General Q and A

Quote :

Ok, seriously... where do these giant preds go to do number 2? I know Negav has a sewage system, but I would think that in the jungle you would eventually run into some... I guess in stories people avoid the subject for obvious reasons.... but what does each species do about this?

Most preds tend to be territorial, so they probably have a certain place, off to the side, where they go to do their business. They probably just dig a small hole, do the deed, and bury it.

As for mermaids...well, you can probably guess. Its not like you don't swim in fish droppings when you go to the beach anyways. It would just kind of get absorbed into the environment and/or cleaned up by other fish.

That kind of thing tends to fall into the same category as what actually happens to the human body when it gets digested. Its unpleasent to think about, and doesn't generally need to be explained in detail, since we pretty much know what happens.

Quote :

Should a Felaryan traveler be concerned that they may get hit from above by fairy/sphinx/harpy.

Fairies probably do it while tiny so that when they grow back to human size, or giant, they won't even notice it. At least, that's what I'd do if I were a Fairy.

I doubt Harpies do it while in-flight. Their humanoid biology would make the act difficult. They probably just land to do it.

Grave, I believe that such bodily functions are rarely relevant to the plot of the story and are therefore omitted.

It's quite obvious that the reason why no one encounters the end results of a giant predator's bodily functions is because Felarya is inhabited by giant dung beetles whose sole purpose is to keep the place clean and neat.

Jasconius wrote:

It's quite obvious that the reason why no one encounters the end results of a giant predator's bodily functions is because Felarya is inhabited by giant dung beetles whose sole purpose is to keep the place clean and neat.

Of course!
You raise an important point there Jascon. Felarya would need dung beetles (they don't necessary have to be giant) to maintain the eco system.
Oh and Dung beetle is not a species, it's a subfamily. Therefore, any variants of Dung beetles fond in Felarya would be a species, not a subspecies.

And I was hoping it would be attributed to a poop removal system like in Family Guy road to the multiverse.


Except with Fairy magic!

Anime-Junkie wrote:

Jasconius wrote:

It's quite obvious that the reason why no one encounters the end results of a giant predator's bodily functions is because Felarya is inhabited by giant dung beetles whose sole purpose is to keep the place clean and neat.

Of course!
You raise an important point there Jascon. Felarya would need dung beetles (they don't necessary have to be giant) to maintain the eco system.
Oh and Dung beetle is not a species, it's a subfamily. Therefore, any variants of Dung beetles fond in Felarya would be a species, not a subspecies.

You know this is actually very clever. I could see dung beetles being a very important part of the Felaryan ecosystem, with several species in nearly every environment taking care of the feces left behind by so many giant species.

There might be even unique breeds with special roles. Small hook-limbed ones that cling to harpy feathers and scoop up excrement right from the source. Stream-lined ones that can "swim" in slug girl/achigate mucus without suffering the stickyness to safely collect the droppings. Crustaceans or isopods that fill the same role but with mermaids and chlaenas.

Not to mention the myriad species that might take chance of the dung-collecting to thrive, or prey on the beetles themselves

Would 4 kilograms of C-4 kill a 70-foot tall naga if it exploded inside there stomach?

Depends on the type of pred, really. Nagas, for example, have notoriously strong stomachs, so they're much harder to kill from the inside

Or any species similar.
Do they have similar proportions to a snake, or are they stubbier? (personally I like them being longer)

Lets use cobras as an example. (Just because they can go upright and stuff) Say a naga is 100 feet tall, just for easy math.
Roughly adding that onto the body of most snakes, just kind of guessing it into the relation of how thick the front part of the snake body is, leaves them seeming in the 900 foot long range.

Is that right?

imokaywiththis.jpg

X wrote:

Or any species similar.
Do they have similar proportions to a snake, or are they stubbier? (personally I like them being longer)

Lets use cobras as an example. (Just because they can go upright and stuff) Say a naga is 100 feet tall, just for easy math.
Roughly adding that onto the body of most snakes, just kind of guessing it into the relation of how thick the front part of the snake body is, leaves them seeming in the 900 foot long range.

Is that right?

imokaywiththis.jpg

The length of naga tails will vary from individual to individual.

The vast majority of nagas tend to fall into, or between two main body types though. We call them the 1/3 and 1/4 ratios.

1/3 ratio: \ __ __

- This is the body type that Crisis has.

- In the 1/3 ratio, the first third of a naga's body is the part that is held upright.

- We know that Crisis has a head-to-ground height of 103ft (31.3m). To get her total length, you just multiply her head-to-ground height by 3.

- When you do this, you will find that Crisis' total length from the top of her head, to the tip of her tail is 309ft (94.1m).

1/4 ratio: \ __ __ __

- This is the body type that Fiona has.

- In the 1/4 ratio, the first quarter of a naga's total length is held upright.

- We know that Fiona has a head-to-ground height of 99ft (30.1m). To get her total length, you just multiply her head-to-ground height by 4.

- When you do this, you will find that Fiona's total length, head-to-tai is 396ft (120.7m). Because of her body type, Fiona has a longer overall length than Crisis, eventhough she is a bit shorter.

Of course, not everyone falls into a perfect ratio, so individual tail lengths will vary.

How exactly does Felarya's language translation work for infants? Since they don't know any, what do they hear?

I'd assume the translation magic doesn't kick in until they've developed language skills, is this reasonable to assume?

To understand a language one must have the capacity to understand it. In addition, for others to understand one, one must be able to formulate clear concepts.
Babies can have the ability for neither.
However I'm sure the translation spell would factor in to their learning. Babies in Felarya probably learn to talk a little earlier than normal. As for what they'd say, that's a completely different matter.

um...if its okey to ask at the\is moment can someone please tell me were to post a character profile?

itsmeyouidiot wrote:

How exactly does Felarya's language translation work for infants? Since they don't know any, what do they hear?

As far as I know, the language thing hasn't really been fully explained... but I'm pretty sure that everyone agrees that an individual must first possess the capacity to comprehend language. Not to sound like I'm blatantly promoting my own theory on the translation factor, which I guess I am, but it makes sense once you assert that language is simply abstract thought expressed by a rule-regulated system of uttered sounds. If, however, one were to experience even a low-intensity mental connection to other sapients (perhaps an effect of Felarya's magical nature?), then the abstract thought could possibly be broadcast through speech, and yet interpreted by the recipient in their own language. There would be slip-ups and discrepancies, of course.

This would also explain why written wording isn't always translated. Since it's not being actively spoken, that link may or may not be present.

What is the different between Wild Magic and Primordial Magic? They seem to be pretty much the same thing described in different ways.

Jætte_Troll wrote:

What is the different between Wild Magic and Primordial Magic? They seem to be pretty much the same thing described in different ways.

Wild magic is natural magic, and to me that sounds more like an effect of life-forces and active influences. It's been said to have a mind of its own, and the mage simply acts as a conduit, not as a director. They don't actively control what's going on at all.

Primordial magic is the very substance of existence. As I see it, it's the manipulation of physical laws and basic energies. Rather than casting "fireball", you're actually concentrating thermal energies into the air to ignite it, and the propelling the combusting gas. My own character Zion, if my interpretation of primordial magic is correct, is a model user of it. Rather than memorizing spells and certain outcomes, a primordial user makes use of magic in creative and less-structured fashion. However, they are in complete and total control of their casting, more so than any other type of mage.

What are the effects of Oosoon berries? I assume they are alcoholic from the related picture, but I couldn't find anything on them in the wiki. Do they only grow in the misty glade?

Merged another topic into this one, but for some reason the posts are on page 52 instead of at the end. They're the posts about naga lengths,

As far as magic goes, I go with Wild Magic somehow having a mind of its own and not just being a type of spellcasting, but also to refer to abnormal magic phenomena in general. Primordial Magic, to me, is basically The Force, except explicitely called magic. Felarya is rich in ambient magic, so you actually just reach into that ambient magic to cast your spells. The obvious downside is that if you were to leave a zone with ambient magic, you'd be powerless.

Sean Okotami wrote:

Primordial Magic, to me, is basically The Force, except explicitely called magic.

I'd think wild magic is more like The Force, what with it having its own will and all.

Do other species besides nagas have "affinities"?

If so, why do only nagas have a list for them on their page?

If not, what exactly makes nagas unique in this regard?

what do you mean by affinity? like Elemental affinity or something else?

Yes, he does mean magical affinities.
(Elemental affinities implies that affinities can only be for elements like fire, water, etc).

As far as I know that hasn't actually been defined. However, in my affinities theory which is still in the works) most things would be able to have an affinity.