Felarya

Felarya forum
 
HomeFAQSearchRegisterMemberlistUsergroupsLog in

Share | 
 

 Size of newborn giant predators

View previous topic View next topic Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
AuthorMessage
rcs619
Felarya cartographer
Felarya cartographer
avatar

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2008-04-07
Age : 29
Location : Hanging out with Fiona in the Bulvon Wood

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 1:01 pm

Karbo wrote:
That's an interesting thread.
I agree that it could be roughly divided between egg-laying and non-egg-laying.

The thing that is the most tricky is the egg-laying type. Now I admit I'm actually unsure if a new-born naga would still be really human-sized or perhaps a little bigger. But the growth spurth is still very much here.

Basically the young naga would grwoth slowly at first, then at a point would experience that growth spurth that leave them at a near gigantic size over a rather short time. Then after the spurth they would continue to growth but much more slowly until they reach their adult size.

A size chart could be nice to do inded ^^

Baby egg-born predators could be slightly larger than a human, but I still think they should be fairly tiny in comparison to their parents. The main advantage of laying eggs is that they are small, and have almost no negative effects on the mother. Given how nagas are structured, how agile dridders need to be to climb and jump everywhere, and the fact that harpies need to be able to fly, none of them could really function if they had to experience a full, human-like pregnancy.

I imagine the size of newborns could be bumped up a little though. Maybe a head and shoulders taller than a human? That'd put them at around 6'6" to 7' ( 1.9m - 2.1m) tall. Combine that with the fact that they are already fairly developed physically and mentally at birth, and a baby pred would be pretty strong compared to the average human. That would bump up the egg-born young of human-sized predators to about 6 inches tall or so, which would make them a decent bit larger and stronger than Neera and Tomthumbs as well.

The growth spurt makes sense. They would still be at their near-human size for a while, but then that extreme growth spurt will at least shoot them up to near-giant size fairly quick. It kind of bridges the gap between having them exposed to danger, and giving them a better chance to reach maturity.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rcs619.deviantart.com/
asaenvolk
Marauder of the deep jungle
Marauder of the deep jungle
avatar

Posts : 334
Join date : 2009-04-18
Location : The great land

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 2:52 pm

its worth noting that the largest dinosaur egg ever found was 2 feet long and about 8 inches across, and it had a hard shell! With out a hard shell, like many Naga and Dridders the size maximum is much more impaired. Also a naga could have a live birth, some snakes do, fully placental too.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://asaenvolk.deviantart.com/
aethernavale
Great warrior
Great warrior


Posts : 501
Join date : 2010-03-07

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:27 pm

asaenvolk wrote:
its worth noting that the largest dinosaur egg ever found was 2 feet long and about 8 inches across, and it had a hard shell! With out a hard shell, like many Naga and Dridders the size maximum is much more impaired. Also a naga could have a live birth, some snakes do, fully placental too.

It should be noted though that the largest dinosaurs are smaller than most of the sapient predator species found in Felarya. It should also be noted that even a creature with a stature such as the giant elephant bird produced massive eggs. I also don't understand the 'hard shell' principle. Spiders create shells for their eggs with their sacs, and in a similar manner with how skates/sharks/chimaeras do (mermaid's purse) - though the construction and processing is different. While the eggs themselves have 'soft shells', they are not without protection and can be large in size.

I do not think you'll find a soft shell egg that compares to another creature that lays 'hard shelled' eggs, but generally speaking soft shell egg layers tend to be smaller in size than the hard shells. Comparatively speaking though, the egg and/or the egg case is a large construct.

Further, it should be noted that spiders undergo all larval stages inside the egg, emerging as a spiderling - sexually immature and small but relatively the same in ability/function as an adult otherwise. Yet, there are several spider species that care for their young after hatching from the egg, either by regurgitating food for it or by giving them whole prey once it has ceased struggling, so the argument that the newly hatched creature is fully functional/ready for life is limited in its scope to how a creator applies it to Felaryan species.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
French snack
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 1169
Join date : 2009-04-05
Location : in Milly's stomach. Care to join me?

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:31 pm

Given that Jissy is currently pregnant (carrying eggs), this is a fairly important issue to me...

I've always thought she would carry the eggs a little while then lay and incubate. My initial assumption would be that she looks visibly pregnant to some extent at least, but on reflection it makes sense that she should lay before the eggs get too big. Which in turn would indeed mean that the young, when they hatch, are proportionally smaller in relation to her than a human baby is in relation to its mother.

However, I'm not sure about baby giant nagas actually being so small that they're smaller than adult humans. For one thing, that would make them very vulnerable. For another, I'd think it would make it less easy for their mother to care for them. (Imagine trying to care for a baby that's so small you can enclose it entirely in your hand!) For a third, a baby that small would be unable to breastfeed. And I'm still not comfortable with the idea that breasts don't serve their normal purpose in Felarya. If a woman has breasts, we should try to work things out in such a way that she can plausibly breastfeed her young.

I would suggest that newborn giant naga are proportionally quite small (having hatched from fairly small eggs, where they have little room to grow), but still big enough for their mother to be able to care for them easily (and handle them without fear of accidentally squishing them!), and big enough to breastfeed.

Yesterday I started writing my next Jissy story. (It won't be done for a while, because it's not my main project right now, but I was inspired to get started at least.) It begins like this:

Spoiler:
 

That would be a retcon of an earlier story where I mentioned a fairly large belly bulge, which I no longer think makes much sense. I prefer the idea of a visible but small bulge while she's carrying her eggs. Enough to see that they're there; not enough to inconvenience her (to the extent that human women are inconvenienced during the latter stages of pregnancy). Also, it occurred to me that the womb doesn't need to be in the human belly area. It does need to be close to the genitals (through which she'll be laying), but I thought it would make sense to use a little of that tail space. So I shifted the womb from just above the genitals to just below - in the uppermost part of the tail section.

Thoughts?

_________________
Meet Milly the giantess, Jissy the naga, Tina the tomthumb, and the others... My Felarya stories are here, and here.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Shady Knight
Lord of the Elements
avatar

Posts : 4511
Join date : 2008-01-20
Age : 27

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 3:38 pm

This is also important because, spoiler alert, Hilary already laid her eggs. I wasn't specific on their size, but it's going to be important when they hatch. Something I need to throw out the window, Misty is very small because her species of dridders are roughly the size of Tora's jumping dridders. This would also bring something else to the table, are dridder and mermaid eggs usually smaller than a naga's or harpy's egg?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://shady-knight.deviantart.com/
rcs619
Felarya cartographer
Felarya cartographer
avatar

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2008-04-07
Age : 29
Location : Hanging out with Fiona in the Bulvon Wood

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:11 pm

Quote :
However, I'm not sure about baby giant nagas actually being so small that they're smaller than adult humans. For one thing, that would make them very vulnerable.

That's kind of the point. When a hybrid predator reaches full-size, the number of lethal threats to it drops significantly. So, the population control has to be at a younger stage. The small starting size, and the long maturation time ensures that not all of them reach adulthood. Imagine how things would be if all preds reproduced as fast and as often as Fairies, and the same amount made it to adulthood. The jungle would be overrun.

But yes, like I mentioned in that last post, it would be fairly easy to bump up their starting size to around 6 and a half feet or 7 feet tall. Give them a little extra size to start with. Their small size is not only a population control though, its what helps the mother survive the pregnancy. Nagas, Dridders, and many other egg-layers tend to be more solitary. If they were hindered by a full pregnancy, they'd likely starve, or get malnourished enough to lose the pregnancy (a real pregnancy will abort itself should the mother become too malnourished, in order to save the mother).

Then there's Harpies, who would need to fly. Although, they tend to at least have some friends around to help them.

Quote :
For another, I'd think it would make it less easy for their mother to care for them.

That is also kind of the point. Egg-born preds are already fairly developed upon hatching. They can move around and eat solid food straight out of the egg. The parents caring for them would largely be optional and down to personal preferrence. I imagine the abandonment rate amongst egg-layers is pretty decent, at least compared to live-birthers.

Quote :
For a third, a baby that small would be unable to breastfeed. And I'm still not comfortable with the idea that breasts don't serve their normal purpose in Felarya. If a woman has breasts, we should try to work things out in such a way that she can plausibly breastfeed her young.

The issue isn't that the breasts don't work, they would lactate in response to pregnancy (which the mothers would likely just see as a minor inconveinance), or even that the child is too small. Its the fact that by the time the baby hatches, it has already developed physically past the breastfeeding stage. The yolk of its egg served that function, provoding nourishment before it could eat solid food, and boosting the baby's immune system. Even if nagalings, for example, were much larger, it still doesn't change the fact that they are physically past the need for breastmilk.

A plausible use for a bodypart only really matters for a species that has evolved naturally. Its pretty clear that the hybrids have not, and they have many holdovers from their human parts that aren't necissarily ideal or useful. They are very strange, very alien creatures that contain a mash-up of human and animal parts, its to be expected that not every single part works 100% well with every other.

Egg-laying preds could still be nursemaids if worse comes to worst. You want breastfeeding, then all she needs is a neko/human/elf/fairy friend who cannot breastfeed their own child for sme reason.

Quote :
This would also bring something else to the table, are dridder and mermaid eggs usually smaller than a naga's or harpy's egg?

I imagine they would be roughly equivalent in size, with maybe some small variations here and there. Keep in mind, they still lay them from their human halves, and the size of the vagina (and the pressure its muscles would apply to the egg) is the real limiting factor.



Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rcs619.deviantart.com/
Jętte_Troll
Friend of the Jotun
Friend of the Jotun
avatar

Posts : 2769
Join date : 2009-02-02
Age : 26
Location : Over There

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:22 pm

Yeah, not all bodyparts need to have a purpose - often times evolution moves past the need for a certain trait but it still remains in a vestigial form. Especially with non-mundane creatures like nagas..

Eww... so naga-boobs are like human-appendixes?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://jaettetroll.deviantart.com/
Shady Knight
Lord of the Elements
avatar

Posts : 4511
Join date : 2008-01-20
Age : 27

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 4:24 pm

Hilary laid her eggs from the end of her tail like a snake do.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://shady-knight.deviantart.com/
asaenvolk
Marauder of the deep jungle
Marauder of the deep jungle
avatar

Posts : 334
Join date : 2009-04-18
Location : The great land

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 7:22 pm

what type of snake (if any) is Jissy based on? because like I said, some give live birth. As for why they have breasts, because they didn't evolve, they came about one way or another that was probably fairly sudden. Another thing is no snake takes care of their children, but humans do, its interesting to think about. Also breasts do more than just produce milk for children, they also attract mates.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://asaenvolk.deviantart.com/
Jętte_Troll
Friend of the Jotun
Friend of the Jotun
avatar

Posts : 2769
Join date : 2009-02-02
Age : 26
Location : Over There

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Wed Mar 23, 2011 7:29 pm

asaenvolk wrote:
what type of snake (if any) is Jissy based on? because like I said, some give live birth. As for why they have breasts, because they didn't evolve, they came about one way or another that was probably fairly sudden. Another thing is no snake takes care of their children, but humans do, its interesting to think about. Also breasts do more than just produce milk for children, they also attract mates.

Well, true, but breast's original purpose was for milk. They later evolved through selection to be larger. (That's why apes don't have big breasts.) They indicate healthiness.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://jaettetroll.deviantart.com/
French snack
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 1169
Join date : 2009-04-05
Location : in Milly's stomach. Care to join me?

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 2:05 am

asaenvolk wrote:
what type of snake (if any) is Jissy based on? because like I said, some give live birth. As for why they have breasts, because they didn't evolve, they came about one way or another that was probably fairly sudden. Another thing is no snake takes care of their children, but humans do, its interesting to think about.

Just replying to this quickly before I'm off to work; the rest later. I imagine Jissy as some sort of colubrid - egg-laying, non-venomous. Of course, since nagas are (presumably artificial) hybrids, I understand the logic in the reasoning that their breasts never served a purpose. I still think it's a little awkward, though. I prefer to assume that they do breastfeed, if that can be made feasible. As for caring for their young or not... You're right of course that nagas may be similar to humans or to snakes in that regard. I suppose there may be subspecies variations, or even individual variations. I would tend more towards the idea that some at least care for their young, for reasons which I'll lay out later. (Primarily because I assume that giant naga births are actually a fairly rare occurrence.)

_________________
Meet Milly the giantess, Jissy the naga, Tina the tomthumb, and the others... My Felarya stories are here, and here.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Shady Knight
Lord of the Elements
avatar

Posts : 4511
Join date : 2008-01-20
Age : 27

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:22 am

Right now it's obvious that there is a lot of variable when it comes to predators parenting, but this isn't what this thread is about. It's about how big a giant predator would be at birth, especially those that hatch from eggs. I'm going to assume that Harpy, Mermaid, Dridder and Naga eggs are roughly the same size on average, since I guess the size of a creature is going to affect the size of its egg. We at least know that they would eventually experience a growth spurt, but we don't quite know the average height of a newborn.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://shady-knight.deviantart.com/
French snack
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 1169
Join date : 2009-04-05
Location : in Milly's stomach. Care to join me?

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 6:43 am

rcs619 wrote:

That's kind of the point. When a hybrid predator reaches full-size, the number of lethal threats to it drops significantly. So, the population control has to be at a younger stage. The small starting size, and the long maturation time ensures that not all of them reach adulthood. Imagine how things would be if all preds reproduced as fast and as often as Fairies, and the same amount made it to adulthood. The jungle would be overrun.

True. But that's assuming giant nagas reproduce frequently, and give birth to large numbers of young (most of whom subsequently die). I've always assumed the opposite. That giant nagas reproduce very infrequently, and that that is what accounts for their small numbers. (And for the fact that virtually every giant predator character in Felarya is single and childless.)

_________________
Meet Milly the giantess, Jissy the naga, Tina the tomthumb, and the others... My Felarya stories are here, and here.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
rcs619
Felarya cartographer
Felarya cartographer
avatar

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2008-04-07
Age : 29
Location : Hanging out with Fiona in the Bulvon Wood

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 7:32 am

French snack wrote:
rcs619 wrote:

That's kind of the point. When a hybrid predator reaches full-size, the number of lethal threats to it drops significantly. So, the population control has to be at a younger stage. The small starting size, and the long maturation time ensures that not all of them reach adulthood. Imagine how things would be if all preds reproduced as fast and as often as Fairies, and the same amount made it to adulthood. The jungle would be overrun.

True. But that's assuming giant nagas reproduce frequently, and give birth to large numbers of young (most of whom subsequently die). I've always assumed the opposite. That giant nagas reproduce very infrequently, and that that is what accounts for their small numbers. (And for the fact that virtually every giant predator character in Felarya is single and childless.)

That's another factor, yes. They don't reproduce as frequently as humans, or other species.

There aren't really that many giant predators. The only reason there seems to be so many is that Felarya is so massive that even with so few of them compared to other races, there is still a large number of them. Also preds get most of the attention from the fan-fiction and art.

They don't reproduce that often, and when they do, a decent chunk of the offspring don't ever make it to adulthood. That's why actually running into a giant predator is kind of rare out in the jungle. You're many, many times more likely to get killed by a carnivorous plant, or large animal than a giant hybrid (but those aren't "sexy" so you almost never see it happen). Felarya is a harsh place, and reaching adulthood is a pretty big achievment, at least for most preds. Fairies are really the one exception, and that's why they've become easily one of the most numerous species in known Felarya (well, the quick reproduction, and all their powers).

Those rather harsh population controls are offset by the fact that when a pred reaches adulthood, they are very, very hard to kill. Barring those giant plants that can eat them (which are excessively rare), Leviathan mermaids (there's only like a dozen in all of Felarya), Giant flying squids (probably semi-rare), and super-massive dryads (extremely rare and only found in deeper Felarya), there aren't a whole lot of serious threats to them. Most of their everyday threats are from wild animals, most of which are quite a bit smaller than them, and can be beaten back with their physical abilities or magic (and the plot-armor most of them are clad in). Unless a pred is extremely careless, or does something very stupid, there's not a whole lot of ways for them to die. If the adult population dies off extremely slowly, then the younger population has to be extremely vulnerable to compensate and keep a balance.

I don't think the fan characters are really much of a representation of the whole. They're a tiny fraction of the pred population spread out all across the map. If the traits of the fan characters were what we judged things by, then male giants would only make up like 5% of the giant population.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rcs619.deviantart.com/
French snack
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 1169
Join date : 2009-04-05
Location : in Milly's stomach. Care to join me?

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:28 am

rcs619 wrote:

That's another factor, yes. They don't reproduce as frequently as humans, or other species.

There aren't really that many giant predators. The only reason there seems to be so many is that Felarya is so massive that even with so few of them compared to other races, there is still a large number of them. Also preds get most of the attention from the fan-fiction and art.

They don't reproduce that often, and when they do, a decent chunk of the offspring don't ever make it to adulthood. That's why actually running into a giant predator is kind of rare out in the jungle. You're many, many times more likely to get killed by a carnivorous plant, or large animal than a giant hybrid

That's actually my point. The population density for giant predators is low. Especially those who live pretty much as individuals, rather than in society. Presumably, humans head out into Felarya because they know there's at least a reasonable chance that they won't run into any of these fairly rare predators. Plus, if there were too many giant predators, they'd place an unsustainable burden on the ecosystem. Consider the number of fairly large animals a giant naga must consume in a single week...

My point is that there are two plausible explanations for their low numbers.

The first would be that giant predators (or at least giant nagas) have a fairly large number of children (born very small), but don't care for them, and most of them don't reach adulthood. Which is your suggestion.

The other would be that giant predators (or at least giant nagas) reproduce very rarely, have few children (born fairly small but far from tiny), do care for them, and that a proportionally large number of these children survive into adulthood.

The end result is the same.

An 8% survival rate among 1,000 births or an 80% survival rate among 100 births yields the same number of adults in the end.

I have a preference for the second option for two reason. First, from what we see of giant naga characters, they seem more enclined to care for their children than to abandon them in the wild knowing that most of them will die. They are after all people, with an individual conscience, and they've demonstrated the ability to care for one another. Somehow, I just can't picture Crisis or Fiona dumping their newborn babies somewhere and slithering off without care, knowing that most of them would soon die if left on their own. The second reason is that if we assume caring mothers and babies who aren't too tiny, then the mother's breasts actually do serve their normal purpose. Which seems, to me, preferable to having to explain that they're vestigial or artificial.

Quote :

I don't think the fan characters are really much of a representation of the whole.

When I say most characters are childless and single, I mean the canon characters. Of the seventeen giant nagas in the wiki, as far as I'm aware only one (Monty) has ever had children, with one another (Jissy) currently being pregnant. (Ajab having lived for a long time already, he's probably had children in the past, but if so he's not talking about it, and I've yet to establish it definitively.)

That being the case, it seems fairly reasonable to assume that giant nagas don't reproduce very often. (For which I'm sure many a neko feels deeply grateful!)

_________________
Meet Milly the giantess, Jissy the naga, Tina the tomthumb, and the others... My Felarya stories are here, and here.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
rcs619
Felarya cartographer
Felarya cartographer
avatar

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2008-04-07
Age : 29
Location : Hanging out with Fiona in the Bulvon Wood

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 8:58 am

Quote :
I have a preference for the second option for two reason. First, from what we see of giant naga characters, they seem more enclined to care for their children than to abandon them in the wild knowing that most of them will die. They are after all people, with an individual conscience, and they've demonstrated the ability to care for one another. Somehow, I just can't picture Crisis or Fiona dumping their newborn babies somewhere and slithering off without care, knowing that most of them would soon die if left on their own.

Yep. Like I said, you may see a higher instance of abandonment among egg-laying preds, but you'd still have some that raise their kids. I imagine it would come down to the disposition of the pred. They are still wild, predatory animals, who are largely uneducated, illiterate, and have had to survive through strength, cunning and luck all their lives. While they may have morals, they certainly aren't going to have the exact same ones as a human.

Quote :
The second reason is that if we assume caring mothers and babies who aren't too tiny, then the mother's breasts actually do serve their normal purpose. Which seems, to me, preferable to having to explain that they're vestigial or artificial.

Well, yeah. Like I mentioned in my earlier post. Nekos, Elves, Fairies, Centaurs, and just about all mammalian/live-birth preds will breastfeed. Their babies are much larger, but also much less developed than one born from an egg. A live-born baby is just about defenseless and needs its parents. The species who give birth to live young are also fairly social, so the mother can get help and support during her pregnancy.

As for nagas, it is canon that they can already slither around, and even eat solid food straight out of the egg. Crisis hatched alone. If she had been as defenseless and helpless as a human newborn, she would have starved. Instead, she survived on her own until that Tonorion got to her. Breastfeeding serves two primary functions. It helps provide a boost to the baby's immune system, and it lets them obtain nourishment until their bodies are developed enough for solid food. The yolk, and other things inside of a naga egg serve both those functions...and by the time they hatch, they're physically past the stage where they would require breastfeeding.

http://felarya.forumotion.com/t2620-size-of-newborn-giant-predators#83117 There's the my earlier post, in case you may have just missed it before. I figure it'd be better to just link it than to go repeating stuff from it.

Quote :
Of the seventeen giant nagas in the wiki

Wow, I knew the naga situation was bad, but seventeen? At least things have been getting more diverse lately.

Quote :
as far as I'm aware only one (Monty) has ever had children, with one another (Jissy) currently being pregnant. (Ajab having lived for a long time already, he's probably had children in the past, but if so he's not talking about it, and I've yet to establish it definitively.)

That being the case, it seems fairly reasonable to assume that giant nagas don't reproduce very often. (For which I'm sure many a neko feels deeply grateful!)

Yeah, I just don't think they can be used as a very accurate sampling of the overall population. If we tried to come up with species norms from that list, then we'd have to assume that only 2/15 of nagas are male, which is just silly.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rcs619.deviantart.com/
Malahite
Cog in the Machine
Cog in the Machine
avatar

Posts : 2433
Join date : 2007-12-11
Location : Old World

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:05 am

As a note, reproduction and threat to young isn't the only thing limiting Giant Predator populations. There's also the typical "Apex Predator" / "Food limitations" reasons for Giant Predators not being extremely prevalent. Fairies can form developed societies because, seemingly, they can maintain smaller sizes, and their dietary requirements aren't as excessive. Giant Dridders can maintain larger tribes / villages, because they can readily (and, indeed, do) feed off other Giant creatures like Giant Nagas or Giant Slug Girls. Those Harpies that fly in flocks tend to be smaller than the more Giant kin, maybe 40'-80' in height as opposed to 120'-160'. A Dryad, though? Or a Giant Slug Girl? Giant Nagas? What would they do with a population density of even just six per square kilometer? Four?

~ ~ ~

So, the general consensus is that "live birth" Predators have their children somewhat larger, but the child is much more dependent (at the start) on their mother / parents, while those who lay eggs are much less stress on the parent (assuming they don't want to watch the child), but have a much higher predation rate when their parents don't smother them with care and attention? And that many Giant Predator youths start off not too much larger / smaller than a fully grown human (proportionally, for the size of their human parts I mean)?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
rcs619
Felarya cartographer
Felarya cartographer
avatar

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2008-04-07
Age : 29
Location : Hanging out with Fiona in the Bulvon Wood

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 9:11 am

Malahite wrote:
As a note, reproduction and threat to young isn't the only thing limiting Giant Predator populations. There's also the typical "Apex Predator" / "Food limitations" reasons for Giant Predators not being extremely prevalent. Fairies can form developed societies because, seemingly, they can maintain smaller sizes, and their dietary requirements aren't as excessive. Giant Dridders can maintain larger tribes / villages, because they can readily (and, indeed, do) feed off other Giant creatures like Giant Nagas or Giant Slug Girls. Those Harpies that fly in flocks tend to be smaller than the more Giant kin, maybe 40'-80' in height as opposed to 120'-160'. A Dryad, though? Or a Giant Slug Girl? Giant Nagas? What would they do with a population density of even just six per square kilometer? Four?

~ ~ ~

So, the general consensus is that "live birth" Predators have their children somewhat larger, but the child is much more dependent (at the start) on their mother / parents, while those who lay eggs are much less stress on the parent (assuming they don't want to watch the child), but have a much higher predation rate when their parents don't smother them with care and attention? And that many Giant Predator youths start off not too much larger / smaller than a fully grown human (proportionally, for the size of their human parts I mean)?

Correct except for the last sentence. Keep in mind, live-birth preds aren't just larger, they are going to be the same size (proportionately) as a human baby. It isn't like Fairies, Elves and Centaurs are going to give birth to tiny babies. That would just be silly. Its only the egg-born preds who would be nearly human-sized.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rcs619.deviantart.com/
Archmage_Bael
Mara's snack
avatar

Posts : 4034
Join date : 2009-05-05
Age : 29
Location : Shatterock Caldera

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:36 am

Why wouldn't nagas be in groups then if not for their snake half influencing solitary lifestyles? If Dridders can find food in a large pack, a pack of Nagas should well be able to as well.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=614917399
Jasconius
Survivor
Survivor
avatar

Posts : 810
Join date : 2010-05-02
Location : Pit of Tartarus

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:44 am

Probably because if Nagas did hunt in packs, they'd devour everything both big and small in their section of forest before starving or coming into conflict with other territories.

Smaller Nagas might hunt in packs though, as their is a greater amount of food for them and their is safety in numbers.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Archmage_Bael
Mara's snack
avatar

Posts : 4034
Join date : 2009-05-05
Age : 29
Location : Shatterock Caldera

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:48 am

Snakes actually take a good couple weeks to digest what's in their stomach. I find it very odd that a naga digests something of similar size over a few hours just to require another meal later that day. Nagas aren't like humans, and since they have digestive systems of another creature I believe that should be taken into account. However, all the drawings and writings suggest that nagas are completely voracious and eat massive amounts of food every day, so my idea would be a total flip. Still, I believe it's a reasonable thing to consider changing.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=614917399
AisuKaiko
Keeper of Flat Chests
avatar

Posts : 2078
Join date : 2009-12-21
Age : 26
Location : In Ruby's cave in the Imoreith Tundra

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 10:53 am

I always assumed that food in their human stomach digests relatively quickly, whereas giant prey that gets sent to their tail stomachs do in fact take weeks.

Plus, gotta consider they have that hydrounobtainic acid that seems to be capable of digesting just about any solid object that had the misfortune ending up in there with ease. That may affect digesting time.
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://aisukaiko.deviantart.com
Shady Knight
Lord of the Elements
avatar

Posts : 4511
Join date : 2008-01-20
Age : 27

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:25 am

Please, stay on topic. This is about the size of newborns, not about food. Is it really that hard to stay on-track?
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://shady-knight.deviantart.com/
French snack
Moderator
Moderator
avatar

Posts : 1169
Join date : 2009-04-05
Location : in Milly's stomach. Care to join me?

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:42 am

rcs619 wrote:

Yep. Like I said, you may see a higher instance of abandonment among egg-laying preds, but you'd still have some that raise their kids. I imagine it would come down to the disposition of the pred. They are still wild, predatory animals, who are largely uneducated, illiterate, and have had to survive through strength, cunning and luck all their lives. While they may have morals, they certainly aren't going to have the exact same ones as a human.

True enough.

Quote :

As for nagas, it is canon that they can already slither around, and even eat solid food straight out of the egg. Crisis hatched alone. If she had been as defenseless and helpless as a human newborn, she would have starved. Instead, she survived on her own until that Tonorion got to her. Breastfeeding serves two primary functions. It helps provide a boost to the baby's immune system, and it lets them obtain nourishment until their bodies are developed enough for solid food.

*nods* True. Breastfeeding wouldn't be essential then. I'd like to think it would at least be helpful, but indeed we can't consider it to be vital.

Quote :

Quote :
Of the seventeen giant nagas in the wiki

Wow, I knew the naga situation was bad, but seventeen? At least things have been getting more diverse lately.

I was rather surprised myself when I counted them. By contrast, we only have two harpies, four mermaids and two slug girls so far, along with five dridders. But there have been recent additions to most of those species ; there's a fair bit of variety in most stories these days. I'd say the current input is quite healthy. Smile

Quote :
Yeah, I just don't think they can be used as a very accurate sampling of the overall population. If we tried to come up with species norms from that list, then we'd have to assume that only 2/15 of nagas are male, which is just silly.

True... The exact gender ratio remains something of a mystery, but I assume the proportion of males is higher than 12%!

Sean Okotami wrote:
Please, stay on topic. This is about the size of newborns, not about food. Is it really that hard to stay on-track?

To determine the most logical size of newborns, there are a number of issues to take into account. Wink

But yes, let's try only to "stray" onto matters that are related to determining size at birth.

_________________
Meet Milly the giantess, Jissy the naga, Tina the tomthumb, and the others... My Felarya stories are here, and here.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
rcs619
Felarya cartographer
Felarya cartographer
avatar

Posts : 1589
Join date : 2008-04-07
Age : 29
Location : Hanging out with Fiona in the Bulvon Wood

PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:59 am

Quote :
Why wouldn't nagas be in groups then if not for their snake half influencing solitary lifestyles? If Dridders can find food in a large pack, a pack of Nagas should well be able to as well.

Because there's not a lot of them, and they are solitary. It has nothing to do with the snake-half. Most giant preds are mostly solitary. They have their territory, and maybe a small circle of friends, but that's about it. Faires are really the only giant pred species that regularly travels in packs, and the Dridders of the Dridder forest are only organized into tribes because they are the remnants of a once great civilization. Most wild Dridders are just as solitary as anyone else.

Quote :
Snakes actually take a good couple weeks to digest what's in their stomach.

That's because they are eating things that are very large comparably to them. If a human could eat a basketball-sized piece of meat, and it didn't kill them, it'd take quite a while to digest too.

Quote :
I find it very odd that a naga digests something of similar size over a few hours just to require another meal later that day. Nagas aren't like humans, and since they have digestive systems of another creature I believe that should be taken into account

The stomach is still in their human half though, and from appearance seems to be very similar to a human stomach. Plus, humans are tiny compared to them. They would be digested in just a few hours, much like how a human would digest a similar or greater amount of food. Now, Nagas DO have that second, larger stomach in their snake half for bigger food items, and that likely does take longer.

Quote :
However, all the drawings and writings suggest that nagas are completely voracious and eat massive amounts of food every day

That's because most of those drawings and writings are trying to cater to voraphiles, and voraphiles find those traits sexy.

In all honestly, they probably eat a comparable amount as a human of a similar size. Maybe a bit more, if you take into account the extra energy required to move all those muscles in their tails. It wouldn't be an extreme amount though.

Quote :
True... The exact gender ratio remains something of a mystery, but I assume the proportion of males is higher than 12%

Yep. I honestly think 12% is too low. I'd put it around 30-40% to keep it semi-believable. Im sure that would give some people in this community nightmares though =P
Back to top Go down
View user profile http://rcs619.deviantart.com/
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Size of newborn giant predators   

Back to top Go down
 
Size of newborn giant predators
View previous topic View next topic Back to top 
Page 2 of 3Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 Similar topics
-
» Adopted newborn coming home in about a week
» Newborn baby kidnapped in 1987 is reunited with her parents
» RAF/RCAF Battle Dress type Blouse size 36 or 38 chest, belt, gaiters
» The Gentle Giant? Bullshit.
» Header Size Problem

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Felarya :: General forums :: General discussion-
Jump to: