Is there anything you think could be improved about Felarya?

GREGOLE wrote:

humans are more like feral twinkies than full course meals.

An interesting comparison.

I like zingers more :3

To be fair, I just think people need to remember that Crisis is kind of a special case among nagas.

She was raised by fairies. All her life she was fed humans that were shrunken down and given to her by her fairy family. She never had to go through that awkward phase most predators go through where they are too "small" to feed on humans (nagas have extendable jaws, so they can usually get around this) and human-sized things...and too large to eat Neera, Tomthumbs and smaller animals.

Crisis never had that. She's been eating humans her entire life, and I think that's why she's abnormally fixated on them. Most preds like them, and will eat them if they come across some...but Crisis really does seem to make an effort to look for them first, even going long distances out of her way, and likely passing up other potential food-items.

Crisis is a fairy trapped in a naga's body, essentially. She can't extend her jaws, and she has an unusually strong taste for humans, even for a giant predator.

Hmm. This does however, for me, mean a very different implication for those predators who do eat humans. It makes it seem not really necessary and makes the predators seem far more cruel.

From our perspective it goes from "I'd kill someone to survive" to "I'd kill someone for a twinkie." No matter how damn good twinkies are, it does make you seem more the moral monster.

Why would predators bother to hunt something like humans at all? Also, the wiki does say that they need to eat 5 to stay healthy. This of course means they eat lots of other stuff. But why the humans to stay healthy? Is there some nutrient in people that predators don't get elsewhere?

Jætte_Troll wrote:

Hmm. This does however, for me, mean a very different implication for those predators who do eat humans. It makes it seem not really necessary and makes the predators seem far more cruel.

From our perspective it goes from "I'd kill someone to survive" to "I'd kill someone for a twinkie." No matter how damn good twinkies are, it does make you seem more the moral monster.

Why would predators bother to hunt something like humans at all? Also, the wiki does say that they need to eat 5 to stay healthy. This of course means they eat lots of other stuff. But why the humans to stay healthy? Is there some nutrient in people that predators don't get elsewhere?

Keep in mind, the "5 humans" thing is an ancient sentence in the wiki. Humans used to be larger in comparison to the preds (Anna was like 6 inches long in Naga Feeding Habits, as opposed to humans being about 3 inches long in comparison now, about as long as a finger. The pred/human scales have adjusted over the years to where they are now, which i like best personally. It makes swallowing a human whole a little more realistic.). That line is old, from back when Felarya WAS mainly just a vore-fetish world. It has gradually moved into becoming a more balanced place over the years. I would take it as more of an equivalent amount of meat preds need to eat, not a dietary requirement of humans.

As for why they do it? The same reason as always. Because humans taste good, they're easy to catch (compared to other animals), easy to eat, and they've been eating either humans, or Neeras/Tomthumbs for most of their lives. If the pred has a choice between trying to catch a Druiker, or a human...they're going to pick the human, for the ease of it. While there ARE humans in the forest, the place isn't crawling with them, so sometimes there are none around and a pred has to eat other things. Keep in mind, according to the wiki, most preds are fairly territorial and keep to the area they call home. They probably aren't going to go out great distances to find humans (except Crisis, for example)...they're going to eat what is around. If there are humans, they'll eat them...if not, they'll just find something else.

The "kill someone for a twinkie" argument doesn't really apply to most preds, since most DON'T see humans as people, or see eating them as anything wrong to do...They just see another small animal to eat. Sure, humans can talk, but to a pred, they're just talking food. Its not about being cruel or insensitive...its just a combination of how they were raised, and their own natural instincts to hunt and eat other, usually smaller, animals. The preds that DO see humans as "real people", usually either eat far less of them, or none at all.

Mhmm. You're probably right, but I just want to lay out the other side as we develop this. That no predator HAS to ever eat humans is something that should just have the implications considered.

Well to be frank I think the "eating humans" in order to survive is something that was a bit of a falsely valid point in the past. A sort of rule to explain the predator behavior but it don't really resist a torough examination.. lot of flaws in that argument.
For example Jade is the living example a predator can stay healthy while not eating humans...

I think we should rather concentrate more on the fact that Felaryan predators have been used to eat humans/nekos for countless centuries, live in a world where it's considered perfectly normal to do so, and above all : just the fact of living in Felarya create a particular urge and voracity in them. I assure you there is a perfectly logical explanation for that, but it's something I prefer to keep secret for now ^_^;

it still doesn't explain why preds decided to eat humans/nekos/elves in the first place.

they should have some quality to them that make them at least semi-essential in some way or another.

Quote :

t still doesn't explain why preds decided to eat humans/nekos/elves in the first place.

they should have some quality to them that make them at least semi-essential in some way or another.

They're bite-sized and tasty. You know, like those spongey yellow snack cakes I keep using as a metaphor.

That, and a lot of predators seems to liek the feeling of people wiggling inside them. Roasted kensha doesn't typically do that.

"Also I agree with Gregole, he's always right."

XD

So, it just comes down to whether right and wrong are concrete concepts, or just social fabrications... for instance, the preds do not see it as evil, because it never occurred to them.

In terms of evil, I believe one needs to be aware of the immorality of his/her actions. So, that would make the preds "not evil". This, however, does not mean they aren't "wrong", necessarily. One can be wrong and not evil, and vice versa.

if you wanna handle it "Elle-style", we go into Darwinism. If it can be eaten, it deserves to be, sentience not being an issue. However, that opens up the idea of "if humans found a way to conquer the Guardians, strip-mine the fuck out of Felarya, and torch every single pred in the place, they'd also be right". I don't think it's so cut-and-dry as "might makes right".

nor are eating humans seen as 'evil' in their culture.

Yes, but the question isn't whether or not they're evil... at least, not in my opinion. It's whether they're right or wrong.

humans seem to call everything that harms them evil, without looking at the big picture. ESPECIALLY in felarya.

I mean, despite living there for how many years? and some of them come from advanced civilizations that most likely have learned how to look at things objectively. I think they'd learn to accept it, albeit a hard acceptance.

Er, see... we don't tend to look kindly upon things that want to KILL us. I think that's easily forgotten. But when a human is eaten, that PERSON is DEAD. Gone. I hope he doesn't have a mother, because that bitch is never gonna see her son again. Oh? What if that poor girl had a son back home? Well, he'll be an orphan, I guess. And we can't forget the fact that children are bound to end up in Felarya sometimes. What do you think happens then?

I know, but that doesn't make them evil. You cant get all pissy just because you aren't at the top of the food chain. If I remember correctly, the only reason why humans (here on earth) are at the top is because of our intelligence.

Exactly. That's what greys it up. To us, we could easily argue that we don't eat other sentient or semi-sentient species, like monkeys and apes (well, not in "civilized" nations like America). So, is that a definitive line, really?

I think that, to anyone actually IN the world of Felarya, especially a human, the morality doesn't really matter. Survival comes first. If eating humans to survive isn't wrong, then neither is killing a pred so they can't eat you. I plan on exploring that in my new-and-improved Felarya Saga, because my main characters are humans from an entirely different world, whereas the Jurdeans are well-adapted to Felarya, and they have differing views. Zion prefers to spare his enemies if he can, but the Jurdeans take no chances.

That's generally a good philsophy in felarya, if you are unlucky enough to run into a predator. I think the first piece of advice is to practice stealth.

I think, for now, it'll just boil down to Darwinism.

I'd like to see more representation of the Tinies.

Poor little guys and gals don't get to eat anyone and have to spend their time making sure they aren't stepped on or blown off a cliff by a giant naga's sneeze. Otherwise they are running away from NEKOS! NEKOS I SAY!

Will no one think of the neeras?

Some of my thoughts on a collection of posts from all over the tread:

GREGOLE wrote:

Crisis ate one fruit once, then complained that she didn't have any humans.

You don't see the problem?

I ate an orange once, then complained that I didn't have twinkie. Doesn't mean that my diet isn't mostly made up of healthy fruits and vegetables, just that I *really* like twinkies.

AisuKaiko wrote:

And how does it have a horizon if it's presumably flat? (correct me if Felarya is, in fact, curved like a round surface)

I know that this question was answered in another way, but I'd like to point out that a "horizon" occur even on perfectly flat, infinite planes. It's not quite the same as what we are used to, because with a suffeciently powerful telescope and no atmosphere you would be able to see as far as you would like to, but it still counts.

Consider yourself standing on a perfectly flat, infinite field of grass, and lets say that your eyes are 5 feet off the ground. If you look straight down, you of course see grass. If you look downward at a 45 degree angle, you still see grass, though it is grass that is further away from you. If you look down at a 10 degree angle, you see grass, but it is grass that is far away from you. If you were to look 0 degrees downward, however, you would not see grass, because the line that you are looking along never intersects with the ground. If you are looking 0 degrees downward, then the line of sight is parallel to the ground. At your eye, the line would be 5 feet off of the ground. At a mile, it would still be 5 feet off of the ground. At 10,000 miles, it would *still* be 5 feet off of the ground. But if you were to lower your line of sight even the slightest bit, it would no longer be parallel with the ground and would eventually intersect it, meaning that you would see very distant grass.

rcs619 wrote:

Crisis is a fairy trapped in a naga's body, essentially. She can't extend her jaws, and she has an unusually strong taste for humans, even for a giant predator.

I feel some empathy for her... a fairy trapped in a naga's body. If Felarya had mental medical care, she might be diagnosed with the species equivalent of gender identity disorder.

But with advanced surgery she could become a post-op fairy!!

...okay, that line of thought took a really strange path... ^^;

Jætte_Troll wrote:

Hmm. This does however, for me, mean a very different implication for those predators who do eat humans. It makes it seem not really necessary and makes the predators seem far more cruel.

From our perspective it goes from "I'd kill someone to survive" to "I'd kill someone for a twinkie." No matter how damn good twinkies are, it does make you seem more the moral monster.

I know this has been replied to, but let me state my opinion: I don't think it makes them more cruel, and I think that it doesn't help to think of people as a dessert food.

Why?

A question; does the fact that you can survive on potatoes and lettuce means that if you choose to eat green beans you are more cruel than someone who doesn't? Obviously not, because green beans, just like potatoes and lettuce, are just food.

If you think about humans as being equivalent to green beans (not very filling in small amounts, decent nutritional value), then predators who like to eat humans are simply the equivalent of people that like to eat green beans. Under that sort of thinking Crisis just becomes someone who really likes green beans; this hypothetical human-Crisis probably has hundreds of recipes for preparing green beans: green bean casserole, steamed green beans, sauted green beans, green beans in salad, mixed green beans and carrot, broccoli, and corn chunks... damn, now I'm hungry.

It probably would have been more accurate to use beef or chicken instead of green beans. Then you could use the whole vegetarian argument.

Well, it's like I said. The morality matters not. I find it funny that I, an unabashed Christian, keep promoting Darwinism, but that's the way it is. From the preds point of view, they may be justified. But, if chickens rebelled and started killing humans, I guess that wouldn't make them evil, either. Or green beans, in your terms.

In terms of consumption, the fitter species survives. You don't have to be at the top of the food chain to be successful. You have to adapt. Cockroaches, ants, rats... they've fared much better than tigers, polar bears, and eagles. Unfortunately, in Felarya, it is the preds who have the environmental advantage... damn Guardians.

ZionAtriedes wrote:

It probably would have been more accurate to use beef or chicken instead of green beans. Then you could use the whole vegetarian argument.

Well, it's like I said. The morality matters not. I find it funny that I, an unabashed Christian, keep promoting Darwinism, but that's the way it is. From the preds point of view, they may be justified. But, if chickens rebelled and started killing humans, I guess that wouldn't make them evil, either. Or green beans, in your terms.

In terms of consumption, the fitter species survives. You don't have to be at the top of the food chain to be successful. You have to adapt. Cockroaches, ants, rats... they've fared much better than tigers, polar bears, and eagles. Unfortunately, in Felarya, it is the preds who have the environmental advantage... damn Guardians.

The Guardians aren't really an issue. They only intervene in world-shattering situations...like the Ur-Sagolians aggressively expanding (dislocating other humans, and preds along the way), and likely experimenting in things they shouldn't.

If a group of preds did the same thing, the Guardians would blast them just as quick. They're about upholding the balance. They don't care about a couple humans killing a couple preds...there's 1000's others of each group. What they DO seem to care about are massive super-groups being formed that completely unbalance the functioning of the world.

I find it funny, though, that the ability to form such groups is humanity's greatest strength. You can argue that it's about fairness, but in the end, the result is still a world more favorable to preds than to humans. True fairness would be to let the rule of Nature take effect.

Then again, without the Guardians, it's probable that Heaven and Hell would get involved, too. So you'd end up with angels, demons, and multiple human factions (and who knows what alien civilizations) fighting for control of Felarya, wiping out everything else.

Balance is a ruse. In the end, Order establishes itself from Chaos, and Chaos arises from the eventual fall of Order. This is because they are not opposites, but are, in fact, the same thing. Every molecular structure is, at its core, Chaotic in its Brownian motion. Within neatly Ordered atoms, electrons zoom around in unmeasured paths, constituting Chaos. But, each vibration of those molecules, each unseen electron's motion, is carefully ordained and choreographed, and has been, and will be, repeated time and time again throughout history, in an ancient and unyielding Order.

So, you see, balance and imbalance are the same. Good and evil, as well.

ZionAtriedes wrote:

So, you see, balance and imbalance are the same. Good and evil, as well.

D:
Stop messing with my head. Those things are diametrically opposite.
Just because one may give rise to the other does not mean they are the same.