evil.

[cumulusprotagonist]

Shape shifting through the use of an unexplainable ability to manipulate energy and matter... (Cumulus)

[Kelpten]

I don't know... I don't have a problem killing other creatures for food; that seems very natural. It's killing other humans that I just can't...I don't know the word. I have a deep revultion to causing other humans pain.

[Vuldari]

I like the idea of setting aside a classification of werewolves simply called "Traditional". (As Silver suggests) It could generally refer to any stories or legends pre-dating the so called "Modern" era / Neo-Werewolf, that more or less began with Lon Cheneys interpretation, and was further meddled with by Hollywood over the following decades and more recently by R.P. and Net-Culture.

I am aware of a Werewolf Saint amongst those old stories, if I am not mistaken, so certainly not ALL of them were about evil "Monsters"... but I'm still pretty sure most of them generally were.

[Rhuen]

How I classify between the two groups.

with in the werewolf group

Lycian: assumes full wolf shape for either a set period of time or at certain times. Like king Lycias and his descendents which had to remain wolves for nine years (unless they are someone in which case it was permanent) a variant is the controled Lycian which is a person born naturally able to change between the two at will.
(First form King Lycian, second like the movie Wolfen)

Folklore: a person who uses magic to transform into a wolf.

Neo-folklore: a person who uses magic to transform into a hybrid monster wolf.

Modern cursed: a human hybrid wolf-man (many variations on size and shape) that is cursed to become an out of control monster.

Modern Born: a person born to have the ability to become a wolf like creature, usally large. real difference between this and the later Beast-Shifter model is that this type is born into a lineage of these as a natural trait for their kind (so no different than elves having pointed ears in specialness)

and now the Shifter-models

Borderline: a person who is basically the same thing as the modern born except its more like a mutant power than anything else and through training can control it.

Beast-Shifter: the special ability to transform into one other shape than your own which is a human/beast muscular hybrid with the enhanced abilities to go with it, in control though. Basically telling these, the borderline, and natural born apart really comes down to origin rather than ability.

Trait-Shifter: a person who can change just their eyes, nails, ears, teeth, or some other minor trait (maybe to the point of furry ears or a short tail) but to the lesser extent and more common just eyes or something else small. Giving some senses and enhanced strength but nothing too showy really.

Furre-Shifter: the abilitiy to transform into a furre version of an animal, have the apperance of a human/animal hybrid, except mostly human, senses only enhanced by different size and shape of eyes, nose, and ears, otherwise basically just an animal person
(this one is not a stage between trait and beast types its an odd side type)

Animal-Shifter: the ability to transform completly into an animal, and maybe some forms in-between (like a sphinx like body) this form is usually much more reliant on magic to explaine.

Myth-Shifter: ability to transform into the shape of but not actually be a mythological creature (also called a Chimera shifter as they combine animal traits)

The last is the Taur shifter which assume the complex varied species taur bodies, most of this though because its usually viewed as a permanent change (due to the suspension of disbelief being hard to stretch with this form going two ways all that often) and is seldom used outside of online fantasies and has yet to appear as a shifter type in any movies or such that I am aware of.

[Kirk Hammett]

[Vuldari]

As I said, we get what you mean.

YOU get it perhaps, but don't presume to speak for everyone else.

I keep repeating myself until everyones responses are relevant to what I actually said. If they are not, then someone misunderstood me, so I will say it again in a different way. I don't like people being angry or confused with me because of some trivial miscommunication.

It's the only way I know how to communicate, since people rarely seem to understand me the first time I speak. I'm just very confusing I guess.

[Kirk Hammett]

As I said, we get what you mean.

YOU get it perhaps, but don't presume to speak for everyone else.

I keep repeating myself until everyones responses are relevant to what I actually said. If they are not, then someone misunderstood me, so I will say it again in a different way. I don't like people being angry or confused with me because of some trivial miscommunication.

It's the only way I know how to communicate, since people rarely seem to understand me the first time I speak. I'm just very confusing I guess.

People don't get me either. ;)

Sorry if I seemed snappy. I've lost patience for certain things of late. I refuse to blame anything, what's said is said.